Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-13 PLAN Packet Meeting location: Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Wednesday, November 13, 2024 7:00 PM Participate in the meeting: Watch the meeting on cable TV or at YouTube.com/EdinaTV. Provide feedback during Community Comment by calling 312-535- 8110. Enter access code 2633 784 7383. Password is 5454. Press *3 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A staff member will unmute you when it is your turn. Accessibility Support: The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927- 8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. October 30, 2024 Planning Commission Minutes 5. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. 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. 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 staff for consideration at a future meeting. 6. Special Recognitions and Presentations 7. Public Hearing During "Public Hearings," the Commission chair will ask for public testimony after staff and/or applicants make their presentations. The following guidelines are in place to ensure an efficient, fair, and respectful hearing; limit your testimony to three minutes and to the matter under consideration; the Chair may modify times, as deemed necessary; avoid repeating remarks or points of view made by previous speakers. The use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not Page 1 of 151 allowed. 7.1. 5605 McGuire Road, Variance Request of 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), from the 50% Impervious surface requirement 7.2. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances – 6016 Vernon Avenue 8. Reports/Recommendations 9. Chair and Member Comments 10. Staff Comments 11. Adjournment Page 2 of 151 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: November 13, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 4.1 Prepared By: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Type: Minutes Department: Item Title: October 30, 2024 Planning Commission Minutes Action Requested: Approve the Minutes from the October 30, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. Information/Background: Supporting Documentation: 1. Draft Minutes - 10-30-24 Page 3 of 151 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers October 30, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Bornstein, Miranda, Daye, Padilla, Smith, Hahneman, Felt, Joncas, and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Jha. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Daye moved to approve the agenda for October 30, 2024. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, October 16, 2024 Commissioner Smith moved to approve the October 16, 2024, meeting minutes. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried. V. Community Comment None. VI. Public Hearings A. Site Plan with Parking Variances – Apartment Conversion, 3400 Edinborough Way Director Teague presented 3400 Edinborough Way's request for a site plan with parking variances. Staff recommend approval of the site plan, as requested, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Page 4 of 151 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Patrick Juetten and Mr. Abe Roberts, Alpha Investment Group, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Ms. Katie Schmidt, SSTS Traffic Solutions, was at the meeting via Zoom and answered Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Steve Brown, 5528 Halifax Lane, addressed the Commission to support the conversion because housing is needed in the area. Mr. Leo Silva, Edinborough Condominiums, addressed the Commission and indicated he opposed the conversion of the building. Ms. Elizabeth Thoms, Brookview Senior Living, addressed the Commission and explained her reason for opposing the building's conversion. Commissioner Padilla moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the site plan and felt the changes were appropriate. Motion Commissioner Miranda moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the site plan with parking variances as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein and recommended that the Council consider requiring a contribution to the Pedestrian/Cyclist fund. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. The Commission discussed the motion. The motion carried. The entire meeting discussion can be viewed on the official City website. VII. Reports/Recommendations None. VIII. Correspondence and Petitions None. IX. Chair and Member Comments Page 5 of 151 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Received. X. Staff Comments None. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Hahneman moved to adjourn the October 30, 2024, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 8:55 PM. Commissioner Bornstein seconded the motion. Motion carried. Page 6 of 151 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: November 13, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 7.1 Prepared By: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Community Development Item Title: 5605 McGuire Road, Variance Request of 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), from the 50% Impervious surface requirement Action Requested: Deny the variance request Information/Background: The property owner is requesting a variance from Sec. 36-437 of the Edina City Code to allow a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase to accommodate a paver walk, paver patio, steps, and stepping stones at 5605 McGuire Road. Better Together Edina: https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/5605-mcguire-road Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report 2. Site Location 3. Narrative 4. Survey and Plans 5. Storm water management Page 7 of 151 The 22,581 square foot lot is located south of McGuire Road, is immediately adjacent to single family homes and has a shared asphalt driveway crossing the back width of the property. The maximum impervious surface coverage allowed in the R-1 zoning district is 50% of the lot area. The property currently has 11,258 sq ft of surface coverage for a total of 49.9% of the lot area. The homeowner is proposing to increase surface coverage by 660 sq ft totaling 11,918 sq ft of coverage or 52.8% of the lot area. The applicant is requesting a variance to install a paver walk, paver patio with walk and steppingstones. The property currently accommodates a house with porch, driveway, front walk, deck with steps, shed, patio, pool equipment pad, inground pool, and a driveway servicing neighboring homes. Without the 2,574 sq ft driveway servicing neighbors, the property would be at 41.37% coverage, well within the 50% limitation and would allow an additional 971.57 square feet of coverage. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. November 13, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-24-13, a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Information / Background: Page 8 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features The subject property was built in 1956 and will comply with all zoning requirements except for the impervious surface request. The lot is 22,581 square feet in area and is located on the south side of McGuire Road, consisting of a two-story home with a three-car attached garage. The city’s Forrester will conduct a full review of the tree plan at the time of a building permit application. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Grading & Drainage The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed Surface coverage 50% (49.9% existing) *52.8% Surface coverage without driveway access surface included 50% (38.45% existing) 41.37% (allows an additional 971 sq ft) *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issue •Is the proposed variance justified? No, staff does not believe the requested variance is justified. Page 9 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 3 Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will/will not: 1.The variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the impervious surface requirement. The reason for the variance request is due to the driveway that bisects the property servicing neighboring property and therefore requiring a variance to include all surface to the subject lot. An increase in surface area is not in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. The intent of the ordinance is to maintain a balance of surface area and landscape area on properties. Criteria not met. 2.The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the property for Low Density Residential Use. The principal use of the property would still be as a single-family home and the property would remain zoned R-1 Criteria met. 3.There are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The term “practical difficulties” means the following: i.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without a 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 property currently has reasonable use of the property beyond the single dwelling unit with an inground pool, sidewalk, driveway, shed, deck and patio. Criteria not met. ii.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Staff has not found there to be anything unique that would support over-building/increasing surface coverage on the lot. The shared driveway may not have been created by the homeowner; it consists of hard surface covering the lot that is therefore included in surface coverage calculations. The cumulative amount of proposed surface coverage is beyond 50% of the lot area and cannot be justified based on lot shape or size. The property is at 49.9% surface coverage currently; allowing it to increase beyond the ordinance limit may set up a precedent for other properties to claim similar encroachment circumstances as justification for increasing hard surfaces. Criteria not met. Page 10 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 4 iii.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The improvements will cover more than 50% of the lot area and will appear to be more than 50% given the driveway access to other properties is fenced off from the subject lot and doesn’t appear to be part of the backyard. The fenced-in back yard appears smaller than it is and may seem more intensely covered with the proposed improvements. Granting a variance may alter the character of the neighborhood by setting a precedence given there are four other properties that have the same driveway access crossing properties. Criteria not met. Optional Actions A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below provides options for the Planning Commission to consider: Denial Deny the request for a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for variance with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot. There are other properties that also have the driveway access crossing their lots. 2. Due to the proposed increase in coverage, the patio conflicts with goals to limit coverage on properties and the policy change to protect half the lot area for open/uncovered space. 3. The property owner’s situation is not unique with four other properties with the same circumstances that may require similar variances for improvements. Approval Approve the request for a 2.8%, (627.5 sq ft), variance from the 50% maximum impervious surface required for a 660 sq ft surface increase, at 5605 McGuire Road. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The practical difficulty is caused by the exiting driveway access that services other properties. 2. A unique circumstance includes the amount of access driveway coverage that does not benefit the subject lot as compared with nearby properties, so there is less opportunity for improvements on the subject property. Without the driveway, the lot could support an additional 971 sq ft of hard surface improvement. Page 11 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 5 3. The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new improvements will be behind a fenced-in rear yard that are not visible from the front street and are at grade surface improvements that will not contribute to additional visible building coverage. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to plans and survey date stamped, October 15, 2024. 2. Subject to Engineering staff’s memo dated, November 2024. Staff Recommendation Staff cannot support the request given the property will exceed the surface coverage requirements recently adopted to address concerns of over-building on property. There appears to be nothing unique to the property or request to support exceeding coverage requirements of the lot. The property currently has reasonable use with the existing rear yard deck, patio, pool, etc., area. Staff cannot identify a unique circumstance and recommend denial of the variance request. Deadline for a city decision: December 15, 2024. Page 12 of 151 © WSB & Associates 2013 Parcels November 7, 2024 Map Powered By DataFi / 1 in = 46 ft Page 13 of 151 Page 14 of 151 Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover ExiSting Alley 2087 SF Existing Alley 2007 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Deck 128 SF Ekistnp Orme = 2710 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Exiting House 2735 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Pato 1591 SF Existing Pato 1591 SF Existing Pool • 800 SF ExhillngPool = 800 SF Eviseng Stoop = 233 SF &Meng Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk 204 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Total Hardcover = 10486 SF Proposed Boulders 85 SF Total Lot Ares - 22579 SF Proposed Palm • 570 SF Percent Hardcover = 46.44 % Proposed Steppe. 24 SF Proposed Steps • 42 SF Total Hardcover = 11207 SF Total LotArea • 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 49.63 % Bluoaloria Full Color Thermal 264 so COP To Match Pool Sack 50th Charcoal Soldier Cowl., 316 so It HardScape Legend Plant List Report Common Name Slze rats/ TREES ./- Pink Spire Crabapple 2 EVERGREENS IPDwarf Globe Blue Spruce 1 SHRUBS ODouble Play Doozle Splrea 1 ttar Glow Girl Spireo 5 PERENNIALS Karl Foerster Feather Reed Grass 5 *Shenandoah Switch Grass 7 - !Summer Beauty Allium 19 GROUND COVERS *Red Creeping Thyme 29 VINES OTHERS EXISTING OExIsting Tree 1 Proposed Landscape Area Legend Drve 575 04 On Leicdscape Propose., WAIL UTILITIES KEY Symbol Fixture QTY 0 Downspout 4 L Catch Basin (Existing) 3 6 H2O Spigot 2 El Sump 1 ri Electrical Outlet 1 S. F„ P4 er W t \ , Pornictie Fire F. Ex. neat,. Sih Fence Along "thosting Fence • Eto,icers Co. Pool Deck Edethiricol Outlet By Oiler 6 4 French Dron See Denvec Eng.neering For Specs SOn Logs .Along SJI I Remove fence section while working end out rt bock togictriler cir end of project 1/8' =T-a. 15 SCALE. 1/e•=1.-0 Scale: Desciler AS Koller Dimon associate. Design Assoc Rebsaa0 8 Dale litasse. Tr arm corium proem., relaneollon*laelmap ',mama.; Clespn IK am uraaoni.d duplcom. tdnak Peleaaea 3 of 8 Poo Dele:20241,03 Fib riemem.3324a148 Jamo.v.ve Measure Input- SH Measure Team C8 SH Silt Lags 'Along ,°dev - X Scott Joing 2383 Pilot Knob Rd Design Plan Mendota Heights, MN 55120 5605 McGuire Rd Edina MN 55439 , Phone 651-203-3000 Far 651-455-1734 SOUTHVIEW SoutriviewDesign.corn •$.13ESIGN4, oand.cop. NO Date Pension Notes NO. Dale Issue Notes Page 15 of 151 ir=.111111= 111' 4izt,„0„, UTILITIES KEY Symbol Fixture QTY 0 Downspout 4 Gatch Basin (Existing) 3 6 H2O Spigot 2 U Sump 1 r..1 Electrical Outlet 1 Existing Hardcover Existing Alley = 2087 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Patio = 1591 SF Existing Pool = 800 SF Existing Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Total Hardcover = 10486 SF Total Lot Area = 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 46.44 % Proposed Hardcover Existing Alley = 2087 SF Existing Deck = 126 SF Existing Drive = 2710 SF Existing House = 2735 SF Existing Patio = 1591 SF Existing Pool = 800 SF Existing Stoop = 233 SF Existing Walk = 204 SF Proposed Boulders = 85 SF Proposed Patio = 570 SF Proposed Steppers = 24 SF Proposed Steps = 42 SF Total Hardcover = 11207 SF Total Lot Area = 22579 SF Percent Hardcover = 49.63 % - - %Immo • r. Vp At. 41111... .11111.. 1" 20 0 = -0" 20 SCALE 40 This drawing contains proprietary information which belongs to Southview Design Inc. Any unauthorized duplication or use is strictly prohibited. Designer. Measure Input: Josh Koller SH Design Associate: Measure Team: Nick Heiling CB SH Sheet 5 of 5 Released By: Date Released: / / Scott Joing 2383 Pilot Knob Rd Grading Plan 11x17 Mendota Heights, MN 55120 NO Date Revision Notes Phone: 651-203-3000 Fax: 651-455-1734 SOUTH VIEW 5605 McGuire Rd SouthviewDesign.com -'DESIGN- Edina , MN 55439 LP„Ci3C01)( NO Date Issue Notes Scale: " = 20'-0" Print Date: 2024-10-09 File Name: 2024-04-15 Joing.vwx Page 16 of 151 //-/I-ii -- w C 2 0 0 0 x 900.0 X 900 0TC X 900 OTW • 0 LOTAREA CALCULATION: Lot Area = 22,581 SF EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE: House w/ Cantilever =Z754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Deck 116 SF (Less 150 SF). 0 SF Shed = 100 SF Total = 3,145 SF Existing Building Coverage = 13.9% EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Driveway, Front Walk = 2,984 SF Deck w/ Steps = 127 SF Shed = 100 SF Patio = 1,578 SF Pool = 820 SF Pool Equipment Pad = 30 SF Driveway Servicing Neighboring Homes =2,574 SF Total = 11,258 SF Existing Impervious Surface = 49.9% Fence Water Main Boulder Retaining Wall Keystone Retaining Wal Air Conditioning Unit Gas Meter Light Pole Power Pole Water Shutoff Valve Existing Elevation Top of Curb Elevation Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Found Iron Monument Set Iron Monument Inscribed R.L.S 15230 20 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND 'Driveway to adjoining homes located in rear yard Is not utilized by homeowner al subject properly. NOTE: 25% Maximum Allowable Building Coverage 50% Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface GENERAL NOTES: • Exiating building dimensions are measured to siding and not building foundation. • No title commitment was provided and no research was performed for any easement. not shown on this survey. • Location of utilities hown are from observed vidence In the field and/or plans furnished by others and are considered aggro imate. Gopher State One Call or a private utility locator should be contacted to locate dillies on site before excavation. N00°21 '43"W 175.02 M Its A r---5;UTPXY EL.E1a7-- 7- , 15 I rs'T-L. k../ I MCGUIRE ROAD N89°31'54"E 33.40 MEAS. (33.4 MAP stz164.05 A.13°33'47' ' (L.36.6 no 46.47 MEAS. X S27 7 P27 OLT /// XP7, <5\ moor 10/ ej L . I SNARED ASPAHLT DRIVEWAY S89°40'05"W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) X.P2PC TREE INVENTORY TREE NO. SPECIES D.B.H. HEIGHT CLASSIFICATION C.R.Z. TREE PLAN NOTES #100 SPRUCE 15' OVER 30' HERITAGE 22.5' N/A #101 SILVER MAPLE 24* NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #102 COTTONWOOD 48' HERITAGE 72' N/A #103 SILVER MAPLE 36' NOT PROTECTED 54' N/A #104 SILVER MAPLE 24" NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #105 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' N/A #106 ELM 15' PROTECTED 22.5' N/A #107 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' N/A #108 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' N/A #109 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' N/A #110 SILVER MAPLE 30' NOT PROTECTED 45' N/A #111 APPLE 18' NOT PROTECTED 27' N/A D.B.H. = DI meter at Breast H ight C.R.Z. = Critical Root Zone EXISTING CONDITION SURVEY FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN :V'', DATED: 06-28-2024 WOODROW A. BROWN, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 8030 OLD CEDAR AVENUE SO., SURE 228 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 PH: (952) 854-4055 WBROVVNLANDSURVEYING.COM EMAIL: INFOOWBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM JOB NO. 239-24 BOOK/PAGE SCALE 1" = 10' DRAWN CME REFERENCE SITE ADDRESS 5605 McGuire Rd. Edina, MN 55439 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot 7, Block 6, LA BUENA VISTA, Hennepin County, Minnesota. REVISIONS REMARKS Revise impervious surface to include driveway servicing neighboring homes. I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. DATE 07-15-2024 SHEET 1 of 1 18x24 BENCHMARKS ID No. 1164: T.N.H. al the northeast corner of McGuire Rd. and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 921.46 (NGVD 29). ID NO. 963: T.N.H. at the northeast comer of Brook Dr and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 925.48 (NOVD 29). Page 17 of 151 20 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND 1[5501 I LV I 31.7 315 7 1 /Cg=„,„, 15 I E-N L.V I I CIA T LV I MCGUIRE ROAD 4 05 A.13°33.47' 1205 ix) N89°31'54'E 0_06.6 P 33.40 MEAS. (33.4PL41) =36.47 MEAS. 9 , 1 x.253 8104 R i t SHARED ASPAHLT DRIVEWAY X.221 S89°40.05-W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) Revise impervious surface to include driveway servicing neighboring homes. SITE PLAN I PROPOSED PATIO/LANDSCAPING FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN TREE INVENTORY TREE NO. SPECIES D.B.H. HEIGHT CLASSIFICATION C.R.Z. TREE PLAN NOTES #100 SPRUCE 15" OVER 30' HERITAGE 22.5' N/A #101 SILVER MAPLE 24- NOT PROTECTED 36' N/A #102 COTTONWOOD 48' HERITAGE 72' NIA #103 SILVER MAPLE 36' NOT PROTECTED 54' NIA #104 SILVER MAPLE 24' NOT PROTECTED 36' NIA #105 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' PROTECT #106 ELM 15" PROTECTED 22.5 PROTECT #107 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' PROTECT #108 ELM 20' PROTECTED 30' PROTECT #109 ELM 24' PROTECTED 36' PROTECT #110 SILVER MAPLE 30' NOT PROTECTED 45' N/A #111 APPLE 18' NOT PROTECTED 27' NIA D.B.H. = DI meter at Breast H Ight C.R.Z. = Critical Root Zone //— w 0 0 X 900.0 X 900 OTC X 903 OTW 900 - • 0 0 0 0 X1900.0) LOT AREA CALCULATION: Lot Area = 22,581 SF EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Deck 116 SF (Less 150 SF) = 0 SF Shed = 100 SF Total = 3,145 SF Existing Building Coverage = 13.9% NOTE: 25% Maximum Allowable Building Coverage 50% Maximum Allowable Impervious Surface Fence Water Main Boulder Retaining Wall Keystone Retaining Wall Air Conditioning Unit Gas Meter Light Pole Power Pole Water Shutoff Valve Existing Elevation Top of Curb Elevation Top of Wall Elevation Existing Contour Found Iron Monument Set Iron Monument Inscribed R.L.S 15230 Proposed Silt Fence/Erosion Control Proposed Retaining Wall Proposed Elevation Proposed Contour EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: House w/ Cantilever = 2,754 SF Covered Porch = 291 SF Driveway, Front Walk = 2,984 SF Deck w/ Steps =127 SF Shed = 100 SF Patio = 1,578 SF Pool= 820 SF Pool Equipment Pad = 30 SF Driveway Servicing Neighboring Homes = 2,574 SF Total = 11,258 SF Existing Impervious Surface = 49.9% 'Driveway to adjoining homes located In rear yard Is not utilized by homeowner at subject property. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ADDITIONS: Paver Walk = 130 SF Paver Patio & Steps = 506 SF Stepping Stones = 24 SF Net Impervious Surface Increase = 660 SF Total Proposed Impervious Surface = 11,918 SF or 52.8% GENERAL NOTES: • Existing building dimensions are measured to siding and not building foundation. • No title commitment was provided and no research was performed for any easements not shown on this survey. • Location of utilities hown are from observed vidence In the field and/or plans furnished by others and are considered apple. hnate. Gopher State One Cal or a private utility locator should be contacted to locale Oldies on site before excavation. 07-15-2024 DATE REVISIONS REMARKS JOB NO. 239-24 BOOK/PAGE SHEET 1 of 1 18x24 SITE ADDRESS 5605 McGuire Rd Edina, MN 55439 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lol 7, Block 6, LA BUENA VISTA, Hennepin County. Minnesota. BENCHMARKS ID No. II 64: T.N.H. al the northeast comer of McGuire Rd and Tracy Ave. Elevation = 921.46 (NOVD 29). ID No. 963: T.N.H. at the northeast comer of Brook Dr. cud Tracy Ave. Elevation = 925.48 (NOVD 29). I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. DATED: 07-09-2024 WOODROW A. BROWN, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 SCALE 1"= 10' DRAWN CME REFERENCE W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC 8030 OLD CEDAR AVENUE SO., SURE 228 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 PH: (952) 854.4055 WBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM EMAIL: INFOOWBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM Page 18 of 151 INLET SPECIFICATIONS AS PER THE PLAN DIMENSION LENGTH AND FLOW VVIDTH TO MATCH FLAP POCKET MINIMUM DOUBLE STITCHED SEAMS ALL AROUND SIDE PIECES AND ON FLAP POCKETS 2111 D2 zm 2 2 FRONT, BACK, AND BOTTOM TO BE MADE FROM SINGLE o. PIECE OF FABRIC TIRE COMPACTION ZONE FLOW EXISTING GROUND -- MACHINE SLICE 8 IN -12 IN DEPTH OVERFLOW HOLES (2 IN X 4 IN HOLE SHALL BE HEAT CUT INTO ALL FOUR SIDE PANELS) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, -- 36 IN WIDE 5 FT MINIMUM LENGTH POST AT 6 FT MAXIMUM SPACING PLASTIC ZIP TIES (50 LBS TENSILE) LOCATED IN TOP BIN USE REBAR OR STEEL ROD -- FOR REMOVAL (FOR INLETS WITH CAST CURB BOX REPLACE ROD WITH WOOD 2 IN X 4 IN). EXTEND 10 IN BEYOND GRATE WIDTH ON BOTH SIDES, LENGTH VARIES. SECURE TO GRATE VATH WIRE OR PLASTIC TIES. SILT FENCE MACHINE SLICED) NOT TO SCALE INLET PROTECTION NOT TO SCALE LANDSCAPE -I- GRATE/INSPECTION PORT RIM=926.4 6" PERFORATED D a°1 ‘•ll",( 4i \ 144V:I'M 4 _ AtIWP "11441 FRENCH DRAIN --.6 FINAL GRADE 2 MCGUIRE ROAD GENERAL GRADING NOTES: 1. THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CITY OF EDINA SHALL APPLY EXCEPT WHERE MODIFIED BY THESE DOCUMENTS. 2. "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (1-800-252-1166) SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. 3. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION, THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH UTILITY COMPANIES. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY WITH ANY CONFLICTS. 4. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES. 5. EXISTING TOPSOIL SHALL BE SALVAGED TO PROVIDE 4" TOPSOIL COVERAGE OVER ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE REVEGETATED. 6. THE BUILDING PAD MUST BE PROVIDED WITH POSITIVE DRAINAGE. THIS WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. 7. AFTER THE SILT FENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED REMAINING SEDIMENT SHALL BE SMOOTHED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED AND SEEDED OR SODDED AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 8. NO FINISHED SLOPE SHALL EXCEED 4H : 1V UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 9. PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. METHODS OF MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT. EROSION CONTROL NOTES: 1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (I.E. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS, ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT, INLET PROTECTION, ETC.) SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 2. INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ANY INLET THAT MAY RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE DISTURBED AREAS OF THE PROJECT. INLET PROTECTION MAY BE REMOVED FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (FLOODING / FREEZING) HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED. THE PERMITTED MUST RECEIVE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CITY ENGINEER VERIFYING THE NEED FOR REMOVAL. 3. INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S, SUCH AS SILT FENCE, AROUND ALL STOCKPILES. 4. RETAIN AND PROTECT AS MUCH NATURAL VEGETATION AS FEASIBLE. WHEN VEGETATION IS REMOVED DURING DEVELOPMENT, THE EXPOSED CONDITION OF LAND SHALL BE KEPT TO THE SHORTEST PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME, BUT NOT LONGER THAN 60 DAYS. ANY EXPOSED AREAS EXCEEDING THIS TIME-FRAME SHALL BE TEMPORARILY STABILIZED (STRAW MULCH, WOODCHIPS, ROCK). AREAS BEING USED FOR MATERIAL STORAGE AND AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ARE EXEMPT FROM TEMPORARY STABILIZATION. 5. ANY STEEP SLOPES (3H : 1V OR STEEPER) EXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY VEGETATION, MULCHING OR BY OTHER MEANS ACCEPTABLE TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITHIN 14 DAYS OF CEASING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ON THE STEEP SLOPES. STOCKPILES MAY BE PROTECTED BY AN ANCHORED TARP OR PLASTIC SHEET. 6. PROVIDE DUST CONTROL AS NECESSARY. DUST CONTROL CAN INCLUDE WATER. 7. REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENTS TRACKED OR OTHERWISE DEPOSITED ONTO PUBLIC PAVEMENT AREAS ON A DAILY BASIS OR AS NEEDED. 8. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S SHALL BE INSPECTED EVERY 7 DAYS, OR WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ALL RAIN EVENTS GREATER THAN 1.0" IN 24 HOURS. CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED SHALL BE INITIATED WITHIN 24 HOURS. 9. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE. THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW. 10. AFTER FINAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED, EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. PERMANENT STABILIZATION SHALL CONSIST OF 4 INCHES TOPSOIL, AND SEED, MULCH AND FERTILIZER APPLIED BY METHODS AND RATES RECOMMENDED IN MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 2575 AND MN/DOT SEEDING MANUAL, OR SOD. THE SEED MIX SHALL BE MN/DOT 25-151. 11.NO CONCRETE WASHOUT ALLOWED ON SITE, TRUCK BASED SELF CONTAINMENT WASHOUT DEVICES REQUIRED. 12. OIL STAINS ON CITY STREETS SHALL BE CLEANED UP WITH FLOOR DRY, AND DISPOSED OF AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIAL. 13. ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE SHALL BE STORED CLEANED UP AND DISPOSED OF PER EPA STANDARDS. 14. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. 15. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AFTER PERMANENT STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 16.TEMPORARY PUMPED DISCHARGE POLLUTION PREVENTION TECHNIQUES: "DANDY DEWATERING BAG" BROCK WHITE CO. USA. 17. CONTACT PERSON FOR SITE CLEANLINESS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS: WILLIE DORNIDEN (651) 203-3034. PUBLIC ROAD s, N88'3134•E 33.40 MEAS. (33.4 PLAT) R_1 ( 5 A=13'33%7' (L.;306.6 PLAT) .435.41 MEAS' 1 IN X 2 IN X 24 IN LONG WOODEN STAKES. STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN THROUGH THE BACK HALF OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG AT AN ANGLE OF 45 DEGREES WITH THE TOP OF THE STAKE POINTING UPSTREAM. STRAW SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG 20' MINIMUM LENGTH o o SURFACE FLOW RADIUS AS REQUIRED -- CRUSHED ROCK PER SPECIFICATION USE EXISTING DRIVE AS CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1111 \ 01 CAD \ 01 Source \ 01 Survey Base.dwg FRENCH DRAIN (2'x27'X3.5') PER 5/C1 IT SILT FENCE OR - BIO-ROLLS S89.40.05'W 185.00 MEAS. (185.0 PLAT) 922.5(LEVEL BOTTOM) BACKFILL AND COMPACT SOIL FROM TRENCH ON UPGRADIENT SIDE OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG EXISTING GROUND PLACE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG IN SHALLOW TRENCH (1 IN - 2 IN DEPTH) CC) MIN. 4" TOPSOIL NATIVE FILL DEPTH VARIES MIN. 4" PEA GRAVEL CLEAN AGGREGATE (1 1/2"± RIVER ROCK), PEA GRAVEL, OR SAND, (<5% FINES) ADS GEOSYNTHETIC NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE OR APPROVED EQUAL. MIN. 4" OF R" PEA GRAVEL 8 IN -10 IN EMBEDMENT DEPTH SPACE BETWEEN STAKES SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 1 FT FOR DITCH CHECKS OR 2 FT FOR OTHER APPLICATIONS. BIOROLLS EXIT WIDTH AS REQUIRED 1 IN - 2 IN CRUSHED ROCK D EXISTING GROUND ROCK STABILIZING EXIT (IF NECESSARY) NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE - TAPER EDGES AT 1:1 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AZI1 FRENCH DRAIN gar NOT TO SCALE 20 40 SCALE IN FEET F:\surveyVa buena vista DRAWN BY: ABL CHECKED BY: GRP DESIGNED BY: JAP REVISIONS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIO • ENGINEER ,UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. EFFREY A. PRASCH, P.E. DATE: 09.20.24 LIC. NO.: 52706 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN 2383 PILOT KNOB ROAD ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55120 LOT7, BLOCK 6 LA BUENA VISTA 5605 MCGUIRE ROAD EDINA, MN DEMARC LAND SURVEYING & ENGINEERING 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560-3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 DemarcInc.com PROJECT: 90824 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN SHEET NO. Cl OF Cl Page 19 of 151 • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Lot 7, Block 6, La Buena Vista 5605 Mcquire Road Edina, Minnesota September 19, 2024 Prepared By: DEMARC LAND SURVEYING 5 ENGINEERING Prepared For: Southview Design 2383 Pilot Knob Road St. Paul, MN, 55120 I hereby certify that this Plan, Specification or Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 'Jeffrey A Prasch, E Project Engineer 52706 09.19.24 License Number Date Page 20 of 151 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 Table of Contents Table of Contents i 1.0 Project Overview ii 2.0 Design Considerations ii 3.0 Rate Control ii Table 3.1 — Discharge Rate Summary ii 4.0 Volume Control iii Appendix A — Figures Figure 1 — Drainage Areas Existing Conditions Figure 2 — Drainage Areas Proposed Conditions Figure 3 — Precipitation Data Appendix B — Existing Conditions 10-Year Summary 1-6 Appendix C — Proposed Conditions 10-Year Summary 7-16 Appendix D — Soil Summary 1-3 i Page 21 of 151 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 1.0 Project Overview A new patio area is being proposed at 5605 McGuire Road in the City of Edina, Minnesota. This site is within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD). The current site is 0.52 acres with a residence, garage, shed, pool and driveway on the property. Existing residences surround the project site with the street to the north. The drainage patterns split the property with about half the site draining to the street and the rear yard draining to private property. The property does not drain to structural flooding issues. The existing drainage conditions are shown in Figure 1. The proposed improvements include a paver patio and associated steps, walk and walls. The improvements will increase the impervious area draining to private property by more than 400 sf. The proposed conditions will maintain similar drainage paths to the existing conditions. The proposed drainage is shown in Figure 2. 2.0 Design Considerations The City of Edina dictates the requirements for this site. The on-site stormwater system design is based on their guidelines. This property is located within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD); because the proposed improvements increase the impervious area by less than 50%, no demonstration of compliance with their stormwater requirements is required. The following design tools, methods, and considerations were used in the design of the on-site storm water system: Rainfall Distribution — MSE 24-hour Type Ill Rate and Volume Modeling Software — HydroCAD 10.20 Soil Conditions — Hydrologic Soil Group B based on web soil survey shown in Appendix D. Rainfall Data — NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall data as shown in Figure 3. 3.0 Rate Control The City of Edina manages rate control for this property. Their rule states that there will be no increase in peak rate to private property for the 10% annual probability event (NOAA Atlas 14, 10-year). Table 3.1 shows the existing and proposed runoff rates. Table 3.1 — Discharge Rate Summary Discharge Node Discharge Rate [cfs] 10-Year Storm Event Pre- Post- Private Property (2L) 0.99 0.98 Street (1L) 0.98 0.98 ii Page 22 of 151 A Stormwater Management Plan 5605 Mcguire Road — Edina, MN September 19, 2024 4.0 Volume Control The City regulates the volume of water discharged from the site. The site does not drain to structural flooding issues per the City of Edina Engineering Department. Therefore, no volume control is required. iii Page 23 of 151 Appendix A Figures Page 24 of 151 FIGURE 1 0 30 6 LEGEND SUBCATCHMENT NUMBER A POND/CATCH BASIN NUMBER LINK NUMBER = REACH NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW (1) 0 E < z w 0 0 0 Q 0 Z z g P v-`12 15 SCALE IN FEET 09.19.24 MCGUIRE ROAD Page 25 of 151 MCGUIRE ROAD LOT 8 14 1OT 0 wa< 1-0 0 z 0 L0 2 _1<ix_ r- 0 I-03 2 W 8 U.) U) 0 < cc z 0 NJ <a Z 111 — (/) 0 0- a 0 FIGURE 2 LEGEND SUBCATCHMENT NUMBER A POND/CATCH BASIN NUMBER 1L3 LINK NUMBER Ei REACH NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 30 60 SCALE IN FEET 09.19.24 Page 26 of 151 NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA* Latitude: 44.9121°, Longitude: -93.3572° Elevation: 969 ft** • source: ESRI Maps " source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES Sanja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Mchaet Yenta, Geolfery Bonnin NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration Average recurrence Interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 5-min 0.353 (0.285-0.442) 0.419 (0.338-0.525) 0.532 (0.428-0.668) 0.631 (0.504-0.796) 0.774 (0.600-1.01) 0.891 (0.673-1.18) 1.01 (0.737-1.37) 1.14 (0.795-1.58) 1.32 (0.883-1.87) 1.46 (0.949-2.09) 10-min 0.517 (0.417-0.647) 0.613 (0.495-0.768) 0.779 (0.626-0.979) 0.924 (0.738-1.16) 1.13 (0.879-1.48) 1.30 (0.985-1.73) 1.48 (1.08-2.00) 1.67 (1.16-2.32) 1.93 (1.29-2.74) 2.14 (1.39-3.07) 15-min 0.630 (0.509-0.789) 0.748 (0.603-0.937) 0.950 (0.784-1.19) 1.13 (0.900-1.42) 1.38 (1.07-1.81) 1.59 (1.20-2.10) 1.81 (1.32-2.44) 2.04 (1.42-2.82) 2.36 (1.58-3.34) 2.61 (1.69-3.74) 30-min 0.891 (0.720-1.12) 1.06 (0.859-1.34) 1.36 (1.10-1.71) 1.62 (1.30-2.05) 2.00 (1.55-2.62) 2.30 (1.74-3.05) 2.62 (1.91-3.54) 2.96 (2.06-4.09) 3.42 (2.29-4.85) 3.78 (2.46-5.43) 60-min 1.16 (0.938-1.46) 1.38 (1.12-1.74) 1.78 (1.44-2.24) 2.15 (1.72-2.71) 2.71 (2.11-3.58) 3.18 (2.41-4.23) 3.68 (2.69-5.01) 4.23 (2.96-5.89) 5.00 (3.36-7.14) 5.63 (3.66-8.08) 2-hr 1.43 (1.16-1.78) 1.70 (1.38-2.12) 2.21 (1.79-2.75) 2.68 (2.16-3.36) 3.42 (2.69-4.51) 4.05 (3.10-5.38) 4.74 (3.49-6.43) 5.50 (3.88-7.63) 6.59 (4.46-9.35) 7.48 (4.90-10.7) 3-hr 1.60 (1.30-1.98) 1.89 (1.54-2.34) 2.46 (2.00-3.05) 3.00 (2.43-3.75) 3.88 (3.08-5.12) 4.64 (3.57-6.16) 5.49 (4.07-7.44) 6.43 (4.57-8.91) 7.80 (5.32-11.1) 8.94 (5.88-12.7) 6-hr 1.88 (1.54-2.31) 2.21 (1.81-2.72) 2.86 (2.34-3.53) 3.51 (2.85-4.35) 4.56 (3.66-6.01) 5.50 (4.27-7.27) 6.54 (4.89-8.82) 7.71 (5.52-10.6) 9.42 (6.47-13.3) 10.8 (7.20-15.3) 12-hr 2.13 (1.76-2.60) 2.53 (2.09-3.09) 3.27 (2.69-4.00) 3.98 (3.25-4.89) 5.09 (4.09-6.60) 6.05 (4.72-7.90) 7.11 (5.34-9.47) 8.28 (5.96-11.3) 9.96 (6.89-13.9) 11.4 (7.59-15.9) 24-hr 2.49 (2.07-3.02) 2.86 (2.38-3.47) 3.58 (2.96-4.35) 4.28 (3.52-5.23) 5.40 (4.38-6.97) 6.39 (5.02-8.29) (5.67-9.91) 8.70 (6.32-11.8) 10.5 (7.31-14.5) 12.0 (8.06-16.6) 2-day 2.90 (2.43-3.49) 3.25 (2.72-3.91) 3.94 (3.28-4.76) 4.64 (3.84-5.61) 5.76 (4.70-7.37) 6.76 (5.35-8.70) 7.87 (6.02-10.4) 9.12 (6.68-12.3) 11.0 (7.72-15.1) 12.5 (8.50-17.2) 3-day 3.16 (2.66-3.79) 3.52 (2.96-4.22) 4.23 (3.54-5.08) 4.93 (4.10-5.95) 6.07 (4.97-7.73) 7.08 (5.63-9.07) 8.21 (6.30-10.7) 9.47 (6.97-12.7) 11.3 (8.00-15.5) 12.9 (8.79-17.7) 4-day 3.37 (2.84-4.02) 3.76 (3.16-4.49) 4.51 (3.78-5.40) 5.23 (4.36-6.29) 6.39 (5.24-8.08) 7.41 (5.90-9.44) 8.53 (6.56-11.1) 9.78 (7.22-13.0) 11.6 (8.23-15.8) 13.1 (9.00-18.0) 7-day 3.88 (3.28-4.60) 4.38 (3.70-5.20) 5.28 (4.45-6.28) 6.09 (5.11-7.28) 7.32 (5.99-9.11) 8.35 (6.66-10.5) 9.45 (7.28-12.2) 10.6 (7.87-14.0) 12.3 (8.77-16.7) 13.7 (9.46-18.6) 10-day 4.37 (3.71-5.16) 4.96 (4.20-5.86) 5.96 (5.04-7.06) 6.84 (5.75-8.14) 8.12 (6.64-10.0) 9.16 (7.31-11.4) 10.2 (7.90-13.1) 11.4 (8.44-14.9) 13.0 (9.26-17.4) 14.2 (9.88-19.3) 20-day 5.94 (5.08-6.97) 6.67 (5.70-7.83) 7.87 (6.70-9.25) 8.87 (7.50-10.5) 10.3 (8.40-12.4) 11.3 (9.08-13.9) 12.4 (9.63-15.6) 13.5 (10.1-17.5) 15.0 (10.8-19.9) 16.2 (11.3-21.7) 30-day 7.34 (6.30-8.56) 8.19 (7.02-9.57) 9.56 (8.17-11.2) 10.7 (9.08-12.6) 12.2 (10.0-14.7) 13.3 (10.7-16.3) 14.5 (11.2-18.1) 15.6 (11.6-20.0) 17.0 (12.3-22.4) 18.1 (12.7-24.3) 45-dav - 9.14 (7.87-10.6) 10.2 11.9 (8.78-11.9) (10.2-13.8) 13.2 (11.3-15.4) 14.9 (12.3-17.8) 16.2 (13.0-19.6) 17.4 (13.5-21.5) 18.5 (13.9-23.6) 19.9 (14.4-26.0) 20.9 (14.8-27.9) 60-day 10.7 (9.24-12.4) 12.0 14.0 (10.3-13.9) (12.0-16.2) I 15.5 (13.2-18.1) 17.4 (14.4-20.7) 18.8 (15.2-22.7) 1 20.1 (15.7-24.8) 21.3 (16.0-26.9) 22.7 (16.4-29.4) I 23.6 (16.7-31.3) 1 Precipitation frequency PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical Page 27 of 151 Appendix B Existing Conditions 10-Year Summary Page 28 of 151 Kis) (2S ) Sub at 2S 1L Street private property Routing Diagram for Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc, Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Page 29 of 151 Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10,20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area (sq-ft) CN Area Listing (all nodes) Description (subcatchment-numbers) 11,324 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (1S, 2S) 8,212 98 Paved parking, HSG B (1S, 2S) 3,046 98 Roofs, HSG B (1S, 2S) 22,582 79 TOTAL AREA Printed 9/20/2024 Page 2 Page 30 of 151 0.98 cfs v / / / / / / 0 Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf, Depth= 2.26" Routed to Link 1L : Street Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 7,093 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,182 98 Paved parking, HSG B 2,061 98 Roofs, HSG B 12,336 77 Weighted Average 7,093 61 57.50% Pervious Area 5,243 98 42.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Hydrograph [..y..F.;.(2.,-„..zij MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=12,336 sf Runoff Volume=2,319 cf Runoff Depth=2.26" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 31 of 151 / / / Existing Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=-4,26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Runoff = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf, Depth= 2.75" Routed to Link 2L : private property Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 4,231 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 5,030 98 Paved parking, HSG B 985 98 Roofs, HSG B 10,246 83 Weighted Average 4,231 61 41.29% Pervious Area 6,015 98 58.71% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Hydrograph [q Runoff 0.99 cfs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=10,246 sf Runoff Volume=2,351 cf Runoff Depth=2.75" 0 Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 • 0 • 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 68 60 62 64 66 68 70 • i2 Time (hours) Page 32 of 151 I CI AR rfs 0.98 cfs V 277 0 2 4 6 8 0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 41 46 48 50 52 54 5658 60 62 6466 68 70 72 Time (hours) 0 Inflow q Primary Inflow Area=12,336 sf Existing Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Link 1L: Street Inflow Area = 12,336 sf, 42.50% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.26" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,319 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 1L: Street Hydrograph Page 33 of 151 Existing Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Link 2L: private property Inflow Area = 10,246 sf, 58,71% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.75" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf Primary = 0.99 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,351 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 2L: private property Hydrograph LL 0 QQ rfs 0.99 cfs Inflow Area=10,246 sf /7 ."..e" W I q Inflow q Primary 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 6'4 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 34 of 151 Appendix C Proposed Conditions 10-Year Summary Page 35 of 151 (3S (new Subcat) 2R) ... Subct 1S Subcat 2S 1L Street FrenIh,Drain private property Routing Diagram for Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc, Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Link Page 36 of 151 Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 10,663 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (1S, 2S, 3S) 523 98 Paved parking, HSG A (3S) 8,349 98 Paved parking, HSG B (1S, 2S) 3,046 98 Roofs, HSG B (1S, 2S) 22,581 81 TOTAL AREA Printed 9/20/2024 Page 8 Page 37 of 151 0 Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf, Depth= 2.26" Routed to Link 1L : Street Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 7,088 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,187 98 Paved parking, HSG B 2,061 98 Roofs, HSG B 12,336 77 Weighted Average 7,088 61 57.46% Pervious Area 5,248 98 42.54% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Subcat 1S Hydrograph 11.:11r..zi-111 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=12,336 sf Runoff Volume=2,320 cf Runoff Depth=2.26" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) 0.98 cfs 0 U- Page 38 of 151 0.98 cfs Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 0 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 10 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Runoff = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf, Depth= 2.90" Routed to Link 2L : private property Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 3,535 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 5,162 98 Paved parking, HSG B 985 98 Roofs, HSG B 9,682 84 Weighted Average 3,535 61 36.51% Pervious Area 6,147 98 63.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7,0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Subcat 2S Hydrograph 0 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=9,682 sf Runoff Volume=2,341 cf Runoff Depth=2.90" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 o 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 39 of 151 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=563 sf Runoff Volume=179 cf Runoff Depth=3.81" Tc=7.0 min CN=61/98 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06- 0.055 0.05 0.045- 0 0.04- - 0.035 0.03- 0.025 0.02 0.015- 0.01 0.005- 0 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 179 cf, Depth= 3.81" Routed to Pond 3P French Drain Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/lmperv., Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 523 98 Paved parking, HSG A 40 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 563 95 Weighted Average 40 61 7.10% Pervious Area 523 98 92.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Hydrograph q Runoff 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Page 40 of 151 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 3P: French Drain Inflow Area = 563 sf, 92.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.81" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.07 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 179 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs, Volume= 179 cf, Atten= 94%, Lag= 63.2 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs, Volume= 179 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routed to Link 2L : private property Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 926.17' @ 13.19 hrs Surf.Area= 434 sf Storage= 112 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 790.0 min calculated for 179 cf (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 790.0 min ( 1,540.1 - 750.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 922.50' 76 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 189 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids #2 926.00' 1,028 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 1,103 cf Total Available Storage Elevation (feet) Surf.Area (sq-ft) Inc.Store (cubic-feet) Cum.Store (cubic-feet) 922.50 54 0 0 926.00 54 189 189 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 926.00 55 0 0 927.00 2,000 1,028 1,028 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 922.50' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #2 Primary 926.40' 1.0' long x 1.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 Coef. (English) 2.69 2.72 2.75 2.85 2,98 3.08 3.20 3.28 3.31 3.30 3.31 3.32 piscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 13.19 hrs HW=926.17' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=922.50' (Free Discharge) L2=Broad•Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Page 41 of 151 n naf f 0.00 cfs 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045- 3 0.04 0 U. 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01- Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Pond 3P: French Drain Hydrograph I1 Inflow I Outflow I 1 Discarded ID Primary Inflow Area=563 sf Peak Elev=926.17' Storage=112 cf 0.00 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 1214 16 1820 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 4042 44 4648 50 52 54 56 5860 6264 66 6870 72 Time (hours) Page 42 of 151 Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 3P: French Drain Elevation (feet) Surface (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) Elevation (feet) Surface (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) 922.50 54 0 925.15 54 57 922.55 54 1 925.20 54 58 922.60 54 2 925.25 54 59 922.65 54 3 925.30 54 60 922.70 54 4 925.35 54 62 922.75 54 5 925.40 54 63 922.80 54 6 925.45 54 64 922.85 54 8 925.50 54 65 922.90 54 9 925.55 54 66 922.95 54 10 925.60 54 67 923.00 54 11 925.65 54 68 923.05 54 12 925.70 54 69 923.10 54 13 925.75 54 70 923.15 54 14 925.80 54 71 923.20 54 15 925.85 54 72 923.25 54 16 925.90 54 73 923.30 54 17 925.95 54 75 923.35 54 18 926.00 109 76 923.40 54 19 926.05 206 81 923.45 54 21 926.10 304 91 923.50 54 22 926.15 401 106 923.55 54 23 926.20 498 126 923.60 54 24 926.25 595 150 923.65 54 25 926.30 692 180 923.70 54 26 926.35 790 214 923.75 54 27 926.40 887 253 923.80 54 28 926.45 984 297 923.85 54 29 926.50 1,082 346 923.90 54 30 926.55 1,179 400 923.95 54 31 926.60 1,276 459 924.00 54 32 926.65 1,373 522 924.05 54 33 926.70 1,471 591 924.10 54 35 926.75 1,568 664 924.15 54 36 926.80 1,665 742 924.20 54 37 926.85 1,762 825 924.25 54 38 926.90 1,859 913 924.30 54 39 926.95 1,957 1,006 924.35 54 40 927.00 2,054 1,103 924.40 54 41 924.45 54 42 924.50 54 43 924.55 54 44 924.60 54 45 924.65 54 46 924.70 54 48 924.75 54 49 924.80 54 50 924.85 54 51 924.90 54 52 924.95 54 53 925.00 54 54 925.05 54 55 925.10 54 56 Page 43 of 151 a 0 3 o u. 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Proposed Conditions Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Printed 9/20/2024 Page 15 Summary for Link 'IL: Street Inflow Area = 12,336 sf, 42.54% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.26" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,320 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 1L: Street Hydrograph I fl cIR rf 0.98 cfs 1 Inflow Area=12,336 sf o Inflow 1 0 Primary Page 44 of 151 Link 2L: private property Hydrograph LL 0." 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 Time (hours) Inflow Area 10,245 sf {0 Inflow 0 Primary rf 0.98 cfs Proposed Conditions MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Prepared by Gregory Group DBA Demarc Printed 9/20/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-5b s/n 09313 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Link 2L: private property Inflow Area = 10,245 sf, 65.10% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.74" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf Primary = 0.98 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2,341 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Page 45 of 151 Appendix D Soil Summary Page 46 of 151 44° 52'40" N 44° 52' 35" N 8 8 Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota 470920 4710:0 470E60 4709130 8 471040 471030 44° SY 40" N 44° 52' 35" N S Map Scale: 1:778 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet Meters 40 60 A 0 35 70 140 210 Feet Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: DIM Zone 15N WGS84 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Nom Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/19/2024 Page 1 of 3 N 0 10 20 Page 47 of 151 Map Unit Description: Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Hennepin County, Minnesota L52C—Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: gj3r Elevation: 800 to 1,020 feet Mean annual precipitation: 23 to 35 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 124 to 200 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 75 percent Lester and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Setting Landform: Moraines Parent material: Loamy till Description of Lester Setting Landform: Hills on moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bt - 7 to 38 inches: clay loam Bk - 38 to 60 inches: loam C - 60 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 6 to 18 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 25 percent Gypsum, maximum content: 1 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.5 inches) USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/19/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Page 48 of 151 Map Unit Description: Urban land-Lester complex, 2 to 18 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Kingsley Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills on moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/19/2024 ATM Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 Page 49 of 151 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: November 13, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 7.2 Prepared By: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Community Development Item Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances – 6016 Vernon Avenue Action Requested: Recommend the City Council approve the requests. Information/Background: The applicant, Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza, is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. To accommodate the request, the following is required: • A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). • A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. • Site Plan Review with the following Variances: o A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. o A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. o Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report 2. Engineering Memo 3. Updated Site Plans with added Parking Stalls 4. Proposed Plans and Renderings 5. Applicant Narrative 6. Traffic and Parking Study 103124 7. Site Location, Zoning & Comp. Plan 8. Site Buildable Area - Meeting Required Setbacks Page 50 of 151 Page 51 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 1 November 13, 2024 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances – 6016 Vernon Avenue Information / Background: The applicant, Jake Schaffer of Station Pizza, is proposing to remodel and expand the existing Kee’s auto repair building at 6016 Vernon Avenue into a 1,685 square foot, 20-seat restaurant. The new restaurant would be a Station Pizza with indoor dining, take-out and delivery service. The existing site is zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District, which allows only automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. Restaurants are allowed uses in the PCD-1, Planned Commercial Zoning District. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential use. To accommodate the request, the following is required: ➢A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from MDR, Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial (a new land use designation). ➢A Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District 4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1, with a lot size variance to allow a restaurant in the PCD-1 District less than 1 acre in size. ➢Site Plan Review with the following Variances: 1. A Side Yard setback variance from 25 to 13 feet for the building expansion. 2. A Front Street Setback Variance (toward Eden Prairie Road) from 35 feet to 20 feet for the building expansion and from 35 feet to 9 feet for the patio and bike rack area. 3. Parking Lot Setback Variances from 10 feet to 0 feet for separation between the building and parking lot, and from 20 feet to 0 feet along the north lot line for 1 new stall. Page 52 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Because the use is not allowed on the site, and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required, the City has complete discretion to approve or deny the request. (See attached pyramid of discretion.) The applicant has gone through the sketch plan process and per the attached applicant narrative have made the following changes to the plans. ➢Created indoor seating for 20 people. ➢Added a building addition on the west side of the building for dry storage/coolers. ➢Created a paved area for bike parking on the north side of the building. ➢Added tandem parking for employees. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Easterly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Southerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Westerly: Apartments/Condos; zoned PRD-3, Planned Residential District and guided Medium Density Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 16,373 square feet in size and contains a single-story two-bay auto repair shop, accessory buildings and parking lot. The main building was constructed in 1957 and the site was also used as a gas station until the early 1990’s. In 1992 the gas pumps were removed, and soil pollution remediation was done. The cleanup was satisfactorily done, and no further action was required by the MPCA. (See attached documentation from the MPCA.) Planning Guide Plan designation: MDR, Medium Density Residential Zoning: PCD-4, Planned Commercial District – 4 Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment This site is unique in Edina in that it is, and has been zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District for the automotive repair use and gas station, however, it is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Medium Density Residential. The Comprehensive Plan designation has been in place at least since 1980 when that Comprehensive was adopted. Staff assumes that when that Comprehensive Plan land use designation was established to match the existing medium density multi-family housing located to the west. Page 53 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 3 To accommodate the request, a Comprehensive Plan amendment is requested to change the future land use designation from Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial, which would be a new land use category in the Comprehensive Plan, which would accommodate a small-scale commercial use. Below shows the proposed change: Below is the potential new land use category for a “Neighborhood Commercial” designation and the current designation of the site, MDR, Medium Density Residential designation: NC Neighborhood Commercial Primary uses: small scale retail/commercial uses. Building footprints are generally less than 2,000 sq. ft. (or less for individual storefronts). Floor to area ratio per zoning code. MDR Medium- Density Residential Applies to attached housing (townhouses, quads, etc.) and multi-family complexes of moderate density. May also include small institutional uses. In new development or redevelopment, improve integration of multi-family housing into an interconnected street network and work to create an attractive, pedestrian- friendly street edge. 5 – 12 residential dwelling units/acre Existing Land Use Plan Site Site Proposed Land Use Plan Change Existing ProposedNeighborhood Commercial Page 54 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 4 Based on the size of the subject property and the density allowed in the MDR Districts, four (4) units could be constructed on the subject property. However, given the odd shape, small size and restrictive setbacks required with two of three street frontages, variances would be needed redevelop the site with housing. (See the attached graphic showing the buildable area for the site.) This site is similar in size to the property at 4404 Valley View Road that received City approval to build 4 townhomes. That site is 11,691 square feet in size, while the subject property is 16,373 square feet in size. Rezoning Per Section 36-216 of the City Code, the Commission may recommend approval by the council based upon, but not limited to, the factors below. As mentioned previously with a Rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the City has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for approval and denial on this one. (See alternatives on pages 11-14 in this report.) Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed rezoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; therefore, an amendment is requested. The current Comprehensive Plan designation is for medium density attached residential which is described as “attached housing (townhouses, quads, etc.) and multi- family complexes of moderate density. May also include small institutional uses. As mentioned, 4 units would the maximum density allowed on the site. Will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract. If the site plan is properly designed for a restaurant and hours of operation are regulated, the use itself may not be detrimental to a residential neighborhood. Hours of operation are proposed to be 11 AM – 9 PM Sunday through Thursday, and 11 AM – 10 PM on Friday and Saturday. Future expansion of the building would be a concern. The parking regulations and setback requirements would provide the City with some safeguards regarding any expansion. Any expansion of the building would require a variance to the parking and setback regulations. That would be a decision for a future planning commission and/or City Council to make. Will not result in an overly intensive land use. Again, a case can be made either way for this standard. As mentioned above, with appropriate regulations on the site the use could fit in well in the neighborhood and be an asset as a local food option. The proposed parking would meet the minimum parking standards, and the traffic study determined that the existing roads would support the restaurant. There is adequate separation between buildings and the site would be screened by landscaping and fencing. Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards. Traffic study was done by Stantec and concludes that the existing roadways can support the project. (See attached traffic study.) Page 55 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 5 Conforms to the provisions of this section and other applicable provisions of this Code. The site plan proposed for the Rezoning does not conform to several provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Variances are requested as noted in the compliance table on page 7 of this report. Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. As mentioned above, there are several variances requested, including a building expansion to extend to the west. However, the closest adjacent structure would be 105+/- feet away and would be screened by fencing and landscaping. Site Plan Review Parking Based on the City Code requirement, Section 36-1311, the proposed parking spaces meet City Code. A 1,684 square foot, 20-seat restaurant with 7 employees on a maximum shift would require 24 stalls. The applicant is offering 24 stalls, plus 3 tandem stalls for employees. The applicant is also proposing bike rack space for up to 20 bikes. (See attached site plan.) A parking study was conducted by Stantec and concluded that there would be adequate parking. (See attached study.) Site Circulation/Access/Traffic Primary access to the proposed development would be off Vernon Avenue, by the two existing access points. Stantec conducted a traffic study. The study concludes that the existing roadways can be supported by the project. (See attached traffic study.) Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, 17 overstory trees would be required. The proposed plans show 30 existing and proposed overstory trees on site. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. The applicant is proposing a cedar fence to provide screening the residential area to the north and west. Per Section 36-1457 (4) of the Zoning Ordinance: “Off-street parking facilities containing six or more spaces and all loading facilities shall be screened from streets located within 50 feet, and from lots which are used for any residential purpose which are located within 50 feet. Said distance shall be the shortest distance between the parking facility or loading facility and the nearest part of the street or the nearest lot line of the residential lot.” This site is located within 50 feet of residential uses to the west and north but would be screened. Trash Enclosure Trash storage facilities, including recycling storage facilities, shall be screened from all lot lines and public road rights-of-way. As proposed, the trash enclosure would be located within the building, in the southwest corner, within the addition. Page 56 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 6 Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be generally subject to the comments and conditions outlined in the attached memo. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The building material of the existing building is metal panel and tile. The proposed addition is designed to match with metal and cementitious panels. The project would meet the City Code provision regarding expansion of existing buildings. Per Section 36-617 (11) f. “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.” Mechanical Equipment Any new rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Loading Dock/Trash Enclosures Loading area would be within the existing parking areas. The trash enclosure is located on the south end of the building. 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 Page 57 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 7 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 City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies a new sidewalk on the north side of Vernon Avenue between Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard to Olinger Road/Highwood Drive. Therefore, a boulevard-style sidewalk should be installed on the site, should this proposal be approved per the attached engineering memo. Compliance Table City Standard (PCD- 1) Proposed Structure Setbacks Front – Vernon Front – Eden Prairie Road (patio) Front – Eden Prairie Road (Addition) Side – West (Addition) Parking & Drive-aisle Setbacks Front – Vernon Front – Eden Prairie Road Side – West Space between building and parking area 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 25 feet 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet 40 feet (30 feet existing)** 9 feet* 20 feet* 13 feet* 1 Foot** 3 feet** (Variance for handicap stall) 20 feet 0**&* Height 2-1/2 stories and 30 feet 1 story Parking Stalls Restaurant = 1 stall per 100 s.f. + number of employees on max shift (24 total stalls required) 24 stalls Lot Size (Restaurant in PCD-1)1 acre 16,373 s.f. FAR 1.0 .13% *Variance Required **Existing Condition Page 58 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 8 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues For this project, the City of Edina has complete discretion to approve or deny this request. A case can be made for both approval and denial of this project. Findings for both approval and denial of this project are provided for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider. (See page 11-14 of this report.) As outlined below, staff is recommending approval of this proposal, however it is primarily due to the fact that the site is currently zoned for auto oriented uses (PCD-4) like the gas station and auto repair station that have existed on the site for 50+ years, and this proposed use could be considered a less intensive land use with a PCD-1 Zoning. Primary Issues •Is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment reasonable? Yes. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 2. The existing zoning is PCD-4, which allows automobile service centers, gas stations and car washes. The Metropolitan Council requires cities to have their land use plan within the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with their zoning designations. 3. The amendment creates a new smaller scale land use category that is currently not included in the Comprehensive Plan. The closest existing category is the NN, Neighborhood Node. This site is too small to be considered a node. 4. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The use would be more intensive in terms of traffic generated and activity on the site. (120 daily trips for a 1,200 s.f. automobile care center and 181 daily trips for the restaurant.) Green space and landscaping would be added to improve the visual appeal of the site. The existing fence that is in a very poor condition would be replaced by a 6-foot-tall cedar fence. The fence would be located along the north and west lot lines to provide screening. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. 5. The proposed use would be supported by the existing roads. The number of vehicular trips to the site would have minimal impact on the existing roads. (See page 7-1 of the traffic study.) Page 59 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 9 •Is the proposed Rezoning to PCD-1 reasonable? Yes. Staff supports the request for the following reasons: 1. If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were approved, the findings for rezoning per Section 36-216 of the City Code would be met. 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a small-scale restaurant and reuse and restoration of the existing building. 3. If the site plan is properly designed for a restaurant and hours of operation are regulated, the use itself would not be detrimental to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Hours of operation are proposed to be 11am-9pm Sunday through Thursday and 11am-10pm on Friday and Saturday. Hours could be further regulated through a liquor license or the rezoning. 4. Parking regulations and setback requirements would provide the City with some safeguards regarding any expansion and intensification of the use. The proposed parking would meet the minimum parking standards, and the traffic study determined that the existing roads would support the restaurant. 5. There is adequate separation between buildings and the site would be screened by landscaping and fencing to minimize impact on adjacent properties. •Are the proposed Variances justified? Yes. Subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, staff believes that the Variances requested with this project are reasonable and meet the variance criteria as outlined below. ➢The existing use on the property has been commercial for over 50 years. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing zoning on the site. ➢The closest adjacent structure would be 105+/- feet away and would be screened by fencing and landscaping. ➢The practical difficulties include the existing small lot size, irregular shape of the lot and street frontages on two of the three sides. ➢It would be difficult to build anything on this site without a variance, due to the small size and shape of the lot. (See attached buildable area.) ➢The proposed Cedar Fence along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. ➢The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. Minnesota Statutes and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance require that a variance shall not be granted unless the following findings are made: 1. The variances would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Ariticle 1. – In General; Section 36-1 – Findings state “Through the enactment of the Page 60 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 10 ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Section. 36-2 Objectives of the Zoning Ordinance includes: ➢Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. ➢Encourage orderly development, use and maintenance of office, commercial and industrial uses which are compatible with the residential character of the city. ➢Recognize and distinguish commercial districts at the neighborhood level, the community level and the regional level, so as to provide retail establishments compatible in use and scale with surrounding properties, especially those used for residential purposes. ➢Establish standards for landscaping and screening to contribute to the beauty of the community, add to the urban forest and buffer incompatible uses from one another. By adding conditions to minimize impacts on adjacent property, such as landscaping, screening, limiting hours of operation the intent of the ordinances could be met. 2. The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, the proposal would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Below is the land use categories and description. 3. There are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The term “practical difficulties” means the following: i. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. 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. These variances are reasonable given the existing small size of the site, the triangular shape of the site, and two lot frontages. The use would be reasonably screened by landscaping and fencing and located 105 feet to the building to the west. The existing use of the site is commercial. There are other restaurants in Edina on property that is Zoned PCD-1 that are less than one acre. Those include Convention Grill, Hello Pizza, Town Hall Station. NC Neighborhood Commercial Primary uses: small scale retail/commercial uses. Building footprints are generally less than 2,000 sq. ft. (or less for individual storefronts). Floor to area ratio per zoning code. Page 61 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 11 ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Yes. The unique circumstances including the small lot size, location of existing building, unique shape, existing zoning being commercial (PCD-4) and the Comprehensive Plan designation of multi-family residential are not created by the landowner. iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances would not alter the essential character of the locality. The existing use has been automobile repair with outside storage. The remodeling of the building, upgrading of the parking lot, added landscaping and fencing would improve the look of the site, which would remain commercial. Options for consideration For this project, the Planning Commission and City Council have complete discretion to approve or deny the request. A case can be made for both approval and denial of this project. The following outlines alternatives for the Planning Commission to consider. Denial Comprehensive Plan Recommend the City Council deny the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the site from MDR, Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The subject property is too small to accommodate all that is being proposed on the site. As proposed, with the number of variances being requested, the restaurant would be an overly intensive use for the site. 2. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is not compatible with the adjacent residential land uses. The variances proposed are significant. 3. The site is currently guided for Medium Density Residential land uses. Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances Recommend the City Council Deny the Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Site Plan Review and Variances. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the Rezoning findings Per Section 36-216 of the City Code. specifically: a) The proposal is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. Page 62 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 12 b) The site plan would be detrimental to properties given the large variances requested, lack of green space, setback and separation from residential uses, potential parking issues and vehicle maneuvering in and out of the site. c) Will result in an overly intensive land use. d) Does not conform to the provisions of the City Code. e) Does not “provide a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. 2. The Variance criteria has not been met. There are no practical difficulties that prohibit reasonable use of the property. 3. The practical difficulty is caused by the applicant’s desire for a restaurant that does not fit properly on the site to minimize impacts on adjacent properties. 4. PCD Zoning District minimum area for restaurants is 1 acre in size. Approval Comprehensive Plan Recommend the City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the site from MDR, Medium Density Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed use and site plan to accommodate the use is more compatible with adjacent land uses than the previous gas station and automobile service station located on the site. The existing building would be used rather than tearing it down and replacing it. The proposal would be an improvement to the site compared to current conditions. 2. The subject property has been used a commercial site with proper zoning for over 50 years. The proposed amendment is reasonable given the change in use from an auto-repair and former gas station to a restaurant. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would then be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site. 3. The proposed amendment would allow a re-development of a commercial property that would be an amenity serving the area. A restaurant would be a community gathering space for this neighborhood which does not have this type of use in the area. 4. With the requirement of an 8-foot cedar fence located along the west and north lot lines and the landscaping proposed, the project would be screened from adjacent residential land uses to minimize impacts. Rezoning and Site Plan with Variances Recommend the City Council Approve the Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Site Plan Review and Page 63 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 13 Variances. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The re-zoning would be generally consistent with existing commercial zoning on the site. 2. The proposed variances are reasonable given the practical difficulties associated with the site including the triangular shape of the site, street frontage on two sides, and the lots small size. 3. The project would include a restoration of the existing building; the expansion area would the west, where the nearest building would be 105+/- feet away. 4. The proposed Cedar Fence along the west and north lot lines would minimize impact on the adjacent residential use to the north and west. 5. The proposal would be an improvement over existing conditions and use of the site. 6. There are other restaurants in Edina on property that is Zoned PCD-1 and are less than one acre. Those include Convention Grill, Hello Pizza, Town Hall Station. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Site Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Site Plans dated October 22, 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. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 3. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated November 4, 2024. 4. Approval of a Site Improvement Performance Agreement at Final approval, 5. Variances are subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Final Rezoning and Final Site Plan approval by City Council. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 7. Final Rezoning is contingent on the Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 8. An eight-foot cedar fence must be installed and maintained along the west and north lot line as proposed to provide screening from adjacent properties. 9. A boulevard-style sidewalk must be constructed along Vernon Avenue. Sidewalk must be 6 Page 64 of 151 STAFF REPORT Page 14 feet minimum width with a 5-foot minimum width boulevard. 10. Hours of construction shall be limited to: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed. 11. Hours of operation shall be determined at the time of final approvals and would be subject to any conditions established as part of a liquor license. 13. Noise from the site shall be subject to the city's noise regulations in accordance article II, division 5 of chapter 23. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan and Variances subject to the findings above. Deadline for a City decision: February 4, 2025 Page 65 of 151 DATE: 11/4/2024 TO: 6016 Vernon Ave, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Ross Bintner, Engineering Services Manager RE: 6016 Vernon Ave – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, and storm water. Plans reviewed were dated September 13, 2024. Review Comment Required For General 1. The applicant is renovating the existing building and parking lot. A 423 SF addition and 6 additional parking stalls are proposed. General Comment Survey 2. Show all existing and proposed public and private easements if applicable. General Comment Living Streets 3. Sidewalk required along Vernon Avenue – 6-ft minimum width with a 5-ft minimum width boulevard connecting to the existing sidewalk near Highwood Drive. This sidewalk will be maintained by the City after construction. Grading/Building Permit 4. Staff recommends a more direct pedestrian connection (in the form of a 5’ minimum width sidewalk) between the building and Eden Prairie Road to promote multi-modal connectivity with the adjacent residential neighborhood. This sidewalk would be maintained by the property owner. Grading/Building Permit 5. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 6. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit Traffic and Street 7. The traffic study estimates 15 and 181 additional trips during the p.m. peak and daily, respectively. The existing roadway systems General Comment Page 66 of 151 can handle these additional trips. No proposed roadway improvements are required as part of this project. 8. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Grading/Building Permit 9. ROW permit from Hennepin County may be required for any driveway entrance replacements. Comply with City standard plate 410 where possible. Any road patching shall conform to Hennepin County standards. General Comment 10. Proposed trees, vegetation, signage and other items adjacent to intersections should maintain a clear view zone as defined in Section 26-190 of City Code. Grading/Building Permit 11. Bicycle parking stalls shall be in convenient, well-lit locations within 50’ of a public entrance to the building. Rack style and spacing for surface parking should follow the recommendations of the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP). General Comment 12. Applicant should review turning movements and travel routes for delivery vehicles. Steps should be taken to minimize the impact of delivery vehicles on pedestrian movement through the site (additional signage, designated delivery zones, etc.). General Comment Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Application shows no changes to sanitary sewer and water utilities. General Comment 14. 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 15. Verified sealed well located onsite. General Comment Storm Water Utility 16. Provide copy of permit from Nine Mile Creek WD. Grading/Building Permit 17. Provide copy of maintenance agreement in favor of Nine Mile Creek WD. Grading/Building Permit 18. Provide As-built record of rain garden. Final / Permit Closure Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 19. A SWPPP consistent with the State General Construction Site Stormwater Permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Sustainability 20. The Sustainable Building Policy would not apply. Applicant is encouraged to take advantage of the City’s free energy General Comment Page 67 of 151 assessment program to increase the building’s energy efficiency and access utility and city rebates. Other Agency Coordination 21. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. Grading/Building Permit 22. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit may be required. General Comment Page 68 of 151 City Submittal Set 001Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 6016 Vernon Avenue South, Edina, MN Project Narrative This project is a proposed redevelopment of the property at 6016 Vernon Ave. S, which was previously Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a Station Pizzeria restaurant with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in services. The scope of the work would include a full interior renovation of the existing building, updating the building's exterior, and all new landscaping and paving. A concrete pad at the rear of the building will be extended to provide space for walk-in coolers and dry storage, as well as a trash enclosure. The proposed design will extensively beautify and screen the property from the surrounding single- family homes, while scrubbers on the exhaust hoods will also mitigate any aromas. Sufficient parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, to avoid any encroachment or congestion onto adjacent neighborhood streets. Creating a Station Pizzeria on this site would provide a valuable amenity and gathering space in a neighborhood that currently lacks walkable/bikeable dining options. Gross Building Area Phase Area Existing 1262 SF New 423 SF Total Area 1685 SF Parking Stall Type Count Accessible 1 Standard 26 Total Stalls 27 Proposed Hours of Operation: Sunday - Thursday: 11am - 9pm Friday - Saturday: 11am - 10pm Includes (3) tandem stalls, see Site Plan Page 69 of 151 PRD-3 PRD-3 R-2 PRD-2 R-1 R-1 Site Proposed PCD-1 Low Density Residential Site M e d iu m D e n s ity R e s id e n tia lProposed Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential L o w D e n s ity A tta c h e d R e s id e n tia l002Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Zoning Analysis Development Summary: Zoning District: Min. Front Yard Setback: Min. Side Yard Setback: Min. Rear Yard Setback: Max. Height: Max. F.A.R. Site Information Address: PID: Site Area: Existing Ord. PCD-4 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 0.3 Proposed PCD-1 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 1.0 6016 Vernon Ave S Edina, MN, 55436 3211721230027 16,373 SF (0.38 acres) Current Zoning PCD-4 Planned Commercial District The current zoning for the site at 6016 Vernon Ave. S is PCD-4, which allows the previous use of automobile service centers, as well as carwashes and gas stations. The proposed re-zoning to PCD-1 would retain the site as commercial zoning, but would allow a restaurant as a principal use for the site. Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Medium-Density Residential In the Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use map shows this site as Medium Density Residential. As none of the other categories accurately describe this unique site, the project proposes creating a new category, Neighborhood Commercial, intended to denote small commercial uses directly serving the surrounding neighborhood. The site is adjacent to the Low Density Attached and Medium Density Residential areas in the neighborhood along Vernon Ave. It would serve these more concentrated populations as well as the surrounding Low Density Residential. Proposed Zoning PCD-1 Planned Commercial District Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Neighborhood Commercial Page 70 of 151 003Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Site Context This site is located along Vernon Avenue, a main road in this part of Edina, among residential neighborhoods. By extending the sidewalk on Vernon Ave. along the site, it will create a more complete path for pedestrians from the immediate neighborhood to visit the pizzeria. Vernon Ave. also has a bike lane and the site is relatively close to Bredesen Park, which has many paths for walking and cycling. This proposal will include bike parking to make it convenient for cyclists to visit as well. Pedestrian Circulation Bike Lane Sidewalk Amenity Key Park Trail Future SidewalkSite Page 71 of 151 004Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Existing Conditions Existing Building The existing building and parking lot have been vacant for multiple years and are accordingly in a state of disrepair. The existing exterior materials consist of metal panels, wood paneling, and concrete masonry. This project would fully renovate the interior spaces, repair and refinish the existing exterior materials and provide new exterior signage for Station Pizzeria, and demolish and re-pave the parking lot with new striping, sidewalks, and an accessible building entrance. Page 72 of 151 Existing Building 1,262 SF Existing green space New dense planting along North and West boundaries New dense planting along North and West boundaries (14) new stalls (3) new tandem stalls N e w a s p h a lt p a v in g Relocated curb cut Relocated curb cut V e rn o n A v e n u e Eden Prairie Road Existing path New perennial planting bed New perennial planting bed New 6' tall fence New 6' tall fence (5 ) n e w s t a lls 24' - 0"Existing foliage to remain Existing foliage to remain 13' - 5" 2 0 ' P a r k in g S e t b a c k 10' Parking Setback 25' Building SetbackBike Racks (20) Trash New Coolers + Dry Storage 423 SF Building Entry Line of building below roof overhang New City sidewalk 10' - 0" Employee Parking Delivery Driver Parking Behind Employees (2 ) n e w s ta lls Flush curb between ADA stall and access aisle This area to remain clear to serve as access aisle for ADA stall 8' - 0" 005Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Site Plan Parking: 17 (1 spot/100 sf) + 7 (1 spot for each employee at a major shift) + 0 (1 for each loading dock) =24 required 24 + 3 tandem = 27 stalls provided 3/32" = 1'-0" Site Context Plan - Revised Parking Page 73 of 151 12' - 1"11' - 10"16' - 10"19' - 3 1/8"7' - 4 7/8"4' - 9 7/8" 7' - 6" 19' - 2"2' - 6"6' - 0" 12' - 1 1/8"5' - 2 7/8"8' - 10"Trash Enclosure Bike Rack Unisex Toilet Kitchen / Dining Unisex Toilet Party Room Mechanical Takeout Counter Coolers / Dry Storage Main Accessible Entry Dishwashing 11' - 11"10' - 0"35' - 6"Fixed Counter SeatingGarage Lobby Toilet Mechanical25' - 0"12' - 0" Existing concrete slab Existing concrete slab 006Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Floor Plans 0"2'-0" 4'-0"8'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" Proposed Floor Plan 1/4" = 1'-0" Existing Floor Plan Page 74 of 151 2 2 56 3 4 4 3 2 318' - 0"2 2 5 6 3 2 32 3 1 33 11' - 8"15' - 0"007Station Pizzeria Edina 10/22/24 Elevations 0" 8'-0"16'-0" 32'-0" EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 Painted CMU Painted Existing Metal Panel Painted Cementitious Panels Glass Panel Overhead Doors Black Storefront Black Painted Steel Page 75 of 151 City Submittal Set 001Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 6016 Vernon Avenue South, Edina, MN Project Narrative This project is a proposed redevelopment of the property at 6016 Vernon Ave. S, which was previously Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a Station Pizzeria restaurant with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in services. The scope of the work would include a full interior renovation of the existing building, updating the building's exterior, and all new landscaping and paving. A concrete pad at the rear of the building will be extended to provide space for walk-in coolers and dry storage, as well as a trash enclosure. The proposed design will extensively beautify and screen the property from the surrounding single- family homes, while scrubbers on the exhaust hoods will also mitigate any aromas. Sufficient parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, to avoid any encroachment or congestion onto adjacent neighborhood streets. Creating a Station Pizzeria on this site would provide a valuable amenity and gathering space in a neighborhood that currently lacks walkable/bikeable dining options. Gross Building Area Phase Area Existing 1262 SF New 423 SF Total Area 1685 SF Parking Stall Type Count Accessible 1 Standard 20 Total Stalls 21 Proposed Hours of Operation: Sunday - Thursday: 11am - 9pm Friday - Saturday: 11am - 10pm Page 76 of 151 PRD-3 PRD-3 R-2 PRD-2 R-1 R-1 Site Proposed PCD-1 Low Density Residential Site M e d iu m D e n s ity R e s id e n tia lProposed Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential L o w D e n s ity A tta c h e d R e s id e n tia l002Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Zoning Analysis Development Summary: Zoning District: Min. Front Yard Setback: Min. Side Yard Setback: Min. Rear Yard Setback: Max. Height: Max. F.A.R. Site Information Address: PID: Site Area: Existing Ord. PCD-4 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 0.3 Proposed PCD-1 35' 25' 25' 3 stories (36') 1.0 6016 Vernon Ave S Edina, MN, 55436 3211721230027 16,373 SF (0.38 acres) Current Zoning PCD-4 Planned Commercial District The current zoning for the site at 6016 Vernon Ave. S is PCD-4, which allows the previous use of automobile service centers, as well as carwashes and gas stations. The proposed re-zoning to PCD-1 would retain the site as commercial zoning, but would allow a restaurant as a principal use for the site. Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Medium-Density Residential In the Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use map shows this site as Medium Density Residential. As none of the other categories accurately describe this unique site, the project proposes creating a new category, Neighborhood Commercial, intended to denote small commercial uses directly serving the surrounding neighborhood. The site is adjacent to the Low Density Attached and Medium Density Residential areas in the neighborhood along Vernon Ave. It would serve these more concentrated populations as well as the surrounding Low Density Residential. Proposed Zoning PCD-1 Planned Commercial District Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Neighborhood Commercial Page 77 of 151 003Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Site Context This site is located along Vernon Avenue, a main road in this part of Edina, among residential neighborhoods. By extending the sidewalk on Vernon Ave. along the site, it will create a more complete path for pedestrians from the immediate neighborhood to visit the pizzeria. Vernon Ave. also has a bike lane and the site is relatively close to Bredesen Park, which has many paths for walking and cycling. This proposal will include bike parking to make it convenient for cyclists to visit as well. Pedestrian Circulation Bike Lane Sidewalk Amenity Key Park Trail Future SidewalkSite Page 78 of 151 004Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Existing Conditions Existing Building The existing building and parking lot have been vacant for multiple years and are accordingly in a state of disrepair. The existing exterior materials consist of metal panels, wood paneling, and concrete masonry. This project would fully renovate the interior spaces, repair and refinish the existing exterior materials and provide new exterior signage for Station Pizzeria, and demolish and re-pave the parking lot with new striping, sidewalks, and an accessible building entrance. Page 79 of 151 Existing Building 1,262 SF Existing green space New dense planting along North and West boundaries New dense planting along North and West boundaries (13) new stalls (3) new stallsN e w a s p h a lt p a v in g Relocated curb cut Relocated curb cut V e rn o n A v e n u e Eden Prairie Road Existing path New perennial planting bed New perennial planting bed New 6' tall fence New 6' tall fence (5 ) n e w s t a lls 24' - 0"Existing foliage to remain Existing foliage to remain 13' - 5" 2 0 ' P a r k in g S e t b a c k 10' Parking Setback 25' Building SetbackBike Racks Trash New Coolers + Dry Storage 423 SF Building Entry Line of building below roof overhang New City sidewalk 10' - 0" 005Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Site Plan Parking: 17 (1 spot/100 sf) + 4 (1 spot for each employee at a major shift) + 0 (1 for each loading dock) =21 required, provided 3/32" = 1'-0" Site Context Plan Bike Racks Bike RacBike Racks Additional Bike Racks 3 Tandem Stalls for Employees / Drivers 1 Additional Parking Stall 2 Additional Parking Stalls Revised Parking Summary 21 Original Stalls Shown +3 Additional Parking Stalls +3 Tandem Employee / Driver Stalls 24 Standard Stalls 3 Tandem Stalls 27 Total Parking Stalls Bike Racks 10 Original Bike Spaces +10 Additional Bike Spaces 20 Total Bike Spaces Page 80 of 151 12' - 1"11' - 10"16' - 10"19' - 3 1/8"7' - 4 7/8"4' - 9 7/8" 7' - 6" 19' - 2"2' - 6"6' - 0" 12' - 1 1/8"5' - 2 7/8"8' - 10"Trash Enclosure Bike Rack Unisex Toilet Kitchen / Dining Unisex Toilet Party Room Mechanical Takeout Counter Coolers / Dry Storage Main Accessible Entry Dishwashing 11' - 11"10' - 0"35' - 6"Garage Lobby Toilet Mechanical25' - 0"12' - 0" Existing concrete slab Existing concrete slab 006Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Floor Plans 0"2'-0" 4'-0"8'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" Proposed Floor Plan 1/4" = 1'-0" Existing Floor Plan Page 81 of 151 2 2 56 3 4 4 3 2 318' - 0"2 2 5 6 3 2 32 3 1 33 11' - 8"15' - 0"007Station Pizzeria Edina 09/13/24 Elevations 0"8'-0"16'-0" 32'-0" EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 Painted CMU Painted Existing Metal Panel Painted Cementitious Panels Glass Panel Overhead Doors Black Storefront Black Painted Steel Page 82 of 151 Page 83 of 151 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C000 - COVR.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:24 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC000CIVIL COVER SHEETBJLBJLPRELIMINARY PLANSPROJECTLOCATIONSTATION PIZZERIAFOR SITE, GRADING, DRAINAGE, EROSIONCONTROL, UTILITIES, AND LANDSCAPING FORPROJECT CONTACTSBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALNOTES:1. NOT ALL OF THE SHOWN ABBREVIATIONSARE UTILIZED WITHIN THIS CONSTRUCTIONPLAN SET.2. ALL SHOWN ABBREVIATIONS MAY BE WITHOR WITHOUT PERIODS.3. ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS MAY BESHOWN ON THESE AND OTHER CIVIL SHEETS.BIT = BITUMINOUS ASPHALTBMP, BMPs, BMPS, BMP'S = BESTMANAGEMENT PRACTICESBOC = BACK OF CURBINGBTM = BOTTOMBW = BOTTOM OF (RETAINING) WALL (ATGROUND/FACE)C&G = CURB AND GUTTERC, COMM = COMMUNICATION (UTILITY LINE)C, CONC. = CONCRETECB# = STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN, INLET/INTAKE, ETC.CBMH# = STORM SEWER CATCH BASINMANHOLECD = CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (PHASE)CIP = CAST-IN-PLACE (CONCRETE)CL, = CENTERLINECO# = SANITARY/STORM SEWER CLEANOUTCPP = CORRUGATED PLASTIC/POLYETHYLENEPIPEDD = DESIGN DEVELOPMENT (PHASE)DIA = DIAMETERDIP = DUCTILE IRON PIPEDT = DRAIN TILE (UTILITY LINE)DWY = DRIVEWAYE = ELECTRICAL (UTILITY LINE)EG = EXISTING GRADEELEV, EL = ELEVATIONENT = ENTRANCEEOF = EMERGENCY OVERFLOW (LOCATIONAND/OR ELEVATION)ESMT OR EASE = EASEMENTEX, EXIST. = EXISTINGFDC = FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFEMA = FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENTAGENCYFES = FLARED END SECTIONFFE = FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONFG = FINISHED GRADEFH, HYD = FIRE HYDRANTFM = FORCE MAINFO = FIBER OPTIC (UTILITY LINE)FUT. = FUTUREGAS = GAS LINE (UTILITY LINE)G = GUTTERGEN. = GENERATORGV = GATE VALVEHDPE = HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PIPEHP = HIGH POINTHWL = HIGH WATER LEVELIFC = ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTIONINV = INVERT/FLOWLINE OF FEATURELP = LOW POINTLS = LANDSCAPE/LANDSCAPINGMH#, STM# = STORM SEWER MANHOLEMATCH = MATCH (EXISTING)MEP = MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBINGMEP/T = MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING,TELECOMMUNICATIONSMH = MANHOLEMPCA = MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROLAGENCYMUTCD = MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFICCONTROL DEVICESN/A = NOT APPLICABLE, OR NOT CONSTRUCTEDNPDES = NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGEELIMINATION SYSTEMOH = OVERHEADOHP = OVERHEAD POWEROHT = OVERHEAD TELEPHONE/INTERNETOHTV = OVERHEAD TELEVISIONOCS# = OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTUREPDR = PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEWPE = POLYETHYLENE PIPEP.E. = PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERPL, = PROPERTY LINEPP = POWER POLEPR, PROP. = PROPOSEDPRELIM. = PRELIMINARYPVC = POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPERCP = REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPERIM = RIM OF STRUCTUREROW, R/W = RIGHT-OF-WAYSAN MH#, SSMH# = SANITARY SEWER MANHOLESBI = SOLUTION BLUE, INC. (PLAN, REPORT, ETC.CREATOR)SD = SCHEMATIC DESIGN (PHASE)SS, SAN = SANITARY SEWER OR SERVICESTA = ALIGNMENT STATIONSTM, ST = STORM SEWER OR SERVICESW, S/W = SIDEWALK/WALKSWMP = SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLANSWPPP = STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLANT, TEL = TELEPHONE (UTILITY LINE)TBD = TO BE DETERMINED (IN FUTURE PHASE)TC, T/C = TOP OF CURBINGTP = TOTAL PHOSPHORUSTRANS = TRANSFORMERTSS = TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDSTV = TELEVISION (UTILITY LINE)TW = TOP OF (RETAINING) WALLTYP. = TYPICALUG = UNDERGROUNDWM, WTR = WATERMAINZC = ZERO CURBUNITS/MEASUREMENTS:AC = ACREAF, AC. FT. = ACRE-FEETCF, CU. FT. = CUBIC FEETCFS = CUBIC FEET PER SECONDCY, CU. YDS. = CUBIC YARDSEA = EACHFT = FEETGPM = GALLONS PER MINUTEHR = HOURIN = INCH/INCHESLS, LBS. = POUNDSLF, LIN. FT. = LINEAR FEETMIN = MINUTESF, SQ. FT. = SQUARE FEETSY, SQ. YDS. = SQUARE YARDSABBREVIATIONS1.SAFETY NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTEDCONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLEFOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURINGPERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND SHALL NOTBE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER, THE OWNER, AND/ORTHE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE ISNOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETYMEASURES IN, ON, AND/OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.2. THE DESIGN SHOWN IS BASED ON ENGINEER'S UNDERSTANDING OF EXISTING CONDITIONS BASEDUPON THE FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED BY ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING, CO ON SEPT. 9,2021. IF THE CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANSWITHOUT EXCEPTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE MADE, AT OWN EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHICSURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AND SUBMIT IT TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW.3. THIS WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT EDITIONS OF THE "MnDOTSTANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION", THE "PROTECTING WATER QUALITYIN URBAN AREAS" (BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES) PREPARED BY THE MINNESOTA POLLUTIONCONTROL AGENCY (MPCA), THE APPLICABLE CITY'S/COUNTY'S SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENTPLAN (SWMP), AND THE LATEST CITY'S/COUNTY'S STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.3. ALL FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, CITY, WATERSHED, AND/OR OTHER PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINEDBY THE CONTRACTOR. ALL COSTS, FEES, ETC. OF SAID PERMITTING SHALL BE CONSIDEREDINCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT CONTRACT.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET AND MATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS; AND SHALL PROVIDETRANSITION(S) AS NECESSARY, REQUIRED, AND/OR DIRECTED.5. ALL MATERIALS SHALL MEET THE LATEST CITY'S/COUNTY'S SPECIFICATIONS. ALL CONSTRUCTIONSHALL MEET CITY'S/COUNTY'S SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT EDITION.6. ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OR DESIGNATEDSTAGING AREAS AND PROPERLY PROTECTED, STABILIZED, ETC.7. ALL CONTROL OF WATER AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BESEQUENCED, INSTALLED, AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR.8. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLPLANS OR STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS (SWPPP) FOR THE PROJECT. SEE THERESPECTIVE PLAN(S), DETAILS, AND NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.9. ALL PUBLIC ROADWAYS, EXISTING BUILDINGS, AND/OR PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS INSIDE THECONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL REMAIN OPEN FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION..10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE OF TREES/SHRUBS NOT MARKED FORREMOVAL, INCLUDING MINIMIZING DISTURBANCE OF SOILS WITHIN THE TREES' DRIPLINE ZONES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STOCKPILE MATERIAL INSIDE THE TREE DRIPLINES.11. NO CONCRETE OR RUBBLE SHALL BE BACKFILLED ONSITE. BURNING OF DEBRIS ON SITE SHALLNOT BE ALLOWED.12. WETLANDS AREAS DESIGNATED TO BE PROTECTED SHALL BE AVOIDED. ANY WETLAND AREASDAMAGED BY SITE OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED AS REQUIRED BY THE JURISDICTIONALAGENCY.13. SHOWN LAYOUTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL, MEP/T, STRUCTURAL, LIGHTING, ETC. WERE CURRENT ATTHE TIME OF THE SUBMITTAL - THE CONTRACTOR(S) SHALL VERIFY ALL PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.14. SEE ALL OTHER CIVIL PLAN SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND INFORMATION PRIOR TO THESTART OF CONSTRUCTION.15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER NOTES ON THEFOLLOWING SHEET(S) PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.16. WHETHER NOTED OR NOT, ALL NOTES ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR(S), SUBCONTRACTOR(S), ETC.PERFORMING THEM.17. THE CONTRACTOR(S), SUBCONTRACTOR(S), ETC. SHALL REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES,MODIFICATIONS, ETC. IN THESE PLANS, THE NOTED REPORTS, ETC. IMMEDIATELY TO THE SIGNINGPROFESSIONAL(S) - WITH A WRITTEN FOLLOW UP, PHOTOGRAPHS, COURSE OF ACTION, ETC.FOLLOWING WITHIN FIVE (5) CALENDAR DAYS.18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TO REDUCE THE AREADISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.19. THE WATERSHED AGENCY FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT(NMCWD).20. PROPERTY IRONS SHALL BE VERIFIED AND REPLACED PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE(S) OFOCCUPANCY BY THE CITY/COUNTY.21. ENCROACHMENTS INTO COUNTY AND/OR STATE ROW ARE NOT ALLOWED UNLESS WRITTENAUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN GRANTED FROM SAID AGENCY.22.CONSTRUCTION IN RIGHT-OF-WAY: ALL WORK ON AT LEAST UTILITIES, CURBS, DRIVEWAYS,ALLEYS, AND SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY MUST BE DONE TO CITY/COUNTYSTANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS BY A CONTRACTOR LICENSED AND INSURED TO WORK IN THECITY.GENERAL NOTESVICINITY MAPINDEX OF SHEETSARCHITECTCIVIL ENGINEERSURVEYORLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTMOMENTUM DESIGN GROUP BENJAMIN LUCAS, PE ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. JOSEPH SCHEFFLER755 PRIOR AVE NORTHSOLUTION BLUE, INC. 17917 HIGWAY NO. 7PLAN-TYPE SITE PLANNINGSUITE 301A6110 BLUE CIRCLE DRIVE MINNETONKA, MN 55345& LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREST. PAUL, MN 55104SUITE 230TEL: 952-474-7964MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408TEL: 952-583-9788MINNETONKA, MN 55343TEL: 737-900-1464TEL: 651-294-0038Sheet List TableSheet NumberSheet TitleRevision No. Revision DateC000CIVIL COVER SHEETC001GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATIONC002GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATIONC100EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALSC200EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILSC201EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILSC210EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PH IC211EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - PH IIC300CIVIL SITE PLANC400GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC500UTILITIES PLANC900GENERAL DETAILSC901GENERAL DETAILSC902GENERAL DETAILSC950 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 1C951 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 2C952 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 3C953 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 4C954 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 5C955 MnDOT STANDARD PLAN - 5-297.250 - 6Page 84 of 151 BENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-202454265COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C001 - NOTES.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC001GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATIONBJLBJLCONTINUED ONTHE NEXT PAGE6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MN----THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE (OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER/INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER). ALLSOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILSENGINEER.A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:COMPANY: ADDRESS: PROJ. NO.:DATE:PHONE:XXX-XXX-XXXX (CONTACT)THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INDEPENDENTLY OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS REPORT.NO GROUNDWATER WAS ENCOUNTERED BY THE SOIL BORINGS.GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT1. DEMOLITION NOTES ARE NOT COMPREHENSIVE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION TO OBTAIN A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENDED SCOPE OF WORK.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LIMITS OF REMOVALS WITH PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSAND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING EXISTING SITE FEATURES (STRUCTURES, CURBS,WALKS, PAVEMENTS, UTILITIES, SIGNAGE, FENCES, TREES, ETC.) WHICH ARE TO REMAIN. REPAIROR REPLACE, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION, ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING PROPERTY OR SITEFEATURES WHICH ARE TO REMAIN, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.3. COORDINATE DISRUPTION OF UTILITY SERVICES WITH THE OWNER'S PROJECT REPRESENTATIVEAND RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S), PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDETEMPORARY UTILITIES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BUILDING SERVICES.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISCONNECTION OF UTILITY SERVICE(S) TOEXISTING BUILDINGS PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING(S).5. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES WITH FENCING, BARRICADES,ENCLOSURES, ETC. TO THE BEST PRACTICES.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS TO ENSURE ADJACENTPROPERTY IS NOT DAMAGED DURING ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.7. PRIOR TO START OF ANY WORK, ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROTECTION MEASURESSHALL BE IN PLACE. SEE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP SHEETS FOR LAYOUT,DETAILS, NOTES, ETC.8. PRIOR TO START OF ANY WORK, CLEARLY IDENTIFY AND LABEL EACH TREE THAT IS TO REMAINPRIOR TO STARTING ANY SITE CLEARING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT OWNER'S PROJECTREPRESENTATIVE FOR SITE INSPECTION AFTER ALL "TO REMAIN" TREES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED.TREES THAT ARE TO BE PROTECTED SHALL HAVE TEMPORARY FENCING PLACED AT THE DRIP LINEAROUND EACH TREE.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE ALL VEGETATION NOT TO BE REMOVED BY CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RE-SEEDING OR SODDING AREAS DISTURBED BYCONSTRUCTION.10. DAMAGE TO DESIGNATED EXISTING TREES AND/OR VEGETATION SHALL BE MITIGATED DURINGCONSTRUCTION THROUGH PRUNING, ROOT PRUNING, FERTILIZING, AND WATERING.11. STOCKPILE TOPSOIL FOR REUSE ONSITE. VERIFY THE STRIPPED TOPSOIL MEETS THESPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED USE. VERIFY THE AMOUNT OF TOPSOIL NEEDED ANDLEGALLY REMOVE EXCESS FROM SITE.12. ALL MATERIAL REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE AND IN A LEGAL MANNER.13. MATERIAL TO BE SALVAGED FOR REUSE BY THE OWNER SHALL BE REMOVED UNDAMAGED ANDIN AN USABLE CONDITION. TEMPORARY PROTECTED STORAGE ONSITE, OR ELSEWHERE, MAY BEREQUIRED.14. ONSITE BROKERAGE OF MATERIALS SALVAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR FROM MATERIALS TO BEREMOVED IS NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR OWNER'S WRITTEN APPROVAL.15. LOCATION AND ELEVATIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MET SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY THECONTRACTOR THROUGH FIELD EXPLORATIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTORSHALL REPORT TO THE ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THEIR MEASUREMENTS ANDTHESE PLANS IN WRITING.16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EXPLORATION EXCAVATIONS AND LOCATE EXISTINGUNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUFFICIENTLY AHEAD OF CONSTRUCTION TO PERMIT REVISIONS TOTHE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEENTHEIR MEASUREMENTS AND THESE PLANS IN WRITING. IF REVISIONS ARE NECESSARY BECAUSEOF ACTUAL LOCATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKEPRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN AND ANY OTHER EXISTINGLINES NOT OF RECORD OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT AND/OR MINIMIZE SAW-CUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL(S) TOONLY THOSE AREAS WHERE IT IS REQUIRED AS SHOWN ON THESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS. IF ANYDAMAGE IS INCURRED ON ANY OF THE SURROUNDING PAVEMENT, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLBE RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS REMOVAL AND REPAIR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.17.