Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-05-13 Planning Commission Packets
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MAY 13, 2015 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting April 22, 2015 & April 8, 2015 V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Planning Commission will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the some issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on this morning's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments today. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Subdivision. Frank Berman. 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road, Edina, MN. B. Variance. Karen & Bill Kelly. 4504 Sunnyside Road, Edina, MN. C. Subdivision. Jerrod Lindquist. 5945 Concord Avenue, Edina, MN D. Final Rezoning. Frauenshuh Companies. 7700 France Avenue, Edina, MN VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Sketch Plan. Edina Community Lutheran Church. 4113 54TH Street, Edina MN. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Attendance and Council Report IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS X. STAFF COMMENT XI. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Next Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission May 27, 2015 City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861 Fax 952-826-0389 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: May 13, 2015 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Blake Woods Subdivision MEMO o e This item was previously continued by the Planning Commission so the applicant could address concerns raised by the engineering department and the Commission in regard to the grading and drainage plan. The applicant submitted revised plans on May 5, 2015. Engineering staff has reviewed the plans and found them acceptable, subject to the conditions in their attached memo dated May 8, 2015. The applicant is requesting flexibility on conditions 3, 5 and 7, curbing type, the sidewalk, and looping of the water. These are policy decisions to be decided ultimately by the City Council. Should these conditions be revised or eliminated, the proposed grading and drainage plans would not cause any increase in rate or volume to adjacent properties. Staff continues to recommend approval subject to the conditions outlined in the Planning Commission Staff report dated April 8, 2015 and the engineering memo dated May 5, 2015. The City has until June I e, 2015 to take final action on the Preliminary Plat. Attachments: Revised plans date stamped May 5, 2015 Revised engineering memo dated May 8, 2015. Planning Commission staff report dated April 8, 2015 Planning Commission minutes from the April 8, 2015 meeting City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St • Edina, MN 55424 DATE: May 8, 2015 TO: Cary Teague — Community Development Director CC: Chad Millner PE — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner PE — Environmental Engineer RE: Berman Subdivision — Preliminary Plat Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject development for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. This review summarizes issues remaining from the February 19 review, the March 3 drainage review memo and the March 30 review memo. The reviewed plan is dated 4/23/2015. General Comments 1. A development agreement will be required for the creation of public road, utilities and stormwater system, and private rain garden ownership and maintenance. Survey/ Plat 2. Public easements will be required for all public infrastructures not already in platted right of way. Traffic and ,Street. 3. Consider Living Streets Policy in design of street. 4. Limit parking to one side of street. S. Use B618 curb and gutter and standard residential driveway entrances as described in city standard plate 411 and found at the following link: http•//edinamn gov/index phhp?section=construction standardA Sanitary and Water Utilities 6. Provide a looped 6" DIP from Blake Rd through to the southeast corner of lot 6 north along the property line to Evanswood Ln. Storm Water Utility & Hydrology 7. The proposed design meets the performance standard described in previous review memos. a. Final stormwater management plan will provide justification for infiltration rate, time of concentration and curve numbers in narrative. b. Development agreement shall include conditions for lot imperviousness, and final plans shall include construction provisions, to ensure grading and constructed works function consistent with design assumptions. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 8. Provide a State construction site permit and SWPPP at time of Final Plat. General Comments ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952-826-0371 + Fax 952-826-0392 9. Provide a private maintenance agreement in favor of the local Watershed District for all rain gardens at time of Final Plat. 10. Provide an inspection and maintenance plan for all public and private stormwater practices at time of Final Plat. Other Agency Coordination 11. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit is required, along with other agency permits such as MNDH, MPCA SWPPP, MCES, and a grading permit from the City of Edina Building Department at time of Final Plat ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 wnvw.EdinaMN.gov • 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 VII. C. Subdivision. Frank Berman. 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 & 5324 Blake Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that Frank Berman is proposing to combine and subdivide his four properties at 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road into seven lots. The existing home at 5331 Evanswood Lane would remain, and the home at 5324 Blake Road would be removed. The other two parcels are vacant. Teague explained that the applicant proposes to construct a 24 -foot wide cul-de-sac off Blake Road within a 40 -foot right-of-way. Two lots would access off Evanswood Lane, and the remaining five off the new road. The applicant has attempted to minimize tree loss and address drainage issues in the area by locating the roadway along the north lot line, and the stormwater retension areas along the street. Planner Teague noted that this item was continued from the last Planning Commission for the applicant to revise the grading and drainage plan to address concerns raised by the city engineering department. The applicant has revised the plans to address those concerns. The engineering department and Barr Engineering, the City's engineering consultant has reviewed the plans Teague said to accommodate the request Preliminary Plat approval is required. Continuing, Teague said all seven of the proposed lots meet the City's minimum lot size requirements. Minimum lot size, width and depth is determined by the median of all lots within 500 feet of the subject property. Based on the surveyors calculation of the medians, the minimum lot size is 21,842 s.f. in size; 166.4 feet in depth; and 120.8 feet in width. The engineering department has reviewed the calculations and lot sizes provided by the applicant's surveyor and does find them to be accurate. Planner Teague concluded that staff the plat meets all requirements and further recommends that the City Council approve the proposed seven lot subdivision based on the following findings: I . The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has reduced the width of the road, and minimized the stormwater ponding on the site in an attempt to minimize tree loss. 3. In meeting all city and watershed district requirements for drainage the proposed subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. Final plat shall include a complete grading and drainage plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 2. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into a Developers Agreement with the City. The Developers Agreement shall include the requirement for construction of the street as proposed, and a sidewalk on the south side of the street as recommended in the engineering memo dated March 30, 2015. The agreement shall also include all the conditions of approval. 3. Prior to release of the final plat, the following items must be submitted: a. Park dedication fee of $15,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. b. A construction management plan will be required for the overall development of the site. C. Submit evidence of a Nine Mile Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. b. Individual homes must comply with the overall grading plan for the site. Each individual building permit will be reviewed for compliance with the overall grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. C. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. d. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. e. All homes must be constructed with fire sprinkler protection in accordance to NFPA 13d or IRC 2904. f. Signage stating "No Parking Fire Lane" along one side of the roadway the entire length of the road, and within the cul-de-sac. S. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated March 30, 2015. 6. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the fire marshal's memo dated February 18, 2015. 7. A stop sign is required to be installed on the new street approaching Blake Road. Clear sight lines shall be maintained from the intersection. 8. Compliance with the city's newly adopted tree ordinance. 9. Compliance with the city's living streets policy. 6 Appearing for the Applicant Kendra Lindale, Landform, jack Perry, and Carrie Berman Discussion Planner Teague was asked to explain the loop water line suggested by engineering staff. Planner Teague responded that engineering staff recommends that the site provide a looped 6" DIP from Blake Road through to Lot 6 along the property line to Evanswood Lane; however, the applicant has not agreed to do so. Chair Platteter asked Planner Teague if the storm water pond to the west was private or public. Planner Teague responded that is a private pond. Applicant Presentation Kendra Lindale introduced, Jack Perry, legal staff and Carrie Berman, daughter of applicant as part of the project team. Lindale stressed how important it was to the applicant to minimize tree loss. She noted the applicant will continue to live in his home. Lindale informed the Commission in response to staffs recommendation of a looped water line that they are hesitant to do so because they believe it would create more tree loss. Lindale stated that as presented the storm water plan is responsive, adding there will be no net increase in rate or volume to surrounding properties. Lindale also noted that in this area Edina has a downstream issue, adding in her opinion this site shouldn't be required to fix an area issue. Lindale further commented that they respectfully request that the suggested B618 curb and gutter be eliminated and a flush ribbon curb built in its place. She pointed out flush ribbon curbs are very common in Edina and work well with rain gardens. Continuing, Lindale stated with regard to the sidewalk condition they are not convinced every site should be required to have a sidewalk. She pointed out there are five homes on the cul de sac and the addition of a sidewalk creates challenges for the project. Lindale said if a sidewalk is required to be built as a condition of approval they would prefer that the sidewalk was constructed on the north side. Concluding, Lindale asked the Commission to eliminate the Fire Department's condition that the homes be sprinkled. Lindale pointed out the State already has a sprinkling requirement based on square footage, adding they would like to abide by State Statutes, questioning if other new homes were required to be sprinkled. Discussion Commissioner Carr commented that she could support a sidewalk on the north vs. south. Carr asked Ms. Lindale to explain "ribbon" curb. With graphics Lindale indicated ribbon curbs, adding that the reason they want them installed on the project was to ensure water flow. Ribbon curbs are designed to handle water run-off. Carr further asked the applicant if they prefer looped or dead ended. Lindale responded they would prefer the dead ended main. Commissioner Lee questioned if the property owner would consider reducing the number of lots from seven to six. The applicants responded that the seven lot plat meets code, adding they have not considered reducing the number of lots. A brief discussion ensued on drainage. Ross Bintner addressed the Commission and explained with regard to the sidewalk requirement the sidewalk is not a code requirement it's a policy. Bintner further indicated that the B618 curb is also a policy, along with looped main vs. dead ended. Continuing, Bintner reported that the sprinkler requirement was from the Fire Department. Teague interjected and explained the Fire Department requested sprinkling because of the narrower street. Chair Platteter asked if the subdivision Acres Dubois had a looped main. Mr. Bintner responded Acres DuBois was not looped. Chair Platteter asked the applicant if the Watershed District has weighed in on the project. Ms. Lindale responded that they have been in contact with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District; however, they will not meet on the proposal until after it receives preliminary approval from the City. Public Hearin Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. The following residents expressed concerns with the proposed subdivision: Rebecca Wallin, 6208 Parkwood Road Charlie Gits, 5311 Evanswood Lane Kim Gits, 5311 Evanswood Lane Marty Wheeler, 6200 Parkwood Road Tim Kuck, 6316 Westwood Court Olaf Hinge, 5525 Evanswood Lane Amy Minge, 5225 Evanswood Lane Concerns were expressed as follows: • Storm water management. Some areas already retain water careful consideration must be given to drainage and storm water management. • Increase in impervious surfaces — more water issues • Change in density • Tree loss • Consider using existing driveway as shared vs. new street. • Decrease in property values • Years of living with continued construction • Rain garden maintenance — who's responsible, will they be maintained • Buffer • Visibility concerns. Site lines are compromised in this area -intersections are close and there is a grade change • The plan as presented is too dense, lots aren't in keeping with neighboring properties, consider reducing number of lots Commissioner Carr moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioners expressed the opinion that issues are unresolved and acknowledged the difficulty in finding balance. It was further noted that in Edina "one size doesn't fit all" and with no conclusions on specific drainage issues it; and other issues make it difficult to make an educated decision. It was further suggested that more creativity could be used in plat development including limiting parking to only one side of the street, etc. Chair Platteter asked Ms. Lindale to comment on the tree loss and drainage issues raised by neighbors. Ms. Lindale said she is unsure of the exact percentage of tree loss, but would have that calculated prior to the next meeting. Lindale explained the proposed street was aligned so the fewest number of trees would be removed. Lindale stated with regard to drainage that their proposal cannot solve the areas storm water and drainage problems; however, they can't make it worse, adding the proposed rain gardens are a critical part of stormwater management for the site. Chair Platteter noted that another concern expressed was sight line issues at the intersection of Blake and the new road. Platteter asked Lindale to comment on that. Ms. Lindale reported at the City's request WSB conducted a traffic analysis. The report indicated that sight lines are sufficient. She further noted that the applicant will enter into a Developers Agreement that not only addresses sight lines and site access but addresses retaining walls, rain gardens, water and sewer too. Lindale said in the Agreement maintenance of the proposed wall, rain gardens, etc. are addressed. In response to comments from neighbors on prior tree loss Steve Gross reported that the site was being cleared of buckthorn and dead trees. A lengthy discussion ensued on the proposed subdivision and Engineers Memo dated March 30, 2015 with Commissioners expressing their hesitancy is supporting the preliminary plat in light of the fact that specific items in the storm water management plan were not sufficiently addressed to gain support of the Engineer. Commissioners were also divided on sidewalk or no sidewalk, style of curb/gutter and the number of lots, etc. Mr. Bintner stated that in his opinion his concerns can be addressed before the applicant returns for final plat. Bintner said he agrees with the majority of items in the memo; specifically numbers 2 and 8 through 21. He acknowledged issues with 3, 4 and 7; however reiterated in his opinion those issues could be agreed on. Bintner stressed from an Engineering standpoint their goal is to ensure that storm water does not increase the flood risk to upstream and downstream properties Commissioner Carr commented that she agrees all issues can be resolved; however, the Commission needs to recommend to the Council approval or denial with sufficient findings, adding some issues (curb gutter, sidewalk, etc.) need further clarification. Continuing, Carr said before final plat specific issues need to be resolved and the storm water management plan needs to be prepared in more detail. Commissioner Olsen commented that she believes if a motion is made it should include conditions that the applicant must provide adequate drawings (as mentioned by Commissioner Carr) indicating how the water is distributed and how/if the applicant can gain rain garden easements. Mr. Gits interjected questioning if he can stub into the rain garden adjacent to his property. Planner Teague responded that he believes Mr. Gits could stub into the rain garden; however, at his expense. Teague noted he believes the easements are public. The discussion continued on if the request should be continued allowing staff and applicants time to resolve any issues or vote the request up or down. Motion Commissioner Carr moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and conditions and subject to the following additions: • The developer can choose between the ribbon cut or B618 curb • The developer can choose between looped or dead end water main. • Water sprinklers not required (note State requirements would be enforced) • Comply with the principles of Living Street with the developer choosing which side of the street the sidewalk should go • Present a more detailed storm water, drainage and erosion control plan. • Address rain garden issues and potential flooding issues because of expressed concerns. Commissioner Hobbs seconded the motion. Commissioner Lee stated she cannot support the motion for approval. She said the conditions of approval are unclear and that she believes a decrease in the number of lots could mitigate drainage issues. Lee acknowledged the plat meets all requirements; however, in her opinion a balance must be reached. Commissioners Hobbs and Forrest indicated they would have to vote against the motion to approve. 10 Mr. Perry said they would be willing to work with staff and grant a 30 -day extension. Chair Platteter called the vote. Ayes; Thorsen, Olsen, Carr. Nay; Hobbs, Lee Strauss, Nemerov, Forrest, Platteter. Motion failed. 3-6. Commissioner Hobbs moved to continue the request for subdivision to allow time for staff and the applicant to resolve any issues. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to continue carried. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Grandview Presentation Economic Development Manager, Bill Neuendorf addressed tl Mmission and reported on AN the redevelopment planning for the former public works sits" r B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Chair Platteter suggested because of the late hourtlie discussion on the Ordinance Amendments be continued to the next Planning Commission",,,,,rri ing on April 22nd. Commissioners Agreed. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE Chair Platteter acknowledged backcket materials. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Forrest rued that last evening (April 7) the City Couctj graved the Wooddale Valley View Small Area 77 Commissioner Hobs informed the Commission one meeting hacurred for the France Southdale y, ,. Area Work Grod"p,"adding he believes the group can craftOic vision of the greater Southdale area. X.ftilkFF COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Thorsen moved meeting adjournment at 12.20 am. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion toa ourn carried. 11 � }U) 9Gdd PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague April 8, 2015 VI.C. Community Development Director INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Frank Berman is proposing to combine and subdivide his four properties at 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road into seven lots. (See property location on pages Al—A3.) The existing home at 5331 Evanswood Lane would remain, and the home at 5324 Blake Road would be removed. The other two parcels are vacant. The applicant proposes to construct a 24 -foot wide cul-de-sac off Blake Road within a 40 -foot right-of-way. Two lots would access off Evanswood Lane, and the remaining five off the new road. The applicant has attempted to minimize tree loss and address drainage issues in the area by locating the roadway along the north lot line, and the stormwater retension areas along the street. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4—A22a and the revised plans on A51 -A71.) This item was continued from the last Planning Commission for the applicant to revise the grading and drainage plan to address concerns raised by the city engineering department. The applicant has revised the plans to address those concerns. (See pages A51 -A71.) The engineering department and Barr Engineering, the City's engineering consultant has reviewed the plans and have offered comments with recommendations on pages A35 -A50. To accommodate the request the following is required: Preliminary Plat. All seven of the proposed lots meet the City's minimum lot size requirements. Minimum lot size, width and depth is determined by the median of all lots within 500 feet of the subject property. Based on the surveyors calculation of the medians, the minimum lot size is 21,842 s.f. in size; 166.4 feet in depth; and 120.8 feet in width. (See attached median calculations on pages A22—A22a) The engineering department has reviewed the calculations and lot sizes provided by the applicant's surveyor and does find them to be accurate. Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the subject properties are single-family homes, zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The site is 4.31 acres in size, and contains two single-family homes. The site contains some gradual slopes and mature trees. (See pages A2 -A3.) Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single -dwelling residential R-1, Single -dwelling district The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. (See median calculations done by a licensed surveyor on pages A22-A22a.) Grading/Drainage and Utilities Rather than constructing a traditional stormwater pond within the subdivision, in an effort to save additional trees on the site, the applicant is proposing to 2 Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 21,842 s.f. 120.8 feet 166.4 feet Lot 1 21,842 s.f. 126.89 feet 169.31 feet Lot 2 21,910 s.f. 129.00 feet 169.86 feet Lot 3 21,842 s.f. 124.70 feet 170.72 feet Lot 4 22,328 s.f. 120.88 feet 166.64 feet Lot 5 24,822 s.f. 121.83 feet 166.80 feet Lot 6 30,033 s.f. 191.4 feet 190 feet Lot 7 21,901 s.f. 128.16 feet 184.18 feet The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. (See median calculations done by a licensed surveyor on pages A22-A22a.) Grading/Drainage and Utilities Rather than constructing a traditional stormwater pond within the subdivision, in an effort to save additional trees on the site, the applicant is proposing to 2 manage stormwater through rain gardens on each lot. (See the revised grading plans on page A60.) The plans are not significantly changed from the original submittal. The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and does have some concern given the existing drainage issues in this neighborhood. (See the engineering memo on pages A35 -A38, and Barr Engineering's review on pages A39 -A50.) The stormwater system downstream to the west is over capacity. The applicant will be required to meet all minimum Nine Mile Creek Watershed district standards. There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all the lot lines. A general building pad would be graded at the time the roadway is constructed. Each lot would be custom graded at the time of building permit. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. Any approval of the proposed plat would be subject to meeting all the conditions required by engineering in their review memo dated March 30, 2015. (See pages A35 - A38.) When considering the requirements in the engineering memo, the following City Code sections are used: Sec. 32-106. - Public hearing by council; preliminary approval. (1) Grant preliminary approval, with or without modification, and without conditions, or with such conditions reasonably related to the purpose and objectives of this chapter, as the council may deem necessary or desirable; Sec. 32-130. - Considerations. The planning commission, in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the council, and the council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider, among other matters, the following: (2) The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including, but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. 3 (5) The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development on the health, safety and general welfare of the public. (6) The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground. (7) The relationship of lots in the proposed plat or subdivision to existing streets and the adequacy and safety of ingress to and egress from such lots from and to existing streets. (8) The adequacy of streets in the proposed plat or subdivision, and the conformity with existing and planned streets and highways in surrounding areas. Streets in the proposed plat or subdivision shall be deemed inadequate, if designed or located so as to prevent or deny public street access to adjoining properties, it being the policy of the city to avoid landlocked tracts, parcels or lots. (11) Whether the physical characteristics of the property, including, without limitation, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a natural recovery and ponding area for stormwater, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. (13) Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. Sec. 32-131. - Additional considerations, In addition to the foregoing matters, the commission, in connection with its recommendation to the council, and the council in determining whether to approve or disapprove a proposed plat or subdivision, shall specifically and especially consider the following matters: (1) Whether the proposed plat or subdivision complies with the policies, objectives and goals of the comprehensive plan. (2) Whether the proposed plat or subdivision complies with chapter 36. (3) Whether the design of the proposed plat or subdivision, or the design or type of improvements proposed to be placed thereon, may be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public. 4 (4) Whether the proposed plat or subdivision conforms to, and complies with, the requirements of applicable state law. Sec. 32-161. - Developer's agreement. After preliminary approval has been given to a plat or subdivision, the applicant shall enter into a developer's agreement (herein called the "agreement") with the city, on terms and conditions determined by the city, and shall cause all street, water and sewer improvements required by the planner or engineer, or by the resolution granting preliminary or final approval, to be completed, pursuant to the agreement and to the city's then standards and specifications for such improvements. Sec. 36-1257. - Drainage, retaining walls and site access. (a) Drainage. No person shall obstruct or divert the natural flow of runoff so as to harm the public health, safety or general welfare. Surface water runoff shall be properly conveyed into storm sewers, watercourses, ponding areas or other public facilities. As part of the building permit, the applicant must submit a grading and erosion control plan along with a stormwater management plan that is signed by a licensed professional engineer. The stormwater management plan must detail how stormwater will be controlled to prevent damage to adjacent property and adverse impacts to the public stormwater drainage system. The plans must be approved by the city engineer and the permit holder must adhere to the approved plans. Street Construction/Sidewalk — Traffic & Safety The applicant is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac off Blake Road. Five of the proposed lots would access off the cul-de-sac, and two off of Evanswood Lane. (See page A8.) The street would be located generally in the same location as the two existing curb cuts for two homes that are removed. (See page A9.) The cul-de-sac would have a center island that would serve as a rain garden. Both the fire marshal and public works director believe that the center island would be acceptable, as fire trucks and snow plows will be able to adequately access the street and homes on the street. WSB conducted a traffic study and concluded that the proposed street and additional homes in the area would not have a negative impact on the existing streets in the area. The level of service on the existing streets would not change as a result of the proposal. (See traffic study on pages A23 -A31.) WSB examined the existing intersections and spacing along Blake Road, and found that while not ideal, the proposed spacing of the intersections is not a safety concern. The proposed development would generate 58 additional daily trips, 5 in the peak am, and 6 in the peak pm hours. (See page A28.) With the reduction in the width of the roadway to 24 feet, the applicant shall be required to post one side of the street and the entire cul-de-sac for no parking for a fire lane; additionally residential fire sprinkler protection shall be required for each home subject to approval of the fire marshal. (See memo from the fire marshal dated February 18, 2015 on page A32.) Per the city's living streets policy, the engineering department is also recommending a 5 -foot sidewalk with a 5 -foot boulevard to be located within the right-of-way on the south side of the street. (See engineering memo on pages A33 -A34, and the living streets sidewalk map and policy on pages A75 -A80.) This sidewalk would connect to the existing sidewalk across the street on the east side of Blake Road. (See page A35.) Tree Removal With the layout of the subdivision there would be 38 trees removed to accommodate the public street and stormwater retention areas. (See page A13.) The generic building pads and drainage areas would result in an additional 87 trees removed. (See page Al2.) Based on the new tree ordinance adopted by the City Council, 80 of these trees would not have to be replaced. Any tree outside of these areas would be required for replacement per the new ordinance. Each lot would be reviewed individually at the time of building permit application to determine compliance with the city's new tree ordinance. Park Dedication As with all subdivision proposals, park dedication is required. Edina City Code requires a park dedication fee of $5,000 for each additional lot created. Therefore a park dedication fee of $15,000 would be required for the three additional lots. Primary Issue • Is the proposed subdivision reasonable for the site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. As such, the applicant is entitled to subdivide the property, similar to how other large properties in this area were able to subdivide in the past. 2. The applicant has designed a grading and drainage plan in an attempt to save more trees on the site. M 3. The applicant has designed a 24 -foot wide street, rather than the traditional 27 -foot wide street, to reduce impervious surface. 4. Upon compliance with all city and watershed district requirements for grading and drainage, the proposed subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Staff Recommendation Because the proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning Ordinance requirements, recommend that the City Council approve the proposed seven lot subdivision. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has reduced the width of the road, and minimized the stormwater ponding on the site in an attempt to minimize tree loss. 3. In meeting all city and watershed district requirements for drainage the proposed subdivision would not have a negative impact on adjacent property. Approval is subject to the following conditions: The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. Final plat shall include a complete grading and drainage plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 2. At the time of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into a Developers Agreement with the City. The Developers Agreement shall include the requirement for construction of the street as proposed, and a sidewalk on the south side of the street as recommended in the engineering memo dated March 30, 2015. The agreement shall also include all the conditions of approval. 3. Prior to release of the final plat, the following items must be submitted: a. Park dedication fee of $15,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 7 b. A construction management plan will be required for the overall development of the site. C. Submit evidence of a Nine Mile Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. b. Individual homes must comply with the overall grading plan for the site. Each individual building permit will be reviewed for compliance with the overall grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. C. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. d. Utility hook-ups are subject to review of the city engineer. e. All homes must be constructed with fire sprinkler protection in accordance to NFPA 13d or IRC 2904. f. Signage stating "No Parking Fire Lane" along one side of the roadway the entire length of the road, and within the cul-de-sac. 5. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated March 30, 2015. 6. Compliance with the conditions outlined in the fire marshal's memo dated February 18, 2015. 7. A stop sign is required to be installed on the new street approaching Blake Road. Clear sight lines shall be maintained from the intersection. 8. Compliance with the city's newly adopted tree ordinance. 9. Compliance with the city's living streets policy. Deadline for a City Decision: May 20, 2015 8 5124 24 '' 5152 5125 ? 5 3 5123 0 520 5151 5200 5201 '622011'6212 46212 5204 52016232 't' 5200 L 6231 � � 6200 ' 1 6112,1 5204 � ._ i2 6229 EQ?( ts9EA0pyV LANE' ' ; 6000 ' i 5224521 I I 5216 24 ( 5217 - " 24 . n;! 5220 �. O5225 �4�5224'l Rik 5224 =1I---- . I 5300 � $ ; �� 52281 5225 _ W M 6300 6304 1 6308 5304 �'w 5225 5228 ( 5232 5236 5240 t 5300 _Sc 6400 `^ _ 5301 1 - t 5300 5301 X6404i 5308 ca 5307 - 6312 (5304 ; i I 6301 6305 ( NSWOOD CANE � 5231 � 5239 � ! 5309 k 5235 5304 1 5305 t .6008 64011 5331 532 311 5316 6313 6309 31 5315 1 5308 I � fl b316 � r� 1 5309 �12� L5312VES +QOD zQURT �" I 6320 5320 5324 (53136024 t 4 6328 1 6324 •, E GR 5316 , Q 5316 ' iINE GROPE ROAD � ' !1602 ` Z.I i 6216 621216208, 620a 6200 i 5401 5400 6029 16025�60211601716013�6009, 6220 IpARKWOOD ROAD 5405 i 6400 6228 6224 I 62056201 5409 5404 15405'540915415417 54215423 6209 ' a \6213 ! _... - �} 541 54 ' w, E E 6217 � (p- 08 _ 5412j 6221 6208'16204162001 541 �542015424542815432 6401 i 6229 6225,6212 t 4� A- \621661121'6108161046100 6020 601�6012�600D 16232116228�,,6224 4P 16209 622085504 _ " 62056201 IDYLWOOD DRIVE 10� 62131 - 6217 �. ! `161136109 6021 5508 _ I 4 6221 62286224 5513 5 6233 6229 6225" " 3 6232 _ 62361 t t j6112 6020`6012,600860046000". Parcel ! A -T -B: Map Scale: V = 400 ft. /NN ID: Print Date: 2/11/2015 -(�} Owner Market w Name: ; Total: Parcel Tax Address: Total: Property Sale Type: Price: This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no Home- Sale representation or warranty expressed or stead: ; Date: implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Parcel Sale Area: Code: COPYRIGHT ®HENNEPIN COUNTY 2015 � A TtthtkG eet J 4a A� BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION Edina, MN APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT January 23, 2014 L A N D F O R M From Site to Finish INTRODUCTION On behalf of Frank Berman, Landform is pleased to submit this preliminary plat application to create seven residential lots from four existing lots at Blake Road and Evanswood Lane. We are excited about this environmentally sensitive design and anticipate that it will be a great addition to the neighborhood. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Frank Berman is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four lots (PID #30-11-72-144- 0053, #3011721440052, #30-11-72-144-0008, #30-11-72-144-0009) to create seven lots. Mr. Berman plans to sell the lots for future construction of single-family detached residential dwelling units. There were three homes on these four parcels. One home was removed and two homes—including Mr. Berman's home—remain. The proposed subdivision is located in the R-1 Zoning District and is guided low-density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. The design team has worked to ensure that plans are consistent with City's zoning standards. The proposed subdivision will help the city achieve its goals of supporting redevelopment opportunities that complement the neighborhood and optimize use of the City's infrastructure. Lot standards: Section 36-438 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet in the R-1 District, but requires that the minimum lot area be calculated by averaging the median lot area, lot width and lot depth of the lots in the surrounding neighborhood. The average median parcel area for surrounding lots is 21,842 sq, ft., the average median lot width is 120.8 ft and the average median lot depth is 166.4 ft. Lot standards for the proposed subdivision comply with the lot standards as defined in Chapter 36 and referenced in Section 32-73. Transportation: We are proposing a 24 foot road in a 40 foot wide right-of-way that will provide access to the proposed lots, connect with existing infrastructure, and minimize tree loss. This new road will 'replace the two existing curb cuts (one for the existing home and one for the driveway easement for the home thatyr as removed). It is anticipated that the additional seven lots will generate minimal traffic on surroundi, Toads. The subdivision application requires that a traffic analysis be performed. We request that the st`Ti., y be initiated to fulfill this requirement. ZZZ14317 L A N D F O R M Manuary 23, 2015 Project Narrative2 AT Tree preservation: The landowners plan to remain in their home, so preserving trees is a priority for them. The proposed lots have been designed to maximize the preservation of trees on the site. The tree survey shows that 82.6% of trees have been saved. The proposed street was aligned along the north edge of proposed Lots 1-5, where the fewest number of trees would be removed. This is the location of the existing driveway easement that served the previous home on the site. Building area and driveway placement are sited to meet setback standards and to remove the fewest number of trees. Trees coverage will remain largely intact along the southern edge of proposed Lots 1-5. Stormwater management: Stormwater management is a critical part of the proposed design. In order to preserve as many trees as possible, stormwater will be managed using rain gardens on each lot. Each lot will provide easement access to the rain garden and homeowners will be required to maintain the rain gardens using appropriate plantings and best management strategies. SUMMARY We respectfully request approval of a prelimirlary plat application for the creation of seven lots and associated infrastructure at Blake Road and Evanswood Lane in Edina, MN. We look forward to receiving feedback on the proposed design from the neighborhood on February 3, 2015 and presenting plans to both the Planning Commission on February 25, 2015 and to the City Council on March 17, 2015. CONTACT INFORMATION This document was prepared by: Mary Matze, Planner Landform 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55330 t�d Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Reid Schulz at !Z--' rschulz(a)landform.net or 612.638.0245. ` O ZZZ14317 Project Narrative L A N D F Q R M 0 n January 23, 2015 3 E*ik1« -I- BLAKE WOODS amr• o4s r 1n••+•u - os.._.• -y./ nxe 4w4row ablaut i -•w/ �"en..r' r•+a R••a nm earn i nli n» BMnY k00 llaf YVaMI ��pV ansa-aa•w!•ue•a ere @A OA wriaol•nndne•Y OM1R4e1r1101•tlelDlf J 1•e.r � araLba W aeervo4wv»e O ^� Q aa�•n MMK Psi[ �• •b• arL ax»vebu .aaw�a-� Mec aan x•n n.n 4a wru+xww e d moan nL1er er•M esu auae•anre nu -" p.p 4wT� xnalm 14Hene OTfLi • /eue 114{ �. b'aowW t•xlq• 4swpW bKYi 107{ LIR wM. wI < �- 414M �l�j drb eeLl rte— WaZ<l1 •nl � IIrN•• �1 rarl4e•vwa �,ea»„-ems xm1 aLn awu.»r sews -nese p x r7 a rr br r.e --oT--1-- r1n ew • ••rrnaeler raven �-ao--�»� a4a ab aLM Mone eeY•erst �� 1eiy� sx- a w res w M xrwln) a •us rox �. w ver. roleca+ W lata E amor � a•rarr -•ass- a o- u waL wr.arl vuw --awe-- - -- �rx.�m. mns+aarm4• •a1••sre a1.+m rw»•wnla •an � aTb ae» a rest YiaYYr • nme nlra p nlao M en4n 111YP[ OIOn »Ide pq roacc cr»a• EDINA, MN � iW leoaea L4wnn •Leew 1•s! WlrYralnl wen ew••rw D •e erwn Oa ser xruabr ® u.n Law sora 0 b•a•wn ro»r ® ansa-aa•w!•ue•a ere @A OA wriaol•nndne•Y OM1R4e1r1101•tlelDlf a al• IML •.Ib •xaK1a. AndeM: a M abae MT Yeaar� LOIYn. II• o�isat: r•i°fewa relax w m.lacac a M aaaroe IMT w�a•wr � nrnrran•Ls •Ar•a•n x41». !•w wrq ON FRAWCBa"fiMW oraraelarne ea4aa»w RIgr111a •gree. acnes ar mimnxeT w raue•4wrnx oir crs oxasweeer• aaanox a mrwa•wueuoiasrm•w Tll Ql xl@TwM••w•wL nrA cr: wacvsrwircraew! uiaaelre4er•ee2c•e @A OA wriaol•nndne•Y OM1R4e1r1101•tlelDlf W n9rl6awle»IIb l�IllOap•ellaw6 W WeWeed•f aen•earumin arcOab t!A ML�M'Aax b01 Y. fOn sax Y• 11TN b xna on Man oYe uw• verve• anne•v wruwrrrr wens Tw�ai-a:ww mwf..a 77- » samosa" � axes b�n4s d as-ee�ww x4 m-Tw+ae o4we verve M x b nab! su xa.e»rn BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION EQI"^. MN PREUMINARY PLAT ovnms L A N D F O R M nrw•rraA • • . • +oeewr+.A.na Fe awalw7 swrwws woe au7ocn awrar.arawr ve •ennaw ru•ae wo®annt n1016T11D. >ar•a - II i-------------- l i f -------------- i I } i i I I I �— E'VARIW000 LANE ;Q- I If I I f II G f I c a rmH. HArtm .aY: w I I IM�rcee»�r��TW�. I I f ' I I auanC x�toNaO rtr<*t1.mM a N iaSwli . I mem- nirr. II �r rm: na+n _xtwx it rs rw�wa I I nor %taa t maHx KaPw na>oM.r. � ; NaGt L Y�1W upekH -HAxS � t. wi4��Ottmu�XS I PG�d-Y�Y�OrAfG1W 7>pO Y. fi. y ww.a bSpot 9a M. II T[94W. KNVN C0.MY.IMCaIA oIDeC To M Po00FR. 0.I.i X— — aAT iKA�h. NWNM [uMY. IH6e0r W TSI. eGCGVRIC t0 tM 19G[RAo f I- �� PCMaKY xM SOH. 6p� �ri ism L¢AMCI; uO llNr�i' T0.TY.9�Owowtm. W I - lxsw/.RLT. WMOl xW, eIC®KtAll MNMA m � R LAAIrG10 9MUPXM� IT:CYVII6U 9Pui � gIW1E0 TO x��0�: x��' III .f I I F0i'E GROVE ROAD 10\5 I s I(m wbw.Below. • CAll6alasymdg. 0 NORTH Neellimmillill 0 40 0 FRANK BERMAN cN�, N f Q� p�F��pN PRELIMINARY PLAT 012312015 L A N D F O R. oM no.srmnew . o 10.59o�•flMMwo Tot OC25LG010 eu40 fiJ Fqc Ef1155YOT Nbe�olo.MH3iW1 Wet I.•iYY(onMN PRELIIIWARY CPAWT Y.L � i I I I � I i I I � t c -------+ I I Ix I I I tII i---------I I � I FRANK BERMAN v�uwxrr. vvaanso as .miw, vaa warATW roauae° m Dome wrtc amevuawmowe PROJECT ••�� :i • 0 —cow.. PRELIMINARY PLAT 01123fm15 L A N D F O R M � ® a08euvixlm Jueree Ts aJ2dxx�am susau.. .. Pe mxancm Je.wpa.,Jaawv umimJwi rexxnc c+vuzan vmaxrx°. SEftffT 1 s NORTH Knmrwhari BBIOW. CAllboronyoumo. o ao eo �w W '------------ / I �1 I 1. I E-ANEWOOO LANE {:t:n p,Giiiii�-i•i { I O+aamun wwnrlW ]NOUN O 1lOH i M]NOW IPOFC15uNt ]fel ]OK fuPb]3Y ecc M4 waFCTw � fM!]aI� @� wi.10Y`l: uo N{l1T'Y4VI2 ROvolA]. I Nmuxrr. ex�]zo os rol�arn rwrauty. wmu®m m�rw �,� +�ar.*i a »nm oaansu°n°�awi. oawanro ro m onr` a°°°'' II a• mnH eea]ra em owannt cmunw. Nw um� w ro murac. e wn'�Pw]xnwi°0.OYD`.vu`�cvf04Jwc°. �m mnw n Nom I I e, ars rw maw wenr+m+.w aumlr mNma mwaw.] Iw.r m N �� faw r0 Oe]umuxSa m a2 I 1 b�aNa mRNp! Wsv N4 a4�NtTMWiOtK�w OCm]O�L a2am w m�. C��wttC], fowN4 eww�me. wv urt usaaArm Iw mrno PNuvoN Nvvu�9 No1�iM! �m 1 M.. �e�aan 4. rocMdY.R �ibl w NtC 0Mf-IX—YNi aW1@ W�mwro�Mi � ea0fecttM v � wmCClgl f�N6r..co Mr[¢rr0 xr/L 1 Nti Crw 1 � — — rmmaa wo/oN oNvnaer urova �. GROVE ROAD t � �� �'�4. q to 1 � NORiH Kmw whd a Below. Call b*W.rwma 0 40 80 FRANK BERMAN r..uNinanun nand, 'T PaojM • • :D I.. - L A N D F O R M rrtm9hmlNW a 0 mssmn alxamw rx ma-ssaaam mmn� rc mxasaeon wcNnxe clorrmv paoctrxl �w I O+aamun wwnrlW ]NOUN O 1lOH i M]NOW IPOFC15uNt ]fel ]OK fuPb]3Y ecc M4 waFCTw � fM!]aI� @� wi.10Y`l: uo N{l1T'Y4VI2 ROvolA]. I Nmuxrr. ex�]zo os rol�arn rwrauty. wmu®m m�rw �,� +�ar.*i a »nm oaansu°n°�awi. oawanro ro m onr` a°°°'' II a• mnH eea]ra em owannt cmunw. Nw um� w ro murac. e wn'�Pw]xnwi°0.OYD`.vu`�cvf04Jwc°. �m mnw n Nom I I e, ars rw maw wenr+m+.w aumlr mNma mwaw.] Iw.r m N �� faw r0 Oe]umuxSa m a2 I 1 b�aNa mRNp! Wsv N4 a4�NtTMWiOtK�w OCm]O�L a2am w m�. C��wttC], fowN4 eww�me. wv urt usaaArm Iw mrno PNuvoN Nvvu�9 No1�iM! �m 1 M.. �e�aan 4. rocMdY.R �ibl w NtC 0Mf-IX—YNi aW1@ W�mwro�Mi � ea0fecttM v � wmCClgl f�N6r..co Mr[¢rr0 xr/L 1 Nti Crw 1 � — — rmmaa wo/oN oNvnaer urova �. GROVE ROAD t � �� �'�4. q to 1 � NORiH Kmw whd a Below. Call b*W.rwma 0 40 80 FRANK BERMAN r..uNinanun nand, 'T PaojM • • :D I.. - L A N D F O R M rrtm9hmlNW a 0 mssmn alxamw rx ma-ssaaam mmn� rc mxasaeon wcNnxe clorrmv paoctrxl �w Z O n 055�aaa m v VL Q 3 snn�anl9j �' �'i 2 z W Ei 2 Fig! ?i�jjs X7~09 Ov ai z Q ibis&566dP99 n IL Do (f) W @'aaaiauarHnE3 E x 11 a • —1 I 8!$ ' j4 a Ivins P R$g=------------- --_--- stRsg9gSl � 8 �� S 9 s" § "n"RzR�• 5 � p I � � r lilt f S E a ° x $S i e a I I ------ aaoa 3XVIa------_�-- - nos Mav"ls------- II 'Q s � �wvel.• ----- I I I I d� iy 111t:IC — -- o I? �v471 8 St 271 i I I 9 C8561 C I q I ym I I �+ 66 SC/ 9 Cr CSdON Ci RIM .