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TO REDUCE THE AREADISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.17.2. USE METHODS AND OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES THAT PREVENT SAW CUT SLURRY ANDPLANNING WASTE FROM LEAVING CITY AND/OR MNDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND FROMENTERING STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: INLETS,CURB FLOW LINES, DITCHES, AND CULVERTS.18. WHERE EXISTING PIPES ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE, THE EXPOSED PIPE ENDS SHALL BEBULKHEADED SHUT WITH A WATERTIGHT NON-SHRINK CONCRETE GROUT AT A THICKNESS OFNOT LESS THAN ONE (1) PIPE DIAMETER. REMAINING PIPE SHALL ALSO BE FILLED WITH FLOWABLEFILL.19. ABANDON OR REMOVE ALL SANITARY, WATER, AND/OR STORM SERVICES PER CITY/COUNTYSTANDARDS. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH THE CITY/COUNTY. REMOVE ALL SERVICES TO THEMAIN PER THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY'S STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS. ALL STREET RESTORATIONSHALL BE COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL STANDARDS.20. WHERE EXISTING MANHOLES TO BE ABANDONED SHALL HAVE THE PIPE LEADS PLUGGED FROMWITHIN THE MANHOLE WITH TWO (2) FEET OF WATERTIGHT NON-SHRINK CONCRETE GROUT.THE TOP SECTION SHALL BE REMOVED, THEN THE MANHOLE SHALL BE FILLED AND COMPACTEDWITH GRANULAR PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL OR FLOWABLE FILL. SEE DETAIL SHEETS.21. THE CONTRACTOR IS ADVISED TO DOCUMENT PRE-EXISTING CONDITION OF AT LEAST THE PUBLICRIGHT-OF0WAY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.22. REMOVE AND REPAIR EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED, CRACKED,DETERIORATED, HOLDING WATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHED TO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.23. ADJACENT STREETS, SIDEWALKS/TRAILS, AND/OR ALLEYS MUST BE SWEPT TO KEEP THEM FREE OFSEDIMENT, DEBRIS, ETC.24. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MONITOR CONDITIONS AND SWEEP AS NEEDED OR WITHIN 24 HOURSOF NOTICE BY THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA.GENERAL SITE DEMOLITION AND CLEARING NOTESGENERAL GEOMETRIC AND PAVING NOTES1. SITE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SET SHALL BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. CHECK ALLPLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS. AT LEAST BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND PAVING SHALL BE LAIDOUT ONSITE BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.2. ALL PAVING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2.1. THE FACE OF CURB IS ASSUMED TO BE EIGHT (8") INCHES FROM THE BACK OF CURB.2.2. ALL CURB AND GUTTER TO BE MnDOT B612 CURB AND GUTTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS ANDDIMENSIONS OF EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS, AND/OR EXACTBUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS.4. ALL SIDEWALKS SHALL HAVE POSITIVE SLOPE AWAY FROM THE BUILDING. THE MAXIMUM CROSSSLOPE SHALL BE TWO (2.0%) PERCENT AND THE MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE SHALL BE FIVE(5.0%) PERCENT, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.5. FOR ALL PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS, SEE MnDOT STANDARD PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS.6. ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE FOUR (4') FEET AT THE BACK OF CURB, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. DETECTABLE WARNING SHALL BE USED ON ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTE RAMPS, SEE 'ACCESSIBILITYGRADING PLAN' SHEETS FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE LOCATIONS AND THE 'ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS'.8. NO SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL EXCEED 2.08% (1:48) IN ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND/ORLOADING AREAS.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH NEW AND EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES, SIDEWALKS,AND/OR CURBING AT SAWCUT LINES, WHILE NOT ALLOWING PONDING OF WATER AT ALL JOINTS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SMOOTH GRADE TRANSITION ACROSS NEW AND EXISTINGJOINTS.10. ALLOW MINIMUM OF SEVEN (7) DAYS CURE FOR CURB AND GUTTER PRIOR TO PAVING.11. ALLOW MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS COOLING PRIOR TO ALLOWING ANY TRAFFIC ON BITUMINOUSPAVING.12. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR BITUMINOUS AND CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION DEPTHS ANDSPECIFICATIONS.12.1. ANY PATTERNED CONCRETE PAVING AND PATIO AREAS AS DEFINED BY SEPARATE HATCHINGSHALL MEET THE TEXTURE, COLOR, AND PATTERN REQUIREMENTS AS SHOWN ON THEARCHITECTURAL AND/OR LANDSCAPING PLANS.13. SIDEWALK GRADES MUST BE CARRIED ACROSS DRIVEWAYS AND/OR ALLEYS.14. REPLACE EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED, CRACKED, DETERIORATED, HOLDINGWATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHED TO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.15. TYPICAL JOINT SPACING IN CONCRETE PAVEMENT SHALL BE THE FOLLOWING:15.1. AT NO TIME SHALL THE RESULTING CONCRETE PANEL EXCEED 225 SQUARE FEET.15.2. AT BOTH ENDS OF A RADIUS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.3. SIDEWALKS OR TRAILS: EQUAL TO CORRESPONDING WIDTH WITH EXPANSION JOINTS ATEACH CHANGE OF DIRECTION, ALONG BACK OF CURB, AND ALONG BUILDING FACADE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.4. ROADWAYS OR STREETS: LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; AND TYPICALLY EQUALLYAT 12 TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.5. DRIVEWAYS OR ENTRIES: CENTER AND/OR LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; ANDTYPICALLY EQUALLY UP TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS WITH EXPANSION JOINTS ATALONG BACK OF CURB AND ALONG BUILDING FACADE - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.6. PARKING LOT DRIVING AISLES: LANE LINES FOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; AND TYPICALLYEQUALLY AT 12 TO 15 FEET FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.7. PARKING LOT PARKING AREAS: MATCH DRIVE AISLE JOINTS; AND ACROSS THE MIDDLE OFTHE STALL PERPENDICULAR TO PARKING - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.8. PARKING LOT PARKING AREAS, HEAD-TO-HEAD: MATCH DRIVE AISLE JOINTS; ACROSS THEMIDDLE OF THE STALL PERPENDICULAR TO PARKING; AND ALONG THE PAVEMENT MARKINGBETWEEN THE HEAD-TO-HEAD STALLS - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.15.9. CURB AND GUTTER: TYPICAL TEN (10') FOOT SPACING WITH EXPANSION JOINTS AT EACHCHANGE OF DIRECTION AND/OR 60 FOOT MAXIMUM SPACINGS.15.10.EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION'S (MnDOT) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND/ORSTANDARD PLATES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE AND FENCINGINFORMATION.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ETC. WITH AT LEASTTHE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.18. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, ENSURE NO SETTLING OF NEW AND EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES,SIDEWALKS, AND CURBS WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.19. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING.SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING NOTES1. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINNESOTA MUTCD, CURRENT VERSION.2. SEE THE REGULATORY SIGN DETAIL FOR SIGN AND POST DETAILS FOR SIGN DESIGNATION ANDSIZE INFORMATION.3. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE PER MINNESOTA MUTCD, CURRENT VERSION, SEEACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POST DETAIL(S).4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOUR (4") INCH WIDE SOLID YELLOW LATEX AND/OR EPOXYPAINT STRIPING IN ALL PAVED PARKING AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SAME MATERIAL, WIDTH, STYLE/PATTERN, AND COLORSTRIPING IN ALL PAVED ROADWAY AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND/OR SYMBOLS AT ACCESSIBLEPARKING SPACES PER MINNESOTA MUTCD, ADA, AND LOCAL CODES.7. ANY PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND/OR SYMBOLS THAT EXISTED PRIOR TO THE START OF THEPROJECT SHALL BE REPLACED IN-KIND.7.1. IF IT IS LATEX AND/OR EPOXY PAINT, ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PAVEMENT MARKINGREPLACEMENT SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTOR.GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY NOTES1. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE ALL ADA ROUTES ARE COMPLIANT WITH ADA AND MINNESOTASTATE ACCESSIBILITY CODE REGULATIONS AND IS TO NOTIFY ENGINEER, IN WRITING, IF FIELDCONDITIONS PROHIBIT COMPLIANCE.3. ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINALSLOPE OF FIVE (5%) PERCENT (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS WHERE A MAXIMUMLONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 8.33% (1:12) IS ALLOWED, AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08%(1:48).3.1. THE MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL AND ACCESS AISLESHALL BE UP TO 2.08% (1:48).3.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADAROUTE(S) PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT.3.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER, IN WRITING, IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS ADISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT.COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING THE CONTRACTOR.3.4.ANY PAVING SLOPES SHOWN ON THE 'GRADING PLANS' ARE AT THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION,AND DOES NOT REFLECT THE TRUE SLOPE EVEN ONE (1") INCH AWAY.4. ALL TURNING LOCATIONS AND/OR LANDING PADS SHOWN SHOULD PROVIDE AT MAXIMUMSLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48) IN ALL DIRECTIONS AND IN A MINIMUM FOUR (4') FOOT BY FOUR (4')FOOT AREA.5. SEE MNDOT STANDARD PLANS FOR TRUNCATED DOME DETAILS AND NOTES.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ETC. WITH AT LEASTTHE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IN PLACE BEFORE BEGINNINGSITE GRADING ACTIVITIES.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING AND SUBMITTING THE APPLICATIONFOR THE MPCA GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WHENCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR THE PROJECT DISTURBS GREATER THAN ONE (1) ACRE.2.1. ALL THE CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORMWATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA'SNATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT (NPDES PERMIT)AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENTS.2.2. THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP AND ALL OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS MUST BEKEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES OF CUT, FILL, AND/ORWASTE MATERIAL TO BE HANDLED (E.G., STRIPPED, REMOVED, REPLACED, ETC.) AND FOR THEAMOUNT OF GRADING TO BE DONE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT.3.1. ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPORTING SUITABLE MATERIAL AND EXPORTINGUNSUITABLE/EXCESS/WASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TOADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT. THECONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENTPROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE(S) OF THIS PROJECT.5. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL SHALL BE PERFORMED ON THESTREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEMAXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTIONOF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILSENGINEER. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTIONTHAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AND/OR WILL NOT PASS A TEST ROLL. LEGALLY REMOVEUNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THEOWNER.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP, STOCKPILE, AND RE-SPREAD EXISTING ONSITE TOPSOIL, IFMATERIAL IS APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND/OR THE SPECIFICATIONS. PROVIDE AUNIFORM THICKNESS OF SIX (6") INCHES MINIMUM IN ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BELANDSCAPED.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LEGALLY DISPOSE OF ANY EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL, UNLESS OTHERWISEDIRECTED.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TEMPORARY PROTECTION MEASURES DURING ALLCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SEE SITE REMOVALS PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. PROVIDEADDITIONAL PROTECTION AS NECESSARY AS WORK PROGRESSES.10. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT ALL TIMES.12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT "GUTTER OUT" WHEREWATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS "GUTTER IN"CURB.13. NO GRADED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 3:1 (HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF GRADING ANDPROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITH UNIFORM SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHEREELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES.15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT THE DISTURBED AREA AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND CONDUCTGRADING OPERATIONS IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION.16. SOIL SURFACES COMPACTED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND REMAINING PERVIOUS UPONCOMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION MUST BE DECOMPACTED. IN ADDITION, TREE ROOTS ANDOTHER EXISTING VEGETATION MUST BE PROTECTED UNTIL FINAL FINAL REVEGETATION OROTHER STABILIZATION OF THE SITE IS ACCEPTED.17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ENTRY AND/OR PATIO LOCATIONS, SIZES, ELEVATIONS, ETC.WITH AT LEAST THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STOOPS, FOUNDATIONS, ADA ACCESS, ETC.18. SEE EROSION CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP SHEETS FOR BMP CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND NOTES.19. SEE CIVIL SITE AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PERMANENT TURF RESTORATION AND PLANTINGINFORMATION.20. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE VARIOUS CONDUIT WITH AT LEAST A SINGLE PULL-STRING(MINIMUM 300 POUND TENSION) FOR NOTED UTILITY SERVICE LINES IN AT LEAST THE "GENERALUTILITY NOTES". SEE THE MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SITE UTILITY INFORMATION.GENERAL GRADING NOTESPage 85 of 151 BENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-202454265COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C001 - NOTES.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC002GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATIONBJLBJL1. THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS CONCERNING TYPE ANDLOCATION OF UTILITIES HAS BEEN DESIGNATED UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL 'C'. THESE QUALITY LEVELSWERE DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02. ENTITLED "STANDARDGUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA".2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING/PROPOSED UTILITY MAINS ANDSERVICES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE LOCATED UTILITIES ANDTHE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN(S) SHOULD BE NOTED AND FORWARDED TO THE ENGINEER INWRITING.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS TO ENSURE ADJACENTPROPERTY IS NOT DAMAGED DURING UTILITY INSTALLATION(S).4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDER(S)FOR THE REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF THE RESPECTIVE EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BYTHE SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY THERESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANY'S OWN FORCES.5. ALL UTILITY CONSTRUCTION TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS AND/ORSPECIFICATIONS OF THE STATE, CITY ENGINEER'S ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), AND THECITY.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OF THE LOCAL GOVERNINGAUTHORITIES (LGAs) FOR CONNECTION TO AT LEAST PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ANDSTORM SEWER UTILITIES AND WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW), INCLUDINGPROVIDING A WRITTEN AND APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AS NECESSARY.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR UTILITY CONNECTIONS ANDUTILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY/COUNTY. THE CITY/COUNTY SHALL BENOTIFIED 48-HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION OR ANYREQUIRED TESTING.7.1. ALL PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, FEES AND CHARGES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THECONTRACTOR AND ARE INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO,AND/OR TAP ANY WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY/COUNTY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TODO SO BY THE CITY/COUNTY IN WRITING. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED ORUNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THECONTRACTOR AND AT HIS/HER EXPENSE.9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED CATCH BASINS, INLETS/INTAKES,AND/OR MANHOLES TO BE FLUSH WITH THE FINAL GRADE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9.1. COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S).9.2. ANY UTILITY STRUCTURES BEING RESET IN PAVED AREAS SHALL MEET THE RESPECTIVEUTILITY OWNER'S REQUIREMENTS AT LEAST FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN ALL SURFACE FLOW CHANNELS, PIPES, AND STRUCTURES AFTERFINAL SURFACES ARE ESTABLISHED AND PRIOR TO PROJECT CLOSEOUT.11. ALL WATER AND SEWER CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY/COUNTY ENGINEERINGDESIGN STANDARDS, LATEST EDITION.12. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE PVC, SDR 35, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.1. SANITARY SERVICES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT (8.0') FEET OF COVER OVER THE TOPOF PIPE, WITHOUT ADEQUATE PIPE INSULATION INSTALLED.12.2. SANITARY SERVICE CONNECTIONS TO THE BUILDING(S) SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.12.3. SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.4. SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE CONNECTED TO A WYE ON THE MAIN AND SHALL NOT BECONSTRUCTED INTO MANHOLES UNLESS APPROVED BY THE CITY/COUNTY IN WRITING.APPROVED CONNECTIONS TO A MANHOLE REQUIRE A KOR-N-SEAL CONNECTION, ORAPPROVED EQUAL, AND MUST MATCH THE MANHOLE INVERT.12.5. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13. WATERMAIN PIPE SHALL BE PVC, C900 (DUCTILE IRON - CLASS 52), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.1. ALL WATER MAIN AND SERVICES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT (8.0') FEET OF COVEROVER THE TOP OF WATERMAIN, WITHOUT HAVING ADEQUATE PIPE INSULATION INSTALLED.13.2. ALL WATERMAINS SHALL BE INSTALLED TO MEET MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH(MnDoH) REGULATIONS.13.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTSON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER THE CITY'S/COUNTY'S STANDARDS.13.4. ALL WATER VALVES AND VALVE BOXES, CURB/CORPORATION STOPS AND STANDPIPE, ETC.SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.5. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED BETWEEN FITTINGS, BENDS, VALVES, ETC., UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.13.6. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18-INCHES AND A MINIMUM HORIZONTALSEPARATION OF TEN (10') FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALLWATERMAIN AND A SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM, AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS.12. STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) SHALL BE DUAL WALL ANDCONFORM TO AASHTO M294 AND TO MNDOT SPECIFICATION 3278. PIPES 3" TO 10" IN DIAMETERMJST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252, PIPES 12" TO 60" IN DIAMETER MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTOM294. ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM STANDARD D3212 AND MNDOT SPECIFICATION327812.1. ROOF DRAIN LEADERS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.2. STORM SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.3. PIPE LENGTHS ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.4. PIPE LENGTHS AT FLARED END SECTIONS (FES) ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURETO TOP OPENING OF THE FES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANHOLES (MINIMUM THREE (3') FOOT SUMPS) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTEDAS THE LAST STRUCTURE THAT IS ROAD ACCESSIBLE PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO ANY WATERBODY. ADDITIONAL PROTECTION MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN OUTLETTING TO A SENSITIVEWATER BODY.13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ACCESS TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (FDC),AND/OR A PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY STANDPIPE, FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONAL AT ALLTIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.14. ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS SHALL BE COORDINATED AND/OR PERMITTED WITH THECITY/COUNTY. FIELD VERIFY UTILITY MAIN LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, SIZES, ETC.15. UTILITY SERVICE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE BUILDING(S) ARE SHOWN CORRECTLY AS OF THE DATEOF THIS CIVIL PLAN SET.15.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UTILITY SERVICE LOCATIONS BY COMPARING THIS CIVILPLAN SET WITH AT LEAST THE MEP/T PLANS PRIOR TO ANY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION.16. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL UTILITY LOCATIONS ANDINFORMATION.17. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING, IF NOT SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SHEETS.18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH AT LEAST THE ELECTRICAL AND/ORCOMMUNICATIONS CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE PROPERLY SIZED CONDUITS FOR AT LEAST SITELIGHTING AND/OR UTILITY SERVICES. SEE THE MEP/T PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SITE UTILITYINFORMATION.19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDERSAND/OR OWNERS FOR REMOVAL AND/OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BY SITEIMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY UTILITYCOMPANY'S OWN FORCES. ALL PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, FEES, AND CHARGES ARE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.GENERAL UTILITY NOTES6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MN----Page 86 of 151 LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4566810TYP.4223355579PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C100 - EC & REM.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC100EXISTING CONDITIONS &REMOVALSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542651. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. PROTECT AND MAINTAIN ANY EXISTING FEATURES NOT SHOWN FORREMOVAL, RELOCATION, SALVAGE, ETC.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THEIR MEANS AND METHODS TOREDUCE THE AREA DISTURBED IN THE PUBLIC ROW.4. TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE THE AREASOF DISTURBANCE TO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT AREA(S).5. REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE FEATURES (E.G., PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK,CURB AND GUTTER, ETC.) TO NEAREST JOINT LINE WITH FULL-DEPTHSAWCUTS.6. REMOVE AND REPAIR EXISTING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK THAT IS HEAVED,CRACKED, DETERIORATED, HOLDING WATER, AND/OR ASPHALT PATCHEDTO THE NEAREST JOINT LINE.NOTESEXISTING ZONING: PCD-4 PLANNED COMMERCIALPARCEL/LOT: TRACT C, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 194, FILES OF THEREGISTRAR OF TITLES, EXCEPT THAT PART OF SAID TRACT EMBRACED WITHINREGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1081, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTATOTAL LOT AREA16,584 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA(S): (AS SURVEYED AND ON PARCEL/LOT)BUILDING(S)1,270 SQ. FT.DRIVEWAY, ETC.10,369 SQ. FT.SIDEWALK, ETC.845 SQ. FT.TOTAL 12,484 SQ. FT.IMPERVIOUS = 75.3% OF PARCEL/LOTNOTE(S):1. REMAINING AREA IS PERVIOUS (GRASSED W/ SOME TREES).SITE DATA6016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL802800|800.00COPROPERTY LINEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINDRAINTILEGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICUNDERGROUND ELECTRICTELEPHONESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPSIGN & BOLLARDLIGHT POLEADA PAVEMENT MARKINGPARKING STALL COUNT11. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL PLAN REMOVALS FOR BUILDINGRENOVATIONS2. REMOVE BITUMINOUS3. REMOVE CONCRETE4. REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK5. REMOVE CURB & GUTTER6. REMOVE WOOD FENCE7. REMOVE PLANTER BOX AND CURBING8. REMOVE TREE9. PROTECT POWER POLE10. PROTECT TREEKEYNOTESEXISTINGREMOVALSLEGENDCURB AND GUTTER REMOVALFENCE REMOVALUTILITY REMOVALSAWCUTBUILDING REMOVALPAVEMENT REMOVALCONCRETE SIDEWALK REMOVALCONCRETE REMOVALEXISTING FEATURE REMOVALTREE PROTECTION~~~~~~~~~~~~~SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 87 of 151 PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC200EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL DETAILSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL RADIUS = 1 FOOTPER INCH OFTRUNK DIAMETER48"18" MIN. POSTEMBEDMENTEROS 01: 4/221TREE PROTECTION FENCENOT TO SCALE42" ORANGE FENCEDRIP LINEEXISTING GRADEFENCE LOCATION ATLIMITS OF CRITICALROOT ZONEDRIP LINESTUDDED STEEL"T" POST6' MIN LENGTHMAX 8' SPACING6"6"APPROVED GEOTEXTILEFABRIC (36" WIDTH)LAY FABRIC IN TRENCH30" MIN.LENGTH 24" MIN.DEPTHNOTES:1. POST SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEED 6 FEET2. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL BE "MIRAFI" TYPE OR APPROVED EQUAL3. TRENCH SHALL BE A MIN. OF 6 INCHES DEEP BY 6 INCHES WIDE4. MACHINE SLICED METHOD IS ACCEPTABLE2" SQUARE SHARPENED WOODPOST @ 6' MAX. SPACING ORMEET CITY REQUIREMENTSBACKFILL OVER THE TOP OFFABRIC & COMPACT THESOIL OR MACHINE SLICE8"-12" DEEP (PLUS 6" FLAP)EROS 02: 4/222SILT FENCE - STANDARD MACHINE SLICEDNOT TO SCALEFABRIC SECURELYFASTENED TO POSTGRADEEROS 06 (ALT): 4/223CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE - AGES MUD MATNOT TO SCALEC200C200C2001. CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA NOTES, STANDARD PLATES, AND/OR DETAILS SHALL CONTROL OVER OTHERNOTES, PLATES, AND/OR DETAILS.2.(NAME OF INDIVIDUAL) IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CLEANLINESS OF THE SITE AND THEMAINTENANCE OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS AND CAN BE REACHED AT(TELEPHONE NUMBER).3. THE STREET WILL BE SWEPT CLEAN BEFORE THE END OF EACH DAY OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION, WHENSEDIMENT IS TRACKED INTO THE STREET.4. AREAS WITH SLOPES GREATER THAN 3 TO 1 AND AREAS NEXT TO WETLANDS/WATERBODIES GRADED OREXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY VEGETATION, MULCHING,OR OTHER MEANS AS SOON AS PRACTICAL AND DOUBLE SILT FENCE.5. ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WILL BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL. UNWORKED SOILS THAT REMAINEXPOSED AND NOT IN USE FOR LONGER THAN 14 DAYS WILL BE COVERED WITH TEMPORARY SEED(GRASS, OATS, OR WHEAT).6. NO CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR ON SITE UNLESS IT IS DONE WITH AN APPROVED MINNESOTAPOLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) DEVICE OR STANDARD.7. ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE SURROUNDED WITH ADEQUATE PERIMETER CONTROL TO PREVENTSEDIMENTATION AND EROSION.8. FROM MARCH 21ST TO NOVEMBER 1ST, DROP INLET PROTECTION WITH CURB OVERFLOW INSTALLED INALL STORM SEWER INLETS DOWNSTREAM OF THE SITE WITHIN ONE (1) BLOCK OR AS DIRECTED BY THECITY.9. THE SITE SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AT ALL TIMES AND REFUSE PROPERLY CONTROLLED.10. TEMPORARY PUMPING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHOUT THE USE OF AN APPROVED MINNESOTAPOLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) DEVICE OR STANDARD.11. SOIL COMPACTION SHALL BE MINIMIZED; AREAS OF COMPACTED SOIL WILL BE REMOVED OR LOOSENEDVIA TILLING TO A DEPTH OF NO LESS THAN FOUR (4”) INCHES.12. DUST CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE TAKEN.13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT ON A WEEKLY BASIS AND AFTER ANY RAINFALL GREATER THAN ONE(1”) INCH ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES AND MAKE ANY REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY. ANINSPECTION LOG SHALL BE KEPT ONSITE DETAILING THESE INSPECTIONS AND REPAIRS PERFORMED.SITE WINTERIZATION AND SPRING REINSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS:1. BY NOVEMBER 1ST1.1. REMOVE ALL INLET PROTECTION.1.2. STABILIZE EXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING UNWORKED GROUND AND STOCKPILES, WITHDISC-ANCHORED STRAW BLANKET. TO AVOID STABILIZING STOCKPILES, EXCAVATED MATERIALSMAY BE HAULED OFF-SITE.1.3. INSTALL OR REPAIR PERIMETER CONTROL.1.4. REMOVE DEBRIS, DUMPSTERS, AND PORTABLE RESTROOM FROM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (WIDTHVARIES) TO AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH SNOW PLOWING OPERATIONS.1.5. REPAIR DAMAGED SIDEWALK PANELS (CONCRETE OR TEMPORARY ASPHALT).2. BY MARCH 21ST2.1. REINSTALL INLET PROTECTION. PROVIDE NUMBER AND LOCATION OF INLET PROTECTION.2.2. INSTALL OR REPAIR PERIMETER CONTROL.GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES:BEFORE DEMOLITION AND GRADING BEGINS:1. INSTALL SILT FENCE/BIO ROLL AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE CONSTRUCTION AREA.2. SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES MUST REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEENESTABLISHED AND THEN SHALL BE REMOVED. SEDIMENT CONTROLS MAY BE REMOVED TOACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BUT MUST BE REPLACED BEFORE THE NEXTRAIN.3. A TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT EACH ACCESS POINT TO THESITE AND A SIX (6”) INCH LAYER OF ONE (1”) TO TWO (2”) INCH ROCK EXTENDING AT LEAST 50 FEETFROM THE STREET INTO THE SITE AND SHALL BE UNDERLAIN WITH PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. THEENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION BY TOP DRESSING OR WASHING TO PREVENTTRACKING OR FLOW OF SEDIMENTS ONTO PUBLIC STREETS, WALKS OR ALLEYS. POTENTIAL ENTRANCESTHAT ARE NOT SO PROTECTED SHALL BE CLOSED BY FENCING TO PREVENT UNPROTECTED EXIT FROMTHE SITE.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL INLET PROTECTION ON ALL EXISTING STORM SEWER INLETS INACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY STANDARD DETAILS. INLET PROTECTION SHALL ALSO BE PROVIDED ON ALLPROPOSED STORM SEWER INLETS IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF THE INLET. INLETPROTECTION MUST BE INSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT IMPOUND WATER FOR EXTENDEDPERIODS OF TIME OR IN A MANNER THAT PRESENTS A HAZARD TO VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.DURING CONSTRUCTION:1. WHEN DIRT STOCKPILES HAVE BEEN CREATED, A DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE SHALL BE PLACED TOPREVENT ESCAPE OF SEDIMENT LADEN RUNOFF AND IF THE PILES OR OTHER DISTURBED AREAS ARE TOREMAIN IN PLACE FOR MORE THAN 14 DAYS, THEY SHALL BE SEEDED WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATION SEED MIXTURE 22-111 AT 100 POUNDS PER ACRE FOLLOWED BY COVERING WITHSPRAY MULCH.2. A DUMPSTER SHALL BE PLACED ON THE SITE FOR PROMPT DISPOSAL OF ANY CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS.THESE DUMPSTERS SHALL BE SERVICED REGULARLY TO PREVENT OVERFLOWING AND BLOWING ONTOADJACENT PROPERTIES. DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES FROM THE SITE SHALL IN ACCORDANCE WITHMINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) REQUIREMENTS.3. A SEPARATE CONTAINER SHALL BE PLACED FOR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE. HAZARDOUS WASTESSHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH MPCA REQUIREMENTS.4. THE CONCRETE TRUCK WASHOUT SHALL BE IN THE PLASTIC LINED DITCH AND DISPOSE OF WASHINGS ASSOLID WASTE.5. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND AFTER MAJORRAINFALL EVENTS AND SHALL BE CLEANED AND REPAIRED AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE DOWNSTREAMPROTECTION.6. ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC WAYS SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY AND IF LITTER OR SOILS HAS BEENDEPOSITED IT SHALL PROMPTLY BE REMOVED.7. IF NECESSARY, VEHICLES, THAT HAVE MUD ON THEIR WHEELS, SHALL BE CLEANED BEFORE EXITING THESITE IN THE ROCK ENTRANCE AREAS8. MOISTURE SHALL BE APPLIED TO DISTURBED AREAS TO CONTROL DUST AS NEEDED.9. PORTABLE TOILET FACILITIES SHALL BE PLACED ON SITE FOR USE BY WORKERS, SHALL BE TIED DOWN,AND SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED.10. IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO PUMP THE EXCAVATION DURING CONSTRUCTION, PUMP DISCHARGESHALL BE INTO THE STOCKPILE AREAS SO THAT THE DOUBLE SILT FENCE AROUND THESE AREAS CANFILTER THE WATER BEFORE IT LEAVES THE SITE.11. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE INSTALLED NO LATER THAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE SITE IS FIRSTDISTURBED AND SHALL CONSIST OF BROADCAST SEEDING WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION SEED MIXTURE 22-111 AT 100 POUNDS PER ACRE FOLLOWED BY COVERING WITHSPRAY MULCH.12. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLPLANS ARE THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY EARTH DIKES,SEDIMENT TRAPS OR BASINS, AND ADDITIONAL SILT FENCING AS DEEMED NECESSARY TO CONTROLEROSION.SITE WORK COMPLETION:1. WHEN FINAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED BUT BEFORE PLACEMENT OF SEED OR SOD AN “AS-BUILT”SURVEY SHALL BE DONE PER CITY OF EDINA REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE THAT GRADING WAS PROPERLYDONE.2. WHEN ANY REMEDIAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED, SOD OR SEEDING SHALL BE COMPLETEDINCLUDING ANY EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS FOR STEEP AREAS.3. WHEN TURF IS ESTABLISHED, SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION, AND OTHER EROSION AND SEDIMENTCONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AND ADJACENT STREETS, ALLEYS, AND WALKS SHALL BECLEANED AS NEEDED TO DELIVER A SITE THAT IS EROSION RESISTANT AND CLEAN.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF A MINIMUM TWO (2%) PERCENT SLOPEAWAY FROM PROPOSED BUILDING - MINIMUM FOUR (4%) PERCENT PREFERRED.CITY OF EDINA EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES10 MIL PLASTIC(MIN)SQUARE BAILS OROTHER APPROVEDMATERIALSWOODEN STAKESPROVIDE MIN. 4"FREEBOARDEXISTINGGROUNDORROADWAYLENGTH & WIDTHSIMILAR TO BELOWGRADE OPTIONCLEAN OUT AT80% CAPACITYASTREETGUTTER1' DEEP MIN.EXISTINGGROUNDBARRIERFENCE1' FREEBOARDFIBER ROLLBACK OF CURBBACK OFCURBBARRIER FENCE(DOES NOT NEEDTO BE SILT FENCE)FIBER ROLLS (MAX4' SPACING FORSTAKES)CLEANOUT AT80%CAPACITYMAX 4' DEEPEROS 31: 4/224C200CONCRETE WASHOUTNOT TO SCALE15' TYP.8' - 10' TYP.2' FEETDEEPMIN.BELOW GRADESECTION A-ABELOW GRADESECTION A-AABOVE GRADEAPage 88 of 151 PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:25 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC201EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL DETAILSBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1C201C201EROS 08: 4/222SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGNOT TO SCALESTRAW OR WOOD FIBER6" ROLL OF ENCLOSED INPLASTIC OR POLYESTERNETTINGENDS SECURELY CLOSEDTO PREVENT LOSS OF FILLSECURED WITH ZIP TIE2'' X 2'' X 18'' LONG WOODEN STAKESAT 2'-0'' SPACING. DRIVE THROUGHNETTING AND FIBER ROLL.TEMPORARY BARRIER OF SILT FENCE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERFROM ENTERING THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION.1.0' MIN.EROS 16: 4/22INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCENOT TO SCALEHEAVY DUTYSILT FENCE (TYP)ANCHOR WITH 2"X2"STAKES DRIVEN INTOTHE GROUNDSTORM SEWERSTRUCTUREHEAVY DUTYSILT FENCE (TYP)2"X2" STAKE (TYP)LCROADWAY1 0 "MI N . 3'3'NOTE:STAPLING OR STAKING OF BLANKET TO BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS.EROS 07: 4/223C201EROSION CONTROL BLANKETNOT TO SCALECATEGORY ACCEPTABLE TYPES1STRAW RD 1S, WOOD FIBER RD 1S2STRAW 1S, WOOD FIBER 1S3STRAW 2S, WOOD FIBER 2S4STRAW/COCONUT 2S, WOOD FIBER HV 2SCATEGORY SLOPE VELOCITY1FLAT-2 3:1 < 5.0 FPS3 3:1 < 6.5 FPS4 2:1 < 7.0 FPSTHE LETTERING DESIGNATION SHALL BE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:1S - NETTING ON ONE SIDERD - RAPIDLY DEGRADABLE2S - NETTING ON TWO SIDESHV - HIGH VELOCITYEROSION CONTROL BLANKET INSTALLATION ON AN INSLOPE( WHEN REQUIRED )SILT FENCE ORBALE CHECK ASSPECIFIEDSLOPE 3:1 AND STEEPERWOOD FIBERBLANKET MULCHEND OF UPPER BLANKETTO OVERLAP BOTTOMEND OF BLANKET BURIED IN6'' DEEP VERTICAL TRENCHSAFETY SLOPE - STANDARDSEED & MULCHVA R I E S ( T R AN S I T IONAR EA ) ( F LA T A R EA )NOTES:1. 1 18" X 1 18" X 30" WOODEN STAKES ARE RECOMMENDEDFOR 6", 9", AND 12" SEDIMENT LOGS.2. 1 18" X 1 18" X 48" WOODEN STAKES ARE RECOMMENDEDFOR 20" SEDIMENT LOGS.ANCHOR THROUGHNETTING BEHINDBACK OF CURBANCHOR THROUGHNETTING BEHINDBACK OF CURBSEDIMENT LOGANCHORED THROUGH NETTINGBEHIND BACK OF CURB( TR AN S I T ION AR E A ) VA R I E S V AR I E S EROS 27: 4/224C201INLET PROTECTION - CURB CUTNOT TO SCALEPage 89 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDSFSFSFSFSF SFSFSFSFSFSILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL 1/C200), TYP.INLET PROTECTION - SILTFENCE RING (SEE DETAIL1/C201)COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC210EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLAN - PH IBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ONSHEET C200 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.3. SEE 'EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS' FOR TREE PROTECTIONLOCATION(S).4. EROSION CONTROL MATERIAL QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONALPURPOSES ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FORTHEMSELVES THE EXACT QUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY ON THESE QUANTITIES FOR THEIRBID. THE CIVIL ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COST ESTIMATESAND/OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS.NOTESITEMUNITQUANTITYROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT EA2SILT FENCELF 140TREE PROTECTION FENCEEA5INLET PROTECTION - RINGEA 1EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 1802800PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWSILT FENCEFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITINLET PROTECTIONTREE PROTECTION FENCELoDPROPOSEDLEGEND802800EXISTINGSF800.00800.00SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 90 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 513925.50925.67TC 926.21G 925.71G 925.73G 925.90TC 926.55G 926.05926.34HP 926.79LP 926.48926.52926.50926.51TC 927.80G 927.30G 927.33G 927.33TC 927.83G 927.33927.33927.33G 927.21G 927.14TC 927.59G 927.09926.98926.95 926.81926.9292 6 . 7 8TC 927.00G 926.50G 926.35G 926.19TC 926.71G 926.21926.30926.40926.51926.91926.82926.29926.84926.81927.31927.20927.18HP 927.13TC 926.87G 926.37G 926.24926.65927.39H P 9 2 7 . 9 7925.83927.90928.08927.87927.68927.58926.10927.09TC 926.90G 926.40G 926.02G 925.85TC 926.56G 926.06G 926.08926.17926.66925.95926.48TC 926.37G 925.87925.89927.90927.90927.90927.90 927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.72927.72925.00926 927926 926 92 792892 8 9 2 7 928927 927 927927927927 92 8 927 TC 927.75G 927.25TC 927.27G 926.77G 926.77G 926.77TC 927.28G 926.78927.72927.66LP 926.76-6.1%1.3%-8.4%1.3% -7 .7%1.2% - 8 . 4% 1. 2% -1.5%-8.0%-8.0%-1.9%-1.2%-2.0%-1.9%SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL 2/C200)ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL 3/C200)TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL 1/C200), TYP.SFSFSFSFSFSFSFSF SFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFSFCONCRETE WASHOUT(SEE DETAIL 4/C200)BIO ROLL PERIMETER CONTROLAROUND RAIN GARDEN BMP (SEEDETAIL 5/C200). CAN BE REMOVEDONCE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGEAREA HAS BEEN STABILIZED (TYP.)INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCERING (SEE DETAIL 1/C201)INLET PROTECTION - CURBCUT (SEE DETAIL 4/C201)INLET PROTECTION - CURBCUT (SEE DETAIL 4/C201)INLET PROTECTION - SILT FENCERING (SEE DETAIL 1/C201)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C200 - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC211EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLAN - PH IIBJLCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)BJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEITEMUNITQUANTITYROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT EA NO ADDITIONALSILT FENCELF 230 ADDITIONALTREE PROTECTION FENCEEA NO ADDITIONALINLET PROTECTION - RINGEA 1 ADDITIONALINLET PROTECTION - CURB CUT EA2BIO-LOGLF 120EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SF 565EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 2802800PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWSILT FENCEFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETINLET PROTECTIONTREE PROTECTION FENCELoDPROPOSEDLEGEND802800EXISTINGSF800.00800.00LOT AREA16,584 SQ. FT.DISTURBED AREA19,120 SQ. FT.PAVEMENT AREA9,793 SQ. FT.BUILDING AREA1,684 SQ. FT.SEEDING AREA5,096 SQ. FT.PRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS12,482 SQ. FT.POST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS11,477 SQ. FT.AREA SUMMARY1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE'GENERAL NOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ONSHEET C200 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.3. SEE 'EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS' FOR TREE PROTECTIONLOCATION(S).4. EROSION CONTROL MATERIAL QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONALPURPOSES ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FORTHEMSELVES THE EXACT QUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY ON THESE QUANTITIES FOR THEIRBID. THE CIVIL ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COST ESTIMATESAND/OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS.NOTESPage 91 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 5132REPAIR PAVEMENT DISTURBANCE1112REPAIR PAVEMENT DISTURBANCE33444566777788888899992299101010101010101010101010101011B6-18, VERIFY11B6-18, VERIFYTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTERTIE INTO EXISTINGCURB & GUTTER121314141414141415TYP.15TYP.15TYP.161617171818181818192021CFACING NORTHCFACING NORTHADFACING NORTHBFACING SOUTHBFACING SOUTHCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C300 - SITE.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC300CIVIL SITE PLANBJLBJL11. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - NORMAL DUTY (SEE DETAIL 1/C900)2. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - MATCH IN KIND3. CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL 2/C900)4. CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL 420/C901)5. CONCRETE PATIO (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)6. CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON (SEE DETAIL 410/C901)7. CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)8. B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (SEE DETAIL 8/C900)9. FLUSH CONCRETE CURB (SEE DETAIL 4/C901)10. TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CONCRETE CURB TO 6" CURB (SEEGRADING PLAN AND DETAIL 1/C901)11. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING12. CURB CUT WITH RIP RAP (SEE DETAIL 2/C901)13. ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING (SEE DETAIL 7/C901)14. ACCESSIBLE RAMP (SEE MNDOT DETAIL SHEETS C950-C955)15. 4" HIGH VISIBILITY SOLID WHITE PAINT (SEE GENERAL NOTES ONSHEET C001)16. 4" POLY PREFORMED PERMANENT PAVEMENT MARKINGS (SEEDETAIL 3/C901)17. 6' TALL CEDAR FENCE (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)18. LANDSCAPE AREA (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS)19. RAIN GARDEN (SEE GRADING PLAN)20. TRASH ENCLOSURE WITH DUMPSTER (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)21. BICYCLE RACK (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)22. RAIN GUARDIAN TURRET (SEE UTILITY PLAN)KEYNOTESBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE "GENERAL NOTES ANDINFORMATION" SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.2. NO NEW, RELOCATED, AND/OR REPLACEMENT SIGNAGE SHALL BEINSTALLED IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW).3. THE SHOWN SEEDING AREAS SHALL BE LOOSENED TO A MINIMUMDEPTH OF EIGHT (8") INCHES AND SOIL AMENDMENTS ADDED TO MEETMINNESOTA STATE STORMWATER MANUAL PREDEVELOPMENT SOILTYPE BULK DENSITIES.NOTESPROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGCURB & GUTTERSOIL BORINGSFENCESIGNLIGHT POLEPARKING STALL COUNTADA PAVEMENT MARKING2" BITUMINOUS MILL/OVERLAYSTANDARD DUTY BITUMINOUSCONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE PAVINGLoDPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTINGZONING: PCD-1 PLANNED COMMERCIALLOT AREA: 16,584 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA:12,482 SQ. FT.PROPOSED NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA:11,477 SQ. FT.NET IMPERVIOUS CREATED:-1,005 SQ. FT. (8.1% DECREASE) BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA:1,684 SQ. FT.BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED:SEE ARCH. PLANSDISTURBED AREA:19,120 SQ. FT.EXISTING IMPERVIOUS DISTURBED:12,482 SQ. FT. (100% DISTURBED)PROPOSED PARKING SPACES:9' X 18.5'20 SPACESADA 1 SPACEPROVIDED: 21 SPACESBUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:FRONT YARD SETBACK (SOUTH)20 FEETSIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST & WEST) 20 FEETREAR YARD SETBACK (NORTH)20 FEETPARKING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:FRONT YARD SETBACK (SOUTH))20 FEETSIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST & WEST) 10 FEETREAR YARD SETBACK (NORTH)10 FEETAA. HANDICAP PARKING - R7-8M (12" X 18")B. DO NOT ENTER - R5-1 (30" X 30")C. WRONG WAY - R5-1a (30" X 18")D. STOP SIGN - R1-1 (30" X 30")SIGN SCHEDULE (PER MN MUTCD)SITE DATAXXSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 92 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD3 513925.50925.67TC 926.21G 925.71G 925.73G 925.90TC 926.55G 926.05926.34HP 926.79LP 926.48926.52926.50926.51TC 927.80G 927.30G 927.33G 927.33TC 927.83G 927.33927.33927.33G 927.21G 927.14TC 927.59G 927.09926.98926.95 926.81926.9292 6 . 7 8TC 927.00G 926.50G 926.35G 926.19TC 926.71G 926.21926.30926.40926.51926.91926.82926.29926.84926.81927.31927.20927.18HP 927.13TC 926.87G 926.37G 926.24926.65927.39H P 9 2 7 . 9 7925.83927.90928.08927.87927.68927.58926.10927.09TC 926.90G 926.40G 926.02G 925.85TC 926.56G 926.06G 926.08926.17926.66925.95926.48TC 926.37G 925.87925.89927.90927.90927.90927.90 927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.90927.72927.72925.00926 927926 926 92 792892 8 9 2 7 928927 927 927927927927 92 8 927 TC 927.75G 927.25TC 927.27G 926.77G 926.77G 926.77TC 927.28G 926.78927.72927.66LP 926.76-6.1%1.3%-8.4%1.3% -7 .7%1.2% - 8 . 4% 1. 2% -1.5%-8.0%-8.0%-1.9%-1.2%-2.0%-1.9%25 FT TRANSISTION1R1EOF926.35 11123 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION23 FT TRANSISTION26 FT TRANSISTION21 FT TRANSISTION34END4START4END4START4START4ENDCOPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C400 - GRAD.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC400GRADING & DRAINAGEPLANBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE 'GENERALNOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHEDSURFACE GRADE.PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSDRAINAGE SLOPEEMERGENCY OVERFLOWFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBSPOT ELEVATIONTOP OF CURBGUTTERZERO CURBMATCH EXISTINGCONCRETEPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTING1.0%EOF802800LoD802800800.00800.00BMPNO.TOPELEV.BOTTOMELEV.WEIR (EOF)OUTLETELEV.ELEV. LENGTH BREADTH1 926.52 925.00 926.35 3 FT 10 FT 926.20INSTALL PER THE DETAIL ON C900RAIN GARDENSR11. ONE WAY DIRECTIONAL PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILSFROM MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250.2. TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CURB TO 6" CURB, SEE SHEETC900 FOR DETAIL.3. PERPENDICULAR PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILS FROMMNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250.4. GUTTER OUT CURB (SEE DETAIL 5/C901)KEYNOTESNOTESTC 800.00G 800.00ZC 800.00MA 800.00±C 800.00800.00SBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 93 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoD LoDLoD LoDLoD LoDL oD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoD LoD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDL oD LoDL oD LoDL oD LoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDLoDRAIN GARDEN, SEE SHEET C400RAIN GUARDIAN TURRETRIM=926.48OUTLET=925.48SEE DETAIL SHEET C902CURB CUT WITH RIP RAPLOW POINT=926.76SLOPE SWALE TOWARDSEXISTING STORMSTRUCTURE IN ROWMH 01RIM=926.20INV=923.92 (8" HDPE)INV=923.92 (6" DRAINTILE)SEE DETAIL 1/C9021 4 2 L F - 8 " HDP E @ 0 . 5 0%MH 02RIM=926.92INV=923.21SEE DETAIL 2/C90256 LF - 8" HDPE @ 0.50%CONNECT TO EXCATCH BASININV=922.956" PERF DRAINTILE, SLOPE TOWARDS MH 01COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#BENCHMARKS (BM)PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C500 - UTIL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:26 PMKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR24080409/13/2024BJLC500UTILITIES PLANBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON THE 'GENERALNOTES AND INFORMATION' SHEETS PRIOR TO THE START OFCONSTRUCTION.2. EXISTING SERVICES WILL REMAIN IN PLACE EXTERIOR TO BUILDING.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL & MECHANICAL PLANS FOR INTERIORIMPROVEMENTS TO SANITARY AND WATER SERVICES.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS AND SIZES WITHARCHITECTURAL AND MEP/T PLANS PRIOR TO ORDERING MATERIAL.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RIM, AND/OR EOF ELEVATIONS WITHTHE GRADING PLANS.5. BUILDING SHALL CONTAIN SPRINKLERS ON EACH FLOOR.6. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR MEP/T PLANS TO VERIFY THE LOCATIONSOF UTILITY CONNECTIONS, UTILITY METERS, DOWNSPOUTS, AND/ORBUILDING LIGHTING.NOTES||COCOPROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINDRAINTILEGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICALUNDERGROUND ELECTRICALTELEPHONESWALESOIL BORINGSLIGHT POLEPROPOSEDLEGENDEXISTINGLoDSBIN( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALEPage 94 of 151 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC900GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTALSITE 01: 4/221C900TYPICAL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONSNOT TO SCALEFINISHED GRADE2" BIT. WEARING COURSE TYPESPWEB340B PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360TACK COAT, MNDOT SPEC. 23572" BIT. BASE COURSE TYPESPNWB330B PER MNDOT SPEC. 23608" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PER MNDOT3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO AMINIMUM OF 95% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITYNORMAL DUTYNOTES:1. REFER TO MnDOT SPECIFICATION 2521 FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION.2. SIDEWALKS TO HAVE 2% MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.3. CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 5' SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 60' OR LESS.2"SITE 06: 4/222TYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTIONNOT TO SCALEFINISHED GRADE4" PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (P.C.C.)FOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK SLABS WIDER THAN 6',PROVIDE 6 X 6 - W1.4 X W1.4 WELDED WIRE FABRIC4" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE (100%CRUSHED) BASE PER MNDOT 3138, COMPACTEDPER SPECIFICATIONSAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED PERSPECIFICATIONS4"CONCRETESIDEWALK4" AGGREGATEBASE CL V6"6"6"12"2% SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDING (TYP.)PAVEMENTSITE 10: 4/223SIDEWALK SECTION WITH INTEGRAL CURBNOT TO SCALEEXPANSION JOINTC9001' MIN.EDGE MILLBITUMINOUSWEAR COURSEBITUMINOUSBASE COURSEAGGREGATE BASEEXISTINGPROPOSEDROUTE & SEAL JOINTPER SPECIFICATIONSTACK COAT,MnDOT SPEC. 23571' MIN.OVERLAP ATSEAMSTACK COAT,MnDOT SPEC. 2357SITE 43: 4/224BITUMINOUS PAVING TRANSITIONNOT TO SCALEPROPOSED TO EXISTINGBITUMINOUSWEAR COURSEBITUMINOUSBASE COURSEAGGREGATE BASEPROPOSED AT SEAMSREQUIREDVEHICLE IDPARKINGFOR VIOLATIONUP TO $200 FINENOTES:1. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SHALL CONFORM WITH ALL CURRENT STATEAND LOCAL CODES AND REGULATIONSSIGN SHALL BE CENTERED ATTHE HEAD OF THE PARKINGSPACE AND PLACED AMAXIMUM 8 FEET FROM THEHEAD OF THE PARKING SPACE3/8" STEEL PLATE AT TOP,SLOPE DOWN, WELD ALL SIDESINTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITY PER ICC/ANSIA117.1, SECTION 703.6.3.1METAL SIGN WITH LETTERING PERICC/ANSI A117.1, SECTION 703.WHITE LEGEND AND BORDER ONBLUE BACKGROUND, FULLYREFLECTORIZED.TS 4" X 4" X .375" STEEL TUBE, FILLWITH CONCRETE AND PAINTWHERE CONCRETE OCCURS ATBASE, USE 1-1/2" EXPANSIONMATERIAL AND URETHANE CAULK10:1 SLOPE4" LONG STUDS WELD ATQUARTER POINTS 8" ONCENTERCONCRETE BASE (3,000 PSI)12" MIN2"18" MIN.60" - 66"2'-6"15"FINISHED GRADEVANACCESSIBLEATTACH 6" X 12" VAN ACCESSIBLESIGN TO POST IF APPLICABLE. SEEPLAN FOR LOCATIONS4'-0" MIN.6"ADA 05: 4/226ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND STEEL POSTNOT TO SCALENO PARKINGCURB RAMP OR FLUSH RIBBONCURB WITH WARNING PANELS(SEE PLAN AND DETAILS)4" WIDESTRIPE (TYP.)ACCESS AISLE SHALL EXTEND THE FULL LENGTH OF THEPARKING SPACE IT SERVESVARIESSEE PLANSACCESS AISLE8' MIN.PARKING STALL8' MIN.CENTER - CENTERADA 11: 4/227ACCESSIBILITY PARKING PAVEMENT MARKINGSNOT TO SCALENO PARKINGMARKINGINTERNATIONALSYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITYMARKING118NOTES:1. DO NOT ALLOW CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC OR COMPACT SOIL WITHIN BASINS2. RAIN GARDEN AREA MAY ONLY BE EXCAVATED TO ITS BASE AFTER THE CONTRIBUTINGWATERSHED IS STABLE3. THE FINAL GRADING OF THE RAIN GARDEN SHOULD FOLLOW THIS DETAIL WITHUNDULATIONS IN THE BOTTOM OF THE BMP. IT SHOULD NOT BE GRADED FLAT. THIS WILLINCREASE THE CHANCES OF ADEQUATE VEGETATION TAKING HOLD IN WET CONDITIONS.4. PROVIDE 12" NATIVE SOIL LOOSENING AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER3:1 MAX.CROSS SECTIONPLANTING MEDIUM - FILTER MEDIA MIX C85-88% SEMI-COARSE WASHED SAND PER ASTM C-338-12% FINES BY VOLUME3-5% MNDOT GRADE 2 COMPOST (SPEC 3890)6" MAX UNCOMPACTED LIFTS SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH AND PLANTINGSSEE LANDSCAPESCARIFY NATIVE SOIL TODEPTH OF 12"TYPE 1 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC,PER MNDOT 373312" MIN.GRAD 10: 4/225RAIN GARDEN CROSS SECTIONNOT TO SCALETOP/EDGE OFRAIN GARDENC900C900C900C900C900C900PAVEMENT SECTION VARIESAGG. BASEVARIES31MIN. OF 4"AGG. BASEUNDER CURB1/4 " LIPMINIMUM 6" BEHINDBACK OF CURB"A" "L"CURBTYPE12" 20"B61218"B618 26"B624 24" 32"13.5"6"A8"LSITE 16: 4/22B6 STYLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERNOT TO SCALESLOPE GUTTER (3/4" PER FT. TYP.) TIPGUTTER OUT AS REQUIRED PER PLAN3" RADIUS3" RADIUS1/2"RADIUSPERFORATED PVC DRAINTILE. SEEPLAN FOR SIZE, INVERT AND LAYOUT.Page 95 of 151 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC901GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL1C90123C901C901NOTE:1. FULL VERTICAL HEIGHT OF CURB IS ASSUMED TO BE 6INCHES AT BEGINNING OF CURB TAPER AND 0 INCHESAT END OF TAPER UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.SEE PLANS FORTAPER LENGTHSITE 37: 4/22CURB TAPERNOT TO SCALECONCRETE CURB & GUTTER(FULL HEIGHT)PERSPECTIVEBITUMINOUSPAVEMENT TAPERWIDTHVARIESNOTE:FILTER BLANKET WITH GEOTEXTILEFABRIC REQUIRED UNDER RIP RAP.A6"SITE 39: 4/22CURB CUT WITH RIP-RAP SWALENOT TO SCALEPERSPECTIVEGEOTEXTILE FABRICFILTER BLANKETRIPRAPSECTION A-AFLOWCONCRETECURB & GUTTERRIP-RAP SWALE WITHGEOTEXTILE BLANKETPER PLANSEE PLANS FORTAPER LENGTHCONCRETECURB & GUTTERACENTER LINE OFTRAFFIC LANE TYP.3'-8"5'-0"9'-5"1'-4"1'-0"2'-8"6'-7"1'-0"5'-0"1'-11"8'-0"1'-0"8'-0"4'-0"4'-0"SEE SITE PLANSITE 46: 4/22TRAFFIC ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSNOT TO SCALEWHITE REFLECTIVETRAFFIC PAINT, TYP.PAVEMENT SECTION VARIESAGG. BASEVARIESVARIES8"MIN OF 4"AGG. BASEUNDER CURBMIN 4"8"6"6"SITE 21: 4/224C901ROLLED CURBNOT TO SCALE3" RADIUS"A"CURBTYPE12"B61218"B618B624 24"3" R1/2" R1/2" R313" R1/2" R1/2" R31SITE 17: 4/225C901B6 STYLE CURB INFALL-OUTFALLNOT TO SCALEOUTFALL CURB & GUTTER6"6"SLOPE3/4"/FT6"SLOPE3/4"/FT6"13-1/2"13-1/2"8"A7"7"8"AINFALL CURB & GUTTERPage 96 of 151 COPYRIGHT © 2024 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.DATE:REG. NO.CERTIFICATIONDESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:SUMMARYDRAWN:INITIAL ISSUE:NOT FORCONS TRUC T ION ISSUE AND REVISION HISTORYDATEDESCRIPTION#PRELIMCADD USER: Benjamin Lucas FILE: C:\USERS\BENJAMINLUCAS\DROPBOX\PROJECTS\240804 - STATION PIZZERIA - MOMENTUM\WORKING FILES\CAD\DWG\PLAN SHEETS\C900 - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 9/13/2024 12:27 PM 24080409/13/2024BJLC902GENERAL DETAILSBJLBJLBENJAMIN LUCAS, P.E.09-13-2024542656016 VERNON AVE S EDINA, MN STATION PIZZERIA MOMENTUM DESIGNGROUPMINNEAPOLIS, MNPRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL CASTING AS SPECIFICED2" ADJUSTING RINGS(MIN 2, MAX 4)MANHOLE STEPS, NEENAH R1981J OREQUAL, 16" ON CENTER AS APPROVED BYOSHA.NOTES:1. NO BLOCK STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED.2. MANHOLE SHALL BE PRECAST IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478, MnDOT 2506.GROUT BOTTOM OF MANHOLE TO 12DIAMETER AT PIPE AND SLOPE GROUT 2"TOWARD THE INVERT.MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE PLACED SOTHAT OFFSET VERTICAL PORTION OF CONEAND STEPS ARE FACING DOWNSTREAM.PIPE SHALL BE CUT OUT FLUSH WITH INSIDEFACE OF WALL.ALL DOG HOUSES SHALL BE GROUTED ONINSIDE AND OUTSIDE.BASE SLAB SHALL BE PRECAST INACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478,MnDOT 2506.SLOPE 2"PER FT.STM 01: 4/222C902STANDARD MANHOLENOT TO SCALEPLAN27"27"MAX4'VARIES12" - 16"VARIES 4'6"SECTIONALL JOINTS IN MANHOLE TO HAVE "O" RINGRUBBER GASKETS, OR APPROVED EQUAL5"NOTES:1. NO WOOD SHALL BE USED FOR ADJUSTING CASTING: CEMENT MORTAR ONLY.2. MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON, ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTICPER ASTM C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS.3. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE BASE SLAB & COVER SLAB PER ASTM C478.4. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH O-RING GASKETS &LUBRICANT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.5. FILL OPENING BETWEEN PIPE AND MANHOLE WALL WITH CEMENT MORTAR.6. INSIDE SURFACE SHALL BE FINISHED SMOOTH.7. LIFTING HOLES WHICH PENETRATE THROUGH SECTION WALLS ARE NOT PERMITTED.24" ADJUSTMENT RINGSPERMITTED, 5 RINGS MAX.·FULL 38" BED OF MORTARBETWEEN RINGS & PLASTEREXTERIOR ONLY WITH 4" MIN.THICK COAT·STRIKE OFF INTERIOR·NO SHIMS PERMITTEDPRECAST REINFORCEDCONCRETE BARRELSTRUCTUREBASE SLAB SHALL BE PRECAST INACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478,MnDOT 2506SAWCUTTING REQUIRED FORPARTIAL PIPE LENGTHSINVERT FILLET CAST INPLACE MnDOT TYPE3Y44 CONCRETESTM 07: 4/221C902SURFACE DRAINNOT TO SCALEPRECAST BASEMANHOLEDIAMETERSLABTHICKNESS48"6"54" - 102" 8"108" 10"120"12"DITCH GRATE, STOOLTYPE NEENAH R4342Page 97 of 151 C950Page 98 of 151 C951Page 99 of 151 C952Page 100 of 151 C953Page 101 of 151 C954Page 102 of 151 C955Page 103 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E 926 925 926 927926926 927 927927927 927 927927 927 927 927 927SOD4" MULCHSODSODEXISTING SITE TREE TO REMAINPLUG RAIN GARDEN, SEE PLANTSCHEDULE FOR QUANTY & SPACINGEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAINEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAIN4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH4" MULCH4" MULCH & EDGINGSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSODSODSODPH (4)SS (2)CS (2)SS (2)CS (3)SF (3)CS (2)BH (6)SE (16)PP (5)PD (13)AF (8)BW (3)FO (3)EV (6)CH (1)LP (3)ER (1)ER (1)LB (6)AF (5)LB (7)BH (9)AF (3)LB (7)LB (5)CH (1)RS (3)SE (6)RS (3)RAIN GARDEN NOTES: NATIVE PLANTS, PLANTING AND TRANSPLANTING·NATIVE PLANTING NOT TO BEGIN UNTIL PLANTING AREAS HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND PREPARED.·PLANTING BEDS TO BE FREE FROM ALL WEEDS AND INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES.·PLANT MATERIAL TO BE SPACED 18" O.C.·ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO BE THOROUGHLY WATERED UPON INSTALLATION.WCWHITE CONEFLOWEREchinacea purpurea albaPLUG36LBLITTLE BLUE STEMSchizachyrium scopariumPLUG36PBPRAIRIE BLAZINGSTARLiatris ligulistylisPLUG36PCPURPLE CONEFLOWEREchinacea purpureaPLUG36PDPRAIRIE DROPSEEDSporobolus heterolepsisPLUG36NANEW ENGLAND ASTERAster novae-angliaePLUG36JBJOHNSON'S BLUE GERANIUMGeranium x 'Johnson's Blue'PLUG36EBELIJAH BLUE FESCUEFestuca ovina 'Elijah Blue'PLUG36SGSHENANDOAH SWITCH GRASSPanicum virgatum 'Shenandoah'PLUG36DECIDUOUS TREESCH2.5" CAL. B&B 50'H x 50'WCOMMON HACKBERRYCeltis occidentalisLANDSCAPE PLANT LEGENDORNAMENTAL TREESPP1.5" CAL. B&B 40'H x 7'WPARKLAND PILLAR BIRCHBetula platyphylla 'Jefpark'EVERGREEN TREESSSB&B 25'H x 10'WSWISS STONE ALGONQUIN PILLARPinus cembra 'Algonquin Pillar'SFPOT12'H x 8'WKOREAN SILVER SHOW FIRAbies koreana 'Silver Show'4' HT#10 CONT.2563LPB&B 25'H x 12'WLIMBER NORTHERN BLUE PINEPinus flexillis 'Northern Blue'4' HT3PH2" CAL. B&B 35'H x 25'WPRAIRIE HORIZON ALDERAlnus hirsuta 'Harbin'4CSPOT8'H x 6'WCOLORADO SESTER'S DWARFPicea pungens 'Sester Dwarf'#10 CONT.5SOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CYSHRUBSNV#5 CONT. POT 20'H x 10'W6NANNYBERRY VIBURNUMViburnum lentagoID#5 CONT. POT 5'H x 7'W8ISANTI DOGWOODCornus sericea 'Isanti'AFPOT 4'H x 4'W16ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOODCornus stolonifera 'Farrow'SEPOT 1.5'H x 2'W22AUTUMN FIRESedum x 'Autumn Fire'LB#1 CONT. POT 3'H x 2'W25STANDING OVATION LITTLE BLUE STEMSchizachyrium scoparium 'Standing Ovation'ORNAMENTAL GRASSESPERENNIALS#2 CONT.#1 CONT.PD#1 CONT. POT 3'H x 3'W13PRAIRIE DROPSEEDSporobolus heterolepisBH#2 CONT. POT 3'H x 3'W15DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLEDiervilla loniceraFOPOT 5'H x 5'W3FIBER OPTICS BUTTONBUSHCephalanthus occidentalis 'Bailoptics'#2 CONT.BWPOT 5'H x 5'W3DWARF BLUE LEAF ARCTIC WILLOWSalix purpurea 'Nana'#2 CONT.EVPOT 2'H X 2'W6DWARF EUROPEAN VIBURNUMViburnum opulus 'Nanum'#2 CONT.ERB&B 20'H x 20'WEASTERN REDBUDCercis canadensis2" CAL.2RSPOT 4'H x 3'W6RUSSIAN SAGESalvia yangii#1 CONT.-- SYKENTUCKY BLUE GRASS MIX. SEE SPECS FOR MULCHINGINFORMATION.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT IAM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLERPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT NAMESHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEDate:License #:PLAN-Type SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com5559706-30-2026DRAWN BYPROJECT MANAGERLOUIEJ + LSTATIONPIZZERIA6016 VERNON AVE,EDINA, MNXXXXISSUE LOGExpiration:09-13-202409-13-2024SUBMITTALNOT FORCONSTRUCT IONLANDSCAPE NOTES:·CONTRACTOR TO HAVE ALL UTILITIES ON SITE VERIFIED AND MARKED BEFORE STARTING WORK.··CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING UTILITIES ON SITE ANDRESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ALL DAMAGE RELATED TO CONTRACTORS ACTIVITY ON SITE ANDRESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR PLANTING IN ALL RIGHT-OF-WAY.·COMPLETE WORK PER OWNERS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND COORDINATE WORK WITHOTHERS ON SITE.·PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMENSTANDARDS AND BE FREE OF DISEASE AND DAMAGE.··ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO BE WARRANTIED ONE (1) FULL YEAR FROM THE COMPLETION ANDACCEPTANCE BY OWNER, WITH ONE TIME REPLACEMENT.··WATER AND MAINTAIN ALL PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL ACCEPTED BY OWNER.·IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOW ON THE PLAN COMPAREDTO THE PLANT LEGEND, THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE.·ALL AREAS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO RECEIVE 6" OF TOPSOIL AND SOD UNLESSOTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON PLANS.··VERIFY TOPSOIL DEPTH AND NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY DEFICIENCY.··REPLACEMENT TOPSOIL SHOULD BE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS, SHARP OBJECTS, ROCKS ANDWEEDS.··ALL AREAS TO BE LANDSCAPED AND SODDED SHALL BE GRADED SMOOTH AND EVEN.·SOD TO BE A KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS SEED VARIETY.··NO GUARANTEE ON SOD EXCEPT SOD THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT TIME OF INSTALLATION.··STAKE SOD ON SLOPES 3:1 AND GREATER.·PROVIDE BLANKET ON ALL SEEDED AREAS THAT ARE SLOPED. MULCH APPLICATION FOR ALLOTHER SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE HYDROMULCH OR DISCED STRAW DEPENDING ON SEED TYPE.·INSTALL BLACK VINYL EDGING AROUND ALL PLANTING BEDS AS SHOWN ON PLAN.·MULCH TO BE FINELY SHREDDED, UNDYED, HARDWOOD ORGANIC MULCH INSTALLED TO 4"DEPTH.··NO WEED FABRIC BARRIER BENEATH ORGANIC MULCHES.··TREES SHALL HAVE MULCH PULLED BACK 2" FROM BASE OF TRUNK.··NO EDGING AROUND TREES OUTSIDE OF SHRUB BEDS.·ROCK MULCH SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIAMETER WASHED RIVER ROCK INSTALLED TO 3" DEPTH WITHAPPROVED WEED FABRIC BARRIER.·SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVEMENT AREAS AFTER LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION IS COMPLETEAND ACCEPTED BY OWNER, DAILY CLEANING TO BE COMPLETED IF REQUIRED BY THEMUNICIPALITY.LANDSCAPEPLANL101Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRN0SCALE: 1"=10'10520LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS·ONE (1) TREE PER 40' OF SITE PERIMETER··676' = 17 TREE REQUIRED··16 PROVIDED + 1 EXISTING TO REMAINSCARIFY & SPREADROOT MASSOVER-EXCAVATE 6"SUBGRADEREMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESEXPOSE ROOT FLARE,SET AT FINISH GRADE4" DEPTH MULCHFINISH GRADEPROTECT MAIN LEADER,REMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESSTAKE & GUY AS NEEDED4" DEPTH MULCH, DONOT PLACE WITHIN 2"OF TRUNKEXPOSE ROOT FLARE,SET AT FINISH GRADECUT & REMOVE ALLTWINE, BURLAP & WIREBASKET, PLACE ONUNDISTURBED SOILSUBGRADEWRAP TREE, FALLINSTALLATION ONLYFINISH GRADEPage 104 of 151 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXS 88°51'01" E207.86L=50.05R=946.71N 02°03'51" E127.49 290.08N 64 °47 '26 " E 926 925 926 927926926 927 927927927 927 927927 927 927 927 927SOD4" MULCHSODSODEXISTING SITE TREE TO REMAINPLUG RAIN GARDEN, SEE PLANTSCHEDULE FOR QUANTY & SPACINGEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAINEXISTING STREET TREE TO REMAIN4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH & EDGING4" MULCH4" MULCH4" MULCH & EDGINGSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSEED REPAIR AS NECESSARYSODSODSODSOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CY-- SYKENTUCKY BLUE GRASS MIX. SEE SPECS FOR MULCHINGINFORMATION.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT IAM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLERPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT NAMESHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEDate:License #:PLAN-Type SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com5559706-30-2026DRAWN BYPROJECT MANAGERLOUIEJ + LSTATIONPIZZERIA6016 VERNON AVE,EDINA, MNXXXXISSUE LOGExpiration:09-13-202409-13-2024SUBMITTALNOT FORCONSTRUCT IONIRRIGATION NOTES:·IRRIGATE ENTIRE SITE, DESIGN SHOULD ENCOMPASS ALLLANDSCAPE AREAS WITH SOD AND PLANTINGS.··MINIMIZE OVERSPRAY ON BUILDINGS ANDPAVEMENT.··DRIP IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR ALLLANDSCAPE BEDS.·CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICALPLANS FOR WATER STUB OUT AND ELECTRICALLOCATIONS.··CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WATER STUB OUT SIZE ISSUFFICIENT, NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY DEFICIENCY.··CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CONTROLLER LOCATIONWITH OWNER BEFORE INSTALLATION.··RPZ BACKFLOW PREVENTER TO BE USED AT WATERSTUB OUT.··PREFERRED CONTROLLER SHOULD BE A WATERSENSEWEATHER BASED IRRIGATION CONTROLLER (WBIC).·CONTRACTOR TO HAVE ALL UTILITIES ON SITE VERIFIEDAND MARKED BEFORE STARTING WORK.··CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TOEXISTING UTILITIES ON SITE AND RESPONSIBLE FORTHE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITHREPAIRING/REPLACING DAMAGE.·CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH GENERALCONTRACTOR IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ALL PVC SLEEVESAT A DEPTH OF 2'-0" BELOW FINISHED GRADE. MARKLOCATIONS OF PLACED PVC SLEEVES.·CONTRACTOR TO PLACE MAIN LINES MINIMUM 1'-6"BELOW FINISH GRADE, LATERAL LINES MINIMUM 1'-0'BELOW FINISH GRADE.·WIRES TO BE MINIMUM 16 AWG SOLID COPPER. SPLICEONLY AT BOXES WITH MOISTURE RATED CONNECTORS.·VALVES BOXES AND COVERS SHOULD BE BEST COLOR TOMATCH WITH SURROUNDING LANDSCAPE.··BOXES TO BE SET ON A BASE OF 3" MINIMUM DEPTH3/4" CLEAR GRAVEL.··PLACE BOXES IN LANDSCAPE BEDS WHEN POSSIBLE.·TRENCH BACKFILL TO BE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS, SHARPOBJECTS AND ROCKS.·CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE AS-BUILT DRAWINGS TOOWNERS UPON COMPLETION OF WORK.GROUNDCOVERPLANL102Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRN0SCALE: 1"=10'10520SEED NOTES:·SPRING SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN MARCH 15TH - MAY 15TH.·FALL SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN AUGUST 15TH - OCTOBER 15TH.··NO SUMMER SEEDING ALLOWED.·PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON ALL SIDE SLOPES.Page 105 of 151 755 Prior Avenue North Suite #301A St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 952.583.9788 www.mdgarchitects.com September 13, 2024 Cary Teague City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 RE: 6016 Vernon Avenue Project Statement Mr. Teague, We are excited to propose the redevelopment of 6016 Vernon Ave. S, formerly Kevin Kee's automotive repair shop, into a vibrant Station Pizzeria. This new establishment will offer a welcoming environment with take-out, delivery, and limited dine-in options. Our plans include a comprehensive interior renovation, an updated exterior, and brand-new landscaping and paving. Additionally, the concrete pad at the rear will be expanded to accommodate walk-in coolers, dry storage, and a trash enclosure. Our design will not only enhance the property's aesthetic appeal but also create a buffer between the restaurant and the surrounding single-family homes. We will install scrubbers on the exhaust hoods to manage any potential odors. Ample parking for both cars and bikes will be provided, ensuring no disruption to the neighborhood streets. Station Pizzeria will be a valuable addition to the area, creating a local gathering space and addressing the current lack of walkable and bikeable dining options. With an already successful location in Minnetonka, this smaller-scale restaurant will bring the same high-quality experience to a new community. Momentum Design Group is an architecture and design firm in St. Paul, with many commercial and multi-family residential projects throughout the metro and beyond, including experience in existing building renovations. Sincerely, Momentum Design Group, LLC. Jesse Hamer, Architect Partner cc: Jake Schaffer, Owner of Station Pizzeria Page 106 of 151 File #193807268 October 31, 2024 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. One Carlson Parkway Plymouth, MN 55447 Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Traffic and Parking Study for 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN Page 107 of 151 October 2024 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-4 6.0 PARKING ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 6-1 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 7-1 8.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 8-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN ................................................................................ 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES .......................... 4-3 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. __________________________________ DATE: October 31, 2024 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 Page 108 of 151 October 2024 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Station Pizzeria to be located at 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN. The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair shop. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard • Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road • Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue • Vernon Avenue/west development access • Vernon Avenue/east development access The proposed project involves remodeling and expanding the existing 1,200 square foot building into a 1,685 square foot pizza restaurant with 20 seats. The site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers. The proposed hours of operation are 11 am to 9 pm Sunday through Thursday and 11 am to 10 pm Friday and Saturday. A maximum of seven employees are expected on- site during the busiest shift. As shown in the site plan, the project includes two access points on Vernon Avenue. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily The proposed development is not open during the a.m. peak hour. • The trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data indicates a peak parking demand of 24 spaces on Friday. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the demand. • Information from the owner on the estimated number of orders per day and the number of employees on-site results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The proposed parking supply of 27 total spaces is 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. Page 109 of 151 October 2024 1-2 • In order to accommodate the potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. • Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. • Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. o Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 110 of 151 October 2024 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Station Pizzeria to be located at 6016 Vernon Avenue in Edina, MN. The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair shop. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard • Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road • Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue • Vernon Avenue/west development access • Vernon Avenue/east development access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project involves remodeling and expanding the existing 1,200 square foot building into a 1,685 square foot pizza restaurant with 20 seats. The site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers. The proposed hours of operation are 11 am to 9 pm Sunday through Thursday and 11 am to 10 pm Friday and Saturday. A maximum of seven employees are expected on- site during the busiest shift. As shown in the site plan, the project includes two access points on Vernon Avenue. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. Page 111 of 151 October 2024 2-2 Page 112 of 151 October 2024 2-3 Page 113 of 151 October 2024 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed project location currently contains a vacant auto repair building and parking area. The site is bounded by Vernon Avenue on the south, Eden Prairie Road on the north, and residential uses on the east and west. Near the site location, Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, Olinger Boulevard, Highwood Drive, and Olinger Road are two lane undivided roadways. Existing conditions at the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide a left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide a left turn/through/right turn lane. Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. All approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide a left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides a left turn/through lane and a right turn lane. The southbound approach provides a left turn/through/right turn lane. Traffic Volume Data Weekday traffic volume data at Vernon Avenue/Tracy Avenue was recorded in September, 2024. Traffic volume data at Vernon Avenue/Blake Road/Olinger Boulevard and Vernon Avenue/Highwood Drive/Olinger Road was recorded in April, 2022 for a previous study. Existing traffic volume data is presented later in this report. Page 114 of 151 October 2024 3-2 Page 115 of 151 October 2024 4-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2026. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2024 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. • 2026 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2026 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth due to additional development in the area. • 2026 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2026 No-Build volumes to determine 2026 Build volumes. Trip Generation for Proposed Project Weekday trip generation totals for the proposed use was calculated using data presented in the eleventh edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The resultant gross trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant (ITE 932) 1,641 SF 0 0 0 9 6 15 181 Notes: 1) SF=square feet. 2) Restaurant is not open during the a.m. peak hour. As shown, the project adds 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily. Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. Page 116 of 151 October 2024 4-2 The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 45 percent to/from the east on Vernon Avenue • 10 percent to/from the south on Tracy Avenue • 35 percent to/from the west on Vernon Avenue • 5 percent to/from the north on Blake Road • 3 percent to/from the south on Olinger Boulevard • 2 percent to/from the south on Olinger Road Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figure 4. Page 117 of 151 October 2024 4-3 Page 118 of 151 October 2024 5-4 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. In accordance with MnDOT traffic study guidelines, this analysis used the LOS D/E boundary as an indicator of acceptable traffic operations. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. Page 119 of 151 October 2024 5-5 The LOS results for the study intersections are discussed below. 2024 Existing Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. 2026 No Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. 2026 Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS Vernon Ave/Blake Rd/Olinger Blvd Signal A/B A/C Vernon Ave/Highwood Dr/Olinger Rd NB/SB stop A/C A/D Vernon Ave/Tracy Ave Signal B/C B/C Vernon Ave/west access SB stop A/A A/C Vernon Ave/east access SB stop A/A A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the a.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS C or better. During the p.m. peak hour, all intersections operate at LOS B or better and movements operate at LOS D or better. Overall Traffic Impact The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. Page 120 of 151 October 2024 5-6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided on the west side of Blake Road, the south side of Vernon Avenue, and the west side of Olinger Road. A two-way off street trail is provided on the west side of Olinger Boulevard. No sidewalk is provided on Highwood Drive. Striped bike lanes are provided on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard. Bicycles are allowed on all the surrounding streets. Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. Transit Facilities The subject site presently is not directly served by transit. The closest bus stop is on Vernon Avenue at Eden Avenue for Metro Transit bus route 46. Travel Demand Management Plan (TDM) Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: • Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. • Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. • Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 121 of 151 October 2024 6-1 6.0 Parking Analysis As described earlier, the site plan shows 27 total parking spaces including 3 tandem spaces to be used by employees and delivery drivers.. Due to the limitations of the surrounding area to accommodate any overflow parking, the peak parking demand was estimated using multiple information sources as shown below. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data resulted in the following peak parking demand values: ▪ Monday -Thursday = 15 spaces ▪ Friday = 24 spaces ▪ Saturday = 19 spaces The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the peak demand. • Information from the owner estimated 100 orders per day at this location, with approximately 75% occurring between 4 pm to 9 pm. This equates to an average of 15 orders per hour during the 4 pm to 9 pm time period. Each order requires a parking space in addition to the 7 spaces for employees, which results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the peak demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. At some locations, parking overflow can be accommodated on the surrounding streets. In this case, however, on-street parking is not allowed on Vernon Avenue near the proposed project. In order to accommodate potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. Page 122 of 151 October 2024 7-1 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 15 trips during the p.m. peak hour and 181 trips daily The proposed development is not open during the a.m. peak hour. • The trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the estimated parking demand for the proposed land use. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 6th Edition, for the High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant use most closely match the proposed restaurant. The ITE data indicates a peak parking demand of 24 spaces on Friday. The 27 total spaces provided are 3 spaces greater than the demand. • Information from the owner on the estimated number of orders per day and the number of employees on-site results in a parking demand of 22 spaces. The 27 total spaces provided are 5 spaces greater than the demand. • Edina City code requires one space per 100 square feet of building space plus one space per employee on the busiest shift, which equates to 24 spaces. The proposed parking supply of 27 total spaces is 3 spaces greater than the City code requirement. • In order to accommodate the potential excess parking demand, the project owner should develop a parking plan that clearly identifies options for parking demand greater than the spaces provided on-site. This could include items such as providing off-site parking locations for employees during busy times and/or parking delivery vehicles behind other employees in tandem spaces. • Future plans for this area include upgrading to buffered bike lanes on Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, and Olinger Boulevard and new secondary sidewalk on Olinger Boulevard. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is proposing to provide bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the building. Page 123 of 151 October 2024 7-2 • Per City requirements, a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan is required for this project. The goal of the TDM plan is to reduce vehicular trips during peak hours and carbon emissions from vehicles. TDM strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes and schedules. o Providing maps of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing bicycle parking spaces for employees and facility users. The goal of the TDM plan is a 10 percent reduction in single occupant vehicle trips. The TDM plan strategies should be implemented at the time the project is complete and fully operational. Page 124 of 151 October 2024 8-1 8.0 Appendix • Level of Service Worksheets Page 125 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 54 334 27 2 323 26 26 17 4 58 12 67 Future Volume (veh/h) 54 334 27 2 323 26 26 17 4 58 12 67 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 59 363 29 2 351 28 28 18 4 63 13 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 730 1108 89 719 1108 88 231 121 19 197 34 106 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 1004 1709 137 992 1709 136 707 866 137 546 246 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 59 0 392 2 0 379 50 0 0 149 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1004 0 1846 992 0 1846 1710 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 0.0 4.0 4.1 0.0 3.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.56 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 730 0 1197 719 0 1197 371 0 0 337 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 730 0 1197 719 0 1197 990 0 0 966 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.4 0.0 3.3 4.2 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.6 0.0 4.1 4.2 0.0 4.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 451 381 50 149 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.1 4.0 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.4 32.0 10.4 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.0 5.8 6.