• II r _ nio ° 01 m A r Tm I� S ��; � I C 2 \ '!R'T� i• \ � r iE)o Yef 6 S.6z.ba20N ..: / .. _ - _ •.-., I _ \ I / I V Ir \ Yual r �r J Ll mid��1 !('iv/\ % (�` _ �`-� '. _ t•'�� /-EvANS�Y000 I.P.HE �\6RI ° � } k° r•. 1 -- w' ' I — 0 I .iy I o, �7�1;/' \_ g 0689• I I „ I w I SLAVE ROA -L - - ROAR �` I F`:� I I I I I �, N •` j% G ,S+ 1-9 r, n b" C�Ot r S B p b b� 8y 5i6 8kp GR� PS 9�d �pq g� a . g .`_ J � � � � � Y� �� �gj � �p �� • � Jy� sp�R$q${� gyp° q pp �' a r• A p{? 5 s— eE, a ge?eegF� m (n W T Z 0 3 154 � ��Jag�4�{�g�gt���� e � gig Jim f(no o z Z co Z j s -------- II It �I t EL "'"° FRANK BERMAN °aaa.mre+° c'00.m: � ; ,,� ,i.,� owx mcc�.. rao m,errxm000w¢ mruwimua ] °w6rNR MN nN�R Illa,r» ro r[O.ID o°CTmc. raNa+ CAr, nm °ansa"mo araarc» ro arcv rnr. ` ao°�OLxc un ir.m�uiim�i ro r°°recc ,avcmu evwerm' raver wr+m m mm �a ao was. rgurz axe ro w.. z aar m,aa vex .oiwaerw wa°a a mam ra�nemeamma,ma mnoro.,rmmmma BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION a»anmma aawaa>.m..r>ewe ' ina s c�.� ma ave wme m wTm am.rnr x.wrsw mr,w+ awe wwx .r wanx°an ka rupee m° a®nme E C> 1 NA. amw.e w rmm a:arxa vme r° marwaa o mm u e�'oauereiu wm+° m o amore usa. rwnes mama em�m.r v ver -------- --_µmoa mrwwx °rare amu m aarmrm am exwarz waz vaar r-- EEC o an awe ra - ma mnm - e,ry ©m,v1°�OVNima . ea ave �a"" omrm =coo aa "mim, . cxa -mvi rwmr w ----- FIRE GROVE ROAD L gyp. N� �pN PRELIMINARY PLAT L A N D o O,R M rmasmmamm a wawmrm,.ww rt °raam° ® m46P Fm: wW1AA°l! a9`IaNaw.w„a�°t Ywt °°aaamM i r1ENw¢ Gpi]p!m ' rPOrttfNO. U2Nat1 NORM m Knmaw. &a Below. GGllboloNyaudlo. 0 40 oo „, 1. — PA STA. 101+37.0 PASTA: 10]+7291 PA E". 940b8 PM E . 943.0 PM E ..A49.43 9: Wm K; 27.00 A I K; 21.7! FRANK BERMAN WT. PT E> * G. 11 BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION EOINA, MN 1. — PA STA. 101+37.0 PASTA: 10]+7291 PA E". 940b8 PM E . 943.0 PM E ..A49.43 9: Wm K; 27.00 A I K; 21.7! 994_* ".= 10030 lof. 10130 1021061 10230 Im4m 1=30 104:00 104W 105:00 lft�25 WT. PT M 100+71 ELEV. * G. 11 "n ww PTMA 90.7 24 PRELIMINARY PLAT D1=015 S 0 SW NY +1 bi NORTH CdlbokmymdlZ 0 3D OD _wcaT.P1 was wo 41 sbs Sko- 545 1445 S40 _S40 994_* ".= 10030 lof. 10130 1021061 10230 Im4m 1=30 104:00 104W 105:00 lft�25 �n, PRELIMINARY PLAT D1=015 L A,;N D F 0 R. M 0 alta 6m.1. F. 2�- NORTH CdlbokmymdlZ 0 3D OD _wcaT.P1 was MOSME 11111 loll HYDRANTAND GATEVALVE 40SCPLE NO ME r fV'11V f\ OCR rte, m PRELIMINARY PLAT L A N D F 0 R M IR:Ew11 MTal BIDEtAo10 SWa 6O Pm I1LELfYT! - CIVIL CONSTRUCTION O;TAILS C7.1 t. FLARED END W=O— NO ME r fV'11V f\ OCR rte, m PRELIMINARY PLAT L A N D F 0 R M IR:Ew11 MTal BIDEtAo10 SWa 6O Pm I1LELfYT! - CIVIL CONSTRUCTION O;TAILS C7.1 RECTION AA STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN MANHOLE N"'LE ASPHALT PAVEMENT TRANSITION tmscµE ELEVATIGN NOSEDOWNCURB v NO9G41E rr wa Y Y a�wmxr aim. Vu�a M' m naoJ 24" CONCRETE RIBBON CURB " FRANK BERMAN aIJt EVN191COpIP/1E mWANMY/i mnamo 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT oimams L A N O F O- R M Nem5YmNYtb � o 0 uss"mPlmxienw tc massaaaro opeaq Pue auasaan �m,nwwr.NN>,vol w.t mnaom.nn rasxv�s amnnv ClUCONSTRUVION DEWLS TAG Dw I" COMDIONPAME REMDVED SAVED 8205 12 AmMonBm x x 8206 16 0Ple—Iftiwrl x B40] 8207 12 White Spurn x BSD am. 7 A—a—Om % 0600 9209 36 Rad Wk It 18 am D wNm Wk x 20 8211 D Whke Sp-. x 8 am 7 Amedrm Eh x AtaarvlOa 8213 9 Whll451— % madder a2149 x Abadac X WMm Od 93357 X10 Asb.= x % 8216 a ArbaMDo X a1V m Su0ar Maple x x 8218 6 Nborvbaa % 8739 7 Artrorvimv X x atm a Ad.,,ft4o x S11Z — a While sp—, x U27 am IS While Sp— x B6Li 8244 14 White Spu4e x X 0345 amdtlar x m Ball 11 PaperBWr 8614 x U29 12 MS. Sp— 14 x 8319 12 Whit. 5— 7 x 8320 12 WBity Stm. X DD D Whlm Oak White Oak x 8322 26 Whl..it Whit. Oak Ped Nk x am 19 WhlmNk Okk x 8324 D Sugar Mapk x x 0325 25 Whlm Oak x am D M.Mk x x 8333 9 Colvndo Sprig X X 8336 7 Fnstem 0.v4 Cc0ar x x M35 9Eastern Rvd ad., 8411 x D3. 15 sugar Supla 8533 x 8337 al p.M* 039 8619 x 9339 D S paradpk 6 x p10 16 WWto Oak x 9341 D WWto Oak 6 x 03 7 Whlty Sit— Bad WBaw X 93m 26 Whih Oak 0"' C"" x 8345 NO Vdd.Nk add Cherry x 8371 26 mi. it x 5372 24 —N—Eh % x 8373 6White"M Bad CMvry X x 8374 26 Mo Wk x x 03]5D mmBrn 0mdder x B6D 8376 D eoxddvr x D 9377 D Af.- x a B379 16 0wativr x ss a— 10 Sup,Maga 9 _ x 0300 6 SUP, Maple 40 X 8383 19 Zk Walnut 26 x 8361 13 nox4Wer whltcoak X 03IS 6 M4dmerry MPA:p= x 23M12 Amrclmntlm WhA<Oek x 830] 8 ArboMrm x 838. 10 Ae-a ' % x 0309 a Whke S— x x .iso a MI. SOrum % x 8391 8 Arb.d x W92 aArbarvkae x 8437 x 8393 16 Aib.Mtm 8X3 x 83X 6 Aib—A , am x 8395 SD Arbmlw 10 x 83% ]8 BDvmutsadwry 36 x 0397 9 8axddtt 17 x 0398 6 Admnlae aoxdaa x 8399 M WhRONk Baxatla x 0800 10 whko Spam Bork Ctny x 8403 m Whim D.k x 8902 9 Whka Sp— x 5494 1791Ramatl9rkory WWt40d % x BMS 9 Arb:M x x FRANK BERMAN ml NM6ALe01ME maalrnam PRELIMINARY PLAT n4mlXHA L A N D F O R M RanSW bPohb o 0 4vssa4eramAwa.. Tat alaul+W0 Bao B1 Eat etwu4n MIH9E awm,r PnpXcrRa >ar9Dr e BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION E�aNA, MN TREE PRESERI�TGNTIM 8522 l0 Black Carry x 860] D MI.Oak x B40] ss Arbm9kna x BSD 9 e—Ift, x 0600 D Whke Wk % 9499 18 Ad.M- x 8524 20 ebdtah X 0609 8 add Chvry % 9409 W AtaarvlOa x 8 madder x as" 22 WMm Od X X10 B ArbpMba % 8 525 x 8611 8 Mbd x 8411 1O AtbwA- x SS26 9 emdd4r x 8612 14 Oak White Oak x S11Z 16 M,wo X U27 9 whkv Dak x B6Li 14 ebdaWm x 9471 X tloxtldat x esD m Arba9Bae x 8614 14 Bbd Cherry x 4D 14 Boxddar % X. BSD 7 BbokU .y 6bck Chong X 8424 ::2n4 Sfi White Oak 8530 15 39 Whit. Oak Ped Nk x X 8615 8616 9 Okk x 8425 IS Bpmtla x 0591 7 BM—t HkkM % 861] 7 ] — Bur Wk x 8426 14 X 8532 13 Bad Cern] x 26 Pid Oak X 8411 13 Whoa Wk hk.W % 8533 6 Bbd Chary x 039 8619 D White Wk x 84D 6 Nmtla x 0534 Ptd Mapk x 8620 6 M..Onk x a4D 33 Bad WBaw x 8535 8 0"' C"" X 8622 B add Cherry % 6430 ] Baxetlar % 8636 36 % a= 6 Bad CMvry X 8431 9 8oaddar x 8531 11 mmBrn % B6D 29 WhitetW x 8431 D Backthary x am a .bd Osvrry 8624 ss ebdcnarry x 8435 9 Bdd Cham % 0539 40 Cottonwood x am 26 Whim Oak X np4 D whltcoak % 8XO ] MPA:p= X 16 WhA<Oek x Bps 9 edd[Aary % 8X1 8 Whka Sprvca % 8626 MO. Nk x 0436 36 Mae Od % 8543 8 LMR45pr�ca x 8621 B6D 20 D Sugar MalMv x 8437 6 Bad Cory x 8X3 6 00adtivr X am 7 Sugar x am 10 MUNI, x W44 36 mx0ldar X aam 17 h.m Bdd Corry N 6439 N aoxdaa x 8565 9 Baxatla x % 8631 9 Bork Ctny x 84. 9 Bbd, Drop] % 8555 6 BomHar x 66]2 D WWt40d % 8441 16 Whkc Oak x 8556 D WAIm Oak x 8633 B evxetla x SMZ 26 Whitt/ Oak X 855] 8 Backah % 86X 11 Back Carry % 8403 11 Bildt Chatty % 8558 9 Bbd Cary 9635 6 .vxdtler x 8444 30 Whke Oak % n559 6 wick Gerry m x 863fi 1] Whka Oak x .445 8 Bk.-Hkk.ry X 8568 d BbdC X 863] Zd Whke0ak X 0446 B Btt4mur Nkkory % mi D Abd Ch Y % 0638 ] Olad Cary X 844] ]0 8oxekkr x 8562 6 Back Gerry X x e639 16 W ...k % 8448 m a-a&r x 194 ] ekck Carry N 864 11 BRtemu[Hklmry % aM9 9 Baaddtt. x 0564 D lMite Oak 8646 m Back Cory ... X am W Bamticr x Ms 6 aleck Chem/ X a Bak Cary x 8151 9 eom'kr x 8566 8 add Chary % 064] 9 Bli ck Carty X 8152 m emtltler x U. 17 Whit. DAx640 X % 8649 12 Bbd Carry x 5403 W MI— x 8560 8 Blad Carry 8653 S6 Whlta NR % .p4 0 Bp Jde, % 8569 22 Pad Oak X .6X ]6 WW.Oak x 9485 0 a—Id. % 8571 9 Bbd Catty x 8655 35 WhhcOak x 84x6 m fglarado5prucc N BS7Z 9 add Crory x 7 Red Wk x .4q 6 BMarnut Mtmry X 86]3 9 Wil Crory x BR9 8120 21 ft..k x am 11 Ammimn dm X 85]4 10 Bomtla x 87D 16 Vmka Oak % 8409 39 Pad Oak X SSIS 7 Bamtlm x % 0712 26 WMty Oak x 8490 N WhRC Odt % 8576 17 'Mdta Nk x W37 10 Green nci wtld Ash x 0191 D White Oak % 85]1 6 Boxddor BDa Rad Uak % 8492 33 Mit.Nk x 098 6 Bad Cary X 8n9 1a Ped Wk % 8493 11 whim Wk X 11 30 11T000ak X 0740 14 Ped Wk x 8494 D Rad Wk % 65W D V". Wk X x 6024 14 .—Ior x Bps m Wbte Wk x 8581 m MI'Wk x Bills ] GrvaleM Whit- AAs x Bp6 6 0IdCary % Bsu 30 whim Oak 0056 8 Whka Sprum % 8491 la 0.td Nk x 8593 9 Bed[herry x 8647 8 WWtesprico x 8498 14 Bad `ZZ I, 8500 s BackCary x .fi58 14 Whlm Spruce % 8699 10 Grmnand Whka Ash % 0585 12 11t.1, Croy x 0659 fi Whka 'p— 8501 0 AA4Mtat x 8586 22 whit. Oak x BB60 ] Whka $P— X 6502 11 Amerlan W % am 6 Cvbrado Sl—% amatla X SSW B Alba . X 85M D WhkeSprucv % BB9] 8898 B 8 abdch ry x 9594 11 msswavd X an a MktSp— x 0899 14 Badehvrry % 0505 m Pad Wk x MO D Red%b 4Phe X 09M ] Whlm spmm % as9fi 11 god Cary x 6591 D RN N.—aha X 6903 6 White Sprum % law 14 wick Cherry x 8592 14 RM—m P1.. x am IB Xpr M4pd SSOB w Bad Ucny x 8593 10 avmtlar X a9D 14Bad Cam? 8509 11 BadChary % 05X Sfi Aspen x X 8930 16 Blodmem7 x Mi) 7 Bed Carry x 6595 0 mxakkr x 8931 10 Bexatlar % .511 ] Arbonidv % 8596 11 mxatler X 8932 ] Grcrnandwhkt Ash x .92 D WMWk m x 8597 6 AlmrWnFkn 8933 10 Whlt4O x 8513 D Alden x 8598 16 Boxetlm % It x93 4 30 EI Amerkan Fkn x 8514 ll Aspen % 8599 U Nmrkan EMx 8935 33 Pvd NR 6515 10 wkltaS— x am 20 W.ddr X D Red Oak X 0516 20 Whlm Oak % 8601 6 Boxoldor % 893fi 0937 D Rad Uki % SSW D Wh:.Mk % 06011 31 White Oak x 8938 0 S-10, % 8518 9 Bad Chant' x 8603 34 Whka Nle x x 8519 9 Bkact" X 9681 b WWMOak x 8939 0940 6 16 0ax4tlor 9md0a x 85x5 7 Back aN x am 24 white Nit X fall 7 aaetlar X am. 24 WW.Oak X FRANK BERMAN ml NM6ALe01ME maalrnam PRELIMINARY PLAT n4mlXHA L A N D F O R M RanSW bPohb o 0 4vssa4eramAwa.. Tat alaul+W0 Bao B1 Eat etwu4n MIH9E awm,r PnpXcrRa >ar9Dr e BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION E�aNA, MN TREE PRESERI�TGNTIM I � , _ � I / / / / / r ------- f� ie I[�GN�c.X4iYe Rb/C6b 1N wlb •CCA1eM a fennYYF! tt xam r. WpWeR giNUMN NM CWfe}mo0.9 PFWMNL Adlitp VnE. Uwoi iNeRFi eeZOnRe. RN tf-OO >, WKc N oWewi � nooi �_ �♦ � tt�m�Uu+L F eYm�iesyFR� Orsirtm}RN ib tw FRuv io emuumR �iAwf r toa KUH�Rain�a aerLeiu w.mroa wW t4M M FaRlaw. orn �� a n a y� J Mrg} Rw4 aat ruM au vRb ow/R[ rFxrc 00 + _ nwo Rnlrenml uo o. sWe«pib ♦ e'. o w aiMoum Ru (n1TM vvJ�ClM�ra l7a Ft4 /.owloN+L Noree CCMraFcrm atM.e a Fa r see .t �G1WL�IwY WJ�'1� M a8 seer C1I tte V esneKim b �e� mei xn�� atm NM oa �� r A R9�n a Aun iLL N e• 6 a�MFc cRPCt Flmea Nrc _ e+N c.+wtl ws. Fac Few. vrem .w mnc I N' `.ornM"eiu.+°ra � a m �w eon`www+.°i+eeean°µixa�rbea"'"Re"`�'8wmc.amx a eNmul. �nara°+r°'�a a �� �roxw`R�"rw n. cwra`noc0°�wme F�wr em'r'°"rwio we iambvo brox nn wFeerw. b rb in FFRa wa mo+Ne mwCAQ°ne = aao rA01—'N— u"e � nx m�"arx+u°t'0r rw�wrRF+� uvew.xm a wu c+mx rO'rcao�1P°'`r°tm°.r rce.a °ttwn �`c �aaRC4N`w°r°Lw"ab'r'�'"`wu+"°'Rra". �� � ecu �> � tb on.Frexr vurR a ,RFm n rRFFlrnnr aaRan w®v«v ora nwr n P.a cwRx. g e�R�eroinrce° a rb rw erFR ro Iwm+e+• mRwc rsallo bNo a >me. r we oa'nM'�c� rae°a"we rWLeru m.°s�wr.�cF,minwmwron a teew°ia wro 10R �i rrb°%. M +"i a m aNcvi nc"0. uo wc°r�"avM`. u ltlL ;Ygr. Q9. KWW WWAGIOW. COJI befonyau dg. 0 NORTH 0 40 80 FRANK BERMAN SUI (WNb5Yeo0 WIF mserRnO tIIINICIPPLItt �1 PROJM i F° oN NsSON PRELIMINARY PLAT D11=0te L A- N D D O -R M fRRftle bflehh b b 1m BRgFIMArbw Ta OI225T-0Gr0 8P50 Fa OIZ2Y-0OT! MimemY. NIIAIM Wet bNfRrnbN PRnlfmN0. TEf+]V ------------ -7------------� I I I I f� ie I[�GN�c.X4iYe Rb/C6b 1N wlb •CCA1eM a fennYYF! tt xam r. WpWeR giNUMN NM CWfe}mo0.9 PFWMNL Adlitp VnE. Uwoi iNeRFi eeZOnRe. RN tf-OO >, WKc N oWewi � nooi �_ �♦ � tt�m�Uu+L F eYm�iesyFR� Orsirtm}RN ib tw FRuv io emuumR �iAwf r toa KUH�Rain�a aerLeiu w.mroa wW t4M M FaRlaw. orn �� a n a y� J Mrg} Rw4 aat ruM au vRb ow/R[ rFxrc 00 + _ nwo Rnlrenml uo o. sWe«pib ♦ e'. o w aiMoum Ru (n1TM vvJ�ClM�ra l7a Ft4 /.owloN+L Noree CCMraFcrm atM.e a Fa r see .t �G1WL�IwY WJ�'1� M a8 seer C1I tte V esneKim b �e� mei xn�� atm NM oa �� r A R9�n a Aun iLL N e• 6 a�MFc cRPCt Flmea Nrc _ e+N c.+wtl ws. Fac Few. vrem .w mnc I N' `.ornM"eiu.+°ra � a m �w eon`www+.°i+eeean°µixa�rbea"'"Re"`�'8wmc.amx a eNmul. �nara°+r°'�a a �� �roxw`R�"rw n. cwra`noc0°�wme F�wr em'r'°"rwio we iambvo brox nn wFeerw. b rb in FFRa wa mo+Ne mwCAQ°ne = aao rA01—'N— u"e � nx m�"arx+u°t'0r rw�wrRF+� uvew.xm a wu c+mx rO'rcao�1P°'`r°tm°.r rce.a °ttwn �`c �aaRC4N`w°r°Lw"ab'r'�'"`wu+"°'Rra". �� � ecu �> � tb on.Frexr vurR a ,RFm n rRFFlrnnr aaRan w®v«v ora nwr n P.a cwRx. g e�R�eroinrce° a rb rw erFR ro Iwm+e+• mRwc rsallo bNo a >me. r we oa'nM'�c� rae°a"we rWLeru m.°s�wr.�cF,minwmwron a teew°ia wro 10R �i rrb°%. M +"i a m aNcvi nc"0. uo wc°r�"avM`. u ltlL ;Ygr. Q9. KWW WWAGIOW. COJI befonyau dg. 0 NORTH 0 40 80 FRANK BERMAN SUI (WNb5Yeo0 WIF mserRnO tIIINICIPPLItt �1 PROJM i F° oN NsSON PRELIMINARY PLAT D11=0te L A- N D D O -R M fRRftle bflehh b b 1m BRgFIMArbw Ta OI225T-0Gr0 8P50 Fa OIZ2Y-0OT! MimemY. NIIAIM Wet bNfRrnbN PRnlfmN0. TEf+]V A ENLARGED PLAN. RAIN GARDEN'S' NO SCPIE A ENLARGED PLAN. RAIN GARDEN 'C' NOSCNE ENLARGED PLAN. RAIN GARDEN 'D' N09CNE ENLARGED PLAN. RAIN GARDENS' NOSCAE ENLARGED PLAN- RAIN GARDEN'R NO SCJIE auw aa+e w alwN av awr Oeea Ob watt wl pttYeorArael more W TRT u.B SeGN aeI➢a avaaaLaYm�aaROOe oeav°0nere�4 ur cor".'aa o'0"aaov��rv.»y wsM �W lse avaa+c�rtwi "'"" SHRUB PLANTING NOSCNE PERENNIAL PLANTING )n svaE ,eaeavaa�c as eannnwb fv4�'aer0 m aw amw mJ ee910auCN lxf acRGAMO) rout N•1 vexa mv. a6aaEp wvwaov oua naw �S a� uravaaw�i�i 4a0W Irtm ��I�ul? I/] rytl) vwt im a P001oN1 wa ewwmN vasa txe neer wl >d tau xeor�awl a -°z wss°�rae o�.u" � e -o• ,K am No swE u ram"`.ule `vow O1 i a wa�e".Im�w mrl (+e n. imiv ttrnl "° Ua' _ rw+w�ir li fu,mew sm P00`e1nr11°0ir�101 van Irl Nom rat aa¢mmrlumeaw owa w,ar moot iW O e�LLlelJe, IA V�V ae ,Ne PPoa� �1a1 Vaa� d Va O�IJ �n fav a roar�wu. rms W rtwl RP.a. Ora xaw•enaae) _ r. r v ]+• vovv arae x, ., woe Naeeaa �a CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING NOSCU Com.` � ��• �g1�\5 � Iaa tee, ua i �MRT�an� •JZ (= YMCrtbaf) eearNe amaave A EDGING AT PLANTING BED �M ' FRANK BERMAN m1 INaxAN00 UAE EVN,tgxp0 magm® mUNlclvnur`' PRGJECI PRELIMINARY PLAT D112301s L A N D F O R M Fav Sae bNvlA: _ _ ,wsamwmaeew rt alxxaaaoio swea vae emaanvon rms.vd.,uNaaraa wrr xeemminn ,eeNaE w1>me p0191iea. ..lS1Ol1 r I S I a tee r .. mmwMnA 4"�r..A. —_ [a.emm�w wAi I -------------� 5 ( I EVANSWOOD LWE I WI 411 Hae. -e dIggYj: I r .7I I I ' /u_rrvvu I caDmw Drw enimee I Property Desarption C.VL/ I v"IL r1/T//lA/ U//It✓ry `�` I 5 I 1 (313_93 PfA17n I D I 4 r . enr i v Westwood I r ;mow . y- 1.) No title went or oosemonto hove boon mviowed far MT, survey. 2) H� ontal Ootum Is booed on Hennepin County e-rdinoto sysfan, 198JNAD (1986dd! U5 Survey Feet. I I tub)ect property. x�ee. o :,dnwarawx,E 4.) Copan of the Adjoinor's Daads have not bocn re--, ou part of Ihta — vv ovodaps were found in d-.*fion provided by eNwt and fox retard I do_ Ipti_ -- — — — — — — Yu 4 CJ ® � ruDm an.conw a �j U � I ra rn• w�. p L \ CJ �� ----------l---� _. W M • re r/Y m.� ♦� r? tem � I —q.— mmwnr awMsw e — ------ 0 am•eD. �-'R�ltrE o _ 46 I o I fi � 0' 4P m tRD' 4i'• r. �t Amv , . ,�>m. � � r. ,• �.,.. I tr..D� DD. I WI 411 Hae. -e dIggYj: I r .7I I I ' /u_rrvvu I caDmw Drw enimee I Property Desarption C.VL/ I v"IL r1/T//lA/ U//It✓ry `�` I 5 I 1 (313_93 PfA17n I D I �'�y esiaw�ia�mewoi.nme rvv• 47 ) a ayn .r tiff S WI 411 Hae. -e dIggYj: (62.5PL4F (82693 PLAT) B17 or eal^811.eem �� caDmw Drw enimee wnvz'+a• A smm Property Desarption _ I -t `�` I 5 I II I D I Lot 46 and Lot 47, AWMOR5 SUDD/V/SION ND. J25, occordog to the radorddd plot therwf, Honnpin County, Minnesota. Westwood I r ;mow . y- 1.) No title went or oosemonto hove boon mviowed far MT, survey. 2) H� ontal Ootum Is booed on Hennepin County e-rdinoto sysfan, 198JNAD (1986dd! U5 Survey Feet. I I tub)ect property. x�ee. o :,dnwarawx,E tiff S WI 411 Hae. -e dIggYj: B17 or eal^811.eem I caDmw Drw enimee wnvz'+a• A smm Property Desarption _ I -t Let I and Let 2 Meek 1, ZUPPKCPVOD, cccerding to the re carded plat thereat• Hennepin County, M7nn=to AND Lot 46 and Lot 47, AWMOR5 SUDD/V/SION ND. J25, occordog to the radorddd plot therwf, Honnpin County, Minnesota. �` General Noteg srmnom mor 1.) No title went or oosemonto hove boon mviowed far MT, survey. 2) H� ontal Ootum Is booed on Hennepin County e-rdinoto sysfan, 198JNAD (1986dd! U5 Survey Feet. S) 71, L- survey —non— the F Id mwumcntutien hn vod for the � tub)ect property. x�ee. o :,dnwarawx,E 4.) Copan of the Adjoinor's Daads have not bocn re--, ou part of Ihta — s rwy Adphors fax datcdptiant os shown on Henn in County webtnto worn reviewed to rataorN ad%oinors retard deo nptbns an7y No 9p. or ovodaps were found in d-.*fion provided by eNwt and fox retard I do_ Ipti_ -- — — — — — — tiff S Legend I O wnvz'+a• A smm _ I -t A; �` srmnom mor � �, x�ee. o :,dnwarawx,E Yu 4 CJ ® � ruDm an.conw a �j F] usme davaZR aAs<az p L I O OM I Ppy GROVE ROAD —q.— mmwnr awMsw e — ------ 0 am•eD. �-'R�ltrE o _ o ,mwa,L,t'•I .a •. fi � 0' 4P m tRD' 4i'• Berman ww acvm.a.q am ]R=2M4— S e S f Frank Berman ham shae Mlm— Mw - edloe, nb5i6 ]Wm, LAlwuoh --247.2- LOT SUMMARY 11 1 ParcelilParcel Asea Lot Wldth Lot De Ik FID House No. Street Name Ownermome Addition Name let NOW Metes&Bnds 1421574-Ift. DA acres 140.1 156:1 3111713110036 6200 IMWOOOLA GEORGETHOLDEN PARKWOODXNOU.SO 0JAODN 009 000 2 0.45 sues 136.5 1414 311172111=7 6216 IDYLWOODLA DAVID P MCCARTKY PARKWOODXNCIULS A ODS ODI 3 0.47 acres 1453 23&4 3111721110038 6212 IDYLWOOO IA DANIEL& KIMBERLY NORMAN PARKWOODKNOLLSOftHADDII 006 001 4 0.5 acres 146.3 145.6 3111721110039 6208 IDYLWOODIA TIMOTWIXOEPPI PARKWOOD KNOLLS07THAODN 007 001- 5 O.Sum 144.9 145.9 311172inOO40 62M IDYLWODDIA R MWEATHERLYAJ WEATHERLY PARKWOOD KNOLLS07THAODN 008 001 6 2 257 .ft. 0.49 acres 143.4 14CS 3111721110041 620D IOYLWOOOEA GEORGETHOLDEN PARKWOOD KNOLLS O7MAWN 009 O00 7 K3061%4.ft. (kSG acres 164.1 140.9 32217211101116 6201 PARKWOOORD WI&JEJOHNSON PARKWO0DKN0US03ROADDN 00S ODZ B 25244s.ft. OSB acres 174.4 145.3 311172112001S, 6205 PARKWOODRD JP&MOANDERSON PARKWOOD KNOLLS 03RD ADDN 007 OW. 9 25.63 s .ft. 0.59 acres 172.2 152.1 3111721110014 6203 PARKWOOD RD W&NDONNEUY PARKWOOO KNOLLS03RDADDN 006 002 10 24 618 s .tL 0.57 aces 160.2 WA 3111721110013 6223 PARKWOODRD R W CARNIAUS ETAL PARKWOODKNOLLS WROADDN 000 062 11 23.2771wft. Q53 acm$ 159.4 145.8 3111721110012 6217 FARKWOODRO - R P & A LNAMES PARKWOODKNOLISMDADDN 0041 002 112 21.87 10L QS acres 1453 1464 3311721110011 6221 PARKWOOD RD S&NMESHBESHER PARKWOOOKNOUS03RDAODN 003 002 23 548WIsqfL 1.17 ams 159.8 319.1 31117211MWZ 6224 PARKWOODRD JASON&7REVAVOGT PARKWOOD KNOLLS03ROADON Oml 001 24 45,7901sqfL 2.05 acres 159.6 292.1 3111721110003 0230 PARKWOODRO WILUAMCFRASERETAL PARKWOODKNOLLS039DAODN 003 OED. 15 X285 .ft. CBS ams 160.1 245.2 3111721110004 6216 PARKWOODRD ES&J S EASTMAN PARKWOOOK14OUSMDADDN OD4 001 16 336 179s Jt. 0.72 acres 199.6 197.8 311172t130005 6212 PARKWOODRO PE&LMOAHL PARKWOOD KNOI1S03ROADON 005 001 17 26,658sq.ft 0.61 was 259.8 166.4 311172111=1 6208 PARKWOODRO DCUICKINSON&RLWAWN PARKWOOD KNOLLS 03ROADON ODE 001 18 A596salt. 039 ares 1652 ISLO 3111721110007 6204 PARKWOOD RD PHIWPMSWEETSER PARKWOOOKNW1S03ROADDN 007 001 19 24, 517s.ft. 0.S6 acres 1622 1SO.7 3111721110008 6200 PARKWOOD RD CARLAI ROSE PARKWOOD KNOLLS03MAODN OW OW 20 A6575 .ft. 0.36 acres 90.0 174.0 3211721220041 5417 BLAKERO MI CONOVER & D P CONOVER IDYLWOODSIHADDN 005 ODl 21 657sq.ft. 0.36 acres 90.0 174.0 3211T21Z20040 5413 SLAKE RO MATTHEW)LQWER W&WOODSTHADON OD4 001 22 15.657 wft. 0.361scresl 90.0 174.0 3211721220039 5409 BLAKE RD EIMILLER&REMILLER IDYL.WOODSTHADON 003 001. 23 ASPSalt. Al6ams 900 174.0 3211721220MB 54% BEAKERD MARYREBRERT IOKWOODSTHADDN 062 OM 24 18,267 sq.fL 0.42 acres 105.0 174.0 3211723220037 5401 BLAKE RD JMSCUSTOMHOMESLLC IDYLWOOD ADON 001 OW 25 17611s .ft. 04- 126.7 137.9 3211721220028 5400 HIGHW0000RW L&MJOHNSON JDYLWDOD3RDADDN 001 002 26 171Z2s .h. OA acres 1062 152.4 3211721220629 5444 HIGHWOOD OR IN THIGEL&P 16E1 IOYLWOOD3RDADDN 002 002 27 92 2]Ss .ft. 0.74 acres 113.6 207.2 3211721220230 5408 - MWRYOOD OR SUNNYSIKKIMTRUSTEE IOYLW0OD3RDADON 003 002 28 142665.ft. 0.37 ares 232.6 13L6 3211721220027 5405 HIGHWOOO DR IP&SRENGEUIERT IDYLWOOD3ROADDN 006 001 29 196 sj.ft. 0.46 acres 136.6 138.6 3211727220007 6029 PINEGROVERD LARRYWOOD&1EANNEW000 IDYLYM09HADON 006 OW 30 24701sq.ft 0.48 ams INA 151.9 291172133ODI5 5313 HIGHWOODORW SR ROUSEY&G O MACNOLIAN WWWOOD6IHADON .062 001 31 27.481 .ft. 0.63 was 111.1 247.2 2911721330013 53M HIGHWOOODRW IADOLAN&TJDOLAN IOYLW0004THADDN 009 001 32 2Z4406q.ft 0.62 was 111.9 197.6 2911721330012 5305 HIGHWOODDRW JOHN CLARKIN RIYLWOOD4IHAOON DW OW 33 2O,6S8lsQ.fL 0.47 ams 1 114.7 197.4 2911721330009 HIGHWOOD.DRW C&KWHITE IDYLWOOD 4TH ADDN 002 001 EXROAD 34 171755.ft. 0.39 ares 1 102:8 181.4 2911721330017 5304 1RGHWOOD DR RAHAYMAXER&ILHAYMAKER REPLATIDYLWOODATH-LOYS3703 SIC 1001 001 35 27,27641t. 0.39 ayes 93.6 177.2 2911721330018 S30B HIGHMOD DR IN CHRISTOPHER DJOHNSON REPLATIDYLW00D4THJCITS ST058LK I OM 001 36 is .h. 036 ams 1 92.8 1610 2911721330019 5312 MGNWOODDRW PATIOCIAMBOOSAUS REPIATMWOOD4TH4QTS3TOSBLXl OW 001 37 13,895sgjt. 0.32 enc 1 86.1 154.5 2911721330010 5316 HIGHWODODRW SUSANJLEE " UMW0004THADON 006 001 38 134]8 .ft. 0.31 NMI 567 1 155.0 2911721330007 5321 BLAKE RD KENDALMASICA IDYLW0003RDADON 004 OW 39 15485 .14. 0.56 ocrasl 2010 1 155.0 2911721330446 5317 BLAKERD PJREiCHEL&JRRDCHEL IDYLWOODIROADON 003 OW 40 sq.ft. 0.36 ens 1 100.0 1 255.0 2921721330005 5315 BLAKE RD 1RLARSON&AMIARSON IDYLW000 ADDN 002 OW 41 44Bt .ft. M45 acres 1 110.0 177.0 2911721330004 5309 BLAKE RD ROGEROHAUCH&KELLYNAUCK IOftWOOD3ADAODN 000 OW 42 14.8515 .ft. 1154 ares I IKO 177.0 2911721330008 5907 BLAKE RD JON A 4IMHOEFER I MW0004THADDN omi 001 43 6 0725 .h. 142 stress 3665 36&4 2912721330060 5275 BLAKE RD ALVIN E&MASYAMOQUINN EMERALDWOODSAODN 001 LCITSIAND2 45 36671a.ft. 0.84 ams 197.9 186.0 3011721440061 $316 MAKE RO DM BALAFAS Is KG BALAFAS ZUIPPKEWOOD2NDADON 002 001 46 2ZosNIsq.ft. 0.51 aces 119.0 185.9 3M1721440060 5311 EVANSWOOD IA CHARLESJ&KIMWGITS ZUPPKEW0002NDACDN OM 001 47 A372150L 0.29 ams 110.0 140.0 3011721440020 5304 EVANSWOOD IA ACKOEHLER&AMKOEHLER EVANSWOOD 062 002 48 1 M3721501. M29 ams 110.0 140.0 3001721110019 53W EVANSWOOD LA TJMONTGOMERYETAL EVANSWOOD 002 062 49 14.6001WJL 0.46 ams 104.4 140.0 3011721440018 5128 EVANSWOODtA AMCARLSON&AJ BARNES EVANSV4000. 001 002 SO 16.291150t. 6.39 ams 120.8 140.0 301 SU4 EVANSWOOD LA MIRIAMCOISON BROWNSWOOOADON 201 002 51 179655.ft. 0.41 ams 320.1 1 150.0 3013721440010 5221 EVANSWOOD LA CAFUNN&JHFUNN BROWNSWOODADDN 001 000 52 27.0171sqfL. 0.62 ams 2249 1 211.7 3011721440013 5225 EVANSWOOD LA OLAFMINGE&AMYNNGE EVANSWOOD 001 ODl 53 334 ,qlt. 10.72 ams 1 1466 1 215.6. 3011721440017 5301 EVANSWOOD LA RVMlC"AUEWJMMJCHAtETZ EVANSWOOD 062 001 34 195 t .ft. 0.45 acres 1 913 1 21L6 3011721440016 6308 EVANSWOOD LII PAULA M AUSON 5JAMES EVANSWOOD 001 ODS 55 M3151sq.h. 0,44acrasl 90.0 1 225.0 3011721440015' 5304 SLAKE iW MJ&LAWADDICK EVANSWOOD 003 S6 19 .ft. OA ams 90.0 21&1 3011721440014 5300JFOXMEADOW RD IOUG&UNLISAYENEWTON EVANSWOOD 002 001 57 8% 293s.h. 117 ami 11&7 280.2 3011721440OU 5224RD GAANDERSON&J ANDERSON BROWNS OOADON 002 001 58 1 soft. 0.41 acres 00.0 215.0 3011721440022 5220 RD JILLCSINN EVANSW0002NDADDN 062 000 59 11 - s0.ft. 0.39 ams IWO 168.0 3011721440M 6209 OWLA LSCHOENFEW&P SCHOENFEID OAKPONDSOFINTERACHEN 004 O00 W 1 $.ft. 0,42 saes 103.0 1863 3011721446047 6215 OWtA AESUItIWAN TSUUIVANTR OAKPONDSOFINTEIWLCHEN 003 002 SUBJECTTOSTREET 61 14 !q& 0.38 Was 204.1 143.5 .3011721400045 6217 OWIA WTGOODNOW&SWGOODNOW OAK PONDSOFINTERLACHEN 002 002 SUBJECTTO STREET 62 24.167 s .ft. QSS ams 1213 223.8 3011721440445 6221 OW LA ES ESKIN&SA CARLSON OAK PONDS OF INTERIACHEN 001 002 63 49 .ft. 0.75 acres 1063 238.9 3011721440058 6273 OWLA BERNIEH&PATRICIA K BEAVER. OAK PONDS OF INTERIACHEN 2ND ROOM 004 001 64 2437 s .h. OS6ams 97.5 1935 3011721440057 6229 OW LA 1SSAVAGE&1MSAVAGE OAK PONDS OF INT'ERLACHEN 2NDADON 003 O00 65 611,4875.ft. 1.57ams 263A 4194. 301L721440059 5217 SCHAEFERRD EOWARDWGUCKMAN OAK PONDS OF INTERIACHEN 2ND AODN 005 001 66 001 w.ft. 181 ams 1255 633.3 3011721440001 5225 SCHAEFER RD BARBARA R OINWIDDIEETALYRE AUDITOR'S SUBO, NG. 325 019 67 2r, sq.ft. 0.6ams 169.6 155.4 3011721490024 6300 WESTVWODCr C&LLARSONJR WESTWOODCOURT 001 001 68 594s.ft. 0.68ares 1766 158.7 3011721440025 6304 WESTWOOOCT FRANCISDAMELHUSSIAN111 Wf51W000 COURT 002 003 69 460295.ft. 1.06ams 14157.9 225.5 3011721440026 6305 WESTWOOOCT MHBOEHNE&TSOEHNE WESIWOODCOURT 0011001 70 OOls .ft. 0.78ams 1 165.8 1713 3011721440027 6312 WESTWOOOCT RSBONELLO&JMBONFLLO. WESTWOOD COURT W41 001 '71 13.203 IQ.ft. 0.72 acres I 267.5 359.5 301J72144OUS 6316 WESTWOODCT TWKUCK&AWKUCK WESTWOOD COURT 005 ODS 72 44,507 salt. 160.6 220.3 3031721440029 6320 WESTWOODCT THOMASA&DIANE C WENTZ WESTWOODCOURT 006 ODS 73 3 s .ft. 388.8 154.6 3011721440030 6324 WES DLT ROBERTE FLYNN ETAL WESTWOODL'OURT 007 001 74 201 .ft. 169.9 155.6 3011721440031 6328 WESTWOODCT TS RITZER&K5 RITLER WESTWOODODURT 008 001 75 3 s .ft. 209.0 155.3 301172144OMS 6313 WESTWOOD CT DAWOEPAUTZ WESPOMOCOURT 006 002 76 10.74acres 928 .ft. 121.9 207.6 3011721440034 6309 WESTWOODC7 HAROLD& REBECCALIEBERMAN WES7WKJ00 COURT OW ODI 77 29 s .ft 113.0 208.4 361172144OW3 6205 WESTWOODCT KW&TARAUHO WESTWOODCOURT 002 00278 3 703 s .ft. 214.3 11%19 3011721440032 6301 WESTWOODCT CHRISTYLCTHIELE WESTWOODCOURT 001 00275 1.0 189.3 MadisD w� NOTESMAP I. THS 19 NOT A 80IAJDARY SURVEY. S MAP 15 FOR LOT ANALYSIS PURPOSES ONLY. 2. TI* TWO OF MEASUREMENTS AND C CULATIONS USED WERE COMPUTED PLATS AND AUTOCAD SOFTWARE. -- i I� � (+ �s �Y /,r 4��J✓rA FRANK 5X2 ED n COKTACI" REYOION I hsrot!y ",Wy tNt Lha wn wda.V drect supervmwns wdar Ua taws W the sLta o A % SB Infrastructure a Engineering • Planning a Construction &.43500wes. lac. Memorandum DATE. February 18, 2015 TO., Mr. Cary Teague, Community Development Director City of Edina FROM. Charles Rickart, P.E., P.T.O.E. RE. Blake Woods Residential Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 - 63 Background 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541.4800 Fax 763 541-1700 The purpose of this study is to determine the potential traffic and safety impacts the proposed development of the Blake Woods residential subdivision plan has on the adjacent roadway system. The site is located north of Vernon Avenue, between Pine Grove Road and Evanswood Lane off of Blake Road. The existing site includes one single family residential unit with access to Evanswood Lane. The project location is shown on Figure 1. The proposed subdivision site plan includes development of seven (7) single family residential homes including maintaining the existing home and the construction of six (6) new homes. Access to five (5) of the homes will be via a new cul-de-sac street connection from Blake Road. The one existing home and one new home will have access on Evanswood Lane. The proposed site plan is shown on Figure 2. The following sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated traffic and safety impacts the proposed development will have on the adjacent roadway system. Site Trip Generation The estimated trip generation from the proposed development is shown below in Table 1. The trip generation rates used to estimate the site traffic is based on extensive surveys for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Oh Edition. The table shows the total daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed six (6) new signal family homes. Aj3 Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 20I5 Page 2 of 6 Table I - Estimated Site Trip Generation Use Size ADT AM Peak PM Peak Total In Out Total In Out Total Iu Out Single Family Residential 6 Units 58 29 29 5 1 4 6 4 2 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition Traffic Operations Analysis In order to determine abase line condition, existing traffic counts were conducted on the adjacent streets the week of February 9t11, 2015. Based on these counts the following traffic conditions currently exist on these streets. Blake Road south of Parkwood Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2,600 AM Peak Hour 208 PM Peak Hour 211 Blake Road north of Pine Grove Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2050 AM Peak Hour 186 PM Peak Hour 208 Blake Road north of Evanswood Lane Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 1950 AM Peak Hour 176 PM Peak Hour 199 Evanswood Lane west of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 280 AM Peak Hour 34 PM Peak Hour 39 Pine Grove Road east of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 440 AM Peak Hour 34 PM Peak Hour 36 Parkwood Road west of Blake Road Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 340 AM Peak Hour 33 PM Peak Hour 36 AAq Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 3 of 6 Blake Road is a north/south street providing local access to Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard. This type of higher functioning street will carry slightly larger traffic than a typical local City street such as Evanswood Lane, Pine Grove Road or Parkwood Road. Typical local City streets will have traffic volumes ranging from 200 to 2000 vehicles per day (vpd) depending on the density of the area and its connection to other higher functioning streets (i.e. collectors or arterials). The traffic operations analysis was conducted using established methodologies documented in the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations. The analysis techniques defined in the HCM are different for roadway segments and intersections. Roadway segment analysis focuses on the average daily volume to capacity ratio, while intersection analysis focuses on delay caused by the AM or PM peak hour critical movements. It is therefore possible to have an efficient intersection located along a poorly operating roadway segment, or a poorly operating intersection along an otherwise free-flowing roadway. Roadway segments or intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from W to 'T*' as defined in the HCM. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay along a roadway segment or at an intersection LOS. E represents the condition where the roadway segment or intersection is at capacity. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be handled by the roadway segment or intersection. At a stop sign - controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through - street intersection. For purposes of this review, the roadway segment analysis was conducted at a planning level. The analysis consists of comparing the average daily flow rates on a roadway segments to the ADT roadway segment traffic capacity threshold volumes. A two-lane urban street with driveway and street access has a capacity threshold of 2000 vpd at LOS A and 4000 vpd at LOS E/F. The existing and anticipated (with the development) roadway segment traffic operations are displayed on Table 2. As shown on the table, all roadway segments are operating at LOS A or B as they exist today and with the proposed development traffic included. Table 2 — Roadway Segment TrafJ9c Analysis Sheet Location Existing AADT LOS Projected AADT LOS Blake Road South of Parkwood Road 2600 B 2650 B Blake Road North of Pine Grove Road 2050 B 2100 B Blake Road North of Evanswood Lane 1950 A 1970 A Evanswood Lane West of Blake Road 280 A 290 A Pine Grove Road East of Blake Road 440 A 450 A Parkwood Road West of Blake Road 340 A 350 A M- - Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 4 of 6 The LOS ranges for both signalized and un -signalized intersections are shown in Table 3. The threshold LOS values for un -signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. Table 3 - Intersection Level of Service Measures Source: Highway Capacity Manual The existing and anticipated (with the development) intersection operations were evaluated for both the AM and PM peak hours. Synchro/SimTraffic microsimulation software was utilized to model the area intersections with the peak hour counts, lane geometry, and traffic control. The results of this analysis are illustrated on Table 4. Table 4 — Intersection Traffic Analysis Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un -Signalized A < 10 :510 B 10-20 10-15 C 20-35 15-25 D 35-55 25-35 E 55-80 35-50 F >80 >50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual The existing and anticipated (with the development) intersection operations were evaluated for both the AM and PM peak hours. Synchro/SimTraffic microsimulation software was utilized to model the area intersections with the peak hour counts, lane geometry, and traffic control. The results of this analysis are illustrated on Table 4. Table 4 — Intersection Traffic Analysis Delay and LOS = Worst case intersection movement Results of the intersection traffic analysis shown in the above table indicate that the existing intersections in the area are operating at an acceptable LOS and would continue to operate at acceptable levels with the proposed development. W AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing Projected Existing Projected Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS (sec) (sec) (Sec) (sec) Blake Road at 4.7 A 4.9 A 5.2 A 5.4 A Evanswood Lane Blake Road at NA NA 2.3 A NA NA 2.7 A New Street A Blake Road at 7.6 A 7.8 A 8.4 A 8.7 A Pine Grove Road Blake Road at 8.5 A 8.7 A 9.2 A i 9.4 A I Parkwood Roadi Delay and LOS = Worst case intersection movement Results of the intersection traffic analysis shown in the above table indicate that the existing intersections in the area are operating at an acceptable LOS and would continue to operate at acceptable levels with the proposed development. W Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 5 of 6 Trak Safety Review In addition to the traffic operations analysis a traffic safety review was also conducted. This included reviewing the crash history in the area, reviewing the sight distance required at the new street intersection to Blake Road and reviewing the site plan for safety issues or concerns. Crash History: Crash data provided from Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS) records from the past 10 years was reviewed for the area. Based on that review two (2) crashes have occurred on Blake Road between Evanswood Lane and Parkwood Road. One (1) rear end property damage crash with a parked car northbound around the Evanswood Lane intersection in 2005 and, one (1) right angle personnel injury crash just north of the Pine Grove Road intersection (at a driveway) in 2007. Sight Distance Analysis: As -built plans for Blake Road were reviewed to determine if sight distance would be a concern with the construction of a new intersection from the proposed Blake Woods Subdivisions between Pine Grove Road and Evanswood Lane. The analysis included review both the horizontal and vertical profile of the existing roadway in relationship to the new intersection location and the speed of traffic on Blake Road. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines were used for the analysis. Two primary conditions were analyzed: 1. The sight distance required for a stopped vehicle at the new street intersection to safely pull out onto Blake Road. For most practical purposes, providing a 10 -second decision time, from the initial detection point to the location of the critical feature, based on design speed, is adequate. Based on these criteria a sight line of approximately 440 feet from the intersection looking north or south on Blake Road should be provided where possible. The new intersection is located between Evanswood Lane and Pine Grove Road. The intersection of Evanswood Lane is approximately 200 feet north of the new street intersection. The intersections of Pine Grove Road and Parkwood Road are approximately 200 feet and 400 feet south of the new street intersection, respectively. Based on the review of the horizontal and vertical conditions and assuming that no trees or vegetation are restricting views, there would be. sufficient sight lines to see any oncoming vehicle including vehicles turning from the adjacent intersections. 2. The sight distance required to stop for a vehicle in the street turning from Blake Road onto the new street. Based on the guideline a sight distance of 200 feet should be provided to see a vehicle or other object in the street to safely stop traveling at 30mph. Based on the review of the roadway conditions, a vehicle traveling either northbound or southbound on Blake Road would have sufficient distance to safely stop for a vehicle turning into the new street intersection. Blake Woods Subdivision Traffic Review City of Edina February 18, 2015 Page 6 of 6 Site Plan Review — The site plan was reviewed with respect to the street alignment and configuration. No issues were identified however, the following should be considered: 1. A stop sign should be placed on the new street approaching Blake Road. 2. Provide a clear sight line from the intersection in both directions; keep it clear of trees or other landscaping that would be in the line of vision. 3. Clear the trees and vegetation in the right of way to provide a clear sight line at the Evanswood Lane intersection looking south. Conclusions /Recommendation Based on the traffic review documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: ■ The proposed development will generate 58 daily trips, five (5) AM peak hour trips and six (6) PM peak hour trips. ■ Based on the traffic operations analysis the intersections and roadway segments on Blake Road will operate at satisfactory (LOS A or B) with the proposed site developed. • Only two crashes have occurred in the area adjacent to the site in the past 10 years. • Sufficient sight lines exist for traffic exiting or entering the proposed new street intersection on Blake Road. ■ Safety would be improved with the installation of a stop sign for the new street approaching Blake Road and providing a clear sight line from the intersection. • At the intersection ofEvanwood Lane the safety would be improved with clearing the sight line looking south from the intersection. MO Dafs+H'fnfoo 2 K12a5 WW iSMramsr w\QKd6-K70%Ce01£xMOtraV6ld-57 -A cls LeCoihlr. ST� 1uTERLACHEM" IIIBLVD INTERt AClWt sr�L ���Ipj� N V' A co JMirror u p W0 RD f�t LA&ke C ACICF A"Lake x is ?� T• LA. W ¢ �� i^TyW (A. M. 52nd T LINK 0 Soo ft 1600 ft c qE( 'ya a FO Apo LA W p CRO a > �� cRFE"v°N FA ' 53rd o T. ���Project >d'J W w� 169 W o :5 LEMARK p T W Location ma E�NMOOR ST. N Lake g RO• W AYR W y� > �. i�QaiCHM010) Harvey ? - < NT ♦J .. x a- ►a A FIELD WAY 9 LA. o YV T ND V I ®�01 �DOVRE�R, 3 ¢ O pLl tA. �f • s �� E 4RK > < iOGiy 24. a a d ATNE �O �y� ®WA 4 W. 57 th ST. X23. 1' S0 uTH LA t EW ' ` o gay ' S IL W ARKW A. H W Y ' ' 'n *,i {iN1E ., GR lb" > a riRpVE V 5T N N 3t � G 2 F 1. 'a iowooNDERRr m $yam_ r v F po ST. < r _ ,� W W. se ST. s 4 OR. r 1 _'cR C{R. AMY DR lYl o i = 4 ❑� �c ~ z .� C u c a BENTON > A OSS '" c vi o > > e < c y~ ASPEN > Cr I a RD. w rIENTON ,IV W. 59th ST. �a W. 59+h ST. 4� •�'1.. R W V pUNTRYS RD. W�� N 2L _••(- LANGFORO DR. ,�` > w r. W 60th ST. SCHOOL AR� �i `at A F N n .+ C pi R W. o A t C4, GA tg1NTER L� V4(CEY V E�f�q ; ART M*I AFF •Pt. AY W BIRCH R T AVE • ® Jti�v� +p� X41 V1R CI �p1 y 1 U . Q p . `� <s �.—J �a LA r W w 62nd ST. u n� VERNON GLEASON -0 MA Y ®rt• 53.E ST J 6<2 _ O1SIA�A1 COLONIAL4 ao Y R. w. FALCON �� 4RE0 FOXR y C • T. 1Y WHITI 2 CAS PASS AV. UN T 4 .ar ice_ u W)_ r-, �. > F-;, t�0 "A ''�tiZ Traffic Review Figure 1 r o Blake Woods Subdivision ,� City of Edina, Minnesota Project Location Map I I I ------------------- ---- i I I-------------------{ --� � I I T114=LUrLKf*W 0 ♦emw a 0 RORIR cr= e...ene.te�L p Olt" P PR LnA*tARY PLAT OYpOCO ♦ O R M Traffic Review Figure z o Blake Woods Subdivision `= City of Edina, Minnesota - Site Pian FRANK GERMAN •.••'" • ••..�" •••.• """ BLAKE WOODS SUSDMSION so�wa, anni R � I I T114=LUrLKf*W 0 ♦emw a 0 RORIR cr= e...ene.te�L p Olt" P PR LnA*tARY PLAT OYpOCO ♦ O R M Traffic Review Figure z o Blake Woods Subdivision `= City of Edina, Minnesota - Site Pian 1000�ExAAffstl6A6-3I Tip -o7 � Eftfsraq rrcrriaayn At m N A , �x Ln z 280 a A ` N a 4�AMOwN � 440 Pine Grove Rd Aire Orae Fd /� 340. � d� a p High_wood Or w Parkwoad.Rd 0 m sa a a Idyivrood fh Y _ R Traffic Review Figure 3 o Blake Woods Subdivision Existing (2015) ay City, of Edina, Minnesota Daily Traffic Volumes Cary Teague From: Jeff Siems Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 12:40 PM To: Cary Teague Cc: Brian Olson Subject: Blake woods housing project Hello Cary, Per our discussion today regarding the Blake Woods housing project the fire department recommends the following: 1) Road width of 24' is below fire code minimums. Residential fire sprinkler system (13D or IRC 2904) required for any building regardless of square footage. 2) Fire hydrants should be located in two areas; at the corner of Blake road and Blake woods and at the beginning of the turn -a -round along the North side. 3) No Parking Fire Lane signage to be installed along the North side of Blake Woods road and around the turn -a -round on the outside radius. Jeff Siems, Fire Marshal Edina Fire Department 952-826-0337 1 JSiems@EdinaMN.gov �0—�' DATE: February 19, 2014 TO: Cary Teague — Community Development Director CC: Chad Millner PE — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner PE — Environmental Engineer Charlie Gerk EIT — Engineering Technician RE: Berman Subdivision — Preliminary Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject development for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. General Comments 1. All rain gardens will need to be on private property and covered by a private maintenance agreement in favor of the local Watershed District. Provide an Inspection and maintenance plan that ensures future functionality. 2. A development agreement will be required for the creation of public road and utilities. 3. All maintenance for the landscaping. -retaining walls and other related items located within the proposed public right-of-ways and easements will be the responsibility of the subdivisions home owners association or Individual property owners. Survey/ Plat 4. Datum for any future surveys will need to be NAVD 1929. 5. Recorded easements will be required for all public infrastructures not already in platted drainage and utility easement. Traffic and Street 6. A traffic study will need to be completed for the impact of an entrance at Blake Rd vs. Evanswood Ln. 7. B618 curb and gutter only and standard residential driveway entrances as described in city standard plate 411 and found at the following link: btWdledinamn go lndex.phhplsection=construction standards & Provide 5 -foot wide ADA compliant sidewalks with 5 -foot boulevards. 9. 24 -foot wide streets will be allowed only if. a The City of EdirWs, largest fire truck is able to navigate the road and cul-de-sac. b. Parking is limited to one side only. Sanitary and Water Utilities 10. Describe sewer and water services and proposed abandonments of existing utilities. 11. A looped 6" DIP from Blake Rd through to the southeast corner of lot 6 north along the property One to Evanswood Ln. 12. Copper lines must be used to the curb stop. 13. Wet tap will need to be completed at night, with an approved closure plan by public works for Blake Rd. 14. Water main to cross northeast at Blake Rd. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaW gov • 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 Storm Water Utility 15. Applicant may review local drainage features at the following links: haps://maps.barr.com/edlna/ and http•//edinamn,gov/index php?section=engineering,, water resource 16. A complete stormwater management plan will need to be completed for the site. a. Stormwater system downstream of sub -watershed MD 29 is over capacity. On site extended detention will be required to control peak rate to the downstream storm system. Provide downstream analysis. b. No Increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. 17. Describe and show downstream connection to public storm sewer system. Connection must remain in public drainage and utility easement on Parkwood Knolls 31 Addition or public right of way on Shafer Road. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 18. Provide Information for grading staging between the land development and individual building permits. 19. A State construction site permit and SWPPP will be required: Other Agency Coordination 20. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit will be required, along with other agency permits such as MNDH, MPCA, MCES, and a grading permit from the City of Edina Building Department. ENGINEERINGDEPARTIAENT . 7450 Metro Boulevard + Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.Ed1naMN.gov+952-826-0371: Fax 952-826-0392 0 DATE: March 30, 2015 TO: Cary Teague — Community Development Director CC: Chad Millner PE — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner PE — Environmental Engineer RE: Berman Subdivision — Preliminary Plat Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject development for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. This review summarizes issues remaining from the February 19 review and March 3 drainage review memo. The reviewed plan is dated 3/18/2015. General Comments 1. A development agreement will be required for the creation of public road, utilities and stormwater system ownership and maintenance. Survey/ Plat 2. Recorded easements will be required for all public infrastructures not already in platted right of way. a. Drainage to the west is proposed in a flow concentration onto private property then into a private pond. Applicant must negotiate future public easement for: the flow path, any drainage infrastructure, or any increase in pond bounce with any affected private parties. Describe precautions against erosion and provide proof of easement on private property. Traffic and Street. 3. Use B618 curb and gutter and standard residential driveway entrances as described in city standard plate 411 and found at the following link. http•//edinamn goy/index.php?section=construction standards 4. Provide 5 -foot wide ADA compliant sidewalks with 5 -foot boulevards on south side of proposed road consistent with Living Streets Policy. 5. Demonstrate fire access turning movement for attached design vehicle. 6. Limited parking to one side of street. Sanitary and Water Utilities 7. Provide a looped 6" DIP from Blake Rd through to the southeast corner of lot 6 north along the property line to Evanswood Ln. Storm Water Utility 8. Submit a revised Stormwater Management Plan that meets the following performance standard. Design to these restrictions will ensure that either east or west flow path meet level of service and level of protection for 100 year events, and risk in downstream water body MD -25 is not increased. 9. No increase in stormwater peak rate, volume or flood stage elevation to neighboring private properties, which will be demonstrated by the following criteria: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaMN.gov • 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 A35— a. No increases In stormwater volumes to MD_29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100- year 24 —hour Atlas 14 events, as compared with existing conditions. b. No Increases in peak stormwater rates to MD 29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 00 -year 24-hour Atlas 14 events, as compared with existing conditions. c. No limitations to total volume runoff (to east) aside from meeting Nine Mile Creek Watershed District volume control requirements for the entire site. 10. Limit peak stormwater rates from the overall site to peak rates from existing conditions for the 2 -year, I 0 -year, and 100 -year, 24-hour Atlas 14 event, not per sub watershed (a sub watershed basis increase to the Blake Road system Is allowed, as that direction has capacity to direct stormwater) 11. Achieve compliance with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District water quality treatment requirements. Hydrology The Engineering Department contracted with Barr Engineering to review the hydrology calculations for this design. The Barr review is attached to this memo. 12. Provide justification for pre and post curve numbers and following guidance provided in attached Barr memorandum (Performance standard comment 2) 13. Provide revised survey or adjust model to describe existing on-site storage consistent with Barr memorandum (Performance standard comment 3, Other comment 4) 14. Future building sites can be limited by impervious surface assumptions though developers agreement. Previous submittal claimed 5,450 sf impervious per lot. Recommend more conservative impervious assumptions to provide flexibility to allow for future expansion. 15. Correct modeling error in rain garden performance (Volume control, Other comment 3) 16. Provide time of concentration justification (Other comment l) 17. Provide infiltration rate justification (Other comment 2) Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 18. Provide a State construction site permit and SWPPP at time of Final Plat. General Comments 19. Provide a private maintenance agreement In favor of the local Watershed District for all rain gardens at time of Final Plat. 20. Provide an inspection and maintenance plan that ensures future functionality at time of Final Plat. Other Agency Coordination 21. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit is required, along with other agency permits such as MNDH, MPCA SWPPP, MCES, and a grading permit from the City of Edina Building Department at time of Final Plat ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaMN.Sov . 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 /% 4(� Turning Performance Analysis ----------- Parameters: 5/1/2013 -- Inside Cramp Angle: 45.000 Axle Track: 81.92 in. Wheel Offset: 5.25 in. Tread Width: 16.60 in. Chassis Overhang: 65.99 in. Additional Bumper Depth: 19.00 in. Front Overhang 84.99 in. Wheelbase: 258.00 in. Calculated Turning Radii: Inside Tum: 20 ft. 4 in. Curb to Curb: 36 ft. 8 in. Wall to Wall: 41 ft. 1 in. Comments: Truck 12205 Components PRIDE # Description Front Tires 0078244 Tires, Michelin, 425/65822.50 20 ply XZY 3 tread Chassis 0070220 Dash -2000, Chassis, PAP/SkyAmMidmount Front Bumper 0123625 Bumper, 19" extended, ImpNel Aerial Device 0006900 xxxAerial, I W Pierce Platform Notes: Actual Inside Cramp Angle may be less due to highly specialized options. Curb to Curb turning radius calculated for a 9.00 inch curb. Page 1 of 2 AV Turning Performance Analysis 5/1/2013 Defialtions: Inside Cramp Angle Maximum turning angle of the front inside tire. Axle Track King pin to king -pin distance of the front axle. Wheel Offset Offset from the center -line of the wheel to the king pin. Tread Width Width of the tire tread. Chassis Overhang Distance from the center -lute of the front axle to the front edge of the cab. This does not include the bumper depth Additional Bumper Depth Depth that the bumper assembly adds to the front overhang. Wheelbase Distance between the center lines of the vehicle's front and rear axles. Inside Turning Radius Radius of the smallest circle around which the vehicle can turn. Curb to Curb Turning Radius Radius of the smallest circle inside of which the vehicle's tires can tum. This measurement assumes a curb height of 9 inches. Wall to Wall Turning Radius Radius of the smallest circle inside of which the entire vehicle can tum. This measurement takes into account any front overhang due to the chassis, bumper extensions and/or aerial devices. Page 2 of 2 resourceful. naturally. BARR engineering and environmental consultants Memorandum To: Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Janna Kieffer subject: Review of Blake Woods March 18, 2015 Stormwater Management Submittal Date: March 30, 2015 This memo serves as a summary of Bares review of the Stormwater Management Plan for the proposed Blake Woods subdivision, as submitted on March 18, 2015 by Landform. Barr reviewed the Stormwater Management Plan for compliance with the performance standards identified in the March 3, 2015 drainage review memo from Ross Bintner, City of Edina Engineering Department, to Cary Teague, City of Edina Community Development Director. Performance Standard Regarding Neighboring Private Properties Standard- No increases in stormwater volumes to MD 29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year 24 -hour Atlas 14 events, as compared with existing conditions. Bares review comments. 1. The stormwater modeling submittal indicates that under existing conditions, 172,408 ft2 within the proposed development area drains west to the MD 29 pond, with 19,741 ft2 of impervious surface (11.4%). Under proposed conditions, 167,669 ft2 of the proposed development drains west to the MD -29 pond, with 46,664 ft2 of impervious surface (27.8%). Based on this information, summarized in Table 1, the total area draining to the MD 29 pond has been reduced under proposed conditions. However, the amount of impervious surface draining to the MD29 pond under proposed conditions is 2.4 times that of existing conditions. Barr Engineering Co. 4700 West 771h Street, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com AM Date: March 30, 2015 Page: 2 Table 1. Summary of subcatchment areas draining to the MD -29 pond under existing and proposed conditions Subcatchment Area (ft2) Impervious % Impervious area Proposed Difference in Runoff Subwatershed 4S: To Pond MD -29 95,550 16.05 15,336 Raingarden B (Pond 15S) 9,748 35.73 3,483 Raingarden C (Pond 14S) 22,318 53.92 12,034 Raingarden D (Pond 12S) 6,167 83.49 5,149 Raingarden E (Pond 11S) 14,352 36.32 5,213 Raingarden F (Pond 17S) 9,847 32.24 3,175 Raingarden G (Pond 18S) 9,687 23.49 2,275 Total 167,669 28 46,664 Existing 1,742 Subwatershed 4S: To Pond MD -29 172,408 11.45 19,741 2. Table 2 summarizes the runoff generated under existing and proposed conditions in the subcatchment(s) draining to pond MD 29, per the March 18, 2015 submittal. Note that the runoff generation summarized in Table 1 does not reflect volume reduction achieved by routing runoff through the rainwater gardens. Table 2. Summary of runoff generated per March 18, 2015 submittal Event Existing Existing Proposed Proposed Difference in Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Volume (ft3) Depth per Volume (ft3) Depth per Generated acre (in) acre (in) (ft3) 2 -year 20,258 1.41 22,237 1.60 1,979 10 -year 37,762 2.63 39,906 2.87 2,144 100 -year 80,280 5.59 82,022 5.88 1,742 Given the significant increase in impervious surfaces draining to MD -29 pond, the increases in runoff generated under proposed conditions seem low. We recommend the following revisions to the modeling approach to ensure that the increase in impervious surface are being properly reflected in the modeling analysis: - Use a pervious curve number for proposed conditions that is the same as or higher than existing conditions to reflect likelihood of compacted soil conditions resulting from construction. When using a pervious curve number of 82 for proposed conditions (consistent with existing conditions), the volume to M D_29 increases under the 2-, 10-, and 100 -year events, and the performance standard for the 2 -year and 10 -year events are no longer met. Date: March 30, 2015 Paae: 3 - Use the distributed curve number method, which calculates runoff separately for impervious and pervious areas. Under existing site conditions, there is a low, depression area located south of the existing driveway on the Berman property. Based on the MnDNR's 2011 LiDAR, it appears that stormwater from an area of approximately 30,000 ft2 drains to this low area, where runoff pools to a depth of approximately one foot before reaching the surface overflow and flowing southward and eventually west to the MD -29 pond. Based on the MnDNR's 2011 WAR elevation data, there is approximately 4,000 cubic feet of storage in this low area. Rough estimates indicate that during the 2 -year, 24-hour event, all runoff from the direct tributary area would be stored in this low area without a surface overflow to MD -29. This low depression area south of the existing driveway is not included in the current existing conditions model. Including the existing low area in the modeling analysis would result in lower runoff volumes to MD_29 under the 2-, 10-, and 100 -year events. The low area should be included in the modeling analysis for comparison of existing and proposed runoff volumes to the MD 29 pond if field survey verifies the presence and characteristics of the low area. Standard- No increases in peak stormwater rates to MD 29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year 24-hour Atlas 14 events), as compared with existing conditions. Table 3 summarizes the peak runoff rates to the MD_29 pond, as identified in the March 18, 2015 stormwater management plan. Based on the modeling, the proposed rainwater garden storage and infiltration/filtration results in peak flows to the MD 29 pond that are lower than peak runoff rates from existing conditions for the 2-, 10-, and 100 -year events. Table 3. Summary of peak runoff rates to MD -2? pond Event Existing Runoff Rate (cfs) Proposed Runoff Rate (cfs) 2 -yr, 24 -hr (2.87") 8.46 6.08 10 -yr, 24 -hr (4.29") 15.61 132.11 10.9 100 -yr, 24 -hr (7.47") 25.08 Performance Standard(s) for Overall Site Standard- limit peak stormwater rates from the overall site to peak rates from existing conditions for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year, 24-hour Atlas 14 events. Table 4 summarizes the peak runoff rates from the overall site, as identified in the March 18, 2015 stormwater management plan. Based on the modeling, the proposed rainwater garden storage and k9 Date: March 30, 2015 Page: 4 infiltration/filtration results in peak runoff rates from the overall site that are lower than peak runoff rates from existing conditions for the 2-, 10-, and 100 -year events. Table 4. Summary of peak runoff rates from overall site Event Existing Runoff Rate (cfs) Proposed Runoff Rate (ds) 2 -yr, 24 -hr (2.87") 9.08 6.66 10 -yr, 24 -hr (4.29") 16.82 11.9 100 -yr, 24 -hr (7.47") 34.72 27.9 Standard- Applicant must meet the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District volume control requirements for the entire site. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District's (NMCWD's) stormwater management rule requires retention onsite of one inch of runoff from all impervious surfaces of the parcel. The proposed site has a total of 54,638 ft' of impervious surface. One inch of runoff from 54,638 ft2 of impervious surface is 4,553 ft3 of runoff. Soils on the proposed site have been identified as Hydrologic Soil Group D, indicating poor infiltration capacity. As such, the proposed rainwater garden designs include installation of a drain tile to collect runoff that infiltrates through the approximately two feet of planting soil. The proposed rainwater gardens include a gravel bed below the drain tile to store and infiltrate runoff. Based on the combined area of the gravel beds, an infiltration rate for the native soils of 0.03 in/hr, and a 48-hour drawdown time, the volume of runoff retained and infiltrated from the proposed rainwater gardens, collectively, is 979 ft3. While compliance with the NMCWD's volume control requirement will ultimately need to be assessed by the NMCWD, it does not appear that the volume retention achieved by the proposed rainwater gardens will meet the NMCWD volume retention requirement. Standard- Applicant must achieve compliance with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District water quality treatment requirements. The NMCWD's stormwater management rule requires that runoff from the parcel be treated to provide at least sixty percent (60%) annual removal efficiency for phosphorus, and at least ninety percent (90%) annual removal efficiency for total suspended solids. Compliance with the NMCWD's water quality treatment requirements was not assessed as part of this review, and will need to be evaluated by NMCWD. Other Review Notes 1. The time of concentration values for the Existing Conditions Subcatchment 4S (10 minutes) and Proposed Conditions Subcatchment 4S (10 minutes) are low when considering the flow length, site topography and ground cover. Adz. Date: March 30, 2015 Pape: 5 2. An infiltration rate of 1.6 in/hr was used in the model to reflect infiltration through the planting media of the rainwater gardens. Based on the 50% sand soil mixture identified in the plan set, we recommend using a lower infiltration rate of 0.8 in/hr to provide a more conservative estimate of filtration rates. 3. ft appears that the method used to account for infiltration through the planting media and infiltration through native soils below the gravel bed is calculating filtrationfinfiltration using a surface area larger than appropriate. o The exfiltration rate through the planting soil should be assigned an invert elevation slightly below the bottom of the rainwater garden's surface storage area. The infiltrated volume will then be calculated based on the surface area of the ponded water, rather than the combined areas of both the surface storage and the underground gravel bed. o The exfiltration rate out of the system (through the native soil below the gravel bed) should be assigned both an invert elevation slightly below the bottom of the gravel bed and a maximum elevation slightly below the bottom of the surface storage area. The infiltrated volume will then be calculated based on the surface area of the gravel bed rather than the combined surface areas of both the gravel bed and surface storage. 4. There is a low depression area on the south side of the property at 5311 Evanswood Lane, which is located just north of the proposed roadway of Berman property. The MnDNR WAR elevation data indicates that under existing conditions, stormwater runoff will pool in this low area until an elevation of 946.4 feet MSL, then flow west via surface overflow. Review of the grading plan included with the March 18, 2015 submittal (sheet C3.1) indicates that the proposed site design includes a surface overflow between 5311 Evanswood Lane and the Berman property to the west at elevation 945.9 feet MSL, lower than the existing surface overflow (based on MnDNR UDAR). �44'� resourceful. naturally. �l► enginoering and environmental consultants BARB Memorandum To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics — Curve Numbers (Item 6, Work Order 1) Date: December 14, 2010 Project: 23/62 1050 MIDS Standard engineering practice during design of stormwater systems usually employs Curve Number methodology. Curve Number methodology is often required by municipal stormwater ordinance due to its wide and historic acceptance as an appropriate rural and urban hydrologic method. Curve Numbers are determined according to the ground cover and soil type, and are used to approximate the varying infiltration, interception and storage capacities of different land covers. A high Curve Number (such as 98 for impervious pavement) indicates low infiltration/abstraction and high runoff, while a lower Curve Number (such as 30 for certain wooded areas) indicates high infiltrationtabstraction and low runoff}:. The Minnesota Stormwater Manual defines Curve Number as "an index combining hydrologic soil group, land use factors, treatment, and hydrologic condition. Used in a method developed by the SCS to determine the approximate amount of runoff from a rainfall event in a particular area." (MPCA 2005). History of Curve Number Method Curve Number methodology as it is now used was developed beginning in the 1950s and updated in the decades since. It is an event -based empirical model developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) (formerly SCS) based on outflow data collected from relatively uniform agricultural landscapes at a watershed -wide scale, using larger precipitation events and larger flood flows. It was originally developed to estimate stream flow based on calendar day storm/rainfall data. Curve Number methodology forms the theoretical basis for MRCS (formerly SCS) TR 20 and TR -55, where various regions of the nation are assigned varying intensities of design storms and varying recurrence event precipitation totals. The method was originally developed to calculate the anticipated runoff volume from a watershed and was later adapted to estimate runoff discharge rate. The typical application is to apply a constant, dimensionless Curve Number to calculate runoff volume from rainfall volume. An assumed typical hydrograph (flow as a function of time) and calculated time -of -concentration (the time of flow from the farthest point on the watershed to the outlet) are used to calculate runoff rates. Curve Numbers generally vary from 30 to 98; the higher the Curve Number, the greater the volume of runoff is generated. Table 1 lists Curve Numbers for common Minnesota land covers (NRCS 1986). Boa Engineering Co. 4700 West 771h Street, Suite 240, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.bor(.com A T3 To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company Subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics - Curve Numbers (Item 6, Work Order 1) Date: December 14, 2010 Page: 2 Project: 23611050 MIDS Table 1. Curve Numbers for Selected Land Covers' Land Cover Hydrologic Curve Numbers for Hydrologic Soil Groups Condition A B C p Predevelopment2 Woods Good 303 55 70 77 Prairies, no grazing Good 30 58 71 78 Developed Impervious Surfaces NA 98 98 98 98 Turf gross, cover < 50% Poor 68 79 86 89 Turfgrass, cover < 50 to 75% Fair 49 69 79 84 Turfgrass, cover> 75% Good 39 61 74 80 Agricultural Fallow, bare soil NA 77 86 91 94 Fallow, crop residue Good 74 83 88 90 Row crops, straight row Good 67 78 85 89 Small grain, straight row Good 63 75 83 87 Pasture, grazing Good 39 61 74 80 'These Curve Numbers supplied by TR -55 are forAntecedent Runoff Condition Il (ARC 11). 2The Curve Numbers listed for Fredevelopment are considered appropriate for native soil and vegetation conditions 3TR-55 specifies a Curve Numberfor Woods 'A"Soils as 30 for runoff calculations, while acknowledging that the actual Curve Number for this condition is lower(unspecifred). Minnesota Stormwater Manual lists a presettlement Curve Number of 20 (Table 8.3). Application of Curve Number Method The.Curve Number for each soil type and land cover dictates the expected maximum storage of the soil, S, where S is in inches. P.\Mpls\23 MN\62\23621050 MIDS\wor3cFiles\PerfomanceCioals\CNs\CN Memo - Final.docx all To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company Subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics — Curve Numbers (Item 6, Work Order 1 ) Date: December 14, 2010 Page: 3 Project: 23611050 MIDS 1000 _ S CN — 10 Abstractions,l,, (interception, depression storage and evaporation) are generally considered to be 20% of the soil storage. /a,=0.2*S Runoff volume is then calculated using the following equation: _ (P — Ia)2 Q (P+0.8*S) The runoff calculated in the above equation is then applied to a rainfall frequency distribution to determine the runoff hydrograph. The NRCS method dictates a Type II 24-hour frequency distribution for Minnesota, however, the runoff volume generated can be applied to other storm durations and intensities. Curve Number methodology is even used in conjunction with continuous rainfall data to determine runoff on an annual basis, but as will be discussed later, the applicability of the Curve Number method for small storms is suspect. Curve Number Method Advantages The primary reason that Curve Number methodology is popular today is the ease of use (Lamont 2008). It is used in TR -20 and various software models for hydrology estimates, including water quality models (such as P8) to attempt to estimate pollutant loadings and sediment yield, and flood hydrology models (such as HydroCAD). Curve Number methodology is frequently used to estimate peak runoff flow, runoff volume and runoff hydrographs for precipitation events of all sizes. Only limited site data, such as location, soil type, land use and slope are required to complete calculations. The method is believed to be relatively accurate for larger scale planning efforts, such as regional flood storage ponds and other flood control facility sizing. Other common hydrologic methods, including Green-Ampt and Horton Infiltration methods, do not share the advantage of ease of use, and thus are not used as often as Curve Number methodology in stormwater regulation or by developers in sizing storm sewer systems and rate and volume control stormwater best management practices (BMPs). Curve Number Method Deficiencies Despite its advantages and widespread acceptance, the Curve Number method presents certain disadvantages for some modeling and estimating applications. In general, these deficiencies are the result P:V41s\23 MN\62\23621050 MIDS\WorkFilcs\PerformanceGoals\CNs\CN Memo - Final.docx 41-7 To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company Subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics - Curve Numbers (Item 6, Work Order 1) Date: December 14, 2010 Page: 4 Project: 23611050 MIDS of the nature of the method's empirical development in large non -urbanized watersheds, in contrast to the differing conditions encountered in urbanized areas. Put simply, the Curve Number method was not originally developed for the urbanized land uses where the method is now most -frequently employed. Developed for Agricultural, Not Urban Watersheds Classification of variable urban soils under specific Curve Numbers remains in question. The Curve Number method was developed on uniform agricultural watersheds and later adapted for urban watersheds (Peters 2010). The model performs well on rural landscapes, but was not developed to ,consider the complexity of a small urban site with many different land covers and BMPs (Reese 2006). Abstractions The Curve Number method poorly estimates initial abstraction/losses, as the method was developed focusing on the long-term conditions for daily rainfall. Initial abstraction is calculated as a function of the Curve Number, as 0.2*S. This does not often account for variation and complexity of smaller, flatter sites and soils within stormwater BMPs. Recent research has suggested that a value of 0.05 or 0.1 may be more appropriate than 0.2 (Reese 2006, Lamont 2008, Eli 2010) and most modeling packages allow the user to adjust this value; however, changing the abstraction value from the standard 0.2 requires the creation of new Curve Numbers for all land cover types and antecedent runoff conditions (Lamont 2008). The most common application of the method uses a constant Curve Number and antecedent runoff condition (ARC) for an entire precipitation event, although some modeling packages allow the Curve Number to vary with time and ARC. The possible inaccuracy concerning the lack of early -event variation of Curve Number (initial losses, infiltration, etc.) and the inability of the method to account for varying antecedent moisture content are deficiencies of the method (especially for small precipitation and first flush water -quality scale events). Small Precipitation Events and Continuous Modeling Curve Number methodology has difficulty accurately determining runoff for small precipitation events (less than Y), and especially for events less than % inch (Peters 2010). In the Twin Cities, storms less than 1/2 inch account for 65% of all precipitation events greater than 0.1 inches (MPCA 2005 —Appendix B). The method is believed to be more accurate for larger precipitation events. The method was not originally developed to model snowmelt or continuous rainfall/runoff simulations, nor was it developed to describe the hydrologic communication between rainfall, soil, soil moisture, subsurface flow and stream flow, therefore has severe limitations in being used for these purposes. Even though it is sometimes used as such, it was not developed to be used for non -point source water quality modeling calculations, such as variable infiltration rates, making a distinction between P:\Mpts\23 MN\62\23621050 MIDS\WorkFilcs\PerformanceGoals\CNs\CN Memo - Final.docx L�l To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics - Curve Numbers (Item 6, Work Order 1 j Date: December 14, 2010 Page: 5 Project: 23611050 MIDS disconnected impervious surfaces and pervious surfaces, etc. Modelers have observed inaccurate prediction of runoff volume for small precipitation events, and corresponding inaccurate estimation of pollutant/sediment delivery using this method. Inaccuracy is heightened when only a portion of the real watershed is actually contributing runoff. Composite Curve Number Deficiencies 1 A composite Curve Number is the areal -weighted average Curve Number of multiple areas with different Curve Numbers, aggregated into a single area with a single curve number. A distributed method differs from a composite Curve Number in that it separates pervious and impervious areas, calculating their runoff independently to avoid undesired approximations that occur in composite Curve Number calculations. Results dif er if a composite Curve Number is used in the calculations or if a distributed approach is used. Peters calculated that for a theoretical 20 -acre, 30% impervious site, and a 1.3 -inch rainfall event, using the composite Curve Number approach generated only 305/o of the runoff volume that a distributed Curve Number approach would generate (0.17 acre-feet versus 0.55 acre-feet). The distributed Curve Number method is generally more accurate because each land cover type is considered, enhancing the resolution of the analysis (Peters 2010). Employing the composite Curve Number method can lead to inadequate sizing of water quality and rate control stormwater BMPs. Composite and distributed Curve Number methods generate more similar results for larger storms (5 -year, 100 -year, etc.); however, when evaluating small storms, composite Curve Numbers for Commercial, Industrial, and varying impervious densities Residential Sites are not recommended for use even though they are listed by the NRCS, in various models, and in Table 8A of the Minnesota Stormwater Manual. References Eli, Robert N. and Samuel J. Lamont. Curve Numbers and Urban Runoff Modeling — Application Limitations. Proceedings from Low -Impact Development 2010: Redefining Water in the City. 2010 ASCE. Garen, David C. and Danial S. Moore. Curve Number Hydrology in Water Quality Modeling. Uses, Abuses, and Future Directions. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. April 2005. Accessed on 20 -Sep -2010: hLtp://www.wsi.nrcs.usda.ggy/productstw2O/H&H/docs/H&H papers/curve number/gamn moore C N abuses.pdf Lamont, S. J.; Eti, R N.; and Fletcher, J. J., 2008. "Continuous Hydrologic Models and Curve Numbers: A Path Forward," Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. July 2008. P.\Mp1s\23 N"2\23621050MIDS\WoMlks\WdoramocGmis\CNS\r—W Memo - MA &" A�j To: MIDS Work Group From: Barr Engineering Company subject: Regional Hydrologic Metrics - Curve Numbers (Item 6. Work Order 1) Dale: December 14, 2010 Page: 6 Project: 23611050 NDS Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 2005. Minnesota Stormwater Manual, v2. Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds TR -55. United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Hydraulics and Hydrology - Technical Information. Curve Number Archive. Accessed on 20 -Sep -2010: bttt)://www.wsi.nrcs,usda.ggy/product&/mL20/H&H/tech in[QZWics-/CNarchivc.html Peters, Erik G. Improving the Practice of Modeling Urban Hydrology. Stormwater. March -April 2010. Accessed on 20 -Sep -2010: hqp://www.stormh2o.coin/march::a modelint; 3.aVx Reese, Andrew J. Voodoo Hydrology. Stormwater. July -August 2006. Accessed on 20 -Sep -2010: httv://www stormb2o cQnAuiy-august-2006/urban-hydrology-methods asi)x PAMp1s123 MN162\23621050 MmSlWorkFiles\PcrformanccGoab%CNs1CN Memo - Finel.dom &ZO L A N D F O R M From Site to Finish • 0 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-2524077 Mmeap*, MN 65401 www.landform.net March 17, 2015 City of Edina Attn: Ross Bintner Environmental Engineer 4801 W. 5& Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Response to City Drainage Review Comments Dear Mr. Lintner: We have received and reviewed the City of Edina drainage comments dated March 3, 2015. We have revised our plans, drainage report and calculation based upon those comments and below are a Nst of our responses address your comments. It is our intent that the changes made to the documents have addressed the City's concerns and we ask for the staff support at the March 25s' planning commission meeting. Storm Water Utility 1. Submit a revised Stormwater Management Plan, and development plan that meets the following performance standard. Design to these restrictions will ensure that either east or west flow path meet level of service and level of protection for 100 year events, and risk in downstream water body MD 25 is not increased. We have revised our plans and calculations based upon your comments below. We do not have the capacity or data to analyze downstream catchment areas outside of our property. Our development shows both a decrease in offsite storm water rate and a decrease in offsite storm water volume. 2. Applicant must not increase stormwater peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties, which will be demonstrated by the following criteria: a. No increases In stormwater volumes to MD 29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 - year 24 —hour Atlas 14 events, as compared with existing conditions. The hydrocad analysis of the existing and proposed conditions shows a decrease in storm water volume to the MD -29 pond in the proposed conditions. b. No increases in peak stormwater rates to MD 29 pond (to west) for the 2 -year, 10 year, and I00 -year 24-hour Atlas 14 events, as compared with existing conditions. The hydrocad analysis of the existing and proposed conditions show a decrease in stormwater rate to the MD -29 pond in the proposed conditions c. Summarize direct offsite drainage to the south property line separately. The revised plans indicate a swale on the south property line. This drainage will be routed to the existing MD 29 pond. Wdfam�:Bw�IY�'+�n�rtl SNabWitMwiep&andaMwie�ludWiloan P" "I "SOMM9M • 0 i d. No limitations to total volume runoff (to east) aside from meeting Nine Mile Creek Watershed District volume control requirements for the entire site. The hydrocad analysis shows a reduction in storm water volume to the east In the proposed conditions for the 2 -year, 10 -yr and 100 -yr, 24-hour storm. 3. Limit peak stormwater rates from the overall site to peak rates from existing conditions for the 2 - year, 10 -year, and 100 -year, 24-hour Atlas 14 event, not per sub watershed (a sub watershed basis Increase to the Blake Road system is allowed, as that direction has capacity to direct stormwater) The hydrocad analysis shows a reduction in storm water rate to the pond in the proposed conditions for the 2 -year, 1 0 -yr and 100 -yr, 24-hour storm, 4. Achieve compliance with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District water quality treatment requirements. a. The submittal indicates that the site is primarily comprised of D soils and the rain gardens will primarily serve as stormwater filtration. Given the limited infiltration and presence of drain file In the bottom of the rain gardens, the TP removals sited in the submittal seems high. Our initial calculations were based on Hennepin County Soils data which indicated Silty Sandy soils. We have since completed a geotechnical report that shows Clay (D) soils and our models have since been updated to reflect those. Our project will meet/exceed the watershed requirements for water quality as we will be required to obtain a permit through the watershed prior to final plat recording. 5. Recorded easements will be required for all public infrastructures not already In platted drainage and utility easement a. Drainage to the west is proposed in a flow concentration onto private property then onto a private pond. Applicant must negotiate future public easement for. the flow path, any drainage infrastructure, or any increase in pond bounce with any affected private parties. The applicant and Landform have been in contact with the two property owners through the design process. Both owners have indicated support for continual storm water drainage to the pond. We will continue to work with the owners to establish any required easements during the final platting process. G. Road grade blocks drainage from proposed lot and private property to the north. Provide positive drainage to low area to north. Summarize any flow through areas separately in hydrology calculations. After further analysis, the low point in the neighboring property is 13 feet outside of our property. We think it is unreasonable for the City to require the applicant to fix this existing off site condition. The proposed road Is set at the elevations in the existing condition and the roadway elevations are not higher in the proposed elevation so the outlet elevation is not changing in the proposed condition. Our plans have been modified to swale our eastern drainage to a rain garden on our site which Is then directed to the offsite pond. 7. Use NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall precipitation frequency The hydrocad models use the Atlas 14 rainfall data for this local. Ross Bintner March 17, 2015 8. Provide justification for pre and post curve numbers. Previous submittal claimed curve number reductions in post development condition. Curve and drainage numbers should make conservative assumptions about activity that will occur to develop custom graded lots. a. The curve numbers used for the pervious areas in the existing conditions model (Woods, and Woods/grass combination) reflect "poor" conditions, whereas the curve numbers used for the pervious areas in the proposed conditions models (Woods/grass combination, >75% grass cover) reflect "good" or "fair" conditions. The selection of "poor" conditions in the existing conditions model results in generation of higher stormwater volumes under existing conditions than likely appropriate. The inconsistency in curve number selection for pervious areas should be corrected in future submittals to ensure an appropriate comparison between existing and proposed runoff volumes. The original curve numbers were selected based on the existing site conditions and anticipated future conditions. The existing site has very little established vegetated ground cover and the curve number of "Poor" was selected. We anticipate the future homes to have established grass in the full build -out so "Good" and "Fair" conditions were selected. However we have revised the existing model to show similar "Fair" conditions similar to that in the proposed model. This will give conservative assumptions for the future condition. 9. Future building sites can be limited by impervious surface assumptions though developers agreement. Previous submittal claimed 5,450 sf impervious per lot. Recommend conservative impervious assumptions provide flexibility to allow for future expansion. The applicant feels comfortable that 5,450 SF of impervious surface per lot is sufficient for the development. Reducing impervious area will help protect trees and other natural topographic features which has been a priority of the applicant and land owner. 10. Model results contain a significant continuity error. Correct this error. a. This may be a result of the model duration, time step or improper routing. Model duration has been extended to shout/ equal volumes. The net changes were very minimal and still below the existing conditions. We hope this letter answers the outstanding concerns. Additionally, we have a few items that have been discussed previously in our memo to you that are pretty important to us for the development. We would like to have the City staff weigh in on these items as they greatly impact our development. Item 7 requests B618 curb and gutter only. Our plans propose to use 8618 curb and gutter in most locations throughout the development Including the north side of the new road and the cul-de-sac, however, we are proposing a flush ribbon curb on the south side of the street as part of our overall storm water management plan. The storm water from the new road will sheet drain north to south over this ribbon curb and will be pre-treated through a grass filter strip prior to entering the proposed rain gardens. Pretreatment is required for the rain gardens and we feel strongly that non -concentrated storm water, pretreated by grass filter Ross einhw March 17, 2015 ,�s3 • strips is the best choice for this application. We strongly request the City to consider our proposed ribbon curb and grass filter strips on the south side of the road for the best long term function and performance of the rain gardens. We ask that the ribbon curb on the south side of the new road be allowed as shown on the plans and incorporated in the conditions. Item 8 requests a 5 -foot sidewalk be installed with a 5 -foot boulevard. While we can revise our plans to provide this sidewalk on the north side of the street, the Planning Commission noted a number of concerns about this item. Commissioners noted that the living streets policy would not necessarily require the sidewalk on a cul de sac such as this, that the drainage issues and tree preservation should take precedent over the sidewalk and that alternative designs be considered. We would like to discuss the need, location and design of the sidewalk with you or receive written feedback so that we can prepare a plan that responds to the Commissions noted concerns. Item 11 requests a looped 6" DIP from Blake Road through to the Southeast corner of lot 6 north along the property line to Evanswood Lane. It is very common to have a water main dead-end in cul-de-sacs in subdivisions. We understand this was approved by the City Council in the Morningside/Acres Dubois development in 2013. Installing a looped main between lots 6 and 7 would cause the unnecessary removal of at least 13 mature trees that all parties wish to preserve. We believe that we can show that the required water pressure can be provided as designed and request that this condition be removed. Our hope is that this letter, the revised plans and reports have addressed the outstanding Engineering comments as outlined in your memo. We ask for your support at the March 2e Planning Commission meeting. Sincerely, Landform Reid Schulz Project Lead COPY: Frank Berman Cary Teague, City Planner Chad Millner, City Engineer Ross Bintner March 17, 2015 m-� EOKIINN pn9� 3 FRANK BERMAN e•��aa wRoa�a BLAKE WOODS EDINA MN BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION HCINA, MN aFno ,. -ao. ,ta[a )•aver rRR �aa� rm a[vatw ntae e•nex ao[nxr o+nsw rw awr •tvarw � [Car rrgKtp FRANK BERLM r�•rM.srgomw �I coon / naame � roaaen — —_ J nen(onomo oo[w¢aao amuaRr FurF aeaaaer 0 1J+OJCa p O none v.0 ea.a w) tt+ cml[wcaaaa• ttr �ooura mmt 'no'n uRw war wrr ® tt1 oamanowweaamwr.w G.1 YIMta•LMaFlaglG CFa Rao ® [CwOxan Pan GI IIRICO-01gG1 wr elmm�m.ronwu raM{ YtCG e ® emF-+wnun euar.[.re q,1 Mf1111a1CIIC11WFNr1i _ Huai xmw ue o .-� � sw.O ta�lr�e wl '4��M q) M4aeI1CK11MeNKia[a q) MWiPRCIWwWa qA MWIQaRIWwlala lt.r 1MM®YCIIFaIar •wns ,m .ra awn[ n ` = 0 WqF WVr DK �[''„p �)'r WOlaMura0. K2bre WueON.ro /ur Mrmm. M•rp[ Lt] lllYaMWA1aNbA[ lelw4al M[ tI.1 WOIWlwlll! r _ fxlm[ a® O •[�.�%aswwr m. as artaem: ro rn mwwn rut �tgma arrwu[rtn O • atr i/r air oat m •-•,�tn��— Ia1a tie.—»�-. b` r mr wn o • srww vo. a am v.us mu aam• aao woe mrtn UM � �� �w `tV'p �'((��{� # of laWrru) Inn r_..`_ raw 'r �' a-axa•wan p��� �O� O Cr YF aVa blf � us Is r,aun) rF RRf wrlg4M W 14eala � ".:CO� m '°warm°” -ba"-' wua•raFmrone ' :."'�...�....""'°w...'...`. - •--- 'ma 0a" RMK)Nl2-C„YCOMI. WM a�1 �.wa ��e�. urx revue sew .war anerxare arab, nt aa.n m aa.m 831182015 �, tae � n..oa • L P, N D F O R M p • nror wr rF a�v[w n.a..lra � .. vwl�eRs M avla�e vane vNn: rlrYo t•e areal . F aamr •FCI] 11s CHMf Mre4RiFA[al Fih YMaYrI 11)Cre wa®0D.16 ®®® Orel[ WFC ~ 00 w anis eFwe M, II _� / I / I / I I I ' � I I I 3 I I I I " a -------------- -- EvAnw-1011 LANE - ------------`---- ; I , 1 , tei " n I I - �•`,_ _ _ vi.80 N86'66a6'F J,e.aa(y) an. •a• - xo.n, 's'.' - `_�_---------� �, r= i /, r --•-•-,o - —•- Ire;------�n�- _ I'', ;ii -------�» -- - 1 :, ' ---BLOC r-1------+-------�`-------�-------�`--------I-------� I NB!'66•ae-d I B a 9'J�(P) I I I I I I i I I I I I rau v.r uPe..�w � -mom ,a rr. •a .ern Ir� _ _ — _ _ .vr .we>. wwaw"`�*'mwn. n.rw.. •ctmws ,o na nra®eo I .. $ e T I AOAD ®---------- 01 NORiN f 16,owr00►e.6�N. CCU-, F" yeuf. 0. 40 so FRANK BERMAN 69f MlN•1®1..! P[aY. W94 —10PA— >R J- •vtiw��.rw.w.a+�ns REVIspN#2-CRY ,s o>narmis new,r•,w o ". wWr amen nieua•a am•n axon xn ma FRANK BERMAN --------------- rte- ------------ --- -4 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - - I I I , i BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION j EYAH:WQoD LANE - - - - -� - - - - ------------------ I j sr. ---------- 7-- o -V 45 aFEMM02-CrTYCOMMENTS m. GROVE ROAU L N D F 0 R M mmwhan Wow NOM I tel-, .. Twft 0 40 80 NEUNQ ma '-------------- - — — — — — — — — — — — ------------------------- - f I { I I I I I 1 c I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , w,v , ,c s •,Wcdm0. roAf Vm9 uu, fx rea ra,o.mm, um un n,ea.mn fwe r.a w v agile m,00 Pcavwmiav�.rse uomri�iu, *e ws f"mne,, rmh, 0.Ax/M9f[uM- Sm �•x rwwean i f ,.. O:n.3 = .._r., FRANK BERMAN MDNICIPALIiY �g1�G!'11 PR- =MW SNEETINDFJ[ REVISION #2 - d1Y COMMENTS OMB2015 F O R M mean �.... n av-mmm bN,bm � OCi9im/ �yy� ,...o,m.�n•,m .aa ,.eem,. rtcx+¢ c,rc�n � mlrn, NORTH 141ewwlbmY�OW. Couwomymft 0 40 M Slff.Ef NQ 4,0 --- j 1= ,---- ----- �-I ILL; I I - - - - ---------- I 6 \ `'— — — — — — — — —LANE J I1 -- ------------ ,--------- - �i; al I » I_74 a3' 1 Sw � --- - - Neaaa•aesO' I�° � —� IraN aaoo+a 3.s5Hv) +mmr�lwa n w.mcn r.o rs mmm, r.�a.wmm � ra..1r I I I `S ,106.110. az1d, i RSN aawo4 a' � ` G�..G!iS. .� �^ ...^.✓ar.. 4 � I ' ,.� I %4 y ` 11/N o 40 Io �• yv � _ v.ina IN 4! INv w.vN ,w.n. m,v�i reaw wry N•� .cc.e ca,a,a (00�iwv nc iw,+.m um� u M Ks�awrwo •u uaw mu A. I :1'. — -----_ •:ice i i�, I II _I I $I !_ 1 % ''- it Rv0� 4 I 1 I BLOCK I --- - - Neaaa•aesO' I�° FRANK BERMAN ® +mmr�lwa n w.mcn r.o rs mmm, r.�a.wmm � ra..1r I I I e_ ,106.110. az1d, i BLAKE WOODS NORTH ,.. SUBDIVISION 6OINA, MN o 40 Io v.ina � INv w.vN ,w.n. m,v�i reaw wry N•� .cc.e ca,a,a (00�iwv nc iw,+.m um� u M Ks�awrwo •u uaw mu I :1'. — -----_ II ii I I II I� II I; s.urn it Rv0� I 1 I S� �- rp.}•,,c aiR^ TYPICAL LOT LAYOUT �.•'~�: REVISION #2 - CRY COMMENTS .0sc&E 01182015 www Q I l I I l II I — I F O R M raesavmn .. :. ® +mmr�lwa n w.mcn r.o rs mmm, r.�a.wmm � ra..1r IILu4[ CEI�A I ,106.110. az1d, i NORTH ow , to YItskm. CallbW..Yoaap. o 40 Io - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I.awm ,:: I - ,. �R m,~ .•..,m m�,.a ,o.r�,o. Nx,�r. W,� r.. Np �, �M• aN� m.�.�. . «Nom.b.a,•, i— — — — — — — — — --a---7-------- i i mo I I I l oa n ! a i21 FRANK BERMAN , : . rnv_ ele soca N ATL ,1p I r/ r�aNf hGfnc T --- r__--- ----- _ j — — 'I .. r' ,I I, _ _ .. r..,.. ... _.._n / . n. REMION #Z- CTTY COMMENTS v BLOCK U!lt82015 I 1 F O R M I I r•smrwm " I 1 I {{ au,am ss ata••mmn II j i � i I u.,ss.aawam rnac mda+.N,+ ( I I I i � � ratxs um>mn i I I I i � r tcrNo l ' 1 1 1 j I I I i NORTH � Capwwt.rmdo. a ao eo sl�txn me i I r----------------- { l � { I - Ett I I � ji4— a\ --------`-------- aVAHS': ; FRANK BERMAN i� m: >bl EVN�T.vOW UM I�, BLAKE WOODS f� 'IISI N' �I SUBDIVISION 940 . ; FRANK BERMAN i� m: >bl EVN�T.vOW UM I�, BLAKE WOODS f� 'IISI N' �I SUBDIVISION w'm N70.m0 10080 lo1.00 Iolow 07.00 =60 101.00 Imld 104.00 104.90 109.00 10915 EOfNAMN hpnpmmlMM1 ..• v n 1m OmOflmMIY Tot E4i9�Of1 ® b.6m Is 06AOa E4mimpem,44Nmml lYR btlbmnm eE>:xm¢ morgan ' rmeyrrro. anon NORTH w1 Klg/m�m.l.kEit ���. �� • lhml myoudg. 0 30 60 S,EGTNQ a18 A STANDARD SAWARY SEWER MANHOLE SANITARY DROP MANHOLE y N - - - -------- CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK CONIMETE THRUST BLOCKS WWALE 4 t—n cmq LUNUKLIL WHO & CAMER Soo CONCRM CURB& . .. . ................ . ...---- HyoRANTAND GATE VALVE 1twxana HYDRANT AND GATEVALVE 74 =Z FLARED ENO SE01ION 240 FLARED END SECTION SANITARY DRO!!! MIZE, ,,/�HOUE 205 SANITARY DROP MANHOLE y N - - - -------- CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK CONIMETE THRUST BLOCKS WWALE 4 t—n cmq LUNUKLIL WHO & CAMER Soo CONCRM CURB& . .. . ................ . ...---- HyoRANTAND GATE VALVE 1twxana HYDRANT AND GATEVALVE mmuw� FRANK BERMAN BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION E�INA• MN L Nd Xv� L A N 0 F 0 R M SHMM 74 =Z FLARED ENO SE01ION 240 FLARED END SECTION mmuw� FRANK BERMAN BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION E�INA• MN L Nd Xv� L A N 0 F 0 R M SHMM ROADWAY SIGNAGE _ ROADWAY SIGNAGE _...._. __.... NODWE _._ .._.. _PIPE BEDDING _.. xoewF MJ:---.. xo i - -- -SEWER AND WATER SERVICE CONNECTION - - -- - N09G16 YI I�..., V�_L I 2 �'' rxnemivx TRACER WIRE ACCESS BO% nMa. a w TRACER WIRE ACCESS BOX .-.. N06VeE A RESIDENnALDRIVEWAYENTRANCE m NOSOMF m®m eo'ro�nv'.+xuur a-aKie-.pox a -mo -i vw�+ .:.nmu.nn N,avu :u�waow .ao-,n� .mwn INLET PROTECTION Nouur; FRANK BERMAN �wp>� xV C:PAl1IY T PRaecr A� c� REVISION #2-CDY COMMeM 0UM2015 wears ll�N:... Trt tuev rm ans�amn YY.�ywr,W®wl Wt YNlmvnl CIVIL CJNS•RU. ION ot1�ILs C7.2 .m. vwe r.nR+r A • owe: •SILT PENCE Y NOVAE CLEAN-0UTSTRUCTURE NOUNS SI b -b �STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN MANHOLE Y WVAE A ASPHALT PAVEMENTTRANSRION NOSCALE PJ.BN I a ELEvb>'ION v NOSEDOWNCURB NOSGYE A 24" CONCRETE RIBBON CURB •`� NDSCNE FRANK BERMAN BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION t=CHINA- MN REVMN 02 -CRY COMMENTS '-. F O R M .a6emE>.nu.o ie eu�mn sreq Esc eaamm� Nw.seawmw rrle rm.rn,r CIVIL CONS RXTUN DE -M. C7.3 �. VENICLETRACKING PAD No snit RAIN GARDEN xoswt BECTICH 'd -d' —d I , LlL CONCRETEAPRON xoscut cea..,u .ue � iTff�tllfFl1 BOUNDER RETAINING WALL no scnit TREE PROTECTION xo srxe FRANK BERMAN BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION E�INA, MN Cp R REVISIONC.CITYCOML+ Ib.m.unq . �mmeAww.0 Te warm r.orrl.a anon I 5 S.EETN6 lal0 �ZZ s Eat 0sit W � "23e•,i3dciecE33ii ! xi : P .; � ��! V �I 1. PRRWfM$ > �iit „r 1- i l}� �}moi =�m1� �lSljte t y � U � iffi e �1 di is 7.4E S � r fi}r i n fi ffi•, e t zi°i i 31p ! a �� 6{ ffi�1 it95 . r S iltjlr�t �i3�} � Y+g ��fid'Iti1= jj� V �I 1. PRRWfM$ ¢¢ t y � U � iffi e �1 7.4E S fi ' r 3�ita7•+�ffit ��3i�€Syay[x �iSilS1!