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 126 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 AM 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 384 7 32 333 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 384 7 32 333 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 417 8 35 362 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 372 0 0 425 0 0 877 873 421 878 872 367 Stage 1 - - - - - - 431 431 - 437 437 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 446 442 - 441 435 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - 1134 - - 269 289 632 268 289 678 Stage 1 - - - - - - 603 583 - 598 579 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 576 - 595 580 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - 1134 - - 251 276 632 250 276 678 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 251 276 - 250 276 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 599 580 - 594 556 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 553 554 - 573 577 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.4 19 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 376 1186 - - 1134 - - 297 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.081 0.005 - - 0.031 - - 0.132 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.4 8 0 - 8.3 0 - 19 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.4 Page 127 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 606 54 104 379 84 41 40 132 69 40 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 606 54 104 379 84 41 40 132 69 40 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 697 62 120 436 97 47 46 152 79 46 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 565 832 74 440 787 175 195 161 249 178 86 27 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.13 0.53 0.53 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 151 1781 1481 330 663 1025 1585 540 547 174 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 759 120 0 533 93 0 152 145 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1688 0 1585 1261 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 21.3 1.7 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 5.3 4.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 21.3 1.7 0.0 11.7 2.7 0.0 5.3 6.8 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 565 0 906 440 0 962 356 0 249 291 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.27 0.00 0.55 0.26 0.00 0.61 0.50 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 0 1496 440 0 1543 645 0 544 551 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.2 0.0 13.1 9.3 0.0 9.3 22.3 0.0 23.5 24.2 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 2.3 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 7.8 0.6 0.0 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.3 0.0 15.4 10.8 0.0 9.8 22.7 0.0 25.9 25.5 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 784 653 245 145 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.1 10.0 24.7 25.5 Approach LOS B A C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 12.0 33.9 13.9 9.6 36.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 3.7 23.3 8.8 2.4 13.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.1 0.6 0.0 4.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.4 HCM 6th LOS B Page 128 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM No Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 371 30 2 358 29 29 18 4 64 13 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 721 1105 89 710 1105 89 235 119 19 198 35 107 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 997 1707 138 984 1707 138 727 847 134 547 245 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 0 401 2 0 387 51 0 0 151 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 997 0 1846 984 0 1845 1708 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.57 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 374 0 0 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 987 0 0 964 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.5 0.0 3.4 4.3 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 0.0 4.1 4.3 0.0 4.1 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 461 389 51 151 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 4.1 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 32.0 10.5 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.2 5.9 6.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.8 HCM 6th LOS A Page 129 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 AM No Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 426 8 36 370 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 380 0 0 434 0 0 896 892 430 897 891 375 Stage 1 - - - - - - 440 440 - 447 447 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 456 452 - 450 444 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 261 281 625 261 282 671 Stage 1 - - - - - - 596 578 - 591 573 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 584 570 - 589 575 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 243 268 625 243 269 671 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 243 268 - 243 269 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 592 575 - 587 550 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 545 547 - 567 572 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.7 19.4 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 367 1178 - - 1126 - - 289 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 0.005 - - 0.032 - - 0.135 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.7 8.1 0 - 8.3 0 - 19.4 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.5 Page 130 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM No Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 710 63 122 445 99 48 47 155 80 47 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 557 842 75 430 795 177 194 161 252 176 87 27 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.50 0.50 0.12 0.54 0.54 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 150 1781 1481 330 660 1011 1585 535 546 170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 773 122 0 544 95 0 155 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1671 0 1585 1251 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 2.9 0.0 5.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 557 0 916 430 0 971 355 0 252 290 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.28 0.00 0.56 0.27 0.00 0.61 0.51 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 0 1463 430 0 1509 629 0 532 536 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.3 0.0 13.3 9.6 0.0 9.4 22.8 0.0 23.9 24.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.7 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.2 0.7 0.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.4 0.0 16.0 11.3 0.0 9.9 23.2 0.0 26.4 26.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 798 666 250 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 10.1 25.1 26.1 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.2 12.0 34.9 14.2 9.6 37.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 3.7 24.2 9.2 2.4 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.2 0.6 0.0 4.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.8 HCM 6th LOS B Page 131 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 341 28 2 329 27 27 17 4 59 12 68 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 371 30 2 358 29 29 18 4 64 13 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 721 1105 89 710 1105 89 235 119 19 198 35 107 Arrive On Green 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 997 1707 138 984 1707 138 727 847 134 547 245 761 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 0 401 2 0 387 51 0 0 151 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 997 0 1846 984 0 1845 1708 0 0 1552 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.57 0.08 0.42 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 374 0 0 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 721 0 1194 710 0 1194 987 0 0 964 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.5 0.0 3.4 4.3 0.0 3.3 16.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 0.0 4.1 4.3 0.0 4.1 16.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A B A A Approach Vol, veh/h 461 389 51 151 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 4.1 16.3 18.2 Approach LOS A A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 32.0 10.5 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.5 23.5 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.2 5.9 6.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.7 0.7 2.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.8 HCM 6th LOS A Page 132 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 AM Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Future Vol, veh/h 5 392 7 33 340 9 10 3 15 21 7 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 426 8 36 370 10 11 3 16 23 8 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 380 0 0 434 0 0 896 892 430 897 891 375 Stage 1 - - - - - - 440 440 - 447 447 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 456 452 - 450 444 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 261 281 625 261 282 671 Stage 1 - - - - - - 596 578 - 591 573 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 584 570 - 589 575 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1178 - - 1126 - - 243 268 625 243 269 671 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 243 268 - 243 269 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 592 575 - 587 550 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 545 547 - 567 572 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.7 15.7 19.4 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 367 1178 - - 1126 - - 289 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 0.005 - - 0.032 - - 0.135 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.7 8.1 0 - 8.3 0 - 19.4 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.5 Page 133 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 AM Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 618 55 106 387 86 42 41 135 70 41 17 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 710 63 122 445 99 48 47 155 80 47 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 557 842 75 430 795 177 194 161 252 176 87 27 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.50 0.50 0.12 0.54 0.54 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1693 150 1781 1481 330 660 1011 1585 535 546 170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 773 122 0 544 95 0 155 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 0 1811 1671 0 1585 1251 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 22.2 1.7 0.0 12.2 2.9 0.0 5.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.18 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.14 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 557 0 916 430 0 971 355 0 252 290 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.28 0.00 0.56 0.27 0.00 0.61 0.51 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 0 1463 430 0 1509 629 0 532 536 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.3 0.0 13.3 9.6 0.0 9.4 22.8 0.0 23.9 24.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.7 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.2 0.7 0.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.4 0.0 16.0 11.3 0.0 9.9 23.2 0.0 26.4 26.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 798 666 250 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 10.1 25.1 26.1 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.2 12.0 34.9 14.2 9.6 37.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 7.5 48.5 20.5 5.1 50.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 3.7 24.2 9.2 2.4 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.1 6.2 0.6 0.0 4.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.8 HCM 6th LOS B Page 134 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 671 38 32 256 45 16 30 4 45 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 671 38 32 256 45 16 30 4 45 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 729 41 35 278 49 17 33 4 49 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 791 1185 67 466 1046 184 145 171 17 159 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1053 1754 99 699 1548 273 330 1307 131 423 543 637 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 0 770 35 0 327 54 0 0 146 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1053 0 1853 699 0 1821 1768 0 0 1603 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 0.0 10.7 1.4 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.7 0.0 10.7 12.1 0.0 3.3 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.40 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 791 0 1252 466 0 1231 333 0 0 313 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.61 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 791 0 1252 466 0 1231 800 0 0 763 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.9 0.0 4.2 7.5 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.3 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.5 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.5 7.9 0.0 3.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 846 362 54 146 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.3 3.9 18.4 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 12.7 6.0 14.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 5.9 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.6 HCM 6th LOS A Page 135 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 PM 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 778 13 32 328 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 349 0 0 791 0 0 1199 1208 785 1205 1204 339 Stage 1 - - - - - - 795 795 - 403 403 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 404 413 - 802 801 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 162 183 393 161 184 703 Stage 1 - - - - - - 381 399 - 624 600 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 623 594 - 378 397 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 154 173 393 148 174 703 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 154 173 - 148 174 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 378 396 - 620 571 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 565 - 361 394 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.1 30.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 234 1210 - - 829 - - 153 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.102 0.004 - - 0.038 - - 0.071 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.1 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.3 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 136 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 697 47 122 416 57 65 47 188 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 697 47 122 416 57 65 47 188 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 590 842 57 417 822 112 230 142 263 144 133 67 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.51 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1732 117 1781 1610 220 788 855 1585 354 804 404 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 759 124 0 482 114 0 192 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1643 0 1585 1561 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 20.5 1.7 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 20.5 1.7 0.0 10.0 3.2 0.0 6.6 3.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 590 0 898 417 0 934 371 0 263 344 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.84 0.30 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.73 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 590 0 1305 417 0 1337 640 0 539 599 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 5.9 0.0 12.9 9.4 0.0 9.3 21.3 0.0 22.7 20.6 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 3.6 1.8 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 3.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 7.7 0.7 0.0 3.3 1.3 0.0 2.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 16.4 11.2 0.0 9.8 21.7 0.0 26.6 20.9 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 783 606 306 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.1 10.1 24.8 20.9 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.0 11.0 32.4 14.0 9.6 33.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.6 3.7 22.5 5.2 2.3 12.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.1 5.3 0.2 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.7 HCM 6th LOS B Page 137 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM No Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 71 684 39 33 261 46 16 30 4 45 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 71 684 39 33 261 46 16 30 4 45 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 743 42 36 284 50 17 33 4 49 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 785 1185 67 456 1047 184 145 171 17 159 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1046 1753 99 689 1549 273 330 1307 131 423 543 637 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 785 36 0 334 54 0 0 146 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1046 0 1853 689 0 1821 1768 0 0 1603 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 0.0 11.1 1.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 11.1 12.6 0.0 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.40 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 785 0 1252 456 0 1231 333 0 0 313 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 785 0 1252 456 0 1231 800 0 0 763 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.0 0.0 4.2 7.8 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 2.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.6 8.1 0.0 3.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 862 370 54 146 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.4 4.0 18.4 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 13.1 6.0 14.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 6.0 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 138 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM No Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 716 12 29 302 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 778 13 32 328 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 349 0 0 791 0 0 1199 1208 785 1205 1204 339 Stage 1 - - - - - - 795 795 - 403 403 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 404 413 - 802 801 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 162 183 393 161 184 703 Stage 1 - - - - - - 381 399 - 624 600 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 623 594 - 378 397 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 829 - - 154 173 393 148 174 703 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 154 173 - 148 174 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 378 396 - 620 571 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 591 565 - 361 394 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.1 30.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 234 1210 - - 829 - - 153 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.102 0.004 - - 0.038 - - 0.071 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.1 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.3 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 139 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM No Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 711 48 124 424 58 66 48 192 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 726 49 127 433 59 67 49 196 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 583 852 58 407 831 113 229 143 265 142 132 67 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1732 117 1781 1611 220 791 853 1585 352 792 399 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 775 127 0 492 116 0 196 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1644 0 1585 1542 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 21.5 1.8 0.0 10.4 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 21.5 1.8 0.0 10.4 3.3 0.0 6.9 3.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 583 0 910 407 0 944 372 0 265 342 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.85 0.31 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.74 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 583 0 1276 407 0 1307 627 0 527 582 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.0 0.0 13.0 9.8 0.0 9.4 21.7 0.0 23.2 21.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 4.1 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.3 0.7 0.0 3.5 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 17.2 11.8 0.0 9.9 22.2 0.0 27.2 21.3 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 799 619 312 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.8 10.3 25.4 21.3 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.3 11.0 33.4 14.3 9.6 34.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 3.8 23.5 5.3 2.3 12.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.1 5.4 0.2 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.2 HCM 6th LOS B Page 140 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM Build 27: Olinger Blvd/Blake Rd & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 71 687 39 33 263 46 16 30 4 46 36 53 Future Volume (veh/h) 71 687 39 33 263 46 16 30 4 46 36 53 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 747 42 36 286 50 17 33 4 50 39 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 783 1184 67 453 1047 183 145 173 17 160 71 83 Arrive On Green 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1044 1754 99 687 1551 271 329 1309 131 429 540 632 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 789 36 0 336 54 0 0 147 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1044 0 1853 687 0 1822 1768 0 0 1602 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 0.0 11.2 1.5 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 11.2 12.7 0.0 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.39 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 783 0 1251 453 0 1230 335 0 0 315 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.00 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 783 0 1251 453 0 1230 799 0 0 762 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.0 0.0 4.3 7.9 0.0 3.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 2.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.2 0.0 6.7 8.2 0.0 3.6 18.3 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A B A A C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 866 372 54 147 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.5 4.0 18.3 20.4 Approach LOS A A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 36.0 10.6 36.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 31.5 19.5 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 13.2 6.0 14.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 6.0 0.6 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.7 HCM 6th LOS A Page 141 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 11: Vernon Ave & west Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 733 311 0 2 1 Future Vol, veh/h 4 733 311 0 2 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 797 338 0 2 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 338 0 - 0 1143 338 Stage 1 - - - - 338 - Stage 2 - - - - 805 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1221 - - - 221 704 Stage 1 - - - - 722 - Stage 2 - - - - 440 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1221 - - - 220 704 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 220 - Stage 1 - - - - 718 - Stage 2 - - - - 440 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 17.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1221 - - - 285 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - - 0.011 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 - - 17.8 HCM Lane LOS A A - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 Page 142 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 9: Vernon Ave & east Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 735 310 5 1 2 Future Vol, veh/h 0 735 310 5 1 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 799 337 5 1 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 342 0 - 0 1139 340 Stage 1 - - - - 340 - Stage 2 - - - - 799 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1217 - - - 223 702 Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 443 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1217 - - - 223 702 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 223 - Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 443 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 13.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1217 - - - 409 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.008 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 13.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 Page 143 of 151 HCM 6th TWSC 2026 PM Build 6: Olinger Rd/Highwood Dr & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 720 12 29 307 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 5 720 12 29 307 19 8 2 12 8 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 783 13 32 334 21 9 2 13 9 2 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 355 0 0 796 0 0 1210 1219 790 1216 1215 345 Stage 1 - - - - - - 800 800 - 409 409 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 410 419 - 807 806 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1204 - - 826 - - 159 180 390 158 181 698 Stage 1 - - - - - - 379 397 - 619 596 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 619 590 - 375 395 - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1204 - - 826 - - 151 170 390 145 171 698 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 151 170 - 145 171 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 376 394 - 615 567 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 587 562 - 358 392 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.8 22.5 30.9 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 230 1204 - - 826 - - 150 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.104 0.005 - - 0.038 - - 0.072 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.5 8 0 - 9.5 0 - 30.9 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 Page 144 of 151 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2026 PM Build 3: Tracy Ave & Vernon Ave Synchro 11 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 714 49 124 428 58 67 48 192 21 22 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 714 49 124 428 58 67 48 192 21 22 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 729 50 127 437 59 68 49 196 21 22 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 581 854 59 405 835 113 230 141 265 142 132 66 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.49 0.49 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1730 119 1781 1613 218 799 845 1585 350 788 397 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 779 127 0 496 117 0 196 58 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1849 1781 0 1831 1644 0 1585 1535 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 0.0 21.7 1.8 0.0 10.6 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 21.7 1.8 0.0 10.6 3.3 0.0 6.9 3.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.12 0.58 1.00 0.36 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 581 0 913 405 0 947 371 0 265 340 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.85 0.31 0.00 0.52 0.31 0.00 0.74 0.17 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 581 0 1270 405 0 1302 624 0 524 579 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.0 0.0 13.1 9.9 0.0 9.4 21.8 0.0 23.3 21.1 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 4.3 2.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 8.3 0.7 0.0 3.5 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.1 0.0 17.3 11.9 0.0 9.9 22.3 0.0 27.4 21.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B A A C A C C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 803 623 313 58 Approach Delay, s/veh 17.0 10.3 25.5 21.4 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.4 11.0 33.6 14.4 9.6 35.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.5 6.5 40.5 19.5 5.1 41.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 3.8 23.7 5.3 2.3 12.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.1 5.4 0.2 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.3 HCM 6th LOS B Page 145 of 151 Site Page 146 of 151 Page 147 of 151 Site Page 148 of 151 Page 149 of 151 Page 150 of 151 Buildable Area Page 151 of 151