% V �I 1. PRRWfM$ _—� --------------� SYMMW005 iA!"Et ; ; r f 5 ; - ( rr i rI F FA-wwoOD ROAD J — — —_ — _— — -- Ig I. mw ro.tn ua ew rrew.aawe FRANK BERMAN eal.ie.amlw .MiI.O BLAKE WOODS SUBDIVISION mCFNA. MN �ZZti w co AIM 9 Mill% is F s°iesa 7 ^ } Y YJ7 is.i Z ai 3 BEil illy gi lin (i% W i ie22ccE?ii"siie'?i: 31x3 M z. s LL zp� . x ..........:....x .. x x .......... x .................. x . x .. x ...... x ............ ........ .....x ................................. ............ . ....... ..... .x ...................xx x x..................................... ...... x.. .... . g x'�j x'�3 s P ga ams a SPPa $ 6e p sa;a�� �5 �3m"• a m mmo 9 3 € m <� g 3 it o»...o90 a A A14 Z39n 31 .. ... aF.«,»..» »».^.8 Apo ^ ^ ���a»aa5�a3a5a"i�a533aa3a33333333�aaa�a3�29i�3Sa��saa�3����Pe���$e9��ugnnsaiant#� ......................... .......................x .................... .... �yg�E�F��88$ga5;I,eea�a se�8ya88 Y m C G Q Q m m g a Q Q Q a A& a? 9 Q Q Q C Q 0 B H 0 8 fl B e e c c e m 3 2 2 x 2 2 2 2 B a ®0 Q e Q 9 6 8 g B C 2 8 0 2 A 71 ..-M A discussion ensued on the merits of the proposal including ceiling height. Questions were raised on if the figures represented in the plans were correct, and if the variance was approved to ensure that all figures are the same. It was further pointed out that engineering supports the request subject to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. Public Comment Chair Platteter asked if anyone would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Olsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Scherer stated she supports the project as presented. Commissioner Forrest said she agrees adding this is the time to "fix" the flood plain issue. Forrest also commented in this day and age an 8 -foot ceiling height is not unreasonable or excessive; adding the Commission has viewed and approved projects with higher ceilings. Motion Commissioner Olsen moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Commissioner Forrest offered an amendment to the motion stipulating that all figures match. Commissioner Schroeder commented that an easy way to ensure compliance is to stipulate that the first floor building elevation be met as established by staff. Commissioners Olsen and Scherer accepted those amendments. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Olsen, Carr, Forrest Platteter. Nays; Lee and Hobbs. Motion carried. C. Subdivision. Frank Berman. 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane and 5320 & 5324 Blake Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that Frank Berman is proposing to combine and subdivide his properties at 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane, and 5320 and 5324 Blake Road seven lots. The existing home at 5331 Evanswood Lane would remain, and the home at 5324 Blake Road would be removed. The other two parcels are vacant. The applicant proposes to construct a 24 -foot wide cul-de-sac off Blake Road within a 40 -foot right-of- way. Two lots would access of Evanswood Lane, and the remaining five off the new road. The applicant has attempted to minimize tree loss and address drainage issues in the area by locating the roadway along the north lot line, and the stormwater retension areas along the street. Planner Teague noted that to accommodate the request preliminary plan approval isis required. i 5 *7 Continuing, Teague explained that all seven of the proposed lots meet the City's minimum lot size requirements. Minimum lot size, width and depth is determined by the median of all lots within 500 feet of the subject property. Based on the surveyors calculation of the medians, the minimum lot size is 21,842 s.f. in size; 166.4 feet in depth; and 120.8 feet in width. Concluding, Teague stated that the city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and does have some concern given the existing drainage issues in this neighborhood. The stormwater system downstream is over capacity. The applicant will be required to meet all minimum Minnehaha Creek Watershed district standards, as they are the regulatory authority in Edina in regard to grading and drainage. There shall be no increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. Teague further stated that at the time of this report, the issues raised by engineering have not been met. If the applicant has not addressed by the time of the meeting, staff would recommend continuing action on this request to the next Planning Commission meeting. Ross Bintner, from the engineering department will be at the Planning Commission meeting to discuss any revised plan that is submitted, and the issues regarding the proposal. Teague also stated since interested residents may be present to address the proposed subdivision that the public hearing be opened this evening to allow testimony and left open so that testimony could continue to the tabled meeting date per engineering recommendation. Appearing for the Applicant Kendra Lyndahl Discussion Commissioners acknowledged the recommendation from the engineering department to table the request until drainage issues are resolved; however offered the following: Commissioner Carr asked Planner Teague if the recently approved Tree Preservation Ordinance would apply to this subdivision. Planner Teague responded that he believes so, adding the Tree Preservation Ordinance goes into effect on July I, 2015. Teague further noted that the applicant is very mindful of the trees on the site. Commissioner Scherer stated that while she understands the significance of Edina promoting "Living Streets" in this instance drainage concerns have been identified and in her opinion a sidewalk just adds more hard surface; reiterating engineering has requested that this request be tabled until all parties reach an agreement. Chair Platteter said he agrees with that comment, adding he's a huge proponent of sidewalks, however, when drainage issues are identified additional hard surface could exacerbate the issue. Applicant Comments Ms. Lyndahl told the Commission the property owner generally supports the conditions of approval. Continuing Ms. Lyndahl said that their first priority was tree preservation and second; creating a project r6 � �Z3 that complies with city ordinances. Concluding, Lyndahl stated they would work with engineering on resolving the drainage issues prior to the next meeting. Commissioner Carr pointed out that the sidewalk was considered in the engineers review, adding if engineering finds that drainage can be managed (with sidewalk) she would be in favor of the sidewalk. Concluding, Carr stated she encourages sidewalks for Edina. A brief discussion ensued on the proposed location of the sidewalk with Commissioners suggesting that the sidewalk may work better on the north side; not south as proposed. Commissioners asked Mr. Bintner if he believes the drainage issues can be resolved. Mr. Bintner responded he believes so; however, at this time the issues are still unresolved. Commissioner Forrest asked when the subdivision project goes before the Watershed District. Mr. Bintner responded the Watershed District hears the request between preliminary and final review. Commissioner Hobbs suggested if the project moves forward with a sidewalk that the sidewalk could be constructed with pervious materials, reducing drainage impact. Public Comment Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. The following spoke expressing reservations on the 7 -lot subdivision proposal: Rebecca Wallin, 6208 Parkwood Road. Charles Gits, 5311 Evanswood Lane. Olaf Minge, 5225 Evanswood Lane. Amy Minge, 5225 Evanswood lane Chris Johnson, 5308 West Highwood Drive. Chair Platteter commented that since the recommendation is to table the subdivision request until the next meeting of the Planning Commission the public hearing will remain open. Motion Commissioner Carr moved to table the request for preliminary plat for Frank Berman 5321 & 5331 Evanswood Lane and 5320 & 5324 Blake Road to the March 11, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. r 7 Legend Existing --•- Future .... Future ..•• Future .. Future Sidewalk State -Aid Sidewalk Active Routes City Sidewalk Nine Mlle Creek To School Sidewalk Regional Trail N. City of Edina + 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Sidewalk Facilities �,++ Living Streets Policy Introduction Living streets balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The Living Streets Policy defines Edina's vision for Living Streets and the principles and plans that will guide implementation. The Living Street Policy ties directly to key community goals outlined In the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include safe walking, bicycling and driving, reduced storm water runoff, reduced energy consumption, and promoting health. The Living Streets Policy also compliments voluntary City initiatives such as the "do.town" effort related to community health, and the Tree City USA and the Green Step Cities programs related to sustainability. In other cases, the Living Street Policy will assist the qty in meeting mandatory requirements set by other agencies. For example, the Living Streets Policy will support the CWs Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan which addresses mandates established under the Clean Water Act. The Living Streets Policy provides the framework for a Living Streets Plan. The Living Streets Plan will address how the Policy will be implemented by providing more detailed Information on street design, traffic calming, bike facilities, landscaping and lighting, as well as best practices for community engagement during the design process. Lastly, existing and future supporting plans such as the Bicycle Plan, Active Routes to Schools, Sidewalk Priority Plan and the Capital Improvement Pian will help to identify which projects are priorities with respect to this Poky. Living Streets Vision Edina is a place where... • Transportation utilizing all modes Is equally safe and accessible; • Residents and families regularly choose to walk or bike; • Streets enhance neighborhood character and community identity; • Streets are safe, inviting places that encourage human interaction and physical activity; • Public policy strives to promote sustainability through balanced infrastructure investments; • Environmental stewardship and reduced energy consumption are pursued In public and private sectors alike; and • Streets support vibrant commerce and add to the value of adjacent land uses. Living Streets PrimVes The following principles will guide implementation of the Living Streets Policy. The City will incorporate these principles when planning for and designing the local transportation network and when making public and private land use decisions. k7c All Users and All Modes The City will plan, design, and build high quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users (pedestrians, cyclists, children, elderly, and disabled) while enhancing safety and convenience for all users, and providing access and mobility for all modes. Connectivity + The City will design, operate, and maintain a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel. • The City will seek opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation. This includes preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way, and adding new rights-of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. • The City will prioritize non -motorized improvements to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas. • The City will require new developments to provide Interconnected street and sidewalk networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development. • Projects will include -consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, In order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. IAgo ication • The City will apply this Living Streets Policy to all street projects including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation, or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also includes privately built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails. • The City will act as an advocate for Living Street principles when a local transportation or land use decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency. • Living Streets may be achieved through single projects or incrementally through a series of smaller Improvements or maintenance activities over time. • The City will draw on all sources of transportation funding to implement this Policy and actively pursue grants, cost sharing opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable. • All City departments will support the vision and principles outlined in the Policy in their work. Exceotions Living Streets principles will be included in all street construction, reconstruction, repaving, and rehabilitation projects, except under one or more of the conditions listed below. City staff will document proposed exceptions as part of the project proposal. 2 107 Exceptions: • A project involves only ordinary maintenance activities designed to keep assets in serviceable condition, such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repair, concrete joint repair, or pothole filling, or when interim measures are implemented on a temporary detour. Such maintenance activities, however, shall consider and meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. • The City exempts a project due to an excessively disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, walkway, or transit enhancement as part of a project. • The City determines that the construction is not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants or native vegetation, wetlands, or other critical areas. Des' n The City will develop and adopt guidelines as part of the Living Streets Plan to direct the planning, funding, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of new and modified streets, sidewalks, paths and trails. The guidelines will allow for context -sensitive designs. The City's design guidelines will: • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared -use pathways on all arterial and collector streets and on local connector streets as determined by context. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid -block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. The design guidelines in the Living Streets Plan will be incorporated into other City plans, manuals, rules, regulations, and programs as appropriate. As new and better practices evolve, the City will update the Living Streets Plan. Context Sensitivity Although many streets look more or less the same, every street is a unique combination of its neighborhood, adjacent land uses, natural features, street design, users, and modes. To accommodate these differences, the City will: • Seek input from stakeholders; • Design streets with a strong sense of place; • Be mindful of preserving and protecting natural features, such as waterways, trees, slopes, and ravines; Be mindful of existing land uses and neighborhood character; and A71� Coordinate with business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts. Benchmarks and Performance Measures The City will monitor and measure its performance relative to this Policy. Benchmarks demonstrating success Include: • Every street and neighborhood Is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling; • Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely; • Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably; • An active way of life is available to all; • There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries; • No unfiltered street water flows into local waterways; storm water volume Is reduced; and • Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. The City will draw on the following data to measure performance. Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy is implemented. • Number of crashes or transportation -related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post -project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Speed statistics of vehicles on local streets. Implementation The goal of this Policy is to define and guide the implementation of Living Streets principles. Several steps still need to be taken to reach this goal. The first step will be to develop a Living Streets Plan to guide the implementation of the Policy. The Plan will: • Identify and Implement standards or guidelines for street and intersection design, universal pedestrian access, transit accommodations, and pedestrian crossings; • Identify and implement standards or guidelines for streetscape ecosystems, including street water management, urban forestry, street furniture, and utilities; • Identify regulatory demands and their relationship to this Policy (ADA/PROWAG, MPCA, MNMUTCD, MnDOT state aid, watershed districts); • Define the process by which residents participate in street design and request Living Streets improvements; and • Define standards for bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to ensure access to key public, private and regional destinations. 4-? 4 Additional implementation steps include: • Communicate this Policy to residents and other stakeholders; educate and engage on an ongoing basis; • Update City ordinances, engineering standards, policies and guidelines to agree with this Policy; • Inventory building and zoning codes to bring these into agreement with Living Streets principles as established by this Policy; • Update and document maintenance policies and practices to support Policy goals; • Update and document enforcement policies and practices to ensure safe streets for all modes; • Incorporate Living Streets concepts in the next circulation of the City's general plans (Comprehensive Plan, Bicycle Plan, Active Routes to School Plan, etc.); • Incorporate Living Streets as a criteria when evaluating transportation priorities In the Capital Improvement Pian (CIP); • Review and update funding policies to ensure funding sources for Living Streets projects; and • Coordinate with partner jurisdictions to achieve goals in this Policy. ��6 Cary Teague From: Joan Bonello <joanbonello@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:30 AM To: Cary Teague; Edina Mail Subject: Blake Woods Subdivision Mr. Teague, I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed Blake Woods Subdivision project. My husband and I live on Westwood Court (6312). Our backyard abuts the Berman property on the northwest corner. am concerned about the effects of development on the water table in the neighborhood. We recently completed a fairly large and expensive landscaping project in our back yard which included removal of large mounts of buckthorn and replacement with more desirable species. During periods of ground saturation, as we saw last summer with large rainfalls, the south portion of our yard becomes flooded. Our neighbors south of us also experienced flooding and water in their basement last summer. The water table is very high already and building on seven new lots and the addition of a new street will create significant run off of storm water. I attended the meeting with Landform on February 3rd at Highlands Elementary School. Reid Schulz presented the project to neighbors and answered questions. I know there are some plans for water management put forth by Landform, however I would like to make sure the city is also looking at this issue and has done due diligence to ensure the plans for water management are adequate. I would like to know how the city is planning on ensuring that this new development will not create problems with flooding and groundwater issues for the existing neighbors. Will the neighbors have support from the city to resolve any water management issues that may arise post development? Please consider the existing ground water issues in our neighborhood and the effect this new development will have on existing water table levels. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joan and Robert Bonello 6312 Westwood Court Edina, MN 55436 952-926-9057 Cary Teague From: charlesj.gits@ubs.com Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:21 AM To: Ross Bintner Cc: Cary Teague; Charlie Gerk Subject: 5311 Evanswood Ln/ Blake Woods Subdivision —resending my 1/29 email here in better format Attachments: Legal Disclaimer.txt Ross Thanks again for spending the time answering some of my questions about the impact on our home at 5311 Evanswood Ln from the proposed sub division. I'm sending you this email and copying Mr. Gerk and Mr. Teague at your suggestion. I will briefly recall our conversation here. We built and moved into our house 15 yrs. ago in Aug 1999. At that time there was an existing water culvert next to the telephone pole running underneath the gravel road on the southeast part of our yard. In spring 2000 we laid sod and created a small rocky dry pond catch area in the south end of our yard and repaired our side of the culvert. Upon seeing the culvert Frank and Toby Berman plugged it up on their side and sent us a letter telling us we were diverting water onto their property. At that time I called and spoke with an Edina city engineer. He replied although there was an existing culvert before we built our home, there was nothing we/he could do and suggested we pump water up to Evanswood Ln. We then installed a sump pump in the dry pond with an underground hose that runs north and empties onto Evanswood Ln. (water then flows east, crosses street and runs south to Blake Rd sewer) I also have an active basement sump pump that is drain tiled into the dry pond and then this water is also pumped north to street. Every Spring melt, and after heavy rains our backyard floods, often with 20' x 60' pools that stretch into Berman's lot. (Similar to your attached screen shot area) Idle water pools are also created on the other side of the gravel road. The water appears to run west from Blake road and east from Berman's house and south from Evanswood Ln. So in addition to the sump pump running, I also roll out a 200 ft 4" hose with an extra pump to clear the water from our yard and runoff from Berman's side lot at these times. Sometimes it takes days to empty with two pumps. I have done this for 15 years. The water on the south side of the back lane (Berman 5320 and 5324) sits idle till evaporated. (Last spring green algae formed on the Evanswood Ln curb because we moved a lot of water) Our lower level is completely furnished with hardwood floors. It has never flooded, and the grass and trees survive after we move the water. However, as I explained to you, I am very concerned about the existing proposal. The displaced water from any house built on 5321 (west lot) will be more than we can tolerate. I can show you photos and I have plenty of history. Please keep me involved and informed about possible solutions and the project. As I told you, the first time we had heard anything about the project was when we received a 1/21/15 letter from developer Landforms about an open house. Thanks, Charlie Gits 952-933-5845 h 952-921-7920 w Charlie Gits Senior Vice President -Wealth Management UBS Financial Services Inc. 8500 Normandale Lk Blvd. #210 Bloomington MN 55437 (952) 921-7920 (877) 894-2418 toll free direct (877) 540-0597 toll free fax charles.i.eits@ubs.com http://f in ancialservicesinc.ubs.com/team/eitsoldendorf/ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Kris Aaker May 13, 2015 B-15-09 Assistant Planner Recommended Action: Approve the front yard setback variance as requested for an unenclosed front entry portico. Project Description An 8 square foot variance to accommodate a small front entry portico larger than 80 square feet in area of allowable front yard encroachment for property at 4504 Sunnyside Road for Karen Kelly. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the north side of Sunnyside Road consisting of a 2 story home with a detached two car tandem garage. The existing home is a Colonial Revival style built in 1938. The home is located within the historic Country Club District that requires a Certificate of Appropriateness through the Heritage Preservation Board for street facing facade changes. The project received a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Heritage Preservation Board on February 15, 2015, (staff report, minutes of the meeting and the certificate are attached for reference). City policy requires that the Heritage Preservation Board review all projects first that require both a Certificate of Appropriateness and a variance. The property owner would like to add an open front porch portico over area of the existing front stoop. The maximum intrusion in the front yard setback for a front entry portico is 80 square feet in area. Excluding steps and posts, the proposed portico is 88 square feet in area exceeding the maximum allowable encroachment by 8 square feet. The adjacent neighbors have a front yard setbacks of 40.3 feet. The ordinance requires all improvements to the home to be the average front yard setback of the homes on either side of the subject property. A maximum 80 square foot porch may encroach the setback. The proposal is 88 square feet. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single -dwelling homes. Easterly: Single -dwelling homes. Southerly: Single -dwelling homes. Westerly: Single -dwelling homes Existing Site Features The subject property is 13,184 square feet in area. The existing home was built in 1938. Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Building Design Single-family detached R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District The proposal is to construct a small front entry portico. Exterior materials will match throughout. Compliance Table * Variance Required Primary Issues • Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? 2 City Standard Proposed Front - 40.3 feet *8 square feet over 80 sq. ft .... maximum Coverage 25% 24.9% * Variance Required Primary Issues • Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? 2 Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit Zoning District and complies with all requirements with the exception of allowable front yard setback encroachment. 2. The porch is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and the improvements will enhance the property and not detract from neighborhood. The footprint of the home will not increase. 3. The improvements will provide a reasonable use of the site and improve on the existing conditions. Spacing between the proponent's and neighboring structures will remain the same. 4. The home improvement has been approved by and receieved a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Heritage Preservation Board. • Is the proposed variance justified? Yes. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: Section 850.0.Subd., requires the following findings for approval of a variance: Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 9) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. A practical difficulty is the original design of the home and lack of front entry protection from the elements. The 1938 front fagade of the home lends itself to the portico as deigned given the width of the original stone cladding. The design is in balance with the other architectural elements of the front elevation. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self- created? Yes. The unique circumstance is the inability to accommodate the portico within the front yard setback by just 8 square feet. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed improvements will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The footprint of the home will remain the same and spacing between structures will remain the same. There are a number of homes within the neighborhood with similar improvements to those proposed. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the Planning Commission approve the variance. Approval is based on the following findings: 1) With the exception of the variance for an 8 square foot encroachment to the front yard setback, the proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 2) The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it slightly alters existing conditions without impacting the surrounding neighbors. b. The imposed front yard setback and existing house location does not provide opportunity for a portico to match architecture of the home. c. The placement of the home to the front lot line makes it difficult to adjust the porch within the existing structure foot print. Approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: 1) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: 4 Survey date stamped: April 14, 2015. Building plans/ elevations date stamped:. April 14, 2015. Deadline for a city decision: June 13, 2015. 5 a .Fee: Itis the policy cf the City t6' appllcanfa for the actual tits legal Ork associated with ,the application. An itemized dill will be proWded d4Min #hirlr l4A� ��M APPUCANrs STATEMENT w '►. �=i__v. �. L. _..►.� t_ r ! .�_ _._r ► _.y. AL.- _._.s...._.� Lt.- IASL..-f._..Ir Apptiaatlrs signature Date pi,anning +Commission Meeting gates zstn April 8 22nd May. 13 11th June I Othj 24a July 8th Wd August 12 26th September 4 30th October t 4 � 28th I November 12 Thursday 5* December 9 23"" *subject t0 change I i i April 13,2015- Edina 3,2015 Edina Planning Cornrnission Variance Request for 4504 Sunnyside Road We are requesting a front projection variance � for the addition of a portico over our front door. The project has already been given a Certificate of Approval from the Heritage Preservation Board. The width of the portico is predicated by the width of the existing entry surround of Fond Du Lac stone, dictating a conformity that puts the overall area very slightly above the standard limit. A lot survey by Harry S. Johnson land surveyors will attest that there are no hard cover limitations at issue, and the forward projection is standard. Also included in this request is a copy of the original narrative submitted for the COA, and the approved COA. Please let me us know if there are any further questions. Thank you very much, Karen and BiLI Kelly karenlcelly7@comcast.net comcast.net 612/518-0340 4504 Sunnyside Road Edina, MN 55424 4504 Sunnyside Road, Edina 4504 Sunnyside Road is a Colonial Revival home built in 1938. We have lived in the home since 1990. Over the span of 25 years we have made some improvements to the house, but raising 4 children put our financial priorities in the typical order, with things like tuition and weddings at the top of the list. As the children have grown, we are presented with options that we have long awaited. We have decided that we love our neighborhood and want to stay put for another 25 years, if luck has it. Going forward, we would like to address some things with the house that we have considered for many years. The top priority is adding a portico to the front entry, which will provide protection from weather elements not only for those who come to the door, but also for packages, and even our mail, which has been subject to rain and snow for all these years. We have a have enormous respect for the Country Club District preservation guidelines, and have carefully researched historically appropriate design for the portico. The existing dentil molding on the home will be replicated on the cornice of the portico; the square columns and the interlacing baluster sections will reflect the appropriate Federal Colonial style; the stone used on the base will be the same Fond Du Lac as is original to the house, with Indiana Limestone as exists now for the steps and ground surface. All materials are specified on the architectural elevations provided. We believe that the overall effect of the portico will, in fact, enhance the historical accuracy of the home. Colonial Revivals quite often had these front porticos, as many of the homes in the Country Club District will attest. In fact, the Colonial home next to ours has a front portico, so this would "relate to the pattern of existing adjacent historical homes," as referenced in the Design Review Guidelines of the CCD Plan of Treatment. In the case of our home, there is an entry surround of Fond Du Lac stone, which dictates the width of the portico. Balance and architectural correctness would position it to be equal to the stone surround. This follows the Design Review Guidelines for scale and massing. To augment design integrity, there is a slight outcropping over the steps, which relieves the horizontal plane with an additional dimension. This mirrors the design of the facade of the home. Finally, in further compliance with the CCD Plan of Treatment, "if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired." As mentioned, we are long-standing residents of the Country Club District, and are very supportive of the intent and purpose of the Heritage Preservation Board. In fact, I, Karen, am part of the committee for the Architectural Walking Tour of the CCD scheduled for May 9', and will likely be a tour leader. I have also submitted an application to take a position on the Heritage Preservation Board, as my time will now allow me to give back to the community which has given our family such a wonderful place to live for so many years. Thank you so much for your consideration, Karen and Bill Kelly February 11, 2015 William & Karen Kelly 4504 Sunnyside Road Edina, MN 55424 Re: File # H -I5-2 Certificate of Appropriateness _ New. Front Entry Portico _ Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kelly: I am sending you the Certificate of Appropriateness approved by the Heritage Preservation Board for construction of a new front entry portico on your home. Be advised that approval is subject to the plans presented. Any changes to what was approved must be brought back to the Heritage Preservation Board for review. I thank you for your cooperation with the Certificate of Appropriateness process. Once the construction is complete, please have your contractor arrange a final inspection with me. l wish you the best of luck -%ith your project, and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, oyce Repya Senior Planner 952-826-0462 jrepya@EdinaMN.Gov Enclosure r 4 Pursuant to the requirements of Subsection 850.20 of the City Code of the City of Edina, no owner or contractor shall demolish any building in whole or in part, move a building or structure to another location; excavate archeological features, grade or move earth in areas believed to contain significant buried heritage resources, or commence new cohstfucti6h ori artypropdriy designated as an Edina Heritage Laftdtnark without a - - — - Certificate of Appropriateness. The Heritage Preservation Board reviews applications for City permits in relation to designated heritage landmarks. Criteria and guidelines used in reviewing applications for Certificate of Appropriateness are contained in Subsection 850.20, subd..10 of the City Code. Issuance of this Certificate of Appropriateness is subject to the plans approved. Any change in the scope of work will require a new Certificate of Appropriateness. A final inspection by the City Planner is required when the work is completed. File M H-45-2 Historic Property-. Property Owner. Proposed Works Decision: Conditions: Date: Joyce Repy2a Senior Planner 4504 Sunnyside Road William and Daren Felly Certificate of Appropriateness for a front entry portico Approved Subject to the plans presented February 10, 2015 Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map Page 1 of 1 http://gis.heimepin.us/Propertylprintldefault.aspx?C=472937.62950000073,4973989.425400... 2/4/2015 2ro..ro�rO°.I fl W-m Ponw .- o,NQN +Y/ -Av r i I � I civ wog go cn3on� moo L�' .^'y�� mm m M I �t��o ^. Z oic p{� $ m^ �g03 ^"g n rn v �cm 2r*iD^g 12.2 8991 2 opMo a.MPS xxi� J lo�.°$aa.^°. a moan poZ�$ d o+g tog��`�p�j�� 1 n v^Gp by p ^ v ®OF®��B®�' I ( • r �m�o�°' 3 $ i�e`2o3 m$�ia oho'^niS��o'n z�v°� m po9A I z I'30• co ^ ' lE o�mvd�p �O�'nv^� ^ -1 II- 'c" Q ��1V O'iN.i�O pp'O ap,^Ob =._.N �t/1�� ..>n o3og'�S$-oge g uW�o11 v -<12mg Q oo o�g m� 0>'c n a °F<roi.coP i - 3E 91 y� es n-i mQ zrn iff 410 pro 1 oo �- ,��� .ob fiv4 io ` i `c,' �O6 1 1 is use`s • o`ma �p� Gs����� 9'�ti �ose8.gi7'�Ip � 6` �' �' m>A v )1. LN-nN_gs4�,r88�g4 1" 10 mQid �•OtapI�KiC! I t ;%� $'O�Kc r •L r oo` 'tp6' ` 5 ``~ \�� C7�3 amp,L g9 l �• �y,GA nXn 89 9°.' `i O - i ayc�� 2 S2 pop $jam`. a��i,00 oa aoc �oo CaO 'oy J- ! N nasi] :on , O `'oa LaZ-ra�O g _, ch > to y= orp c q p = g01 gg q1 rri C4 O F$ R .l ti Arm, ) t lrli m i jl i� -,■� t— g ^0 e 4 M I ELI Pi I inl {�h�arho rn �-------------- m rte - 4 j U N EXCAVATE 1 i i{ A2 --oma-4' 2" �10 8'-8 7/8" t 10 4-2" 37c a 1► 1�t E Foundation Plan A2,,' Scale: 114"=1'-O" o I "Li 11 41 ' Ken ' Heyda Design, LLC DESIGNED FOR 200 Niagara Ln N Bill and Karen Kelly 1 , Plymouth, MN 55447 By Ken Heyde Design, LLC Lia# BC634662 e12.221-8ass Hwy% — .._ US14TH65t]FFK Az i EXTERIORS Fut.L HEIGHT AH6ff1 IT ME 4'-2" Bill and Karen Kelly 4504 Sunnyside Ave. Edina, MN 4'-x' J " I 3111� L I ear lip \ / � cV r 4'-2" l o 't Roof Plan_ Scale:1/4"=1';0" DATEBY SCALE SEE VI SHEETN nvm R EV _._.... DATE.... _ a i 1 1 Column Section AA3 Scale:1 /2"=1'-0" Mitere B Base "MOO in Sloped Root per roof plan 3141 Treated plywood EPOM roof Per roof plan Wrapped up Parapet Well and House wan 3141 Moo ding panel 276 tr OC Roof Joist 314" Treated Plywood Metal Fbshtng integrated into roof system Wall CrownParapet Cram and rnNdh7g to match Existing 5147170 Cedar 5140 Cedar 4" CONCRETE FLOOR 1x8 Cedar Exterior Boom 2-202 attached to post with t>a1 to beam nen 0111110 Column Framed par 1/A3 Column Sachs_ FA3, !— Scale:112"=1'-O" �I� 42" SB 702 CHAIR RAIL MP 0C MDO PLYWOOD PANEL SB 163 BASE CAP PRFJT 1X3 CEDAR RIPPED TO 21/2" MITERED CORNER SS 1250 RANCH CASING PRFJT 1X4 CEDAR 3/4 AZAK BASE 6" THICK METAL WRAPPED PARAPET WALL $B 48 CROWN P DENTAL MOLDING MATCH EXISTING ON HOUSE 1X4 CEDAR 5/4X10 CEDAR 5/4X4 CEDAR 1X8 CEDAR 5/4" CEDAR WITH ROUND OVER SS 48 CROWN P SB 702 CHAIR RAIL MP 1/4" MDO PLYWOOD PANEL SB 163 BASE CAP PRFJT 1X3 CEDAR RIPPED TO 2112" MITERED CORNER SB 1250 RANCH CASING PRFJT 1 X4 CEDAR 5/4 AZAK BASE POST ANCHOR BASE PLATE ATTACHED TO SLAB WITH ANCHOR BOLTS 21/4" INDIANA LIME STONE CAP FOND DO LAC STONE MATCH EXISTING 12" CONCRETE BLOCK W/ VERTICAL REINF TO CODE 8" X 20" CONT. CONCRETE FOOTING RE -BAR (2) Ken Heyda Design, LLC DESIGNED FOR ! DATE _ BY Bill and Karen Kell ym Niagara Ln N Y Bill and Karen Kelly Plymouth, MN 55447 By Ken Heyde Design, LLC 4504 Sunnyside Ave. R EV Lic# BC634662 612-221.6995 Edina, MN i k�.net Portico Detail__ Scale: 10=1%-O" ESEE VI SHEET# A3 DATE MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Community Room Tuesday, February 10, 2015 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was Chair Weber and Members, Moore, McLellan, O'Brien and Student Member Otness. Absent were Members Sussman, Christiaansen, Mellom and Student Member Druckman. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel was also in attendance lit. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Moore moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member McLellan seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES January 13, 2015 Member Moore moved approval of the minutes from the January 13th meeting. Member McLellan seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT - None VI. REPORT -S& RECOMMENDATIONS A. Certificates of Appropriateness 1. H-1 5-2 4504 Sunnyside Road • A New Front-En,Pi Woo Planner Repya explained that the subject home located on the east side of the 4500 block of Sunnyside Road is a Colonial Revival style constructed in 1938. The Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) request is for the addition of a new 88 square foot projecting front entry portico with a flat roof supported by square columns. A COA is required because the portico is a structural change to the street facing fagade of the home. The new portico is designed to provide protection from the elements at the front entry; and is proportional to the front €agade of the home - particularly the existing Fond du Lac stone cladding at the front entry which dictates the width of the portico. Ms. Repya added that a variance for the proposed portico will be required because the zoning ordinance allows a maximum intrusion in the front yard setback for a front entry of 80 square feet in area. The proposed 88 square foot portico exceeds the maximum by approximately 8 square feet in area. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes February 10, 2015 Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and observed that the subject home represents a good example of mid -20`' century modern architecture and is typical of colonial style homes built in the district during the latter part of its period of significance (19241944)—unlike the older Colonial Revival style houses in the Country Club, this house shows the influence of modern architecture and the federal government's design standards for new home construction (enforced by the FHA after 1934). Mr. Vogel observed that both the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment allow for facade alterations that may be needed to provide for "an efficient contemporary use" of a historic house, provided the new work does not destroy significant historic character defining features. Virtually all of the historic homes in the district have been modified to some extent and the primary goal of heritage preservation is not to prevent change, but to manage change—the standards do not require that every element of a historic building must be preserved intact. Mr. Vogel recommended approval of the COA finding that the proposed new front portico meets the following standards for rehabilitation: • No significant character defining details will be destroyed; • There will be no substantial loss of historic fabric; • The new porch will be compatible with the scale and proportions of the historic fagade; • The details of the new porch/portico are characteristic of the Colonial Revival aesthetic; and • The new work is reversible (if it was to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the house would be unimpaired). Staff agreed with Mr. Vogel's recommendation for approval of the plans for the front entry portico subject to the plans presented and receiving a variance from the Zoning Ordinance requirements for the front street setback. Applicant Representative: Karen Felly, Homeowner R3n�rrl Member 0"asti-n&I f nry�man4c_• Member O'Brien stated that he did not have an issue with the appropriateness of the proposed portico from the standpoint of meeting the Country Club District's plan of treatment, however he did question whether the HPB should take a stand supporting a variance request - commenting that he did not believe the board is equipped to evaluate the standards required for a variance; that is the responsibility of the Planning Commission. Planner Repya explained that the Planning Commission has asked that if a project in the Country Club District requires both a COA and a variance, the COA should be considered first, and if approved, then move to the variance application phase. While there have been very few COA's requiring a variance too, typically the HPB has expressed support for the variance when approving the COA. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes February 10, 2015 Member Weber observed that the 80 square feet allowed for the front entry protrusion Is actually not excessive for providing shelter - noting that typically a functional porch providing living space would require more depth than what the plan proposes. Public Comment: None Motion: Member O'Brien moved approval of the Certification of Appropriateness application subject to the plans presented. Member Moore seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. 2. H -I5-4 4505 Arden Avenue - Changes to the COA plans approved 3-11-2014 Planner Repya explained that as construction of the home at 4505 Arden Avenue is now underway, the homeowners have determined that they would like to make several minor changes to the north and south facades of the home. North Elevation: 1. The homeowners are proposing to add a wood burning fireplacetchimney to the family room located at the rear of the home. "The chimney is shown to extend 2 feet beyond the north building wall of the home, and will be clad in the same natural stucco and Miratec trim as the rest of the home. 2. The request also includes adding a small 4 -pane window in a closet on the second story, this window will mirror a window located beside it to the west. South Elevation: 3. The last change request involves adding a dormer window on the south elevation of the home above the master suite to add natural daylight to a small storage/play area. Planner Renva oointed out that while there are no changes proposed for the front elevation, the proposed chimney indicated on the north elevation will be somewhat visible from the street facade. The rendering provided is one dimensional which makes the chimney appear to be part of the front facade, when actually it Is proposed to be setback over 40 feet from the front wall of the home, and will not have a major impact on the street facing facade of the home. Ms. Repya concluded that she and Consultant Vogel compared the COA approved plans from March 11, 2014 with the proposed changes to the plans and determined that the changes are minor and will have minimal impact on the historic integrity of the house. Furthermore, no significant historic character defining architectural details of the home will be destroyed or altered, thus approval of the changes to the COA was recommended subject to the revised plans. Ms. Repya concluded that findings supporting the recommendation include: 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes February 10, 2015 • The proposed changes to the plans are minor and will have minimal impact on the historic integrity of the house; and • No significant historic character defining architectural details of the home will be destroyed or altered as a result of the proposed changes: Applicant Representative: Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes Mr. Busyn stated that Planner Repya did a good job of walking the board through the proposed changes to the plans. He added that the homeowners want to add natural light to the two storage/closet areas where the additional windows are proposed; and the husband has his heart set on a wood burning fireplace in the rear family room instead of the gas unit that was part of the original plan. Board Member Questions/Comments: Member McLellan asked if the chimney on the front facade served a wood burning fireplace. Mr. Busyn explained that the fireplace at the front of the home will be a gas insert unit. Public Comment: None Motion: Member Moore moved approval of the Certification of Appropriateness application for gree revisions to the previously approved plans subject to the plans presented on 2/10/201 S. Member Weber seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. 3. H-154 4601 Casco Avenue - Changes to the COA plans approved 9-9-2014 Planner Repya explained that on September 9, 2014 the original plans approved for the COA at 4601 Casco Avenue Included converting an attached garage to living space and adding a detached garage to the east side of their property. As the homeowners were firming up the details, they determined that the following changes would not only make their home more livable, but also enhance the architectural integrity of the project: #1 - Second Story of Rear Facade - Replace two double hung windows with French doors Changing the two double hung windows to French doors with a decorative railing on the second story of the rear facade is proposed to be consistent with the historic architectural style of the home. #2 - Attached Garage Conversion to, Living Space - Changes to a street facia fg acade To accommodate the increased size of the detached garage, the conversion of the attached garage to living space must be reduced by two feet to ensure that the building coverage does not exceed the maximum allowed for the property. The two foot reduction to the north wall of the home 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD ve `% CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # VI. A. 1. Joyce Repya February 10, 2015 H-15-2 Senior Planner APPLICANT: William and Karen Kelly LOCATION: 4504 Sunnyside Road PROPOSAL: Certificate of Appropriateness to add a front entry portico RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness Request Subject to Conditions INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the north side of the 4500 block of Sunnyside Road. The existing home, a Colonial Revival style, was constructed in 1938. The Certificate of Appropriateness request is for the addition of a new front entry portico. New Front Entry Portico The proposed 88 square foot front entry canopy requires a COA because it is a structural change to the street facing fagade of the home. The new portico is designed to provide protection from the elements at the front entry; and is proportional to the front fagade of the home - particularly the existing Fond du Lac stone cladding at the front entry which dictates the width of the portico. A variance for the proposed portico will be required because Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum intrusion in the front yard setback for a front entry of 80 square feet in area. The proposed 88 square foot portico exceeds the maximum by approximately 8 square feet in area. CONSULTANT VOGEL'S OPINION: Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and observed that the subject home represents a good example of mid -20th century modern architecture and is typical of colonial style homes built in the district during the latter part of its period of significance (1924-1944)—unlike the older Colonial Revival style houses in the Country Club, this house shows the influence of modern architecture and the federal government's design standards for new home construction (enforced by the FHA after 1934). While it is not individually eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark, 4504 Sunnyside has been evaluated as a contributing property within the Country Club Heritage Landmark District and is therefore considered a heritage preservation resource. The COA is required for alteration of the existing front entry, which is considered an important architectural H-15-2 4504 Sunnyside Road February 10, 2015 character defining element of colonial homes. The project involves construction of a new projecting front entry porch or portico with a flat roof supported by square columns. Both the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment allow for fagade alterations that may be needed to provide for an efficient contemporary use of a historic house, provided the new work does not destroy significant historic character defining features. Virtually all of the historic homes in the district have been modified to some extent and the primary goal of heritage preservation is not to prevent change, but to manage change—the standards do not require that every element of a historic building must be preserved intact. In my opinion, the proposed new front porch meets the standards for rehabilitation because: 1) No significant character defining details will be destroyed; 2) There will be no substantial loss of historic fabric; 3) The new porch will be compatible with the scale and proportions of the historic fagade; 4) The details of the new porch/portico are characteristic of the Colonial Revival aesthetic; and 5) The new work is reversible (if it was to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the house would be unimpaired). Based on the plans presented, the new work will be differentiated from the original construction. I recommend approval of the COA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION & FINDINGS: Staff agrees with Consultant Vogel's evaluation of the proposed COA application and too recommends approval of the plans for the front entry portico, as well as the Heritage Preservation Board's support for the pending variance application. Findings supporting the recommendation include: • No significant character defining details will be destroyed; • there will be no substantial loss of historic fabric; • The new porch will be compatible with the scale and proportions of the historic fagade; • The details of the new porch/portico are characteristic of the Colonial Revival aesthetic; and • The new work is reversible (if it was to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the house would be unimpaired). Conditions associated with the approval recommendation include: • Subject to the plans presented. • Approval of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance requirements for the front street setback Deadline for City Action: March 6, 2015 4504 Sunnyside Road, Edina 4504 Sunnyside Road is a Colonial Revival home built in 1938. We have lived in the home since 1990. Over the span of 25 years we have made some improvements to the house, but raising 4 children put our financial priorities in the typical order, with things like tuition at the top of the list. As the children have grown, we are presented with options that we have long awaited. We have decided that we love our neighborhood and want to stay put for another 25 years, if luck has it. Going forward, we would like to address some things with the house that we have considered for many years. The top priority is adding a portico to the front entry, which will provide protection from weather elements not only for those who come to the door, but also for packages, and even our mail, which has been subject to rain and snow for all these years. We have a have enormous respect for the Country Club District preservation guidelines, and have carefully researched historically appropriate design for the portico. The existing dentil molding on the home will be replicated on the cornice of the portico; the square columns and the interlacing baluster sections will reflect the appropriate Federal Colonial style; the stone used on the base will be the same Fond Du Lac as is original to the house, with Indiana Limestone as exists now for the steps and ground surface. All materials are specified on the architectural elevations provided. We believe that the overall effect of the portico will, in fact, enhance the historical accuracy of the home. Colonial Revivals quite often had these front porticos, as many of the homes in the Country Club District will attest. In fact, the Colonial home next to ours has a front portico, so this would "relate to the pattern of existing adjacent historical homes," as referenced in the Design Review Guidelines in the CCD Plan of Treatment. In the case of our home, there is an entry surround of Fond Du Lac stone, which dictates the width of the portico. Balance and architectural correctness would position it to be equal to the stone surround. This follows the Design Review Guidelines for scale and massing. To augment design integrity, there is a slight outcropping over the steps, which relieves the horizontal plane with an additional dimension. This mirrors the design of the facade of the home. Finally, in further compliance with the CCD Plan of Treatment, "if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired." As mentioned, we are long-standing residents of the Country Club District, and are very supportive of the intent and purpose of the Heritage Preservation Board. In fact, I, Karen, am part of the committee for the Architectural Walking Tour of the CCD scheduled for May 9th, and will likely be a tour leader. I have also submitted an application to take a position on the Heritage Preservation Board, as my time will now allow me to give back to the community which has given our family such a wonderful place to live for so many years. Thank you so much for your consideration, Karen and Bill Kelly CASE NUMBER,=I DATE I -ad-/15 EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK FEE j (nDt . c0 Planning Department 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952) 826-0462 FAX (952) 826-0389 Application for: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FEE; 600.00 $1,200.00 New House PROPERTY ADDRESS: APPLICANT: NAME ADDRI PROPERTY OWNER: 3140 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: ZONING: Z1.P.I.D.# EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Ir (Use reverse side or additional pages if necessary) IS A VARIANCE REQUIRED: ❑ YES 10 ARCHITECT: NAME: V.f�A, PHONE: - SURVEYOR: NAME: i PHONE: Sign PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda Item Cary Teague May 13, 2015 VI.C. Community Development Director INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Jerrod Lindquist is proposing to subdivide his property at 5945 Concord Avenue into two lots. (See property location on pages Al—A5.) If the request is approved, the existing home would be torn down and new homes built on each lot. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A6 Al2.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 77 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 10,028 square feet to 6,794 and 6,800 square feet. Lot 2 would gain access off Concord Avenue, and Lot 1 would have the option of access of Concord or 60th Street. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 10,028 square feet, median lot width is 77 feet, and the median lot depth is 135 feet. (See attached median calculations on pages Al and Al Oa.) The applicant made this same request in 2012. The Planning Commission recommended denial on a 5-4 vote. The City Council then denied the request on a vote of 4-1. (See attached Planning Commission and City Council minutes on pages Al3-A19.) Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the subject properties are zoned and guided low- density residential. Existing Site Features The existing site is a corner lot and contains a single-family home and attached garage on the east side of the lot. Access is gained off of 60th Street. (See pages A3 -A5.) Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single -dwelling residential R-1, Single -dwelling district Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED — Median 10,028 s.f. 77 feet 135 feet Lot 1 1 6,794 s. f. * 1 50 feet* 1 135 feet Lot 2 j 6,800 s. f. * 1 50 feet* 1 135 feet F variance Kequfred Grading/Drainage and Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and submitted comment. (See pages A24 -A25.) If the project is approved, a condition of approval should be that the conditions outlined in the city engineer memo must be met. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to Concord Avenue, and/or 60th Street. Sewer and water are available to the site. Specific hook-up locations would be reviewed at the time of a building permit for each lot. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. History of Subdivision Requests in the Area The City of Edina has considered several subdivision requests with variances in this area. (See attached area map showing this locations of these requests on page A20. Please note that the medians were smaller than the subject proposal.) The following is the history in the past nine years: .Requested Subdivisions in the last five years 1. In 2006, the property at 5901 France Avenue received variances to build four (4) 66 -foot wide lots consistent with the area. (Median = 9,269 s.f. & 73 feet wide.) 2 2. In 2008, 6120 Brookview Avenue was proposed to be divided into two (2) 50 -foot lots by Bravura Construction; however, the applicant withdrew the request before action was taken. (Median = 6,700 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 3. In 2009, a 100 -foot lot at 5920 Oaklawn was granted variances to divide into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,699 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 4. In 2011, the property at 5829 Brookview was granted variances to divide into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,769 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 5. In 2012, the property at 6109 Oaklawn was denied their request to subdivide the property into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,701 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 6. In 2012, 6120 Brookview was again proposed for subdivision. That request was denied. (Median = 6,700 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 7. In 2012, 5945 Concord was denied the request to subdivide the property into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 10,028 s.f. & 77 feet wide. 8. In 2015, 5825 Ashcroft was approved for their request to subdivide the property into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,790 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) Within the above mentioned neighborhoods, the median lot size was smaller than the subject subdivision area. The median lot sizes in these other areas were typically less than 7,000 square feet and lot width was 50 feet. The median in this neighborhood is 10,028 square feet and 77 feet wide. Primary Issue • Are the findings for a variance met? No. Staff believes that the findings for a Variance are not met with this proposal. Per state law and the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: a) Will the proposal relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with the ordinance requirements? No. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes that the property already has reasonable use with a single family home that complies with all minimum lot size requirements. It is the same size as the adjacent lot to the east. (See page A2 and A21.) Additionally, while the proposed lots would be similar in size to the lots to the north, they would however, be much smaller than the lots to the west, south and east. (See pages A2 and A21 -A22.) These lots all far exceed the proposed lot width of 50 feet and lot area of 6,794 and 6,800 square feet. Because these lots are larger, the median lot area and width in this neighborhood is larger than the areas that had previous requests for subdivisions. (See previous pages.) Given the difference in the median lot size in this instance, it cannot be compared to subdivisions that have been approved in the past with far less median lot sizes. For instance, this proposed subdivision is very different than the subdivision just approval, two blocks to the north on Ashcroft. The median width was 50 feet at 5825 Ashcroft; while the median width here is 77 feet. The median lot area was 6,790 square feet at 5825 Ashcroft, while the median lot area here is 10,028 square feet. The adjacent lots on Ashcroft were all 50 -feet wide; the adjacent lots here are similar in size to the existing lot. (See page A2.) There are three lots on this block that are similar oversized lots that have developed by combining two 50 -foot lots. (See page A2 and A21.) The action or request by the applicant to subdivide the property causes the practical difficulty. The request to subdivide the lot causes the need for the variances; therefore the practical difficulties are self-created. Applicant does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner prohibited by the zoning ordinance. The Subject Property is only 3,566 square feet larger than the required minimum lot size. The proposed lots which are approximately 32% below the minimum lot size requirement are not reasonable. b) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? .19 The condition of this oversized lot is not unique to this neighborhood. There are three lots to the east that are the same size as the subject property. While the lots to the west and south are smaller than the subject lot, they are much larger than the proposed new lots. (See page A21.) Again, this is a self-created hardship or practical difficulty caused by the applicant's request to subdivide. The circumstances are self-created due to the request to subdivide the property. C) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Yes. To subdivide this corner lot into 50 -foot wide lots, it could alter the essential character of the intersection of 60th and Concord. Each lot on the corner is currently larger than the proposed 50 foot wide and 6,800 square foot lot. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed two lot subdivision of 5945 Concord Avenue and the lot width variances from 77 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 10,028 square feet to 6,794 and 6,800 square feet. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The Subject Property is a conforming single-family residential lot with a new single-family house and has a taxable market value of $319,700. Reasonable use of the property exists today. 2. The proposed variances are not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance which is to require nonconforming lots in common ownership to be developed as a single parcel. 3. There are no practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance standards. The applicant does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner prohibited by the zoning ordinance. The Subject Property is only 3,566 square feet larger than the required minimum lot size. The proposed lots which are approximately 32% below the minimum lot size requirement are not reasonable. 4. The practical difficulty alleged by the applicant's proposal to subdivide the property is self-created. 5. The need for the variance is created only by Applicant's desire to maximize the return on its investment. Such economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. 6. There are no circumstances unique to the Subject Property that justify granting multiple variance to enable the Applicant to create nonconforming lots. The Subject Property is similar in size to several lots to the east. Deadline for a City Decision: August 5, 2015 G 3 City of Edina sdot sdoo lQ0/ loony Nor l�! bb Eta we x06 E10D Swrmuud1i64 Nave Number adotdolt f do't i don Labels stn ro > 561rr IY ro Lau Nowa, Number Labels ase a seri r- tMa 3 Labels _. !tri Sm .. Creeks -Sol-s617 stir Lake Memel SW am tett _ .. lift 5601 Lakes Q Perks awsrw Spo O percers v!1 3601 HOe 44»1do3ItH 7S -I S9&1 KIO l._. / wr- SSbt 191i acro SM »N SF1 A 4132 1 ro 02 ! 7 C d 5920 5907 1 3GKVGLMtB" sus » » doss Sm ms002/ , Saw t H3. 48011732 >2f 41ri 4r11 11r 7141 Ido 4180 SSYZ do1J 24 »4o 46 461 4800 ON 4M4121 YID 4116 711 Irat 101 Sss! -wit-W,- st2a 'sMS;I eeN aer,.p1431 »t! liar lflo vitt SOMSTre 1111 411, 47/7 600041H tYb IIH Ie21p/ 6661 Gab 666/ lab war on 6001 4000 pdo em OW 0064 ta» 8044 600! 6000 6603 8004 toes am 663 bot 4012 am - 60oi dodo Im 6606 eels 4800 Sm i dois dolt SIR i"Sn001?6012 � doll 663 ; bre bon ton aero 1017 and its 7141 m 6021 6021 doro fear 6020 0021 dodo 260 4806 Yy� 111Ow 0020 ea6s 0016 6025 8021 6015 4801 4YriY/b � 4144 Irtl t1 0021 lS 6036 on 51119lq 700 6106 t am 1 Etta 6112 at" amort 4106 Hdo _ 24 H t011 +bra 4104 f ro HH aide ilii Hb aro4 #for tido H16 a/u Olaf am ern 41la 4� 1806 1701 arcs era am 1500 6125 6114 Hat site 4101 03100631 lR Hdo Ha aids 416 6126 We Hae HH « H21 Y�wau. MW s. 1Crlaane6]ltl 6NI en1 Hla 6fa t3q �g1�1Ar PID:1902824310101 3 O 5945 Concord Ave` s(y 55424 ,2 Edina, MN f .yy iJ4 3 City of Edina u 99TN67W "�'��; ��tY�•i hFtiva 3943 Sallsisdnp Ite6sa tamltier 6901 SAM 3901 ssoF Labels 3903 5901 a9as seal tkw" IUM& r Labels !beet flims Labets s969 s96s s9a9 590e C", UsatF ON utt 61113 JIMJIMLaNflem0 391E 6etr 6916 59f7 Lakes garbs $021 3920 k a9n »u � E:3Panels 3c1166tOw �zs sus eau esu esu 4717 Ilia '109 1703 X76 66)2 aslz a9» z4 3027 3936 nc Sn1+o. e.t 6940 $941 4110 1113 4706 4701 d9l3 59N SON ;" ..., SSTIV 17/7 6602 '� 4709 h09 a 4761 6061 6000 6001 6290 6003 am 6003 6004 66N 6065 6009 0009 am 6009 6008 am am 6009 � A 0013 6012 QOn 6012 6012 6012 dap 2011 6017 4720 II016 4116 6016 sets 4112 602! 6021 1706 1701 Namu4.wea:aww.ep.yattl�0asmam a >� 6020 s. Pro: 1902824310101 !; „ `. 5945 Concord Avel Edina, MN 55424 ,tp • �A yl����'f� 3943 M r J _ v Jo ., I-V 44dd j114t., w r - _.» 1 . JERROD C. LINDQUIST 5945 Concord Avenue, Edina, MN 55424 Applicant Narrative My name is Jerrod Lindquist and I am the property owner at 5945 Concord Avenue in Edina. I have lived within our wonderful city for the past 20 years and at this current address for 18 years. I am seeking approval of subdivision/variance of my property at 5945 Concord Avenue in Edina into the original two platted lots, 5941 and 5945 Concord Avenue. My lots are currently recorded as lots 13 and 14 of the Fairfax Addition. I understand that this requires a subdivision and variance as the resulting lots would be less 75 feet wide at 50 feet wide, even as they were originally designed and remain shown this way. To approve the variance, there are four criteria, all which are met and are compelling reasons why the variance should be granted. Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. If approved, the proposed variance will allow for two 50 -foot wide residential lots. This is considered reasonable land use for this neighborhood as every other lot on the east side of the 5900 block of Concord Avenue is a 50 -foot lot. Without the granting of this variance, a practical difficulty exists in that the land owner cannot do what the neighboring property owners can do on identically zoned land, which is build a new home on a 50 -foot lot. This lot was originally subdivided into two lots and is continued to be described as two lots. Additionally, corner 50 -foot lots have been successfully redeveloped in the neighborhood within the last few years. As stated in previous staff reports for supported and granted subdivisions, the practical difficulty is that the subject property is double the size of all the lots on this block, which is the east -facing block of the 5900 block of Concord Avenue. The wider and larger medians are due to lots that are further away for the subject property that were divided by much later subdivisions. If the subdivision were denied, the applicant would be denied a subdivision of his property of which the lots would be the same as existing lots in the area. 2 Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. Among the 82 within the 500 -foot circular zone, this property is one of only four properties that is comprised of two 50 -foot lots combined and built upon with one house. This means that 4.8% of the properties are this size. Granting the variance will allow this property to fit in much better with surrounding properties. For instance, this property is twice the width and area of every other lot on the east side of the 5900 blodk of�gncord Avpue This is an extraordinary circumstance that this variance will correct: 3 Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The proposed subdivision and variance would meet the intent of its zoning as it would create two lots of similar size to that of other lots within this neighborhood. The proposed subdivision and variance would restore this land to its originally platted condition of two 50 -foot lots, which certainly is in harmony with all aspects of the zoning ordinance. 4 Not alter the essential character of a neighborhood. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The Fairfax subdivision and neighborhood includes a vast majority of single-family homes built on 50 - foot wide lots as proposed. 50 -foot lots are common to the area. Conclusion Yes, the findings for a variance are met. They are in line with previous variances granted and those previously supported by Edina city staff. Subdivisions of this exact type have previously been granted within the Fairfax subdivision and this application asks for nothing more. Sincerely, Jerrod C. Lindquist A7 4 i e I y � F Q Z t � —f [{ }fig i 1 t• � Q J lg d € Sf $ �d�a $ J41 3 A's 3 1. I W 4 i e I y � F Q 1 I 1 2 H i 1 ; $ Q k Z fn di Hit 8li� I �• `� ` A's 1. I W Z t U J ^ !LjL� 3 u 4 i e I y � F 1 I 1 ( 1 1 l!i i 8li� I �• `� ` A's 1. I o rV 1 t U c I 3 : I !ii! Jill u .., _._..�._._� .,--.}... +• -r _.:viriw a .—.1.,,3 i� I = •' I wM� r � i � i htc7C11+' (fllp7wa Nl(10S ----------- r -------------- Mom: 4 ---rsMn+s Nllflb' 6yoomoo Hinos � � t g jj 3 � 1 'fill �iai gR 3gt g9 Ag9 gn as gn gn jettgt�a R9t 3%n$ngsn�Maaya ar aanin#7Pnr$a as gs KAgn gR gA gn ai aRfinan g7 SR gk}n6$a Pga gan$gng/'gMj�.3jn}}i'�aa�RBNac%dOn Cnr��n t701ARdI{d.irllii�dndPil�dii�el3nI�ddddslaAi i�dA �l7a idi�}da¢ r #333133333333#i33333333iiii#�fi$ imuiiii �iii$i111i1 s a 1.1 fill', `lag..11111 ,-.11 � Mm 1111111 1 Jill 11 1 1 11,11,11H HIM i fli 1111 il 0111 !_....ten. wAagg3qn Gagagrnaq RnanaragngnnrnY9Y PICYIIrr..Anna...n 0a Oraranr aRtttaaa CRCr nn. ill I1_N m 2 � �� [_ lv� 3AV %NHOf 1Nr4 Y 0 0, N s _ N � � QQQ p mm fit Cl � (f1 0 O S�if e g T O p SS A m rw � i k HIM ltc� � z � . w to �mrnrn M R N N C4 ai N " �iai gR 3gt g9 Ag9 gn as gn gn jettgt�a R9t 3%n$ngsn�Maaya ar aanin#7Pnr$a as gs KAgn gR gA gn ai aRfinan g7 SR gk}n6$a Pga gan$gng/'gMj�.3jn}}i'�aa�RBNac%dOn Cnr��n t701ARdI{d.irllii�dndPil�dii�el3nI�ddddslaAi i�dA �l7a idi�}da¢ r #333133333333#i33333333iiii#�fi$ imuiiii �iii$i111i1 s a 1.1 fill', `lag..11111 ,-.11 � Mm 1111111 1 Jill 11 1 1 11,11,11H HIM i fli 1111 il 0111 !_....ten. wAagg3qn Gagagrnaq RnanaragngnnrnY9Y PICYIIrr..Anna...n 0a Oraranr aRtttaaa CRCr nn. ill I1_N m 2 � �� [_ lv� 3AV %NHOf 1Nr4 Y 0 0, N s RAV LdOaOM5v _ N � � QQQ p mm fit Cl � (f1 N O p OpH� N 1T O ((p�yytf ur m rw JORm � RAV LdOaOM5v 3AVOVOON09 rn m � Qi 1� �n,ajlva 5016 ;COL? sate I sate £6Ltr UO wr I Out ozrt� rr�rti N � � p Cl � (f1 O p OpH� N t0 O ((p�yytf W 1 O 0 � � in . w to �mrnrn M R N N C4 ai N " C4 SA a0Ci 00 m in U5 to IA 1A mmm m lfa to LLS Y5 3AVOVOON09 rn m � Qi 1� �n,ajlva 5016 ;COL? sate I sate £6Ltr UO wr I Out ozrt� rr�rti S/v o/t C)U31 / t i 3 3 1 l N � � p Cl � (f1 $C3 m � Op co N_ O SA S/v o/t C)U31 / t i 3 3 1 l Lot auras shown from Hennepin County Tak Records Lot Width and Depth as determined by the Coy of. Edina's de6netion shown k1 SedIQn.ON of the City! Coda. Lot infogriatlorrfraijierJnepin Cv"uillyt. c 1 '< . b z l f • ��,....++•dam .""'m.sar�..i+.��'^�-- LL LUQFLY7SWbl 4W9LVNLUNLJAW: AG&CLVANMAASDAM WDICONCORDAVE EDINA MH 55424 W 129 10655 10212 23 1402624.33.0064 WWCONCORDAVE ASMHASAN/MLSTOLTZHASAN 6008CONCORDAVE EDINA MN55424 75 126 9451 135.97 6808 t 5219.03624340056 6001ASICROFTAVE KIMLGSCHLENDEREfAL 60D1ASHCR0FrAE EDINA MN55424 as 2519.028.21-33.0066 W16CONCORDAVE ONUS LGRAUZEETAL 6016CONCORDAVE EDINA MNSS42A 773 120 922$ 6005ASHCROFfAVE EDINAMNSS424 2619.028.24-31.0091 S WASHCROFTAE KATHY LU -ANN ROMERO 5900ASHCROFTAE EDINA MN 55424 4&91 135.E 6790 , 5 2719.02E-2431.0092 59WASHCROFTAVE 291$028.24•$1.0093 SWBASHCROFTAVE WIRRELLBRUCEPEARSON W R LUNGB & LA LUNGER S804ASHCROFTAE EDINARN45542A S90BASHCROFTAE EDWA MN 6424 SD SO 16M 23SA4 6790 6790 SS 12428.21.34-W%S13ASHCROFfAE 2919.02824-31-0094 5912ASHCROFTAVE PAULJDONNAYTHREELLC Sft2ASHCROFTAVE EDINAMNSS424 SO 135.85 6791 3014028.2431.00955916ASCROI-TAVE JASONLABLEITNER S916ASHCROFTAVE EDINA MNSUN 50 135.86 6791 57194)26243140114 39MSTJOHNSAVE RTHY �&PACRATER 392DASHCROFrAVE EDINA MN SSW so 13&88 6792 t 3219428.24.31 7 HCROFTA E BJCRAT SWASHCROFTAVE EDINA MNSS434 SO 1l9 6792 3319.02&24 -SI- 118 S926ASHCROFT'AVE K M FISCHER & P C FISCHER S92MASHCROFTAE EDNAMNSSM 100 135,91 13515 µ 3419-028.MI-OM506ASHCFOTAVE LAVONNEJDUBaS SMASHCROFTAEEDINAMNSS424 SO 1IL23 4x798 594 " .• 3S 251-1211-24-U-011010 SPIOASHCROM RO►ETFRSON&TEPETERSN4 S=SF 0180AE EMNAMNSS424 95 Im 12820 3619-028.24340065 WWASSCROFTAE• VE MMFLOKOOWICH&MELAKOWICH 6000 FFrAVE EDINA MN SSW a5 135 11691 37 294111-24-34-M WGIASCROFTAVE J A SWANSON & L E SWANSON IKKAASHCROFTAVEEDINA MIN 55424 85 LISA 125M 3619.62624-34-0067 600BASHCROFfAVE HOPEHEFFELFINGER 60WASHCROFTAVE EDINA MN 5S4Z4 ES 136 11435 1�1 : "59.21 39194M24-3"= W12ASHCROFTAVE JOHN V HAAIM TRUSTEE GD32ASHCROFTAE EDINAMNSS424 90 136 12172 4019.0262434.00 6016ASHCROFTAVE SWANNELREDMAN OD16ASHOWFTAVE EDINAMNSS474 90 142S 127 4119-028.24.340070 6OWASHCROFfAVE OJCARTER&JMCARTER 6020ASHCROFfAE EDINAMNSS424 91 1S4 19842 { i 4219-02&24-31-0127 S9MASK2LOFTAVE M 0 KLEIN & S KLEIN S9MASK:ROFrAE EDINAMNSS47A 46.91 MA 6654 ' 4329-MO.2441-OMWMASHCROFTAVE TONIAGERST S906ASHCROFrAE EDINA MN55424 50 13S.d1 am 4419-02624.31-0125 S909ASHCROFfAVE DOROTHY KRONLOKKEN TRUSTEE SMASHCROFTAE EDINAMNSS424 50 11512 pOS �t3e 4519.028.2431.0124 S913ASHCROFTAVE WEUSFAR60BANKNA 3913AMMFTAE EMNAMN5504 SO 135.84 61105 46 MM-2431-OIB S917ASHCROFTAVE THERESA UOSKI-LANG 5917ASICROFTAVE EDINA MN SS42A 50 13485 SON #sQ'q, 47294211-24-31-M22 S921ASHCROFTAE JAMES DONSON S921ASHCROFTAE EDINA MNSSM SO 185.86 006 4J -1.V 4819-0262431-01215929ASHCROFTAE JJLEE&1LMATU5 S929ASCR%TAE EDINA MNSSM 10) 135.9 03613 4929.028.2431-01WSMASHCROFTAVE JC&MBWEIDNER SMASCROFfAEEDI NAMNSSQA 75 235.91 16211 Lot auras shown from Hennepin County Tak Records Lot Width and Depth as determined by the Coy of. Edina's de6netion shown k1 SedIQn.ON of the City! Coda. Lot infogriatlorrfraijierJnepin Cv"uillyt. c 1 '< . b z l f • ��,....++•dam .""'m.sar�..i+.��'^�-- 5019.028.24 -31 -OW 5941ASHCROFTAVE 8 R ANDERSON & S K ANDERSON 5941ASHCROFTAE EDINA VASS424 75 135.93 10212 5119.028.2431.0118 S94SASHCROFfAVE MICHAEL GROVE &MARY GROVE SWASHCROFTAE EDINAMN55424 50 135.97 6808 t 5219.03624340056 6001ASICROFTAVE KIMLGSCHLENDEREfAL 60D1ASHCR0FrAE EDINA MN55424 as 135 11549 5319-028.24.340W GWSASHCROFTAVE ANN LTORGERSON 6005ASHCROFfAVE EDINAMNSS424 83 136 11233 5419.028-24-34.00566009A5ICROFTAVE ASTALLMWN&WWTALLMAN WWASHCROFTAVEEDINA MN55424 77 13S 10466 SS 12428.21.34-W%S13ASHCROFfAE E&MBREKKE E013ASHCROFTAVEEDINA MN55424 7S 13S 2005E 5629.0MZ0400W6017ASHCROFTAVE SRERUNG&LCERUNG 6017ASCAOFfAVEEDINA MNSSM 80 136 10986 57194)26243140114 39MSTJOHNSAVE JPAWUCIO&EPAWUCKL S90RSTJOHNSAVE EDINAMNS5434 67 135.84 9114 {� } 59 IS QS-24-31-MlS SK6STJOHNSAVE 5919028-24.31-0116 S920STJOHNSAVE JOSEPHMFEVDN&WIFE PETER C MCCOMBER S916STJOHNSAE EDNAMNSS424 S92DSTJOHNSAE MMAMNS5434 67 66 US1f 156.88 9115 am 60390Q621.3t0015 SMSTJOHNSAE JEFFFVOKM.E/ANNMOMLE 6000STJONNSAE INNAMNSS04 10 116 III= µ 61 I"W3E34OM6=STJOINSAE MBRERANO&TOVERMOEN E006STJOMJSAE EDINAMNSS424 92 136 3208 6214@&24.34.009/ 6024STJDNSAVE RO►ETFRSON&TEPETERSN4 S=SF 0180AE EMNAMNSS424 95 Im 12820 • 53254W24-11"M6D12STJOHNSAE DOUGASSCHAFFiNICOLESCHAEF 8n12STJOHNSAE OXNAMNS54M 95 135 12758 6419.018.24-3300W0MVIRGINIA AVE ►J&CAMICHAESON WWVNMMAAVE EDNAMNS424 91 325 17426 0 19421144-334051 SWIVIRGINIA AVE T580WDEN&EHBOWDEN 6O04VIRl9NAAVE EDINA MNSSM 75.5 1443 1106K 66390Q624.1LMM 6006VIRWNIAAE 6729-021 4 31•0065 a012VIAGINIA AVE HHPAULSON&JRPAULSON RODNEYTOPT& KARd4 FETTI6 8MVIRGINIAAVE WWAMNS5424 6032 VIRWNN AE MM MM SS414 a" 78 351{ IN 1201 11563 W29A28.24.33-CM 800MWRGNIAAVE PL&LMWANDR9 $OOSVIRER4UAVE EDINAMNS5424 92 322 10582 0290Q6243340n SMOVIRGINIAAE ANDREWBEHM&KIMBERLYBEHM W0VI MIAAVE EDNAM NS5434 99.5 207 3068 )029015•3433.00/0 6013VIRGINIAAE CWSTEEL&LGSUK 6013VIROINIAAVE EOINAMNSS424 S&S 2W 93M 7139-078.74naR 47D1WMSTW DAWDO&MARYJNELSON 47MWMSTW EDINAMNSS424 90 12S U282 7219 -02624 -JIM 61 470SWMSTW BONNIETGUARI 470680MSTW EDINAMNS504 90 12S 31548 73 n4WM.830080 47O 1457 W C M SERER &J I MORINTRSTES 47W W WMST MMA M455424 86 225 31002 7419•)28824330049 471760TH 5T W R & 6 NELSON 4717 W 60MST EOINA MN SS424 90 125 WM 6oy 75 3902624.32.0034 4704WM ST W M D & K LGRESNAM 4704WTH ST W EDINA MN 55424 $3.71 12946 30796 M 19-0Q674 320035 470B60M ST W G S DORRIAN & KS DORRIAN 4X5 WTH ST W EDINA M N S5424 SL71 32946 WM 771942624.324 364712 EOMSTW MJTOKAR&JLTOKAR 47126 MSTW EDINAMNS54M SL71 129.0E WM V 61 781902624-37'0037 4716WrH ST W S W UNTON & KA UNION 473842113 ST W EDNA MN 5504 0.71 119.06 3070 7919.028.24320ov 4705SCHOW."D JOLR411MARCH&MARYCMARCH 4705 SCHOOL RD EDINA MN5504 85.52 120 10OP>f 8019.OQ8.2432-004647095p�O1R0 GICARDONA&APBERNAL 47085CHOOLRO �INAN9i�4T4 8352 32010= 8119018-2432.0045 4713SCHOOLRD RJCONNBL&HFCONNELLTR 4723SCHOOLRD EDINAMN5W4 BL52 12D 3002$ 8219-028.2432.0044 4717SCHOOLRD WJ&SKESSENDRUP 4717 SCHOOL RD EDINAMNSS424 83.52 12D 30024 TOTALS TOTALS 82 82 59OL31 10997 796883 MEAN AVERAGE MJ1N AVERAGE 72.E ULU gm Lot auras shown from Hennepin County Tak Records Lot Width and Depth as determined by the Coy of. Edina's de6netion shown k1 SedIQn.ON of the City! Coda. Lot infogriatlorrfraijierJnepin Cv"uillyt. c 1 '< . b z l f • ��,....++•dam .""'m.sar�..i+.��'^�-- Elm -- i�--- ---- --------- K SQL ,I j j i rwwlrlsr J 1 j 1 VALLEY VIEW. f av wrs �r.,e�. McProeM a�r..e mb SS fllwlawg4R r � ! w.vr�r.n. r �e:er.a.aeer. rw> frc .rr awaw.r.a.werw '�LS1AItltita a~ww�r a:'�'rrswr wsmwiraar�wc�o�i.iW�Wv rr1� GMDM PLAN LOT 1@Y arwaw �.rw � 1►WwnP a DieWfP r------------------ i 1 .ar TERRACE i I me DW*m w asw� w .I.awfrr� r � rr nvrsww tw rawrrf.ywer.n iwwiwaws�� f`.wwuif rr�alwr rraw'M s rwe. traerc I�an?nevvnerr rr�`er.ale.r.r. e rrw.r.rr Owrwrvrr.err w w • rte,. p.r w.a r.Irw. r...... arw.. rrr rw — rrraw r.NN. 4.IrYrallnearr.4e�/r? 'A-nfPX GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND TREE PLAN Jerrod Lindquist so4s coitiwa Aw. EEN+q MN 55424 NGTES: eWnerryAaaaa 4bcwMmw.6...,w Nrx neeanvfea.rner� Nw.•, ,wWT.afefa E«arvetax+e Gn•raaNn-Mf fBny. ba.Mq W gwa6 P D ]C4whslen-M1,IAW.LMneWI}aM! W rmWwn,M ruv.'maw,°�a nNw aLelMrWrv. air vnvNenwvaranwn.w TantsMaMP,epry+1?f4NW WN.o.y Mra.nrCaalYer•auR %% e.Mpaaeru.waiaf n.reP,e TNONrYfart W q M1M almr a.unpn I nse�t Mw. bMT 4n 4wfMpsrutl W wN•nAq TY. teoal oescriplla, Lar ITa. ti B4•i Rl`..P . il.•pviGom.l.Yaw�u. GRADING, DRAINAGE. UTILITY Atm TREE PIAN LINDQUIST ADDITION Fx JMod urww wl "" C—M Ave. E*M MN 55124 cEamrw110N aFMYiaMenwtllMnRe�wM1MTa.r�wewraeaC rw..arr..nrfr f.P..nrnrarn,a r+n.wa.r.wr. n� wrinr.wfrr. wrwNiwwwn.w«w. aw..annin+'�s r.sw gEAflPYm GO om 1@. :.o-C.'Orp 1?N YTIpA4e4wN e1190q?NafMnW. W 6.T ?wG.Y•ll!?M. Sheet 4 of 4 acwerNalO aPranrwnONa t fb]wlN...MriwasM OP•&1a.1. TM,r.,loe4YNPW MunMaa.f T. iMYre arentlaa MFrnaYYYaa..tMP11 Twee rr.taa J flucvat•rn..MG1YGN••p•Mspe.uA LwM?Oaaa4lYawo I ..UNern 1 /d1sA/5w Ise � v`r � � � rwlMl Cd/517e1GTldl NOES v axeAcrm�eesrAYsaaeauP�WtorN sYCVpIp. WL4i,, ...- • i, fav- ? MtlMu %lT 1HICi nw041pfelrTWCIYeN ...ry w�_ •� A ,1•-��� _'(Rr7`W`•\ C yy 2;--------f1 raeen'•'y '� -_� ��!, Y' jillT. ------------ -- �.Y �,' �' � .�'- �, 1 fWIECfAN/E?131RW'.%W1W[EYGi016W16 TNin?eLTNN1KNNCEnnRB. Y. N1f:11lCiWNe OMNEM1YIg10Wl YrfM1 nocrlwrmiW:naMWaEBtwPrtEAal9s GcpbwStm0ncCiA r �rW»a Elm -- i�--- ---- --------- K SQL ,I j j i rwwlrlsr J 1 j 1 VALLEY VIEW. f av wrs �r.,e�. McProeM a�r..e mb SS fllwlawg4R r � ! w.vr�r.n. r �e:er.a.aeer. rw> frc .rr awaw.r.a.werw '�LS1AItltita a~ww�r a:'�'rrswr wsmwiraar�wc�o�i.iW�Wv rr1� GMDM PLAN LOT 1@Y arwaw �.rw � 1►WwnP a DieWfP r------------------ i 1 .ar TERRACE i I me DW*m w asw� w .I.awfrr� r � rr nvrsww tw rawrrf.ywer.n iwwiwaws�� f`.wwuif rr�alwr rraw'M s rwe. traerc I�an?nevvnerr rr�`er.ale.r.r. e rrw.r.rr Owrwrvrr.err w w • rte,. p.r w.a r.Irw. r...... arw.. rrr rw — rrraw r.NN. 4.IrYrallnearr.4e�/r? 'A-nfPX GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND TREE PLAN Jerrod Lindquist so4s coitiwa Aw. EEN+q MN 55424 NGTES: eWnerryAaaaa 4bcwMmw.6...,w Nrx neeanvfea.rner� Nw.•, ,wWT.afefa E«arvetax+e Gn•raaNn-Mf fBny. ba.Mq W gwa6 P D ]C4whslen-M1,IAW.LMneWI}aM! W rmWwn,M ruv.'maw,°�a nNw aLelMrWrv. air vnvNenwvaranwn.w TantsMaMP,epry+1?f4NW WN.o.y Mra.nrCaalYer•auR %% e.Mpaaeru.waiaf n.reP,e TNONrYfart W q M1M almr a.unpn I nse�t Mw. bMT 4n 4wfMpsrutl W wN•nAq TY. teoal oescriplla, Lar ITa. ti B4•i Rl`..P . il.•pviGom.l.Yaw�u. GRADING, DRAINAGE. UTILITY Atm TREE PIAN LINDQUIST ADDITION Fx JMod urww wl "" C—M Ave. E*M MN 55124 cEamrw110N aFMYiaMenwtllMnRe�wM1MTa.r�wewraeaC rw..arr..nrfr f.P..nrnrarn,a r+n.wa.r.wr. n� wrinr.wfrr. wrwNiwwwn.w«w. aw..annin+'�s r.sw gEAflPYm GO om 1@. :.o-C.'Orp 1?N YTIpA4e4wN e1190q?NafMnW. W 6.T ?wG.Y•ll!?M. Sheet 4 of 4 � H C4 v v it ---i-------------r---------- ----� I'W I ra+rsrNw *� nia MINUTES CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS October 10, 2012 7:00 P.M. L CALL TO ORDE& Chair Grabiel called theetin II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were Scl Cherkassy, Carpenter, Staunton III. (APPROVAL OF MEETING A The agenda was filed as sub IV. APPROVAL OF um Commissioner minutes. Com carried. CSI to order at 7:00 PM , Forrpd, Schroeder, Kilberg, Potts, Platteter, aer d Grabiel. r moved approval of t September 27, 2012, meeting Staunton seconded the nXtion. All voted aye; motion A. Subdivision with Lot Width and Lot Area Variance for Jerrod Lindquist, 5945 Concord Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Jerrod Lindquist is proposing to subdivide his property at 5945 Concord Avenue into two lots. If the request is approved, the existing home would be torn down and new homes built on each lot. Also attached to the back of the report are signatures from adjacent property owners that support the project. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 77 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and Page 1 of 13 Ara 3. Lot area variances from 10,028 square feet to 6,794 and 6,800 square feet. Teague noted that Lot 2 would gain access off Concord Avenue, and Lot 1 would have the option of access of Concord or 60`h Street. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council deny the proposed two lot subdivision of 5945 Concord Avenue and the lot width variances from 77 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 10,028 square feet to 6,794 and 6,800 square feet. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The Subject Property is a conforming single-family residential lot with a new single-family house and has a taxable market value of $266,900. Reasonable use of the property exists today. 2. The proposed variances are not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance which is to require nonconforming lots in common ownership to be developed as a single parcel. 3. There are no practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance standards. Applicant does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner prohibited by the zoning ordinance. The Subject Property is only 3,566 square feet larger than the required minimum lot size. The proposed lots which are approximately 32% below the minimum lot size requirement are not reasonable. 4. The practical difficulty alleged by the applicant's proposal to subdivide the property is self-created. 5. The need for the variance is created only by Applicant's desire to maximize the return on its investment. Such economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. 6. There are no circumstances unique to the Subject Property that justify granting multiple variance to enable the Applicant to create nonconforming lots. The Subject Property is similar in size to several lots to the east. Appearing for the Applicant Jerrod Lindquist, applicant and property owner. Discussion/Comments & Questions Commissioner Staunton asked for clarification on the 500 -foot neighborhood radius. Planner Teague responded that the 500 -foot radius is found in both the subdivision and zoning ordinances as a way to establish "neighborhood". Chair Grabiel asked for clarification on the lot description(s). Teague responded that the subject property is identified as Lots 13 & 14, Block 9, Fairfax, Hennepin County, Page 2of13 A Minnesota. Application Presentation Jerrod Lindquist addressed the Commission and delivered a power point presentation explaining his reasons for subdividing and addressing the variances requested. Lindquist said his intent is to do what's best and right for the neighborhood. Lindquist highlighted the following: • Home was constructed in 1948 and it's not family -friendly by today's standards. • Cost prohibitive to improve the home. • House is functionally obsolete and not architecturally significant. • Legal description indicates Lots 13 and 14, Block 9 of the Fairfax Addition. • Believes the establishment of the 500 foot radius is out of date and was meant for other parts of the city. • A precedent was established by approving subdivisions in this area. • Current zoning laws were created after the Fairfax addition was designed, approved and build out. • Character of the "immediate" neighborhood is preserved and enhanced by these two lots. • Neighborhood support. Public Comment Ray Sharp 5940 Ashcroft Avenue acknowledged to the Commission his "lot" is also a "double lot", adding he recognizes there are those in Edina that are opposed to subdividing and the further redevelopment of these 100 foot "lots". Concluding, Sharp said he supports the subdivision request, adding it makes sense to approve this request noting it was originally platted as two 50 -foot lots in the 50 -foot lot neighborhood of Fairfax. Gary Dorrian, 4708 west 60th Street, told the Commission he does not support the subdivision request as submitted. He noted that variances are needed, adding he can't support a subdivision that doesn't align with the 500 -foot neighborhood lot size requirements. Jeff Johnson, 5825 Ashcroft Avenue stated he supports the subdivision as proposed and acknowledged his home does not fall within the 500 -foot neighborhood. He said Edina is a mature fully developed City with limited options for growth. He said in his opinion Edina is chosen for its schools, adding the new houses built on these smaller lots are almost always purchased by young families with kids. He also noted architects are also finding ways to build desirable houses on the 50 -foot wide lots. Concluding, Johnson said if one looks at the facts and analyses the area, 60th Street is a major divide between "neighborhoods". The lot and homes south of 60th Street are larger and Page 3 of 13 A I were constructed 15 years after the lots were platted and houses were built north of West 60th Street. Mary Lokowich, 6000 Ashcroft Avenue said in her opinion she feels that allowing the applicant to build two homes on these lots makes sense. Concluding, Lokowich added the two new houses would look better than one overly large house on a larger than average lot. Edina needs to continue to allow growth for families and this is one way to encourage that. Chair Grabiel asked if anyone else would like to speak to this issue; being none Commissioner Staunton moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion/Comments Commissioner Forrest told the applicant she appreciates his presentation and is not adverse to subdivision; however, in this instance the criteria needed to support the variances is not there. Continuing, Forrest further explained that the Commission cannot consider economic circumstances in the decision making process. Concluding, Forrest said in her opinion changing the ordinance is the way to proceed; especially in these smaller lot neighborhoods. Commissioner Fischer acknowledged the Commission has considered a number of subdivision requests in this immediate area with differing outcomes. He added this "immediate neighborhood" was platted with 50 -foot wide lots but "sits' at the edge of a change in neighborhood character. Fischer acknowledged one could come to the conclusion that in this instance the methodology the City has chosen to determine "neighborhood" does not measure its character. Fischer agreed with previous comments that the "neighborhood" changes south of West 60th Street. Concluding, Fischer acknowledged the applicants outreach to the neighborhood and the neighborhood support. Commissioner Scherer stated she isn't persuaded by the original plat to support the subdivision request as submitted. Scherer pointed out the ordinance was changed in the 1950's to require 75 -foot wide lots, adding that should also be taken into consideration. Continuing, Scherer did acknowledge the differing outcomes for recent subdivisions in the area; however, she pointed out this one is different. This subdivision not only doesn't meet the 75 -foot lot width zoning ordinance requirement it doesn't meet the median required in the subdivision ordinance. Scherer concluded she can't support this request, adding in this instance she is relying on the Code. Chair Grabiel pointed out that there is and always has been a stipulation in the zoning ordinance that allows variances so requesting a variance is permitted under Code and not unreasonable. Scherer agreed, reiterating in this instance she doesn't find a hardship. Page 4 of 13 Ai� Commissioner Carpenter said he finds this frustrating on many levels. He explained that the Commission has attended hearings where neighbors are very much opposed to a subdivision but in this instance it's the opposite; neighbors support the request. Continuing, Carpenter said it is difficult to know what the right answer is. Carpenter said what it comes down to for him is that he can't find practical difficulties to support the request for variance. He noted the lot(s) can be used by remodeling the existing home or building a new house. Commissioner Schroeder said he agrees with comments expressed by Commissioner Carpenter on the challenge of finding practical difficulties to support the granting of variances. Schroeder said he just can't find them; a house can be constructed on this lot. Continuing, Schroeder said he finds it interesting to think in terms of character, questioning if character is the plat; lines on paper or is character what one sees. Concluding, Schroeder added whichever way one views this subdivision; one lot or two this corner will change. Commissioner Staunton agreed with Commissioner Fischer that cataloging the requests for subdivision within this area can be difficult, adding he believes an attempt should be made to be consistent. Continuing, Staunton said for him a difficulty arises because the new "lots" do not meet the median; therefore variances are required from both the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Staunton acknowledged that the Fairfax plat is mostly comprised of 50 -foot wide lots; however, this lot(s) is located at a change in neighborhood. Concluding, Staunton said he cannot support the subdivision with variances as presented. Chair Grabiel said that best way to ask "what's the neighborhood" is to ask the residents. Grabiel said it appears that the majority of residents within this neighborhood support the request as submitted and believe they reside in an area comprised of mostly 50 -foot lots in a neighborhood of families with young children. Motion Commissioner Forrest moved to recommend denial of the preliminary plat based on staff findings. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Forrest, Schroeder, Carpenter, Staunton. Nays; Fischer, Potts, Platteter Grablel. Motion to deny carried 5-4. B. ComprehenIfto Planned Office D Development Pla na, MN. o ezoning from POD -1, Unit Development, and Preliminary 4005 West 65th Street and 6500 Page 6 of 13 { I Minutes/Edina City Council/December 4, 2012 VLC. PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH LOT WIDTH AND LOT AREA VARIANCES — JERROD LINDQUIST, 5945 CONCORD AVENUE — RESOLUTION NO. 2012-159 FOR DENIAL ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the request of Jerrod Lindquist to subdivide his property at 5945 Concord Avenue into two lots. If approved, the existing home would be torn down and two new homes built on 50 -foot lots. Mr. Teague indicated that to accommodate the request, the following was required: 1. Subdivision; 2. Lot Width Variances from 77 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and, 3. Lot Area Variances from 10,028 sq. ft. to 6,794 and 6,800 sq. ft. He displayed a map of the subject site and properties within 500 feet that were used to determine the median lot width of 77 feet; lot area at just over 10,000 sq. ft.; and, lot depth at 135 feet. Mr. Teague then displayed a map identifying the location of properties that had previously been denied a request for median lot width variances. The Planning Commission, on October 10, 2012, recommended denial of the request on a vote of 5-4 based on the variance findings not being met. Mr. Teague presented the variance criteria and staffs findings. He noted the requested lot sizes were 32% below the median, a significant variance request. In addition, there were similar oversized lots to the east and west, making a self-created hardship by the property owner in requesting this subdivision. With regard to the character of the neighborhood, this was a visible corner lot when compared to interior lots and could potentially alter the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Teague advised that both staff and the Planning Commission found the variance findings were not met by this request and recommended denial. Proponent Presentation Jerrod Lindquist, 5945 Concord Avenue, stated he had lived in Edina for 20 years, at this address for 16 years, been involved in the community, and was interested in what was best for the community. He explained his house was built in 1948 on a large property. The house was now functionally obsolete, not architecturally or historically significant, not family friendly, and it would be cost prohibitive to improve the home. Mr. Lindquist defined this neighborhood and belief the variance findings were met as the practical difficulties were clear and precisely the same as for subdivisions approved in 2011 (i.e., 5829 Brookview and 5920 Oaklawn Avenue). He listed the practical difficulties and unique hardships that existed with this property. Mr. Lindquist believed two lots would not alter and be the most harmonious with the neighborhood, a vast majority being 50 -foot lots. He indicated a neighborhood survey showed overwhelming support for two lots with 71 in support, 8 neutral or not available, and 3 against this proposal. Mr. Lindquist concluded his presentation by describing benefits to Edina should the lot subdivision and variances be approved. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Public Testimony Raymond Sharp, 5940 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Council. Thomas Palladino, 5841 Concord, addressed the Council. Jeff Johnson, 5825 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Teague responded to the Council's questions relating to square footage and building coverage of houses recently constructed on 50 -foot lots by displaying graphics of several such houses. He stated a two-story house on a 50 -foot lot could approach 4,000 sq. ft. It was noted the City code required that lot dimensions and area meet code minimums or area medians, whichever were larger, It also was noted that Page 4 I � Minutes/Edina City Council/December 4. 2012 code stated that non -conforming lots that had been held in common ownership shall be considered one lot and not decreased below the minimum requirements. Mr. Teague stated that a variance would be needed to subdivide such a combined lot. The Council discussed the request. ted as a single pr-apeFW if ef rAinifflum Sh-ce and-4-hat-waS the rare with this pmpeky.. In regard to street assessments, it was noted that a single assessment was applied to lots held in common ownership that were not of 'buildable' (i.e., legal minimum) size. Before preparing a final assessment roll, the Engineering Department would confer with the Community Development Department. When Concord Avenue was reconstructed, this property was assessed as a single REU (residential equivalency unit). In answer to the question of how the two originally -platted 50 -foot lots came to be combined, Mr. Teague stated that some people chose to build on bigger lots. The Council reviewed the proposed five-foot side - yard setbacks and eave encroachment into the side -yard setbacks noting it would bring neighboring houses within close proximity. Mr. Teague advised that conditions could be attached to limit lot coverage and prevent construction of an imposing house, which had been done previously under similar considerations. He indicated staffs evaluation included a comparison of the two most recent subdivisions that were denied. Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, and Swenson advocated for denial based on the rationale that the Council needed to conservatively and consistently apply variance criteria to assure stability in land use decisions and In this case, the variance standards were not met. The Members found the requested subdivision would not preserve the Integrity of the neighborhood; the property already had a reasonable use; there were no unique circumstances, the application to subdivide was a choice of the property owner; economic considerations alone would not constitute practical difficulties; and, the mass and scale of two houses on two 50 -foot lots could be significantly greater than that of one house on one 100 -foot lot. In addition, multiple and significant variances were sought and this request would not rise to the level of qualifying for variances. Mayor Hovland indicated he was not Influenced by the economics of having one or two lots and advocated for support, finding benefit In considering two lots based on the rationale that most lots within a block of the school were 50 feet in width; this property was originally plated as two 50 -foot tots; the proponent had not created the hardship; and, construction of two homes with limited lot coverage would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood as would construction of a "McMansion" on one 100 -foot lot. The Council acknowledged the due diligence and thorough preparation of Mr. Lindquist. Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012-159, denying a Preliminary Plat, Subdivision, and Variances for property at 5945 Concord Avenue in Edina. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson Nay: Hovland Motion carried. W.D. SITE PLAN REVIE , NDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FRONT D SETBACK VARIANCE, PARKING STALL VARIANCE, AND BDiVISION - 10 SOUTH D CENTER FOR STUART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY —RESOLUTIONS 2012-160,2012- , AND 2012-162 ADOPTED Community Development Director Presen on Mr. Teague presented the request of Stuart D opment Company and Simon Properties to develop the southeast corner of the Southdale site th 32 -unit luxury rental apartment and townhome development. The site was currently overflow par lot for Southdale and used by Park -N -Riders for Metro Transit. The applicant pr osed to develop the's�WtWhupscale ten- and six -story apartment buildings and a three- to four- ory townhouse building. Ie site was 5.1 acres. Mr. Teague Page 5 4 4810 wJAMM 1113 1 4,094105 I,1e 1 ars 1 sroa 1 ra 'JS" 6.rN17W of Edina low Orn eoeo '� 0094703 a 0,03r MOS 3901 5909 59M 8090 !� ,f1 S. �100f 1 ss L r*-. L►,xca S r�• S f. s A Si. JMura PM ON {r`iin 60a 8Q08 $016 /.,X03, G3G Mu tori .i3,ZS� ew3 "If 1%1, 0'3 q,x 602, vM as Www.1,r»ha11s-Oun•VKCft066®isr sm 0® PID:1902824310101 5945 Concord Ave Edina, MN 55424 Mdlq►,Lpf Afcq = 10,D;($ 511. Mor s9oo MOS 3901 5909 59M 0009 39x0 6e0e 3,49 Si. JMura PM o s°C+ son 0001 cop stc = em Moa am 0009 6e0e 9913 4013 son $016 totx 6, 70. x. (Let I) �'TOO s.r. VO � -�) RI Lapaad w2Nwftd fe.mr. EurronalKag Haas. Number Labals Nause Number Labels Elraet Name Labels Cal Lknft f+ Cloaks D Lake Nemo. ED Lek.. 0 Park. .soak 1010 somber® sm D HH s90I (yt S -OH" sea p5913 HM Os91r HK so 4nr sn3 Oros 43os SD an HJ loo SO Ji SOtt /h Hf0 !_0 4196 Int 41" 0113 $3 4 H"fi8 of Edina 5901 sm D HH s90I (yt S -OH" sea p5913 S9020 Os91r HK so S� H21 sus g sown sb SD an HJ loo SO Ji wmsrw err Om 4m 910 $itooi r J 0000 COOS mor$.7 X09 mos / 3 soH >. mil mp�t+2 M13 f i mu ars "is ail 7� �•amlr 4M Oro. misgb 001016 em PID:1902824310101 5945 Concord Ave Edina, MN 55424 senrarw s9.r s9H (� HOS 391M 5-b sms Me so H13 HK yp air b sur0 5929 106 24 MJN \PAA 9(� /! (S_ SD H49 mor mos mH 1013 r -- wit 1� mgr WN eJmv, Lo f tilJlk = 77 Feed Pnn osc ! = 5'6 f(J 0Lo 576 {ct (Lola) UWnd tt��t- l w&v%w` ft"" sur"Mm q Meuse MmMr L"aw MateUmber teals seed Name Labels N Qy WOO Cneks pLake Merrres Q Lakes D Parke O Pw. w. 1 � fapr 135- 4 cc l ��1 " 3j- 4f� (to City of Edina p1q@3q,, t :S Lei ��r • "INS7w ( wWilloldre Fisuw 1 1s3 t � SNS alQlO fwtasednO douse lMnber Labels I ST Nelms Umber Labels !Nowt Mom Labels 091 Umdft rnf Crooke sero p Luke Nsams Q Lakes 0 Parke 0 Panels aremOc!¢O I SatB 1717 tlra Im9 170J - �y��� E} 4716 1712 1706 4104 aerearIN 1 4717 eon g 4ms 470: Y I 4mr wool 115' anti ft Boor aroo (Qp� 3 � i3r / aero aro+ 141 am �3b roar eros 66, Iota V4111 6of7 i;'�' boa i +'A sort eon 6ot7 147 Mir 6016 t "f 1T aurae+'{ eoro i74r eoC2t eon 4764 roti ,J 6°20 YarmamrshAdr60�reaia7lecBfamt awl 6020 PID:1902824310101 e 5945 Concord Ave Edina, MN 55424 ,fy2,Q `� y All 1 � fapr 135- 4 cc l ��1 " 3j- 4f� (to saassyn p1q@3q,, t :S �r� ��r • 39H t� 7 1 1s3 t � SNS alQlO MelAY) L6+ O-A{k = .ss- �«+ � l sror asap 5905 Sao! 97169 39D6 wn tiara 3617 sf:r rop spy 9079 N 'H darn's 1x4 9011 5915 4J 3 DATE: May 8, 2015 TO: Cary Teague — Community Development Director CC: Chad Millner PE — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner PE — Environmental Engineer RE: 5945 Concord — Preliminary Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject development for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. General Comments 1. A storm water management plan signed by a Professional Engineer is required. Survey/ Plat 2. No Comment Traffic and Street 3. Application proposes relocation or modification of curb cut, Follow standards in curb cut permit application: htW.//edinamn gov/edinafiiles/fiiles/City Offices/Public Works/CurbCutAplication pdf Sanitary and Water Utilities 4. A full width (curb to curb / saw -cut to saw -cut) repair of Concord Avenue will be required when installing the new sanitary sewer and water service connection. Storm Water Utility S. Applicant may review local drainage features at the following links: hMs:Hmaps.barr.com/edina/ and hM://edinamn gov/i_ndex ohR?section=engineering—water resource 6. The subject site rear yard drains to subwatershed MHS -51. This drainage path is through private property to the southwest and the subwatershed is subject of the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan section 13.3.1.5. 7. Due to this downstream flooding and limited capacity: a. Limit flow to MHS 51 to the maximum extent possible. b. No increase in peak rate or volume to neighboring private properties. 8. The subject site front yard drains to subwatershed MHS 57 and 53. Downstream public system stormwater capacity is available. A 4" service connection (Plate 241.310) to a 6" sump drain is available on concord and 600' street. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 9. A grading and erosion control plan signed by a Professional Engineer is required. a. Provide erosion and sediment control precautions described under Edina City Code Chapter 10, Article 7 — Littering in the Course of Construction Work (10-341 to 10-345). ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaM.gov • 952-826C0371 • Fax 952-826-4392 P t b. Include provisions to limit exposes soils and provide temporary erosion control to meet Edina City Code Chapter 10 Article 17 (10-703). c. Provide sediment control precautions, including downstream perimeter sediment barrier. d. Identify on the plan the individual responsible for the cleanliness of the site and the maintenance of the erosion and sediment controls. e. Describe stockpile locations. f. Describe site access and precautions against undue soil compaction. g. Identify pollution prevention techniques that will be used in the case of temporary pumped discharge. h. Identify pollution prevention techniques that will be used for concrete washout, and hazardous waste storage and handling. Other Agency Coordination 10. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed permit may be required, along with other agency permits such as MNDH, MPGA, MCES, and a grading permit from the City of Edina Building Department. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov.952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague May 13, 2015 VI. D. Community Development Director INFORMATION/BACKGROUND Project Description Frauenshuh Companies is proposing to develop the northeast corner of 7700 France with a free standing, 7,700 square foot seafood restaurant. (See property location on pages Al—A3.) The site is 17 acres in size and contains a six -story 275,000 square foot office building and a 7,623 square foot single -story office building (bank) in the southeast corner of the site. The restaurant would be designed for seating up to 242 people, and would provide 63 dedicated parking spaces in addition to the shared parking with the office building. The proposed building would be made of brick, stucco, plank siding, cedar, glass and metal panels. An area for outdoor dining is proposed along France Avenue. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4 -A19.) The applicant received Preliminary approval of the project in October of 2014. The proposed plans are consistent with the Preliminary approval. (See approved Preliminary plans on pages A7 A9.) The primary issue with this request was that a free-standing restaurant is not a permitted use in the POD -2 zoning district. A restaurant is a permitted accessory use within an office building. The applicant went through the sketch plan process with this request in 2012. Both the Planning Commission and City Council suggested that PUD rezoning was the best way to approach the use on the site. (See attached Planning Commission and City Council minutes on pages A20 - A24.) To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢ Final Rezoning from POD -2, Planned Office District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; and ➢ Final Development Plan. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Nash Finch Office building; zoned POD -1, Planned Commercial District and guided Office Residential. Easterly: Centennial Lakes Office Park; zoned MDD-6 Mixed Development District and guided for Office Residential. Southerly: Frauenshuh Office tower located in the City of Bloomington. Westerly: Office Building; zoned PID, Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 17 acres in size, is relatively flat and contains a multi- story office building. The site has a very large parking field that is under- utilized. Excess parking stalls are rented to a nearby car dealership for storage of new vehicles. Planning Guide Plan designation: OR — Office Residential Zoning: POD -2, Planned Office District - 2 Site Circulation & Traffic There are no new access points proposed. The existing right in and right out off of France Avenue would be primary entrance for those coming from the north. Access from the south and west would be from 77th Street. (See page A15.) Wenck Associates Inc. conducted a traffic study and concluded that the existing roads could support the project. No improvements would be necessary. (See page A47 of the traffic study.) The applicant has added the sidewalk connections as recommended by the Planning Commission during the preliminary review. (See page A9 and A53.) 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: 2 (1) It is the policy of the city to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the city. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the city's sidewalk and trail plan; and b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. Parking Wenck Associates also conducted a parking study. (See the attached study on pages A44—A47.) The Study concludes that the proposed development could be supported by the existing/proposed parking provided. (See page A47.) Based on the square footage of the existing buildings and the proposed restaurant seating capacity and 45 employees on a maximum shift, 1,245 spaces are required for the site. With the construction of the restaurant there would be 1,329 spaces on the site. The study concludes that during peak hours on the site, there is an excess of 459 parking spaces. That does not include the 391 spaces that are leased to the car dealer. If those cars were removed, there would be 850 unoccupied parking spaces during the busiest time of day. Bike Racks The applicant has shown (9) bicycle parking spots on the site plan, located adjacent to the sidewalk connection to the front entrance. (See page A15.) Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, the applicant is required to have 98 over story trees and a full complement of under story shrubs over the entire site. The site currently contains 160 over story trees. There would be about 12-14 trees removed in the area where the proposed building would be located. The applicant proposes 11 new over story trees, including Lindens, Honey Locust and Birch, and 15 Techny Arborvitae that were recommended in the preliminary review to provide screening to the north. (See page Al 3.) A full complement of understory landscaping is also proposed around the building. Loading Dock/Trash Enclosures Loading and trash pick-up for the restaurant would be at the rear of the building in the northwest corner. (See page Al 5.) Trash would be collected within the building and the garbage truck would pick up in the loading area. This loading area would be screened from the property to the north by the Techny Arborvitae. (See page Al 3.) Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined on the attached page A56. Any approvals should be conditioned on the conditions outline in the director of engineering's memo dated May 8, 2015. Building/Building Material The building would be constructed of brick, stucco, plank siding, cedar, glass and metal panels. (See renderings on page Al 0.) A materials board will be presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. lH Signage The underlying zoning of the property would be POD -2. Commercial signage similar in size would be the regulations of the PCD -2, Planned Commercial District -2, therefore, would be subject to signage requirements of that zoning district. Staff has incorporated the PCD -2 Zoning District signage regulations in the PUD Ordinance. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Section 36-253 of the Edina City Code provides the following regulations for a PUD: 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any .variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; 5 e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and L ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. At the time of the sketch plan review and preliminary rezoning, both the Planning Commission and City Council suggested that a PUD would be an appropriate zoning classification to allow the proposed use, rather than amending the Ordinance, or rezoning the site for commercial use. (See minutes on pages A20 -A24.) The purpose of the PUD would be to create a development pattern consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Limited retail and service is a described land use allowed in the OR, Office Residential district in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed restaurant would provide a commercial or service use that would enhance this office zoning district, and provide another fine dining alternative for Edina residents. A free standing restaurant is not an allowed use in the existing zoning district. The applicant is proposing a boulevard style sidewalk along France with a connection to the building and the existing building. 2. Applicability/Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in Section 850 of this Title shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. Property currently zoned R-1, R-2 and PRD -1 shall not be eligible for a PUD. The proposed use, a restaurant would be an allowed use in the OR, Office Residential area, as described in the Comprehensive Plan. Through a PUD, the proposed use would be allowed. b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: M i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as "Office Residential — OR," which encourages the mixing of land uses and limited retail and service uses. ii. any PUD which involves a single land use type or housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; Again, the proposal is for a mixture of land uses, and introduces a mixture of land uses including a free standing restaurant to serve the existing offices in the area. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and Given the size of the existing parcel, the site could be considered underdeveloped. Nearly half of the property is taken up by parking spaces that are not needed for the existing office building. iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1 above. The following shows a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed new building would comply with the underlying POD -2 Zoning Ordinance Standards. Should the City decide to rezone this site to PUD, the proposed setbacks, height of the building and number of parking stalls would become the standards for the lots. The applicant is not looking for relief from the POD -2 standards; rather, they are looking for a use that would not be otherwise allowed in the POD -2 District. VA Compliance Table Buildinq Setbacks 10 - 4 Stories or 48 feet whichever One story 20 story building is less feet tall Front — France 35 feet 35 feet Side - North 20 feet 30 feet Side — South 20 feet 200+feet Rear — West 20 feet 200+ feet Building Height 4 Stories or 48 feet whichever One story 20 is less feet tall Building Coverage 30% 15% Maximum Floor Area .50 of the tract .44 of the tract Ratio (FAR) Tract size = 17 acres or Gross s.f. = 740,520 s.f, 326,623 s.f. Parking Stalls (Site) 1,245 spaces office + 1,329 spaces restaurant Parking Stall Size 8.5' x 18' 8.5 x 18' Drive Aisle Width 24 feet 24 feet PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Are the proposed Final Plans consistent with the approved Preliminary Plan and is the PUD appropriate? Yes. The proposed plans are consistent with the preliminary approval and the conditions of approval. As determined at Preliminary approval, the PUD is appropriate for the site for the following reasons: 1. As found during preliminary review, the proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. In summary the PUD zoning would: a. Provide a mixture of use within the area/site by allowing a free standing restaurant to be located on the subject site. b. Create a pedestrian friendly development with the construction of the boulevard style sidewalk along France Avenue and connections to the existing and proposed buildings. 8 2. The proposed uses would fit in to the neighborhood. As mentioned, this site is guided in the OR, Office Residential which encourages limited retail and services uses and a mix of land uses. 3. The existing roadways would support the project. Wenck Associates conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads. (See traffic study on pages A25—A47.) 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • A Pedestrian -Friendly Environment. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower - density districts and upper stories "step back" from street. Staff Recommendation Preliminary Rezoning to PUD & Final Development Plan Recommend that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from POD -2, Planned Office District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Preliminary Development Plan to build a free standing 7,700 square foot, seafood restaurant at the northeast corner of 7700 France Avenue. E Approval is subject to the following findings: The project would introduce a use that would fit into the area, and provide a service for local employees and nearby residents. 2. With adequate pedestrian connections and facilities, the project would create a pedestrian friendly development which would encourage walking in the district. 3. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council 4. The existing roadways would support the project. Wenck Associates conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads. 5. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets sand connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. ■ A Pedestrian -Friendly Environment. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower - density districts and upper stories "step back" from street. Final approval is subject to the following Conditions: 10 I . Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped April 21, 2015. • Grading plan date stamped April 21, 2015. • Landscaping plan date stamped April 21, 2015. • Building elevations date stamped April 16, 2015 • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies 3. The applicant shall construct a boulevard style sidewalk along France and sidewalk connections from the existing building to the restaurant and from the boulevard sidewalk to the building. 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section 850.04 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 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. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated May 8, 2015. 8. Final Rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. PUD Ordinance Recommend the City Council adopt the Ordinance Amendment to establish the PUD -8, Planned Unit Ddvelopment-8 District at 7700 France Avenue. Deadline for a city decision: August 16, 2015 11 ORDINANCE NO. 2015 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE PUD -8, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -8 DISTRICT AT 7700 FRANCE AVENUE The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Chapter 36, Article VIII, Division 4 is hereby amended to rezone the below described property to PUD, Planned Unit Development in accordance with the following: Sec. 36-494 Planned Unit Development District -8 (PUD -8) — 7700 France (a) Legal description: Insert Legal (b) Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the re -development plans received by the City on April 16 and 21, 2015 except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2015-_, on file in the Office of the Planning Department. (c) Principal Uses: All uses allowed in the POD -2 Zoning District A free-standing restaurant. (d) Accessory Uses: All accessory uses allowed in the POD -2 Zoning District. (e) Conditional Uses: All conditional uses allowed in the POD -2 Zoning District. (f) Development Standards. Development standards per the POD -2 Zoning District. (g) Signs shall be regulated per the POD -2 Zoning District. Section 3. This ordinance is effective immediately. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2015. City Clerk 2 41,l7 WAVI,� f zf m'y €z 1,4xT-{i �a . j-�-i ! i + " .' ''�rX, I k 3 _ PE RVY 1. x�ii it'!y_s,J Jt Gd r # 4W= nisi _l0rrr� rrsisiRE"EI i, f iiElb f7 gNra, •• x vt ii L a:NK..tari l !I isll `72NE)SIR Wflr Tr 7 ` i , t• i r t of i._ prnr.iFNnft� �* - EST-t!r' d !I ,x,, _. 7ies ,j 7iRr?SII CkIV fWNnEEr E�r� s ! x=�` >>?+�� y cy7trrcaRnra jvr t 1t ��, ; �3i� �� r las f i i I) J l I .' i S ..L.,......_ t•� �. ,t ES.I, a al W w - RJ.Rb_AiS`tJ A4'F jyllE. 2 �w72wp• mm. pp 4 t - --t �, iY .» r� A�, �V� t ' dz�i✓� � _r Z S REETI - i P'^ : i tirR Fr.1rEs'i y 771H STRCFTTT :Vi4t n_ r� # v"IBitra.Gk naE✓�....._._.�.,.�,.--...:- ... 5 �bR1Y ,•� - • r rCKTClIxb iE•h_•5?` • ttt nwv *, � rr �^ ", uttsiREifv:r�1 a r � � n 71 w.ti " u I W . $1 1 Juta - 'y j rr Si Trfi�fRkET 1VfiS1 i`< i:^ ,�-" ; {( f Il jG..,. m,. ilt tj iw`€ K_ n a e allosyw , , tea. � �.,fi_ ._.-ae 3.L>.�' _- Parcel .�_...._ Map Scale: l" =1800 ft. N ID: 31-028-24-44-0013 A -T -B; Torrens Print Date: 9122/2014 Owner 7700 France Avenue Llc Market e: Total: Parcel 7700 France Ave S Tax Address: Edina, MN 55435 Total: Property Commercial -Preferred Price: This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS with no Home- Sale representation or warranty expressed or Non -Homestead implied, including fitness of any particular stead: Date: purpose, merchantability,or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Parcel 17.1 acres Sale Area: 344,758 sq ft Code: COPYRIGHT ®HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014 Think Green! M Hennepin County GIS - Printable Map FOFIGE Lb I DI 7320 3821 i 9 7333 k 7340 DOD O lil ( 24� _ 7355 7380 _ �; flL9 7373 'r ► f t �� c400 n 4000 7400 # 3 PARKLAWN AV6WE L 1 4470 ! _ Parcel 31-028-24-44-0013 ID: Owner Name: 7700 France Avenue Llc Parcel 7700 France Ave S Address: Edina, MN 55435 Property Type: Home- stead: Parcel 17.1 acres Area: 744,758 sq ft Market Total: Tax Total: Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: 0OP7 3400 t. 3500 } Map Scale: 1" - 800 ft. N Print Date: 9/22/2014 This map Is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or Implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT 0 HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014 A RlInk Gmen! A3 leps W/" W-/ DESIGN Statement of Intended Use 7690 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 April 17, 2015 A, IV L I( klu T� Architecture & Planning 12400 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Burnsville, MN 55337 Office: (952) 252-4042 Fax: (952) 252-4043 This will be a full service seafood restaurant with a bar, private dining venue and an outdoor patio and bar created and operated by Parasole Restaurant Holdings. The restaurant is divided into two Intersecting volumes. Parallel to France Avenue is a tall textured brown brick structure which houses the main dining and private dining rooms. At the top of this volume, around all four sides runs an aluminum clerestory window topped with a tapered overhang of the same material. Through this structure, perpendicular to France Avenue, passes a lower gray metal clad structure housing the indoor bar and oyster bar and the covered outdoor bar adjacent to France Avenue. A planted patio, covered by a cedar trellis, nestles up to the covered bar and runs along the taller brick building. In a sea of chains, this is a Twin Cities original: A casual seafood grill and bar with a unique identity yet broad appeal, one with homegrown roots and a world-class menu. it's flexible and approachable enough to have everyday utility without sacrificing foodie credibility. And it has a pronounced urban feel — without the urban attitude. Why a seafood restaurant? Mainly, because there's a hole in the market for one. And because the public loves seafood. Yet aside from a few boutique outliers like Sea Change, all we have are chains — McCormick & Schmick, Red Lobster, Joe's Crab Shack— and few fusty holdouts like Kincaid's and Blue Point. And nowhere is the need more pronounced than in the Southwest suburbs, where the business and residential demographics point to strong demand. Moreover, we know seafood. With Oceanaire and Sea Change, Phil Roberts and Tim McKee have created the two most important seafood restaurants in the history of Minnesota. This will be Minnesota's next great seafood restaurant — and an unprecedented one, with two distinguishing features: a charcoal -fired grill and a wood -fired oven for roasted seafood — dishes like Cast Iron Roasted Sea Bass with Black Olive and Capers and Wood -Oven Steamed Australian Kingfish with Ginger & Soy. Wood Roasted Oysters alone will have their own section on the menu. There will be a raw bar, of course; fish & chip options for the timid; and new twists on classics like chowders, Po -Boys and Lobster Rolls. For the seafood averse: beef filets, chicken, pork — and, surely, a killer burger — will headline the "Shore" section of the menu. Open for lunch and dinner; the saloon -like bar's happy hour will be a magnet for working -folk; and an expansive patio will enable diners to enjoy warm weather dining. A� www.reprisedesign.com As pristine as the seafood will be, the experience itself will be a breath of fresh air. Managers and staff will execute from a culture of service, not a manual of rules. Even the most timid eaters will find safe harbors here, while the most jaded foodies will find adventures in dishes like Bourbon Roasted Maine Lobster with Sweetcorn Spoonbread. The ambiance will be warm and inviting, yet bright and energized. The attitude will be confident but not pretentious and the offerings will be broadly accessible. Our goal is to be a citywide destination for foodies; the go -to choice for the locals, and the best seafood restaurant anyone could hope for. Headquartered in Edina, Minnesota, Parasole Restaurant Holdings operates BURGER JONES in Burnsville and on the north shore of Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis; Salut Bar Americain in St. Paul on Grand Avenue and in Edina on France Avenue; Chino Latino and Libertine in Uptown; Manny's Steakhouse, The Living Room & Prohibition at the W Minneapolis — The Foshay in downtown Minneapolis; Pittsburgh Blue Steakhouse in Edina and Maple Grove; Muffuletta Cafe in St. Paul's Como Park neighborhood; the Good Earth Restaurants in Edina and Roseville; and Mozza Mia Pizza Pie & Mozzarella Bar in Downtown Edina. By joining the Parasole Dining Club, guests have the opportunity to earn points for the dollars they spend and to redeem them for food and drink at any participating Parasole restaurant. Details at Parasole.com leps ff/.IU DESIGN September 08, 2014 Proposed Restaurant 7690 France Avenue S. Edina, MN Architecture & Planning 12400 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Burnsville, MN 55337 Office: (952) 252-4042 Fax: (952) 252-4043 Looking Southwest www.rep(isedesign.com V Pits . W .. OCT 15 2014 {IF PARASOLE - SEAFOOD RESTAURANT - NEW CONSTRUCTION 7690 FRANCE AVENUE EDINA, MN 55435 lep, * Architecture,ln0. DESIGN 12400 Portland avenue South SuUo ';00, 1`001,1141 Corporate Center Burnsville, NIN 5!'8'17 {Rett•' (952)352'44 252+1043 gilNVId 3dVOSCINVI gg ao""s"o 3nN3AV 30NVd9 069L < > 1: 11- MIN, HinOS 3nN3AV 30NY83 3A N U -i z LLJ O 0 1i III III U 11111 LL� 4A d I Cl "9 "i till ki k r4-) < oo 0114. 111 IN 11 fill', F Fy < M ---------- _-SSG 'Z q11 -- --- - CN L-imss I CN ('i 0 xg Ln 0 _7D lev co U� till T\ m --------- --- ------- - ---- 9"zq I -- ---- I— u 7 Z< LLJ U El - _j A gg N LA- 1- CL OW LLM CD oz cog ac CD UA o_.4 , _ Sao MAP alp; hd UA go PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1 i. II0�I 1. W" OfCIfF OEIII,EwR.. um.0 Ilwl p t th, tyYp —o=., Nn It1216ly a«ere"gYleltlw nncoEul qn�u. M. Nw�mY, Cbunly. MMiN,l NOTES CORRESPONDING TO EASEMENTS: M Toq.lM MN 1M nunRb al In. «a.mnu xl bin N Oxunnl NatJit6.J. �rip,RO M1.°«ty L Tenn. �� e•1�iwJYss WU4•.� r4� � � IIDMI . Cn,lOcete m. tb65Ri GLlml� w °,�ii.� a�iW sstal,e.:ccia�xao¢cnaron nm m°u.�. c•nwv. m,,,«nma,l tvm m x? n Mrp°°Oauroior vn o.v°rn'�wm:x"� u m �"`m.�• omo, en I:�,,.im 1 un iucRESE REss�\ i 67H STREE I NE COR LOT J ov. t qi•[w rq 1su•g9W u"v N rNRR V "M>PN •• ~`. FONA OI%LE CENIER :c.�'p1p1yN,5`w..n �°.:"R °"m m""l.eiOL3.� N- .• � /- GENERAL NOTES: w« rw x coram ywlR atl ter. "�°No�..ro� '4 E ` ------ um -_-_ .axlr a nR..ewc um,w, uw rwlrc \ ' fY•, _ _.•_--jrROFERx UNE b mnain ><�.,`c cin ie,n."l.. m'x «^m'"To rlr I...e. NAn,m. A� MNH� � , w iiKi wsoYs.a mL w. \ \ \ ~C:�'T .w. -iOYa rs. x«I . ,x.A. r., l�•F➢°ru a nail 414.CY bau•xw roc sa,Nu r,.wom .a eoe Ne xeJ:No N \ % �{. /LOT 1 ,�w.«e...lwe ,..,.e s«,.r..u... r•..r-,w.,..n . `y AREA NOT IN EASEMVM O nmar lu roe Nn am«..s •N« d R.I•�T. LOT 3 � � FARr a, WT 01REEi EASEMENT' tl A ! ��iW�x°- wm u a Iro Delo Im. as , �.�. « m. w.. yen. e+n• STATEMENT OF POTENTIAL DETAIL g f.mME. w+NMOY°•ur p.•�oN•Iw,R�YtNn. ENCROACHMENTS: NOT TO SCALE OA tu«I rr«s,4n IIRl �l H �• ;'.iLe �:L1' O auwuc 01eNwSs e,0, m fe,--�dis"A\ 11 X '' • " f�,4 � P .'; i• © .Iw, mm r.�nn •, urm. Nr �=� u+. � p !' � ! ,•, F LEGENDc,.r J .. v \1 ..•.. arnN�orw n,NS{ue 9 '• t .: ..�P �.L:" TFi�Y T- qtr ! � � • °nr u«u • � � f I e 0 wows on« R:•-�. _ _ __ ___ _ _ __� __ I 1 ` e I iR- trhea a �, �,�« _T✓ u...q..,,e o..m. •.. L ; tY-`' '''I11���plj'II IJT,j��rlT a" TRACT 1,11 i_ F:-5,.;„,9��w� ,, wE_ _ my " • JIR""NR': !u le . 'Gt wlxIx"„a c.;u d _ t �- I ♦ ® w"',..t --- s____ ___ __ ux _ _m.r�. t 4 X- ,f,•� M%('�o94x-� ® eo-'e:l«,.. ml, l in •51`1 1111111 1 •, r^: zil till Hill 11lIIIL'LI I Ill 1111 Hill Ill I till 1�!!QKTMI . ,h'ly. ' "qkw f i`I 111 {yam ' :• 5"s.�xa� a \ so a� o no eo vo till q SCALE N FEET __•'GW°4-m�a- I{I��--• x• % I � ,/ 1_ � ui �� ��' �'`�, VICINITY MAP 9j 21 All I — — — — — % - uavNdl�TFJ •F , f ^ or —d _ r , azAe •.A.• x , d,, �y/ .mow, ` , ' 0 o a.e n n.°°&•a t FRANCE! A. ,. E.THEATRE ;. I, I� d �x r—Rxc R� w,N •RE� N rr Y SCALE: I INCH a 80 FEET RENf/ONS Os,r _eY x, x,x TOPOGRAPHICAL AND BOUNDARY SURVEY For: FRAUENSHUH COMPANIES BLOOMINGTON SITE: ]]00 FRANCE AVENUE SOVM WNA. NIINNEWTA HENNEPIN COUNTY HARRY S JOHNSON CO., INC LAND SURVEYORS 000 LYIMdnAW,ue Seu:n BbOmin0len, NN.600) Tdc 00SB0A•SN1 Fu B51e&Y01M ..�n.}u.rY•ax•n 831.42 OEM "m w MAW % IX, )LE CONT PLANTING NOTES: MWAL 4r ML amm mu IQ p =a am me am AWL M am AL W " 8W WiL MU Naas WL 10 MWOM MMU MAL 2e M COM arlcM1at NMaram"Mm K" 20 W. Wff. mm ally K fr M wk a"= ow "m wmmm wmm mum an vn=w .OAunm PW W= 10 K VAILU VON KACK MOO OR APROM W,, it M MA OWN mmm" som V w Mwo um 4p or mom ONAWD we =r,X=,W WAH VM MM FAM Ir 4w nm4m WL To K M A" 4'Mff. WZA"awpOw"W"m WAR NWO floor $W= W ILL irgrom .�L Qw a. MW LOW "Mm. 2$X no kvm ox cm. cowmw UUMM ALL gm F" A mm or an rmsmnw O 0.4 WE 1. WE CF AOCU%VM W)W ILL MAMOft PROM vwwq�°0M W --X NMMN W."m I aq- low, AL,=WJFAW Mmw WH m" =m "a Ww"6 Apm WW AND 9WX , MM —`=Wjm ,V� t 4UVMM 0 OW OF wMN ALL ftm met" mm" WAMM WK YK WE or Accumu" aaamm vmlAMN1 M maw commm EMT! Aro W—JLJW-ff —MO MMMW KWM MAKS WS OF MU M LIGHTING LEGEND r& WUWjrjM="A mu 6 on= m I -TREEPLANTING.. DETAIL ow Mar" s"m on mm fa can M=w "M U,mw OFson coava m pp, NMrtw Aro mraeMr!%maroM roeswmw ve " R 0 on mum= iotOi.L w w Im. w w "am 0 wpm "W"." CMDOOMMM /JK1 SCMA IN FM At� 8 31.42 Y V V I- 'J"I % `C 'Alf &M-20 7Z, 4" pi— I IL VATCH IUL Y V V I- 'J"I WWI SM" IArmrI w%z-& MW'M,QM FM THE RMAW" OF Ir rx-vowwm :JM FOR KNOD OF 2 WS ON UM WON BE 1 14 PAYS " THE MR WE OF .M'M* mw Im town THE Sim um BE "DOM IM AT LOW MW 7 CME"M OM MO LAN 6RnD�U6o- L 11 larcul I PROPOSED Cm" 1"7.w TOP of cm Imm N CUM UK 7%� 400* w w w WPM M FM Nom 'Alf WWI SM" IArmrI w%z-& MW'M,QM FM THE RMAW" OF Ir rx-vowwm :JM FOR KNOD OF 2 WS ON UM WON BE 1 14 PAYS " THE MR WE OF .M'M* mw Im town THE Sim um BE "DOM IM AT LOW MW 7 CME"M OM MO LAN 6RnD�U6o- L 11 larcul I PROPOSED Cm" 1"7.w TOP of cm Imm N CUM UK 7%� 400* w w w WPM M FM Nom Y STREET WESTI �" E 831.42 sm ITE IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND: STANDARD OMAUNOUS PAMEW BOU CONCREFE CUNO & GUTTER 8612 CONCRETE CURB 49 GUM (WWAU) �Al 0 V) z W uj 0 Z 9 Si7E PI.hN WALM M MW mom 0 f D �'� °° I � �{ I r i F D } 10. •..-� $� I I € I I J f I C I v I j O� ; trJf I 7 1 67 g 1 I 1 1 I � D I I 1 ' I ' � C I 1 I I 1 O1 ' W _187.10, Zj O I I In m S •e ei IN • J • D -- --------- < ------ z - C N In m— $ > • O I z m i $ I � I fr t I r r I u � 7 • � I t ! e a--_ S O'ww E 681.40 a a FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH �� ae•.: woo ar .a» I .. _ __ • PARASOLE — SEAFOOD *7&axc• maw - • x mesmKim vw•a•a XVtM &��! ow�waw 0 C3� OVERALL SITE PLAN ospx e 00 Nv1d 3115 N 2nWAY 3*WUI 069 GOOJV3S — 31ZSVn8v—Vd. NOMOnHONOO > 0 c Hinos 3nN3AV 33NV21J an no 1030 0 1 1-4 1 9. -j 00 LO 0 IN 0-) 00 F] ism JE ------------------ ----------------- an F M 0 a i CL — — 91 W -- — — — — — — — LLI Eli y V V L- li II N1 on^Fz'nF" c Q 7 1 A r) GRADING NOTES: EROSION CONTROL NOTES: [ov.RM oRRJnrM .�, TR :vm JJwIJn[W rnomx ewmx mKe a000 � eRwua. - . a°viii rnaarnw nw� i i°�wico ro wJxc�T mJJsr Js xaus.Re N°'' °` °� M we Mvu nnwx m xiJ¢ aM K w[RJJxm M Rood em Roam+ swoums wwmm m`M mRiRkiaR uxm n¢ art vrJJ omJ u-wmum a v.n®. �� ro �s� Rau pm1Ta-i,m..e xoom a wJrimJr mo[p[ arou K soewnm ai r�nmo®m JJJJM wR m[ RwxanJr rc r uOMWR Jr IVRRL fRR omuMm JisJ9 ro K Rc-rmrxca oxoro,�icm munwo`Mwi uJ04i"om`c w°�'ix r°N1aw Jac xor arta ronc M -7—W, roRr[�o°a mrnc usMOKi uuc or¢ a cu1RRJ4toR TJJOL MR? JIUPM MV RMO f E1RiA'RM6 • NpRN M T6 MIA TDOP[� 1LLA N50 A[ Aim. _ /�u�frt�lt'�S t � ME NWc �.is JM 4tl.Wr tIMT [GNrn AK IDR �JA BC IIQIMO m me eamc°wN1OOR K nro x m[ ar. T. MR,I 4WRIC[ a01CJ IpT Ol[®I!W 190 -4-2-7N�A iOLLR ,/a' xWMCS Mm K Nv6Tm p ,[M' MRY T WLiOOJ Ww JHB JWY WaM 011[OMO. Ne KKSMIOx NR 01'.IIIIMrn J� 1910CCM MRH Tao GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN RAIN GARDEN SECTION NBI iR M:LL[ ROW W LEGEND: — i �v — amne cOVJouv tIN - PROROSRR CRMOVR 0R K CUM u cun[R .ort 0 6 SCALE M FEET NORTH Q GO�ry��b P MTRJ Rv to J00 N0.R K JTUO C-3 paces to 6,442 spaces based on staff findings and subject to staff co ions. Fischer a recommended that approval is to include direct pedestrian 9xCess to the Sou ale Mall via a 45 degree angle and to also include ped ian access to the transit cility. (Fischer also asked that special thought b ven to find a way to preserve trees along that access route). Commis ' er Potts seconded the motion. Ayes, cherer, Forrest, Schroeder, Potts atteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer and Gra . 1. Motion carried 9-0. Commissioner Staunt moved to rec mend Conditional Use Permit approval based on staff findings a subjec o staff conditions to include direct pedestrian access to the'Southdale Mal 45 degree angle and to also include pedestrian access to the transit facilit Co issioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; Scherer, Forrest, S roeder, Po , Platteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer and Grabiel. Motion ca ed 9-0. CommissioVfCarpenter moved to recomm6pd re -plat approval. Commissioner Potts se ded the motion. All voted aye; ScheIVr, Forrest, Schroeder, Potts, Platt r, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer and Grabiel. Motion carried 9-0. VII. REPORTS A. Sketch Plan, Frauenshuh, 7700 France Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is being asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to develop the northeast corner of the 7700 France with a single -story, 7,500 square foot "fine -dining" restaurant building. The site is 17 acres in size and contains a six - story 319,000 square foot office building and a 7,623 square foot single story office building in the southeast corner of the site. The restaurant would be designed for seating up to 250 people, and would provide 93 dedicated parking spaces in addition to the shared parking with the office buildings. Teague said the proposed building would be made of high quality stone, glass and metal. An area for outdoor dining would also be provided, however, is not guaranteed to be utilized. Teague asked the Commission to note that the primary issues with this request is that a free-standing restaurant is not a permitted use in the POD -2 zoning district; however, a restaurant is a permitted accessory use within an office building. Teague said if the Commission and Council are receptive to allowing a restaurant in this location the applicant would needs to decide on two options; 1) a PUD rezoning and 2) Ordinance amendment to allow restaurants as a permitted use in the POD -2 zoning district. Page 10of112 �j 1 ZIO Concluding Teague also stated if this proposal "moves forward" a traffic study would need to be completed to determine impacts on adjacent roadways. Appearing for the Applicant David Anderson, Frauenshuh. Comments,/Questions' Commissioner Fischer said this seems reasonable considering the size of the tract and asked PIanner Teague if he knows the reason a freestanding restaurant isn't allowed in a POD -2 zoning district. Teague responded he really doesn't know the history behind this decision. Commissioners said maybe the decision to exclude freestanding restaurants in this zoning district was to prevent fast-food restaurants from popping up. Applicant Presentation Mr. Anderson briefed the Commission on the history of the property. He said the site is 17 acres that consists of a principal multi -story office building totaling 319,000 square -feet. Anderson explained that the site includes underground parking spaces for building tenants and ample surface parking with over 1,400 parking spaces for building tenants and guests. Continuing, Anderson said the property has a solid appeal in the market place and is in a sound financial position. Anderson said this request is a direct response to market interest. He noted the property is very large and the proposed building isn't very large. Anderson introduced Eric Reiner of Sperides Reiner Architect. Mr. Reiner informed the Commission that at this time they are not working with a particular restaurant company. They are only working off directives to develop a restaurant that engages France Avenue and complements the office building(s). Chair Grabiel noted if you lookup and down France Avenue there are a number of restaurants. Grabiel asked if there was a decision on the type of restaurant. Mr. Reiner responded that their goal is an upscale high service restaurant. Commissioner Carpenter asked if the applicant viewed the site in broader terms. Mr. Anderson responded that if one views the site the proposed location of the restaurant is on a natural pad. Anderson explained that at this time the office market is slow; however, if a PUD is granted the option of amending the PUD would remain. Concluding, Anderson said at this time they believe a high-end restaurant addressing France Avenue is a great fit for the area and of benefit to the site itself. Commissioner Forrest said she agrees with a rezoning to PUD, adding it's a great idea trying to incorporate the restaurant to work with the public realm. Page 11 of 12 0r Commissioner Platteter agreed that a PUD'rezoning is this situation was best. Platteter said in his opinion changing the Ordinance to allow this isn't the way to proceed. Changing the Ordinance could open the door to less desirable proposals. Commissioner Fischer said he likes this concept and in his opinion PUD is the correct way to proceed. Fischer added this fits the "theme" of doing innovative things with large parking lots. Commissioner Schroeder stated he agrees this is a good concept, however, the pedestrian physical connection is missing because the area lacks sidewOlks. Chair Grabiel stated the consensus of the Commission appears to support a rezoning to PUD to facilitate construction of a freestanding restaurant. Grabiel encouraged the applicant to proceed to the City Council with their sketch plan. VII. Chair Grabiel VIII. CHAIR AND AND PETITIONS back of packet Chair Grabiel said the joint w*k ses on between the City Council and Commission was constructive. \ ,� IX. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Teague reported th Starbuc will be back before the Commission on October 10th with a revised plan. T ague told the ommission Starbucks is rotating their building similar to the suggestion ade by Commis 'oner Staunton. Jordan Gilgenbach as d the Commission ton to a new interactive City website SpeakUpEdina.org. Commissione Potts moved adjournment at 10:k0 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded th r otion. All voted aye; motion to a I ourn carried. Respectfully submitted Page 12 of 12 �d d Minutes/Edina City Council/October 16, 2012 improve nts of sidewalks, trails, and non -motorized transportation projects. He indicated if dopted tonight, th ranchise fees would be Imposed the first quarter of 2013. Finance Directo aliin advised of an ordinance language change requested by Centerpol o Subdivision 8, Surcharge, of 4 nance No. 2012-15 and by Xcel Energy to Subdivision 4,Surcharge, rdinance 2012- 16. Mr. Neal explained the flity company had the ability to impose a nominal sur arge above the City's franchise fee to cover adm istrative costs to impose the fee. Attorney Knutso?notified. vised the utilities had to obtain Minnesota Public Ut 'fes Commission approval to impose such a suarge and until that action was taken, the amount was n known. Should that occur, the City woul It was noted the franchise fees would be collecte onthly and disbursed quarterly. Michelle Swanson, Xcel Energy, stat their legal department advise hat the Department of Commerce asked that language be included in tk standard fee ordinance. Ahe assured the Council that nothing above the City's franchise fee wouldNe collected by Xcetermitfees." rgy and explained the tradeoff for administrative costs to administer franchis ees was "in lieu o Mr. Neal reviewed the Council's rationale to iYrawould Ise fee because the City was not able through existing resources to adequately fund sidewalbicycle paths that would increase safety and walkability. In addition, the fee would resulcost across the City instead of assessing to particular property owners. Mr. Neal noted tbe fixed at $1.45/residential customer until a Council adopts another ordinance to change ed the additional classifications of customers and indicated over 95% of customers were rest The Council acknowledged a franchise fee snot depend ton usage, income, or property value. There were not sidewalks on every street in th ty so under the c rent system, some land owners paid special assessments for sidewalks that were ed by others who mig never share in the cost. A franchise fee would help make assessments mor ffordable and expand si alk/trail funding across the City to all, Including tax exempt properties. ollowing discussion, the Coun determined to not consider a sunset provision since it would be str ured as a special enterprise fund h a proposed budget that would be under the Council's review ember Swenson made a motion grant Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012-15, 1 ementing a gas energy franchise fee on C terpoint Energy Minnesota Gas ("Centerpoint Energy") r providing gas energy service within the of Edina, with revisions to Subdivision B. Mem Sprague seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Br" le, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion Carrie VlIGD. OR ANCE NO.2012-16 — ADOPTED — FRANCHISE ORDINANCE —XCEL Member ennett made a motion to grant Second Reading adopting Ordin ce No. 2012-16, impte ting an electric service franchise fee on Northern States Power Com pa a Minnesota Cor atic n, D/B/A Xcel Energy, Its successors and assigns, for providing electric service ithin the City rr Inawith revisions to Subdivision 4. Member Brindle seconded the motion. s: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.E. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWED —RESTAURANT PROPOSAL AT 7700 FRANCEAVENUE Community Development Director Presentation Mr. Teague presented the sketch plan to develop the northeast corner of 7700 France Avenue with a single -story 7,500 sq. ft. fine -dining restaurant. The 17 acre site was zoned POD and contained a six -story 319,000 sq. ft. office building and 7,623 sq. ft. single -story office/bank building in the southeast corner of Page 7 A Minutes/Edina City Council/October 16, 2012 the site. He advised of the Planning Commission's deliberation at its September 12, 2012, meeting and consensus reached to support a rezoning to PUD to facilitate construction of a freestanding restaurant. Proponent Presentation David Anderson, Senior Vice President of Frauenshuh Commercial Real Estate, 7101 West 7e, Bloomington, thanked the Council for the opportunity to share this concept and PUD approach. He explained allowing flexibility for this development to work in harmony with the existing office building and tenants and to address this property's long-term development potential through future PUD amendments. In the meantime, the design concept would be pedestrian oriented and a presence on France Avenue. Mr. Anderson indicated the architectural theme would evolve depending on the user but definitely would be an upscale effort. He noted there was a sidewalk along France Avenue on the west side. The Council discussed the site plan and indicated its support to consider a PUD. It was acknowledged that people were drawn to live and work in this area and visit places such as this restaurant. The Council commented on the desirability of creating pedestrian connections, intense landscaping, insulating outside diners from France Avenue, addressing accessibility, and not tying into the existing bulkhead sidewalk but creating a boulevard sidewalk design with a garden/oasis setting. Mr. Anderson described types of upscale restaurants and indicated the building's architecture, service, and theme that would be attractive to the market and consistent with France Avenue. He thanked the Council for its conlipents to create quality opportunities and indicated it would be designed for a specific tenant. V111.F. RES ON N0.2012-137ADOPTED —ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hov,A n xplained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donatio 004o the City must be adopted by Re tion and approved by four favorable votes of the Council cepting the donations. Member Bennett troduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2-137 accepting various donations. Member rague seconded the motion. Rolicall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, ague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AN ETITIONS W.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the C ncil's receipt of sous correspondence. &.B. MINUTES 1. EDiNA TRANSPORTATIO O ISSION — AUGUST 16, 2012 2. HERITAGE PRESERVATION ARD —SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 AND OCTOBER 1, 2012 3. PARK BOARD — SEPTEM 2012 4. BUILDING CONSTRU NBO D—JULY23,2012 S. ART CENTER BOAR — JUNE 28, 12, JULY 26, 2012, AND AUGUST 23, 2012 Informational; no action require X. MAYOR AND COUWL COMMENTS — Xi. MANAGER'SJOMMENTS—Received X11. ADJOU MENT There being further business on the Council Agenda, 10:20 p.m submitted, Page 8 Aa$ Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at Wenck Wenck File #3022-03 September 19, 2014 Traffic Impact Study for 7690 France Avenue in Edina, MN Prepared for: CITY OF EDINA Prepared by: WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359-0249 (263) 479-4200 A��- Table of Contents 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....................................................................................................5-1 6.0 PARKING ANALYSIS...................................................................................................5-1 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................7-1 8.0 APPENDIX...................................................... ........................................................... 8-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION............................................................................................2-2 FIGURE2 SITE PLAN............................................................................................................2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS........................................................................................3-3 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES.................................4-3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES.................................4-4 FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS.....................................5-4 FIGURE 7 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS.....................................5-5 FIGURE 8 PARKING SURVEY AREAS.....................................................................................6-3 I September 2014 Wenck 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed new restaurant building located at 7690 France Avenue in Edina, MN. The project site is located in the northeast corner of the 7700 France Avenue property. The proposed project location is currently occupied by parking spaces and landscaping area. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • France Avenue at 76th Street • France Avenue at Minnesota Drive • Johnson Avenue at Minnesota Drive • 77th Street at Parklawn Avenue • France Avenue at Site Access • Minnesota Drive at Site Access • 77th Street at Site Access The proposed project will involve constructing a new restaurant building. The project will utilize existing parking spaces on the site. Access for the site is provided via the existing access points for the 7700 France Avenue building. The proposed land uses and sizes are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Proposed Land Uses and Sizes Land Use Size Unit Quality restaurant 7,700 SF SF = square feet The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2015. 1-1 September 2014 1IU£iCi{ The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to generate a net total of 6 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 58 trips during the p.m. peak hour. • Trips generated by the proposed development do not change the level of service of movements at any of the analyzed intersections. • The project trips have minimal impact on the overall traffic operations. No improvements are needed to the surrounding street system to accommodate the proposed project. • The existing site provides a large number of surface parking stalls which are utilized for employees of the on-site office buildings. These uses operate from approximately 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. There is very little use of the parking areas after 6 p.m. • The peak demand for existing parking spaces occurred at 2 p.m. during the weekday survey. At 2 p.m., 910 of the on-site parking spaces were used, leaving 459 available. The parking demand greatly decreases after 6 p.m. The minimum Zoning Code parking requirement is 116 to 126 spaces and the peak parking demand using ITE data is 126 spaces. As shown in this report, there are adequate spaces available to accommodate these requirements. 1-2 September 2014 -wIAWenck 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed new restaurant building located at 7690 France Avenue in Edina, MN. The project site is located in the northeast corner of the 7700 France Avenue property. The proposed project location is currently occupied by parking spaces and landscaping area. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • France Avenue at 76th Street • France Avenue at Minnesota Drive • Johnson Avenue at Minnesota Drive • 77th Street at Parklawn Avenue • France Avenue at Site Access • Minnesota Drive at Site Access • 77th Street at Site Access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve constructing a new restaurant building. The project will utilize existing parking spaces on the site. Access for the site is provided via the existing access points for the 7700 France Avenue building. The proposed land uses and sizes are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Proposed Land Uses and Sizes Land Use Size Unit Quality restaurant 7,700 SF SF = square feet The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2015. 2-1 September 2014 -qAWenC-1k TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 7 Wencl< FOR DEVELOPMENTAT 7690 FRANCE AVENUE PROJECT LOCATION Engineers •Scientists IN EDINA, MN I I ...j I A30 \ —S f 832.20�aw 2. n 9 U'1 w am 3430 833.80 814:70 535.0 .2c &J5.0 APPROXIMATE SCALE N 0 45' t TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 2 FOR DEVELOPMENT AT AWenck 1 7690 FRANCE AVENUE Engineers - Scientists IN EDINA, MN SITE PLAN 01 10 10 83 oa0 15"44 140 013,20 L 83 U'1 w am 3430 833.80 814:70 535.0 .2c &J5.0 APPROXIMATE SCALE N 0 45' t TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 2 FOR DEVELOPMENT AT AWenck 1 7690 FRANCE AVENUE Engineers - Scientists IN EDINA, MN SITE PLAN 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site is currently used for parking and landscaping. The site is bounded by France Avenue on the east and parking lots on the north, south, and west. Near the site location, France Avenue is an eight lane divided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. 76`h Street is a four lane divided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. Minnesota Drive is a four lane undivided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. Johnson Avenue, 77`h Street, and Parklawn Avenue are four lane undivided roadways with turn lanes at major intersections. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. France Avenue/76th Street (traffic signal control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide two left turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn, three through lanes, and one through/right turn lane. France Avenue at Site Access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection provides right turn only access to/from the parking areas on the west side of France Avenue. France Avenue has a raised median at this location, which prohibits left turns in and out. The eastbound approach provides one lane for exiting right turns. The southbound approach provides three through lanes and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides four through lanes. France Avenue at Minnesota Drive (traffic signal control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. Minnesota Drive at Site Access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. 3-1 September 2014 A3'�- Wenck Johnson Avenue at Minnesota Drive (traffic signal control This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides one left turn/through lane and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through lane and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. 77th Street at Site Access (minor street stop sign control This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the eastbound and westbound approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn lane and one through/right turn lane. 77th Street at Parklawn Avenue (traffic signal control This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides two left turn lanes and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through/right turn lane, and right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. 3-2 September 2014 UUE nck nPPtc `�' TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY V V enck FOR DEVELOPMENT AT Engineers • Scientists 7690 INFDINAEAMVNNUE FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2016. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2014 Existing. Turn movement volumes collected in August 2014 were used for existing conditions. The existing volume information includes trips generated by uses near the project site. 2016 No -Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 2.0 percent per year to determine 2016 No -Build volumes. The 2.0 percent per year growth rate was based on both recent growth experienced near the site and expected future growth. • 2016 Build. Trips generated by the existing office building were removed and trips generated by the proposed uses were added to the 2016 No -Build volumes to determine 2016 Build volumes. Trip Generation The expected development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Ninth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent gross total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 44. Table 4-1: Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Land Uses ITE I Weekday Land Use Code Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Quality restaurant +931 17,700 SF 5 1 1 6 39 19 58 693 SF=squareteet The a.m. peak hour trip generation assumes the restaurant Is not open before 9 a.m. This is typical for this type of use. The trips shown during the a.m. peak hour are for deliveries and employees. As shown in Table 4-1, the proposed development will add a net total of 6 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 58 trips during the p.m, peak hour. 4-1 September 2014 A3 We�c�< The total trips can be categorized in the following two trip types: • New Trips. Trips solely to and from the proposed development. • Pass -By Trips. Trips that are attracted from the traffic volume on roadways immediately adjacent to the site. 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. The distribution percentages for new trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 27 percent to/from the north on France Avenue • 36 percent to/from the south on France Avenue • 23 percent to/from the west on 77`" Street • 7 percent to/from the east on 7e Street • 7 percent to/from the east on Minnesota Drive 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 Figures 4 and S. 4-2 September 2014 436 Wenck is" 2014 2016 NO -BUILD 7 2016 BUILD XX/XX= m r 10/311318 <-4 M /154 I i _ I r- 0/010 4021418/416 -+ 5_ 407/423/423-3► 0/010--4, � $ t r A r t-147/153/153 L> 4j L! E-19/20120 44146146 010/0 z � 1- 120/125/126 16117/17 --T 2071215/215 -'► I� MINK 10/10/10, TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Wend{ FOR DEVELOPMENT AT Engineers •Scientists 7690 FRANCE AVENUE 1N EDINA, MN 77 r <-- 2so//228$ r1 ST. t � 1-131/1 3611 36 57/59158 r* 127/132/132 50/52/52 PROJECT LOCATION } as a� 41415 rl 0 r r 0 A M m 2112 E-128/ 301130 f-.95198199 28M9 --t 15171157 --111 56M64 --I,1 111 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES 1 -9 n h 2014 2016 NO -BUILD N clip a T2016 BUILD 78TM ST. Jr � 82/1891 88 +,� 18911e7/198 XX/XX/XX 2751288288 -� 4181435/435 -� 206/214/214. - PROJECT LOCATION A g M 3"111195 ACCESS E- O✓O10 77TH ST. 623/648/848 4"9 605/6291636 ?S +-48�4?1293293 $ F 2996/33008/308 L> ;-- 8!818 F 119961204=5 - 373/388/388 '�W54154 MNNESOTADR 41 426/4414 ->I � R6 2628 0 � 396/41no 2/4413 i r tir TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 6 V VnCi FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 7690 FRANCE AVENUE WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK HOUR Engineers - Scientists IN EDINA, MN TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES 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 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. 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. 5-1 September 2014 _AeAWenck The LOS results for the study intersections are described below and shown in Figures 5 and 6. All LOS worksheets are included in the Appendix for further detail. France Avenue/76th Street (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C. Traffic generated by the proposed project does not change the level of service of any movement during either peak hour. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue at Site Access (minor street stop sign control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS A. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS A. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue at Minnesota Drive (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall Intersection operates at LOS B. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS D. Traffic generated by the proposed project does not change the level of service of any movement during either peak hour. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. Minnesota Drive at Site Access (minor street stop sign control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. No Improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. 5-2 September 2014 Wenck Johnson Avenue at Minnesota Drive (tro ffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. 77th Street at Site Access !minor street stop sign control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS A. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. 77th Street at Parklawn Avenue !traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C. During the p.m. peak hour under all scenarios, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. Overall Traffic Impacts As described above and shown in Figures 5 and 6, the project trips have minimal impact on the overall traffic operations. No improvements are needed to the surrounding street system to accommodate the proposed project. 5-3 September 2014 j Yl end< J( 4-1 rD 2014 2016 NO -BUILD 2016 BUILD xxwxxlxx III -teAWenck Engineers • Scientists TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 7690 FRANCE AVENUE IN EDINA, MN FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS I- E -=/D DID ID 78TH. � AA roro E—c/AIA= CJGC PROJECT -'jDlD1D LOCATION as D/DID � I. ACCESS " AfAIA l AlAIA a ��a a TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 7690 FRANCE AVENUE IN EDINA, MN FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS AA E—c/AIA= CJGC FaIA I AIFVA -'jDlD1D E-clCIC AIA/A MINNESOTA DR. D/DID AA/n�as"aa Al, l A JA a ��a TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 7690 FRANCE AVENUE IN EDINA, MN FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS U) OC J Z W <eee Ye� � jolt '-am oQI '�vrov W fWJ � W 3AV 33NVH:i _ `1 i f' Fz VIV/V r I t r U. ero oa W- a Om v o j Y o '31a � -' �� a0 w W a 0 aaa t-Vnrro Vroro �- F �i,Q,6 F-vnrro j ¢ W ss3mv - a. �a It �2<7 ara�a� aaa ¢ p w aaa a�Zo w LLowz LL 03 ag® <00 F � � a 3 t-vnrro J �. �►U Orao-Ja"I t IN*� Hor C m -i cn zm vcocti oao 4—Ol3l� 4 NNCd�t C" LL vlviv--;� �/ad-3 UUU 3 Wenck 6.0 Parking Analysis Background Information The existing site provides a large number of surface parking stalls which are utilized for employees of the on-site office buildings. These uses operate from approximately 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. There is very little use of the parking areas after 6 p.m. A total of 1,369 on-site parking spaces are located in four surface parking areas. The proposed project will result in the removal of 40 parking spaces for construction of the new building. After construction of the building, there will be will 1,329 parking spaces on-site. The existing parking area was divided into four areas for survey purposes, with each area shown in Figure 8. Area A contains 1,002 spaces, Area B 158 spaces, Area C 121 spaces, and Area D 88 spaces. The proposed project will include 63 reserved parking spaces in Area C. These spaces will be signed for restaurant parking only. ne ODeration Observatio Parking operations were observed during the 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. time period on a typical weekday in August, 2014. During this time period parking usage varied depending on location. In addition, the entire western portion of Area A is occupied by new cars from local dealerships. The dealerships use this parking lot for new car storage, with cars moved in and out periodically. During the parking survey period, 391 spaces were occupied by new cars. Existing Parking Usage Existing parking usage was recorded during the 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. time period on a typical weekday in August, 2014. The results of the parking usage survey are shown in Tables 6-1. 6-1 September 2014 Wenck Table 6-1 Existing On -Site Parking Usage As shown in Table 6-1, the parking usage peaked at 2 p.m. and steadily declined after 6 p.m. For the overall site, there was a maximum of 857 spaces available at 8 p.m. and a minimum of 459 spaces available at 2 p.m. Zoning Code Requirement The City zoning code minimum parking requirement is 1/3 of the maximum seating plus one space per employee during the major shift time. The proposed restaurant contains 242 seats and is expected to have 35-45 employees during the major shift time. This equates to a minimum parking requirement of 116 to 126 spaces. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Data Calculations In addition to the zoning code requirement, parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was also used to determine the expected parking demand. As shown in Table 6-1, the on-site parking usage peaked at 2 pm. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 0 Edition, Indicates the parking demand for a quality restaurant peaks at 7:00 p.m. on a non -Friday weekday and 8:00 on a Friday. The non -Friday weekday peak parking demand is 82 spaces, while the Friday peak parking demand is 126 spaces. Overall Parking Impact As shown in Table 6-1, the peak demand for existing parking spaces occurred at 2 p.m. during the weekday survey. At 2 p.m., 910 of the on-site parking spaces were used, leaving 459 available. The parking demand greatly decreases after 6 p.m. As described above, the minimum zoning Cade parking requirement is 116 to 126 spaces and the peak parking demand using ITE data is 126 spaces. As shown in the table, there are adequate spaces available to accommodate these requirements. The existing office uses peak earlier during the weekday that the expected restaurant peak. These uses are complementary to each other from a parking perspective. 6-2 September 2014 Area A 1,002 total spaces) Area 8 (158 totals aces) Area C (121 totals aces) Area 88 totalspaces) D Total Spaces Available Time of Day Spaces used- new cars Spaces used- employees Total spaces open Spaces used Spaces open Spaces used Spaces open Spaces used Spaces open 9:00 am 391 265 346 40 118 84 37 43 45 546 10:00 am 391 289 322 54 104 96 25 63 25 476 11:00 am 391 282 329 62 96 100 21 59 29 475 1:00 pm 391 301 310 54 104 93 28 56 32 474 2:00 pin 391 297 314 63 95 104 17 55 33 459 3:00 prn 391 283 328 60 98 98 23 54 34 483 6:00 pm 391 102 509 25 133 25 96 18 70 808 7:00 prn 391 85 526 24 134 23 98 15 73 831 8:00 pm 391 72 539 20 138 17 104 12 76 857 As shown in Table 6-1, the parking usage peaked at 2 p.m. and steadily declined after 6 p.m. For the overall site, there was a maximum of 857 spaces available at 8 p.m. and a minimum of 459 spaces available at 2 p.m. Zoning Code Requirement The City zoning code minimum parking requirement is 1/3 of the maximum seating plus one space per employee during the major shift time. The proposed restaurant contains 242 seats and is expected to have 35-45 employees during the major shift time. This equates to a minimum parking requirement of 116 to 126 spaces. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Data Calculations In addition to the zoning code requirement, parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was also used to determine the expected parking demand. As shown in Table 6-1, the on-site parking usage peaked at 2 pm. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 0 Edition, Indicates the parking demand for a quality restaurant peaks at 7:00 p.m. on a non -Friday weekday and 8:00 on a Friday. The non -Friday weekday peak parking demand is 82 spaces, while the Friday peak parking demand is 126 spaces. Overall Parking Impact As shown in Table 6-1, the peak demand for existing parking spaces occurred at 2 p.m. during the weekday survey. At 2 p.m., 910 of the on-site parking spaces were used, leaving 459 available. The parking demand greatly decreases after 6 p.m. As described above, the minimum zoning Cade parking requirement is 116 to 126 spaces and the peak parking demand using ITE data is 126 spaces. As shown in the table, there are adequate spaces available to accommodate these requirements. The existing office uses peak earlier during the weekday that the expected restaurant peak. These uses are complementary to each other from a parking perspective. 6-2 September 2014 t TRAC i N^4 000, INROT OW NTICS. LLLP EAST 575.77 I I k3 I 5 ; k: 49 I � c� � I I i O i '✓3 I i� I yt I I U-1 _ _ _ ..ate... _ tea-... ___...__-..- ------0�c: -------- l N li Ai� GO ' is UN'ER,YING TRACT U i I 1 I I I hr I t i I it H ,r Ti i I I f ==77TH. ST�a' WEST -_ RW (PWA RICHT Or WAY) EAST 1216.60 WEST 1412.49 N OW0.3 VD t 041.42. V V enCi� TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 8 FOR DEVELOPMENT AT Engineers •Scientists 7690 FRANCE AVENUEIN EDINA, MN PARKING SURVEY AREAS i,. i„ it 11 I 'I 0 I I k3 I 5 ; k: 49 I � c� � I I i O i '✓3 I i� I yt I I U-1 _ _ _ ..ate... _ tea-... ___...__-..- ------0�c: -------- l N li Ai� GO ' is UN'ER,YING TRACT U i I 1 I I I hr I t i I it H ,r Ti i I I f ==77TH. ST�a' WEST -_ RW (PWA RICHT Or WAY) EAST 1216.60 WEST 1412.49 N OW0.3 VD t 041.42. V V enCi� TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 8 FOR DEVELOPMENT AT Engineers •Scientists 7690 FRANCE AVENUEIN EDINA, MN PARKING SURVEY AREAS 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 generate a net total of 6 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 58 trips during the p.m. peak hour. • Trips generated by the proposed development do not change the level of service of movements at any of the analyzed intersections. • The project trips have minimal impact on the overall traffic operations. No improvements are needed to the surrounding street system to accommodate the proposed project. • The existing site provides a large number of surface parking stalls which are utilized for employees of the on-site office buildings. These uses operate from approximately 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. There is very little use of the parking areas after 6 p.m. • The peak demand for existing parking spaces occurred at 2 p.m. during the weekday survey. At 2 p.m., 910 of the on-site parking spaces were used, leaving 459 available, The parking demand greatly decreases after 6 p.m. The minimum Zoning Code parking requirement is 116 to 126 spaces and the peak parking demand using ITE data is 126 spaces. As shown in this report, there are adequate spaces available to accommodate these requirements. 7-4 September 2014 Wenck issue, no hearing, the proposed use is allowed in residential zones. ague agreed, adding the review this evening is to ensure that the plans prese are consistent the plans approved at preliminary approval. 100 Motion Commissioner Piatteter moved to development plan approval based conditions. Commissioner Lee sed carried. 5-0 ,eon°' rmend final rezqpffig and final 'findings andLoubject to staff the moti . All vote aye; motion Commissioner Platteter omved to recoend approval of a zoning ordinance amendmen Ittablishing the D District based on staff findings to include the revisgroordinance lann&ee and staff conditions. CommissionerS rer seconded a motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 5-0 Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague to clarify for the Commission the revision to the ordinance. Planner Teague explained that the revision would tie the parking stall requirements for the site to an office use. CrD. Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan. Frauenshuh; 7700 France Avenue, Edina, MN. �Q 1V \\ Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Frauenshuh Companies is proposing to develop the northeast corner of 7700 France with a free standing, 7,000 square foot seafood restaurant. The site is 17 acres in size and contains a six -story 275,000 square foot office building and a 7,623 square foot single -story office building (bank) in the southeast corner of the site. Teague reported the restaurant would be designed for seating up to 242 people, and would provide 63 dedicated parking spaces in addition to the shared parking with the office building. The proposed building would be made of brick, EIFS, cedar, glass and metal panels. An area for outdoor dining is proposed along France Avenue. Teague explained the primary issue with this request is that a free-standing restaurant is not a permitted use in the P013-2 zoning district. A restaurant is a permitted accessory use within an office building. The applicant went through the sketch plan process with this request in 2012. Both the Planning Commission and City Council suggested that PUD rezoning was the best way to approach the use on the site. Continuing, Teague stated to accommodate the request a Preliminary Rezoning from POD -2, Planned Office TU 7 District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; and Preliminary Development Plan is required. Teague noted the "preliminary" review is the first step of a two-step process of City review. Should these "preliminary" requests be approved by the City Council; the second step would be Final Rezoning to PUD and Final Site Plan review which would again require review by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Planner Teague stated that staff believes that the PUD is appropriate for the site for the following reasons: I . Subject to enhancements to the site plan, the proposal could meet the City's criteria for PUD zoning. In summary the PUD zoning would: a. Provide a mixture of use within the arealsite by allowing a freestanding restaurant to be located on the subject site. b. Create a pedestrian friendly development with a requirement to construct a boulevard style sidewalk along France Avenue and provide a pedestrian connection from the restaurant to the sidewalk. In addition, a pedestrian connection should also be required from the existing building to the restaurant. Detailed plans on how these sidewalks would be constructed should be submitted as part of the final development plan application. 2. The proposed uses would fit in to the neighborhood. As mentioned, this site is guided in the OR, Office Residential which encourages limited retail and services uses and a mix of land uses. 3. The existing roadways would support the project. Wenck Associates conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads. 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. ■ Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. ■ A Pedestrian -Friendly Environment. b, Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. f. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower -density districts and upper stories "step back" from street. 1Z Teague concluded staff recommends approval subject to the following findings: 1. The project would introduce a use that would fit into the area, and provide a service for local employees and nearby residents. 2. With adequate pedestrian connections and facilities, the project would create a pedestrian friendly development which would encourage walking in the district. 3. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 4. The existing roadways would support the project. Wenck Associates conducted a traffic impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads. S. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. ■ A Pedestrian -Friendly Environment. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. C Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings "step down" at boundaries with lower -density districts and upper stories "step back" from street. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated September 8, 2014. 2. The Final Site Plan must include a boulevard style sidewalk along France and sidewalk connections from the existing building to the restaurant and from the boulevard sidewalk to the building. 3. The Landscape Plan should be revised to show the specific trees that would be removed, and consider additional planting and/or saving trees along the north lot line to provide screening of the loading area. 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section 850.04 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Submittal of a complete sign plan for the site as part of the Final Development Plan application. A)D 9 6. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated October I, 2014. 7. Final Rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. Appearing for the Applicant Steve Faber, Frauenshuh and Alan Ackerberg, Parasole Applicant Presentation Mr. Faber addressed the Commission highlighting architectural features of the proposed restaurant including exterior building materials. Faber reminded the Commission a couple years ago Frauenshuh brought before the Commission/Council a sketch plan concept for a free standing restaurant at 7700 France Avenue. Faber said the result of the sketch plan review was favorable and at this time there is an interested tenant (Parasole). Faber introduced Alan Ackerberg with Parasole to speak to the proposal. Mr. Ackerberg told the Commission Parasole would be the restaurant tenant and Frauenshuh would own the property. Ackerberg noted Parasole will have input on the size of the building, its configuration and materials used. Continuing, Ackerberg reported the restaurant would be a seafood establishment (Sea Change), adding he was very excited about the project. Ackerberg added with regard to staff conditions he has no issue with the condition of a sidewalk connection from the building to France Avenue; however, would like to defer the larger section of the sidewalk until the site is redeveloped to its' fullest potential. Concluding, Ackerberg said bike racks would be added and additional screening would be added to the north side of the proposed building. Discussion Commissioner Lee questioned the use of EIFS and asked where it's going. Farber responded that EIFS would be used on the north elevation where the kitchen is located; with graphics he indicated those areas. Lee noted that at sketch plan review the materials indicated in this area was brick. Mr. Faber said he would be willing to review the use of EIFS vs. brick Faber said another point of interest is landscaping, adding it is their intent to plant a line of trees along the north boundary, A discussion ensued with Commissioners commenting on the difference in building materials between sketch plan review and the request before them. It was pointed out by the applicant that sketch plan was conceptual; there was no tenant at that time. The goal of the previous sketch plan was to gauge the City's position on allowing a freestanding restaurant at this location. A 10 Commissioner Platteter inquired about the proposed outdoor seating. Mr. Ackerberg informed the Commission that three outdoor dining zones are anticipated. One is an outdoor bar lounge area similar to what's found on Tavern on France. Ackerberg said that their goal is to integrate the eating areas with the street. He noted the outdoor seating would be apparent from the street and landscaping would be used throughout the "front yard" outdoor seating areas of the site. Ackerberg said it's important to have and present connectivity to the sidewalk and street. Chair Staunton said he agrees it's a good move to engage the street; not only for vehicular traffic but for pedestrian traffic as well. Commissioner Platteter observed this site contains a lot of concrete/parking spaces and questioned if more parking was added for the project. Mr. Faber responded more parking wasn't added; however, with the new building the parking was reconfigured to include a valet service area. Continuing, Platteter commented what's nice about this use is the cross hours. He pointed out a majority of parking would occur during the evening and weekend hours when the office building would be mostly vacant. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Y tt�� Kristie Bohn Berman/Spartan Nash, 7600 France, reported her company has a concern if parking isn't adequate visitors to the new restaurant may choose to park in their parking lot. Bohn -Berman added additional landscaping would also be of benefit. It was suggested by the Commission that signage could be posted to discourage cross- over parking. Mr. Faber pointed out with graphics there is a berm and grade change between properties. Discussion A discussion ensued on the importance of continuing with the boulevard style sidewalk into and adjacent to the site. Commissioners wanted assurances the restaurant would engage both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Commissioners also discussed the significance of the access into the site from West W Street and the importance of the north building wall, materials used and patio engagement. Commissioner Lee commented whether it's at the preliminary or final stage the tone is set, adding in her opinion what was established at sketch plan review was the marker. Lee said she is uncomfortable always adding so many conditions to a land use and development project/request. She acknowledged she doesn't want to be too prescriptive; however, preliminary should "have" more teeth. Lee concluded and suggested that the applicant postpone their request to the next meeting of the Planning Commission. This time could be used to provide the Commission a better understanding of what you want and your intent. Commissioner Scherer said she appreciates the concerns expressed; however, feels comfortable at the preliminary level adding additional conditions. Motion Commissioner Platteter moved to recommend preliminary rezoning and preliminary development plan approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including the following conditions: I . Install a boulevard style sidewalk between France Avenue and the subject building. He further suggested that the applicant review Edina's "Living Streets" policy. The applicant is to work with staff on both sidewalk and plantings on the right-of-way,- 2. Add bike racks; suggesting they are not placed at the rear of the building: 3. Add additional landscaping on the north side of the proposed building site and the northeast corner 4. Remember that this building is 4 -sided architecture and all finishes should be consistent and complimentary. Ensure this building is architecturally and material pleasing on all sides. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion and offered an amendment to the motion that requires the applicant to bring back a full sidewalk and boulevard tree/vegetation plan. Commissioner Platteter accepted the offered amendment to the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Platteter, Staunton. Nays; Lee, Hobbs. Motion carried 3-2. 12 Minutes/Edina Cir Council/October 21, 2014 Erik Scheurle, 2007 61st meet West, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made motion, seconded by Membe prague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, S son, Hovland Motion carried. Attorney Knutson addressed issues raised ring publi estimony, indicating that the Council was not adopting the ordinance tonight, but instead ting reading. He advised there were no legal issues approving first reading tonight. Mr. Teague addressed issues raised during lic to ony, indicating that the deadline for City Council action was October 22, 2014, but an a sion had b granted from Beacon through November 19, 2014. Member Swenson made motion to grant First R ding to Ordinance No. 2014-17, amending the Zoning rdinance to Establish the PUD , Planned Unit Development -7 District at 3330 66 treet. Member Sprague seconded the otion. Rolicail: Ayes: Benne rindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion ed. V1.& PRELIMINARY REZONING FROM POD -2 TO PUD AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FRAUENSHUH COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE GROUP, 7700 FRANCE AVENUE — RESOLUTION NO. 204-116 ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Mr. Teague presented the proposal from Frauenshuh Companies to develop the northeast corner of 7700 France Avenue with a free standing, 7,000 square foot seafood restaurant. The restaurant would be designed for up to 242 people and provide 63 dedicated parking spaces in addition to the shared parking with the office building. The primary issue was that a freestanding restaurant was not a permitted use in the Planned Office District -2. zoning district but a restaurant is allowed in POD -2 as an accessory use within an office building. Both the Planning Commission and City Council suggested that Planned Unit Development rezoning was the best way to approach the use on the site. The preliminary review was the first step of a two-step process of City review and both staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval. Proponent Presentation Steve Faber, Frauenshuh, shared the lay out of the restaurant, reviewed the materials, and discussed connectivity with sidewalk and main office building. Alan Ackerberg, Parasole, shared that the company had four restaurants in Edina and that it would be a mid -priced seafood restaurant. Mr. Teague answered the Council's question relating to a bus stop Indicating that staff would determine whether there was a bus stop at that location. Mr. Faber agreed that if there was a bus stop, the sidewalk would continue to France Avenue. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Page 4 A v� Minutes/Edina City Council/October 21, 2014 Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council discussed sustainability and making the sidewalk and restaurant access more pedestrian friendly. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2014-116, approving Preliminary Rezoning from POD -2, Planned Office District -2, to PUD, Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Development Plan for 7700 France Avenue, subject to the following conditions: I. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated September 8, 2014. 2. The Final Site Plan must include a boulevard style sidewalk along France and sidewalk connections from the existing building to the restaurant and from the boulevard sidewalk to the building. 3. The Landscape Pian should be revised to show the speck trees that would be removed, and consider additional planting and/or saving trees along the north lot line to provide screening of the loading area 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section 36-1260 of the Zoning Ordinance. S. Submittal of'a complete sign plan for the site as part of the Final Development Plan application. 6. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated October 1, 2014. 7. Final Rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. 8. Bike racks must be located on the site near main entrances. 9. Building shall be 4 -sided architecture with all finishes consistent and complimentary. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CHAD AND JENNIFER HELMER, S808 CREEK VALLEY ROAD — RESOLUTION NO. 2014-117 ADOPTED Assistant Planner Presentation Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request for a Conditional Use Permit at 5808 Creek Valley Road to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. The applicant was proposing to tear down and rebuild on the property and to raise the first floor elevation 1.5 feet above the existing first floor elevation to conform to the Federal Emergency Management Agency flood elevations and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District's approval for a new basement elevation with a corresponding ceiling height of slightly over 8 feet. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval on October 8, 2014. Mr. Millner answered questions from the Council, indicating that the basement was rising, but the grade was changing minimally. Two rain gardens would address the increased volume from the roof and the flow would continue to drain towards the back of the home and the backyard. Proponent Presentation Steve Schwieters, Wooddale Builders, answered questions of the Council concerning storm water treatment. He explained that Wooddale had hired Hedlund Engineering to help meet all the requirements of the City and that all down spouts would be catch basined into specific areas. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:49 p.m. Public Testimony Carol Deming, 7027 McCauley Trail South, addressed the Council. , Page 5 ) DATE: May S, 2015 TO: Cary Teague — Planning Director CC: Chad Millner — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner P.E. - Environmental Engineer RE: 7690 France Avenue — Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. I. City Standard Plates available here: http•//edinamn goy/index php?secdon=construction standards 2. A separate permit is required from Nine Mile Creek Watershed District: www. ninemilecreek.org. 3. Provide an easement exhibit for a 20 foot easement will be needed along France Avenue for access to public utilities and sidewalk. Survey 4. No comments. Soils 5. Submit soils, soil boring and geotechnical report. Details 6. No comments. Traffic and Street 7. Remove existing sidewalk length of restaurant parcel and provide a minimum eight foot boulevard with a six foot sidewalk. Sanitary and Water Utilities 8. Installed fire hydrant on northeast corner of lot. 9. Note private or public ownership of existing and proposed utilities. Storm Water Utility 10. Provide hydraulic and hydrology calculations that meet Nine Mile Creek Watershed District standards. Capacity is available in public stormwater system from SP I I subwatershed, downstream of project. 11. Note ownership and provide copies of maintenance agreement for private stormwater systems. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 12. Identify pollution prevention techniques that will be used in the case of temporary pumped discharge. Other Agency Coordination 13. Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit is required. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits may be required. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edlna, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaMN.gov. 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 MEMO City Hall - Phone 952-927-8861 Fax_952-826-0389 - www.CiVo dinaxom Date: May 13, 2015 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Sketch Plan Review — Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to build a sanctuary and kitchen addition and a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church located at 4113 West 54th Street. (See the property location on pages Al -Al a.) To accommodate the request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of the request is to provide larger fellowship and supportive areas to the church. (See the applicant narrative and plans on pages Al b -A16.) The site is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District, where a church is a conditionally permitted use. The applicant submitted a request for the conditional use permit in 2013. (See original plans on pages A25 -A35.) The applicant did not move forward with the request after concerns were raised in regard to the architecture of the proposed addition, and impact to the steep slopes and mature trees as a result of a new parking lot south of the building and construction of stormwater ponding. The applicant has now revised the plans in an attempt to address the concerns raised in 2013. They hired a new architect to design the addition to better fit with the neighborhood. The proposed addition uses a pitched roof rather than a flat roof, and has more variety in building material compared to the lap siding originally proposed. The new plan proposes using an underground storage tank for stormwater, rather than the surface pond proposed in 2013. The new plan would preserve the slope and mature tree area. The table on the following page demonstrates how the project would conform to the R-1 Zoning Ordinance. City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th SL - Edina, MN 55424 MEMO 4gj�l� o a Compliance Table * Existing Condition - Variance Granted in 1992 Traffic/Parking The number of parking spaces required is based on the seating capacity of the largest place of assembly which is the sanctuary. The Code requirement is one stall per three seats. The capacity of the existing and proposed sanctuary is 210 people; therefore, the required number of stalls is 70. A parking variance was granted in 1992 to allow 37 spaces when the church last expanded. A condition of the variance was that a proof of parking plan be established. (See the proof of parking plan on pages A36 A43.) When the proof of parking plan was established however, it did not specify how the added number of stalls were to be created; rather, it listed options that included: The city property used for parking and located west of the creek and south of 54th street; on 54th Street following reconstruction and widening of the street to provide parking bays; or other off-street locations or combinations thereof. (See page A37.) There is adequate area on the site to build more parking, however, that would be in the flood plain area adjacent to the creek on the west side of the site. Many mature trees would have to be removed. That was not an alternative that was desired in 1992 and would not be desirable today. There are 37 spaces on the site today, though not all are code compliant. The revised plans would be have 39 spaces that are code compliant. A traffic and parking study was done in 2013, as part of the original application, and is attached for reference. The study concludes that the existing parking generally works, and there is not a problem with parking in the neighborhood on adjacent streets. The study would need to be updated to examine the new parking lot configuration. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50d, SL . Edina, MN 55424 City Standard (R-1) Proposed Building Setbacks Front - 54 Street 50 feet 23 feet* Side - East 50 feet 80+ feet Side -West 50 feet 100+ feet Rear - Creek 50 feet 100+ feet Building Height 3 Stories or 40 feet whichever is One story 36 less feet tall Building Coverage 25% 15%+/ - Parking Stalls (Site) 70 required stalls for the 39 spaces* sanctuary maximum seating proposed (37 capacity of 210 seats existing) * Existing Condition - Variance Granted in 1992 Traffic/Parking The number of parking spaces required is based on the seating capacity of the largest place of assembly which is the sanctuary. The Code requirement is one stall per three seats. The capacity of the existing and proposed sanctuary is 210 people; therefore, the required number of stalls is 70. A parking variance was granted in 1992 to allow 37 spaces when the church last expanded. A condition of the variance was that a proof of parking plan be established. (See the proof of parking plan on pages A36 A43.) When the proof of parking plan was established however, it did not specify how the added number of stalls were to be created; rather, it listed options that included: The city property used for parking and located west of the creek and south of 54th street; on 54th Street following reconstruction and widening of the street to provide parking bays; or other off-street locations or combinations thereof. (See page A37.) There is adequate area on the site to build more parking, however, that would be in the flood plain area adjacent to the creek on the west side of the site. Many mature trees would have to be removed. That was not an alternative that was desired in 1992 and would not be desirable today. There are 37 spaces on the site today, though not all are code compliant. The revised plans would be have 39 spaces that are code compliant. A traffic and parking study was done in 2013, as part of the original application, and is attached for reference. The study concludes that the existing parking generally works, and there is not a problem with parking in the neighborhood on adjacent streets. The study would need to be updated to examine the new parking lot configuration. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50d, SL . Edina, MN 55424 MEMO Additional Consideration ➢ Review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is required. ➢ Tree loss and replacing will need to be examined closely, as that has been a concern in the neighborhood. ➢ Building renderings and perspectives would need to be prepared to show what the addition and parking lot would look like on the site with existing and proposed landscaping. A rendering must be prepared from the south side of the creek. ➢ Sidewalk connections for ADA accessibility shall be examined. ➢ Landscaping is a concern of residents to provide screening of the parking lot. Concern is raised in regard to vehicle lights shining in to adjacent property when leaving the site and parking in the parking lots. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina. MN 55424 t i'•. 54STSTREET WEST � StSi SFREETEST - .3 I 52ND STRFFT WEST � � ? 5)fS�ii S �\ s� I STREET WF;ST _ _ t 3 a srt , �81�( 53RD STREET 4"�li�t l — w S4TH STR ,N .. ......4y. FULLER R i � � 5 � � � '� _t I SSTH STREETWFST - 5STH STREETFST �� 9 a GTO td tNVFM4UE-- s - SETH 5tREE1 WEST :ET _ D VVFST fl 57TH STAWEST " _ -- r� —� + — pHILBRUO WIE v 58TH STREET WEST + �` C, t Parcel 19-028-24-11-0010 A -T -B: Map Scale: 1" = 800 ft. N ID: Print Date: 5/6/2015 Owner Edina Com Luth Ch Name: Parcel 4113 54Th St W Address: Edina, MN 55424 Property Residential Type: This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular - purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Parcel 4.15 acres Area: 180,764 SQ ft Cod( COPYRIGHT W HENNEPIN COUNTY 2015 ThI Green' A k 400, ticom � A e rn 14", BENTZ / THOMPSON / RIETOW ARCHITECTURE • URBAN DESIGN PLANNING • INTERIORS EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & RENOVATION 4113 W 54th Minneapolis, MN 55424 Edina Community Lutheran Church (ECLC) hopes to expand their existing church facility in order to better serve their congregation and the surrounding neighborhood and larger community. The proposed project consists of an addition and remodeling of the existing Edina Community Lutheran Church to expand worship space (with the same amount of seating), enlarge fellowship and support areas, increase classroom and meeting space, enlarge the kitchen facilities, consolidate administrative offices and improve parking and handicapped access. The Church has been operating at this site for over 60 years as a productive member of the Edina community and this addition and remodeling project will allow them to better continue that relationship into the future. The Church currently has a main worship space, as well as an adjacent fellowship hall both on the main entry levet. Even though the existing sanctuary is approved to seat up to 210 people, during worship services typically closer to 175 can be accommodated. Both the sanctuary and fellowship hall are undersized and crowded before, during and after services. The kitchen serving the fellowship hall is undersized to provide for the needs of funerals, weddings, or other celebrations. The kitchen equipment is old and outdated and due to current building code requirements and space restrictions in the current kitchen, newer equipment would be very difficult to accommodate. Off-street parking is limited by useable buildable area on the site and wheelchair/handicapped accessible access is also limited. The Church property includes an adjacent parsonage which in the past has been the home of one of the pastors until a few years ago when the church determined that the parsonage site could be used to allow for a building addition. Integral to this proposed project also includes the demolition of the parsonage which results in a large open space adjacent to the east side of the church. This open space provides the opportunity to add more off-street parking but also allows for a location to include an integrated underground storm water management system below the parking lot. A major benefit to using this approach to address requirements for storm water management is that it eliminates any need for large surface ponds which would likely result in the removal of significant areas of trees from the wooded area along Minnehaha creek. The ECLC congregation is active and socially responsible, so many of the of the upgrades to the existing building will include improvements to make the building more energy efficient, including improved windows, light fixtures, new HVAC systems, new roofing and additional insulation. The entire project is being planned to closely follow sustainable guidelines. At this time, ECLC asks that the City of Edina approve this request as the church is not changing the intended use of the site or building, but improving the use that has existed since 1948. The Church is asking to remodel and add space to provide improvements within their facility that assure compliance with current building and accessibility codes, are up to date, sized to their current population, and visually integrated with the original building and the surrounding residential neighborhood. BENTZ/THOMPSON/RIETOW, INC. - 801 Nicollet Mall, Suite 801 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 35402 (Phone) 612.332,1234 (Fox) 612.332.1813 - www.btr-orchitects.com Aa, EXISTING SITE PLAN Edina Community Lutheran Church -A* NORTH Bentz / Thompson / Rietow EXISTING UPPER -J* NORTH Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz /Thompson / Rietow EXISTING LOWER Edina Community Lutheran Church NORTH Bentz / Thompson / Rietow E i t I { �s ,• avr , aa.Y ���"w� '�� T�� �t t � ,s� 4 "`.�..`is ��';`� �� \ A a ' X � .'+w"� �' P .QUI `ads � �� wa .._l � ."""`*+• 'e �. % �" � .t �' � � f .e 4 _ `_Jr •r , ... .. �rK . � � gent �� �y� & ¢¢'yA +�L � � ire: 1'"` .-C _ ,• +..r4�h-w.�' ��+.`a�•.. �.. ,.y+�.. ...-^,..-w..•:..;:° ,M*� J' >77, ,,.. `.`Z'4'.3i�-_ ....,-....��s,�„ ,:Pu��r�°'-'�Y-` 4 �r r�-�a a t,^ ,.. ',.-.,,�•,,,r,. `� ,..,,._�M--s%r._, .... ��.. { L' � w x ,_t. t PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN NORTH Edina Community Lutheran Church CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN wsj7wsralLwr HEM I Edina Community Lutheran Church DAM O NFARBERASSOCIATES t UPPER LEVEL PLAN NORTH Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz / Thompson / Rietow All O z z IL a, lu J C9 W 3 O SU Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz / Thompson / Rietow NORTH ELEVATION Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz / Thompson / Rietow EAST ELEVATION Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz / Thompson / Rietow SOUTH ELEVATION Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz/Thompson / Rietow a-, WEST ELEVATION Edina Community Lutheran Church Bentz / Thompson / Rietow A iS infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 � Minneapolis, MN 66410 & ds+vdatef• Inc. Tei: 783 641.4800 Fax 763 6414700 Memorandum DAM July 6, 2012 TO. Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director Mr. Wayne Houle, City Engineer City of Edina FROM: Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE. Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 - 32 Background The purpose of this study is to determine potential traffic and parking impacts the proposed expansion to the Edina Community Lutheran Church (SCLC) would have on the adjacent roadway system. The site is located on the south side of West 50 Street between Minnehaha Blvd and Halifax Avenue. The project location is shown on Figure 1. The ECLC expansion will include room for additional seating capacity for the main sanctuary, additional classroom space and removal of the existing residential building on the east side of the site. The plan includes the reconfiguration of the parking, driveway circulation and drop off areas to provide for a one-way circulation drive. Access to the site will be from an entry only driveway (existing driveway location) on the west side of the site and a new exit only driveway on the eastside of the site. The proposed site plan is shown on Figure 2. The traffic and parking impacts of the proposed expansion were evaluated at the following locations. • 5e Street west of Minnehaha Blvd to east of Halifax Ave • Halifax Avenue north of 50 Street • Intersection of 54th Street and Minnehaha Blvd • Intersection of 54`h Street and the site entrances • Intersection of 54`h Street and Halifax Avenue • ECLC Site Parking Lot The following sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated impacts of the proposed ECLC expansion. A q ECLC Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina July b, 2012 Page 2 of 7 Existing Traffic Characteristics The existing lane configuration and traffic control include: 54"` Street is an east/west city 2 -lane (on lane in each direction) local street with no turn lanes. An all -way stop is provided at Minnehaha Blvd and a side street stop is provided at Halifax Avenue. Access to adjacent developments and residential property including the Edina Community Lutheran Church site is provided directly from this street. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street except: west of Minnehaha Blvd where no parking is allowed; on the south side of the street from the Church driveway east for approximately 30 feet where no parking is allowed for site sight lines, and; on the south side of the street for the drop off area in front of the Church where parking is restricted to 15 minutes. The speed limit posted on 54"' Street is 30 mph. The City is currently completing plans and specification for the Bike Blvd project that will modify the existing street configuration. It will be completed in the summer of 2012 and include restriping of the street with advisory bike lanes. Parking will continue to be allowed on both sides of the street. Halifax Avenue is a north/south city 2 -lane (on lane in each direction) local street with no turn lanes. Access to adjacent residential property is provided directly from this street. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street except directly at the intersection of 54h Street where no parking is allowed approximately 30 feet back from the intersection on both sides of the street. The speed limit posted on Halifax Avenue is 30 mph. Turning movement counts and parking utilization data was collected on Sunday June 10`h, 2012 from 7:30am to 1:00pm. In addition hourly directional counts were collected on 54h Street, Halifax Avenue and Minnehaha Blvd beginning on Friday June 8'h through Monday June l Ph. Figure 3 shows the existing conditions in the area including: lane configurations and traffic control; average daily and average weekend daily traffic counts; weekday and Sunday peak hour traffic counts, and; the Sunday "Church" peak hour traffic turning movement counts. Site Trip Generation In order to determine the impacts the proposed expansion will on the adjacent roadway system the number of trips from the site needs to be determined. For the Church this is based on attendance. Reviewing the Churches attendance records for the past year, the average attendance (not including Christmas or Easter) for a Sunday is approximately 130 persons at the 11:00 am service. The 8:30 am service has a lower average Sunday attendance, therefore the 11:00 service was used for the analysis. The attendance at the June 10`s, service was 125 p��e� so can therefore be concluded that the traffic and parking counts for that day would repigt- tit an average event for the Church. ECLC Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina July 6, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Based on the traffic and parking counts on June 10th, the 125 person attendance was represented by approximately 73 vehicles. The largest attendance during the past year was 234 on Christmas Eve. Although the expansion is not anticipated to generate additional attendance on an average Sunday, a growth in attendance was assumed for this analysis. Assuming a modest growth in attendance to an average of 150 persons the corresponding traffic growth would be approximately 15 vehicles. Background Traffic Growth Traffic growth in the vicinity of the site will occur between existing conditions and any given future year due to other growth and development within the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future year traffic forecasts. Reviewing the historical traffic counts in the area, traffic has stayed constant or dropped in the past few years. In order to account for some background growth in traffic a .05% per year factor was applied to the through traffic on 54th Avenue. Trip Distribution Site -generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on existing travel patterns, the population distribution relative to the site and the travel sheds for the major routes that serve it. The Trip Distribution was assumed as follows: 65% east on 54th Avenue 35% west on 54th Avenue Future Year Traffic Forecasts Traffic forecasts were prepared for the year 2014, which is the year after the proposed expansion would be completed. The traffic forecasts were developed by adding the projected annual background traffic to the existing traffic counts then adding the anticipated additional site traffic to the system based on the traffic distribution outlined above. Figure 4 shows the projected 2014 Sunday peak hour traffic volume. Traffic Operations Existing and forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for each of the study area intersections. This section of the study describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations. Analysis Methodology The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations.] ECLC Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina July 6, 2012 Page 4 of 7 Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" to describe the average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is primarily a function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration, and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection operating at that level. LOS E represents the condition where the intersection is at capacity, and some drivers may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through an intersection controlled by traffic signals. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be handled by the intersection, and many vehicle operators may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through the intersection. At a stop sign -controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each approach at an all -way stop, or long queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through -street intersection. The LOS ranges for both signalized and un -signalized intersections are shown in Table 1. The threshold LOS values for un -signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. Table 1- Intersection Level of Service Ranges Source: HCM LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches') or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a two-way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un -Signalized A 510 <-10 B 10-20 10-15 C 20-35 15-25 D 35-55 25-35 E 55-80 35-50 F >80 >50, Source: HCM LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches') or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a two-way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. ECLC Traffic and -Parking -Study City of Edina July 6, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low-volume Iegs of some intersections. The LOS analysis was performed using Synchro/SimTraffic: Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input database for turning -movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and timing characteristics. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing parameters for future conditions. Output from Synchro is transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model. • SitnTraffic is a micro -simulation computer modeling software that simulates each individual vehicle's characteristics and driver behavior in response to traffic volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model simulates drivers' behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as different vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue lengths at each intersection being analyzed. Existing Level of Service Summary Table 2, below, summarizes the existing LOS at each of the study area intersections based on the current lane geometry and traffic volumes. The table shows that all intersections currently operate at an overall LOS A during Sunday peak hour with all movements operating at LOS B or better. Table 2 - Existing Level of Service Intersection Sunday Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) 50 Street at Minnehaha Ave A (B) 4 50 Street at Church Entrance A (A) 2 54`h Street at Halifax Ave A (B) 5 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS _.._ ._ECL -e Traf&c-and-Parking study City of Edina } July 6, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Forecast Traffic Operations A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the study area intersections for 2014 which represents the year after the proposed expansion is planned for completion. The results of the analysis are shown below in Table 3. All of the intersections are expected to continue to operate at similar levels of service with the proposed increase in attendance as before the expansion. Table 4 — Expansion (2014) Level of Service Intersection Sunday Peak Hour LOS Delay (sec/veh) 50 Street at Minnehaha Ave A (B) 5 50 Street at Church Entrance A (A) 2 54°i Street at Church Exit A (A) 3 54" Street at Halifax Ave A (B) 6 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Parking Demand The parking demand for the site was analyzed based on the existing and anticipated attendance for the Church. Based on the parking inventory and count conducted on June l Oh there is 38 parking spaces available in the existing Church parking lot (including 3 handicapped spaces) and 35 spaces on 50 Street from Minnehaha Blvd to Halifax Ave south. This represents a total of 73 spaces available on site or adjacent to the Church. There are also an additional 25+ spaces on Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street that could be used during peak attendance days. The peak parking demand on June 10th was 73 vehicles between 10:30 and 11:30 am. All of these vehicles were parked in either the existing Church parking lot or on 54th Street. No vehicles were parked on Halifax Avenue. Figure 5 shows the number of parking spaces available and used based on the parking count conducted. As discussed in the Traffic Analysis section, if attendance would grow to an average of 150 persons, this would represent and additional 15 vehicles, raising the parking demand to 88 vehicles. The proposed revised site plan includes an additional 11 spaces and 1 handicapped space for a new total of 50 spaces. Although this will accommodate much of the traffic growth, there will be a need for some vehicles to park on Halifax Avenue. It is estimated that on an average attendance day when all spaces are occupied in the Church parking lot and on 54thS Street, vehicle would also be parking on Halifax Avenue to a distance of 50 to 100 feet north of 4 ` 54th Street. dX The current City Code and previous parking agreement would require approximately 7Q parkingbf�' spaces to be provided on site for the Church, based on the existing seating. The ChQ receiv . a variance for the parking requirement in 1992 for 37 spaces using proof of parking as a justification. The proposed expansion project would also require a variance for the parking `�► requirement for 50 spaces also using proof of parking. ��4 EUC—Traffic-and Parking Study City of Edina July 6, 2012 Page 7 of 7 Conclusions /Recommendation Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: • The proposed Church Expansion will include additional capacity in the main sanctuary, additional classroom space and removal of the existing residential building on the east side of the site. ■ Although the expansion is not expected to generate new attendance, assuming a modest growth from 130 persons to 150 persons, the site would generate an additional 15 vehicles / hour on an average Sunday (11:00 am service). ■ Traffic operations at the study area intersections and driveways on 54`h Street will remain the same with or without the proposed Church expansion. ■ Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded that, although the available parking does not meet the City's Code, based on the expansion of the Church parking lot and the availability of on street parking, adequate parking spaces are available for the anticipated parking demand. ■ A proof of parking should be provided documenting the availability of additional parking on site if required. Based on these conclusions no additional improvements other than those shown on the site plan would be required to accommodate the proposed Church expansion. . bt1P A43 *411jh �)���� o1B nv� yow L A. �c oa w CONGO a a Ix TIRE ST. s i- a /E.1 �?� �� oa ~i o j Wa W. 59th ST. g _ ROOK LA. � SBth w a ST V Z x� a T. a Q 4 O 61 Ist ST. 4 ,�Ul_ N FST."— A 'a o ioo ft 1400 +t W. LEd ST. 4 r Project Location' I thJU ST. �___i J (� Creek OFULLER i m 55th a W, ST. ST. 4 a v h 55th Sj W. 56th ST. W MST. T TAGE 164th ST. w JUST.. 'JUL v a \\ 2 W. oorIiiI o...�.1• a ccs o 0o c --r w t o D SOUTH �- ALE l a A ie 68 th � a m ROYC `rte BAL ANZ ¢ `Q ST. O PAYTON R-7 > w bL N CT. UPPER I // ._ l�f� F o-�� %�\ 4 a "A.�,� Traffic and Parking Studye� gure i r e Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion 64K �~ ':,�a �,•. City of Edina, Minnesota Pr ocation Map g� A lk WOODOALE a P c EOEN a W000 J c GL 02 W. 52nd y T J 3` W. 53 o' ST. a Lake 4; Li AIGHMOND Harvey GOLF a TER. a nv� yow L A. �c oa w CONGO a a Ix TIRE ST. s i- a /E.1 �?� �� oa ~i o j Wa W. 59th ST. g _ ROOK LA. � SBth w a ST V Z x� a T. a Q 4 O 61 Ist ST. 4 ,�Ul_ N FST."— A 'a o ioo ft 1400 +t W. LEd ST. 4 r Project Location' I thJU ST. �___i J (� Creek OFULLER i m 55th a W, ST. ST. 4 a v h 55th Sj W. 56th ST. W MST. T TAGE 164th ST. w JUST.. 'JUL v a \\ 2 W. oorIiiI o...�.1• a ccs o 0o c --r w t o D SOUTH �- ALE l a A ie 68 th � a m ROYC `rte BAL ANZ ¢ `Q ST. O PAYTON R-7 > w bL N CT. UPPER I // ._ l�f� F o-�� %�\ 4 a "A.�,� Traffic and Parking Studye� gure i r e Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion 64K �~ ':,�a �,•. City of Edina, Minnesota Pr ocation Map g� A lk I 9 � �M2Traffic I _. pow 'Y`�" �� �,�� y�>^���Iiy�,_ ` ,�E T.i1 •� � > z. f the . a�C r ®� 1 Parking Study Edina Figure City of Edina, Minnesota Proposed Site Plan 1 C'1 650 (550) Z PEAK HOUR VOLUME COMPARISON R :0 SUNDAY 111:00 AM TO 120 PMI 169 S SUNDAY PEAK (12:00 PM TO 1:00 PM) 221 7Z WEEKDAY PEAK t 4:00 PM TO 5:00 PM/ 416 tP O T � 2200 ,4 y //'.. � 4-\ l 8 9 Il y f— 106 I� \ 9 69 �► R JP 1200 [950) N A D 0 50 ft 100 ft C Mi LA 2650 __ 54th STREET---------------1�--- 2650 2550) .J -I* (2500[ /io m AlT 4— 85 21 66 •0. !• Edina Community LEGEND -�� Lutheran Church XX SUNDAY 11:00 AM TO 12:00 AM �✓.� LANE CONFIGURATION TRAFFIC CONTOL - STOP SIGN Iry 4r" XXXX AVERAGE DAIL TRAFFIC (XXXXj AVERAGE WEEKEND TRAFFIC a'CIO Traffic and Parking Study Figure 3 e Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion aY City of Edina, Minnesota Existing Traffic Volumes N 0 So ff 100 ff ;I 7- rn T OCG C m O i 128 a A? 4-119 14 %A 98 126 ------------------- ----------------- 54th STREET --------------------- 83 10-0 83 J C- 23 79 10 9 W 83 -10. Edina Community Lutheran Church LEGEND XX PROJECTED 2014 SUNDAY 11:00 AM TO 12:00 Am %affic and Parking Study Figure 4 e Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion City of Edina, Minnesota Projected 2014 Traffic Volumes Dote: PrInteC: 7///Z00 NS8 Foonoaa: K:X016$6-J20%C0a\£x Tlbf?5(KB6-JZ fV-DS - Por*fnO DWOM4d9n N A �� 4t 0 50 fT 10. �Y T` V1 F Edina Community Lutheran Church LEGEND •;n XX AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES IXX) PEAK PARKING USE (10:30 TO 11:301 .1, Traffic and Parking Study Figure 5 o e a �.4 J Y Edina Community Lutheran Chum Expansion r parking Demand .� ` City of Edina, Minnesota 9E0-zVq+wty . UM"-NOwf... • .,H • .......... •.MI dnOJ.} 16Jn1za114)l -- Yzm for—AI-M VKPmaso cum — 43Jn43 ueia4inl lunww6'3 ewp3 i :'%r -h� •eus,~p mad auox,� wisxrH A �. Z m 1 ainpak4yb adeosPuel 1 (/, . L O '3u!f- mS'6U1J-ug6u3 WL Z �� e I 7' 2 M 19 w t CV 10 mm <mm ° P 0 IN A 1 0 0 oilMom r �OON�1iK,4,�i��y:�r�i\ r`•9:• i0i •� ,l• .1'.`,` , "I IAW i. i 7? 0:` � O • rig` _ vt/j�,AAis i• `4 �.� i/J - N; /YN/)Il/II/I !S/�%I.//�� 1��� ., u iY�•`,n:♦.:♦ ti..�y�� ..... 'a � ul r"fs �t''y,""qqy�� ■ ..r .....uuu • • _ .... ........... .: momf. e a 5 6 �T7'(T 10 Hiro m< �� 2" 4 5 z 'r g qgu a $A" 3p, gig _ zo a p 2t I � Ali : >�gm r "- age Lv gig 1� p P. z 1 11 , go $ b Al �a .1 of -,v z r Z" %St 5j r , a g e Engineenng.Surveying. Landscape J4ehgecWre HAnsexbJ Txartr Paunsn OisoN, l.c. Edina Community Lutheran Church atr]wesY sansa.eu tamfapo}s, �.vl sstxs ®Architectural Group Ltd. w;R,ataata !. •+II,. u. Ya.°a-!.a o-:-1, AKC-.,JrlA rel, ♦+fr ari.aax ixa. +r'i,l flJ.a>x.� YI �^�� +. _., «.c 5AEi01»>�� o a i Z l R o CA o go --� G -)Cn ,3 -� �� .0 o0 C-13 Z -------------- ��r apt . &Yne Cw nw* Lutheran Church ®ArcAltacleralG)OUP Ltd. — �=s'�19 ^• —'» 4111V" SM Wd, Mimewfir, UN 554H ly.-- !Gill .. 1 S 4rorelaM h.nn . wlnaea3olli.MM 336.3.1 151 � E64a11 arcAWs'e'.<ew. Wb--VtY fi, ,^ m TaNpJ,ane 6l T.l .1)31. h< IN 612.3)).1331 b+m' f�§e,,.,� ha.....�.e�^.�^n:..•^..+�+�.�.�^..wvw.�n.�..wr...ru.r.+^..m�raA..�.nrnr..—w......«..�.—....^..�...«.«..��....�.�.���._._._..__�._..r._.___....__ gill 3N14 . &Yne Cw nw* Lutheran Church ®ArcAltacleralG)OUP Ltd. — �=s'�19 ^• —'» 4111V" SM Wd, Mimewfir, UN 554H ly.-- !Gill .. 1 S 4rorelaM h.nn . wlnaea3olli.MM 336.3.1 151 � E64a11 arcAWs'e'.<ew. Wb--VtY fi, ,^ m TaNpJ,ane 6l T.l .1)31. h< IN 612.3)).1331 b+m' f�§e,,.,� ha.....�.e�^.�^n:..•^..+�+�.�.�^..wvw.�n.�..wr...ru.r.+^..m�raA..�.nrnr..—w......«..�.—....^..�...«.«..��....�.�.���._._._..__�._..r._.___....__ ......e...- �i�aa.•N ..-« Iff 1'LLE'L19 s11w Py•Lf[L'LLE'Ll9 auoyaa�a1..®.r..+.u..w..rev...........,........m.....+........w+-..r. v S6W 18pap.a Ls e•a0 Woa•lapal'a�mm »ISyaM • w»'iapoy6yv[ ilep] -'--'- s5I IE6aSfti1Y'a11oO»uu11y • »e.as[ Puela^9✓J SI _.____ LI IOB :g1paetl pL05S fE]•sn90aOtlji'Na15 M1w EIOVE ........ ,.....,........ .»........e.., A-ri Y5PiNE :aO 'Pil d—!) Ie[e]�s114]�V _.—_.. 4pin4o—a41n"1 ALunwwa9 mp3 I ✓- ¢m ft` j 14, zv 0o N 52-5 CEa Z 09 t � O Y Z � �.: 0 PivocsLstl0tld5 X33 Edina Community Lutheran Church Exterior Street Level Perspective ®Architectural Groep Ltd. May3,2013 13 Gm d.d hnsce • MN—po6a.MN 93403-1154 t4daH MhOkodel.com . Web31[e W"AC dN.cae Vapkope 612.377.2737 . Mg046Ne 612.377.1331 02M3 WM ARMWMCN6WOR", L70. OPk6fPkL h3� 22'72021 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Madq and entered into this day of 1992, by and between EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, INCORPORATED, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (the "Church") and. CITY OP EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"); WITNESSETH, THAT: WHEREAS, The Church is the Owner of certain real property. — . L. ("Property") located in .the City of tdina, County of H%nnepin, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, The Church proposes to construct an addition to the building currently. existing on the Property ("Building"), which addition is to include parking and landscaping to be used in connection therewith as shown on the plan prepared by Siivik Mathre Sathrum, Quanbeck Edwins dated February 20, 1992 ("Plan") (the addition and said parking and landscaping being hereinafter called the "Improvements"); and WHEREAS, the Plan provides 37 parking spaces on site but would need 70 parking spaces, following completion of the Improvements, to comply with the' City's zoning ordinances; and WHEREAS, additional on site parking spaces could only be provided by locating them on the.flood plain of Minnehaha Creek; and WHEREAS, the Church has sought approval from the City for construction of the Improvements and requested a parking variance necessary to allow construction of the improvements as shown on the flan, and WHEREAS, the City did, on April 6, 1992, in Case No, C-92-1, approve the construction of the Improvements and grant the requested variance because strict enforcement of the City ordinances would, in this case, cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Property, and the approval of construction and grant of such variance has been determined by the City to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the applicable ordinances, but the approval of construction and grant of the variance was conditioned upon the execution, delivery, and recording of this ;Agreement, and upon the conditions hereinafter set out in this Agreement, which the City deems, necessary to impose to ensure compliance with the applicable City ordinances and to protect adjacent properties; and rl 3 ON D 6a4 l5aputy Exarniner of Titles i-A� WHEREAS, The Church is agreeable to the approval of construction and the granting of the variance being subject to the conditions hereinafter set out, and is willing, and represents that it has the power and authority, to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval given by the City and the granting of the above requested variance, by the City, and of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. The City hereby confirms that it did, as above stated, approve construction of the Improvements, and did grant variance from its applicable ordinances concerning parking requirements and buildixtg.sgtback, requirements, subject, however, to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. If the City Manager and the City Planner shall hereafter determine, in their sole and absolute discretion, that additional parking spaces are required on the Property, the Church will, at its sole cost and expense, submit to the City a plan for providing the additional parking spaces as the City Planner and City Manager shall then require, up to the maximum number of parking spaces required by the then applicable City Ordinances. The City Planner and City Manager need not require that all of the additional parking spaces be provided at any one time, but may require additional parking spaces be provided from time to time as they deem them necessary, again in their sole and absolute discretion, until the maximum number of parking spaces as required by the then applicable City Ordinances have been provided. The plan for additional parking spaces may provide for additional parking spaces on the Property, on the City property used for parking and located West of Minnehaha Creek and South of West 54th Street, on West 54th Street following reconstruction and widening of the street to provide for parking bays, or on other off-street locations or combinations thereof. 'The plan shall also include methods for implementing the use of any such additional parking areas by Church patrons. Any such plan shall avoid use of the floodplain area for additional parking spaces. The plan must be approved by the City, and if approved by the City (which approval may be withheld for any reason or cause), such additional parking spaces may then be utilized by the Church pursuant to said new parking plan, as approved, and subject to the then applicable ordinances of the City, except as such ordinances may be waived by variances, if any, then granted. As above stated, the City Manager and City Planner shall be the sole judges of whether or not additional parking is required, from time to time, and if so, how much Is to be constructed at any given time. 40"Wo The City Manager and the City Planner shall give written notice to the Church of their determination that additional parking spaces are then required, .2_ lvi setting forth In said notice the number of spaces then required to be provided, up to the maximum required by the then applicable City Ordinances. The Church must submit its proposed plan for additional parking spaces within thirty (30) days after such notice is given. 3. If any term, condition, or provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall, to any extent, be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder hereof and the application of such term, provision, and condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom it shall be held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby, and this Agreement, and all the terms, provisions, and conditions hereof, shall, in all other respects, continue to be effective and to be complied with to the full extent permitted by law. 4. In the event that the Church fails or refuses to fully comply with all of its obligations under this Agreement, or violates any of the provisions hereof, - and such failure, refusal or violation continues for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof is given to the Church,, then, in that event, in addition to any other remedies then available to the City at law or in equity, the City shall have the right to: (a) Prohibit any parking on West 54th Street (which City may do whether or not agreed to herein by the Church). (b) Obtain enforcement of this Agreement by court order for mandatory injunction or other appropriate -relief; and (c) Withhold, deny, or revoke any building permits, certificates of occupancy, utility connection permits and any other permits and approvals, now or hereafter issued or granted or to be issued or granted by the City for the construction or occupancy of all or any part of the Property, or Improvements, until such failure or refusal ends and the Church fully complies with its obligations hereunder. All of the foregoing remedies shall be usable and enforceable by the City separately or concurrently as the City shall determine, and the use of one remedy shall not waive or preclude the use of any one or more of the other • - remedies. Also, the failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any remedy hereunder In the event of a failure or refusal by the 'Church, shall not preclude City from thereafter exercising any of its remedies for the same or a subsequent failure or refusal. The Church agrees to pay to City any and all costs and expenses incurred by City in enforcing this Agreement by the use of the remedies above set out or by other remedies or means available to the City at law or in equity, including attorneys' fees whether suit be brought or not, and with interest on all such costs and expenses at the highest rate permitted by law, or, if no maximum rate is -3- A35 applicable, then at the rate of twelve percent (12°x) per annum from the dates Incurred by the City until paid. The Church also agrees to pay all costs of collection of any monies due to the City from the Church pursuant hereto, and of such costs and expenses incurred in enforcing this Agreement, with interest thereon, again including attorneys' fees and whether suit be brought or not, with interest at the highest rate permitted by law, or if no maximum rate is applicable, then at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the dates such costs of collection were incurred until paid. 5. All notices, reports, or demands required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given when personally. delivered ta. any ofi cer of tiro party. to which notice is being given, or. when deposited in the Unites States mail in a sealed envelope, with registered or certified mail postage prepaid thereon, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: To City: 4841 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Attn: City Manager To the Church: 4113 West 54th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Such addresses may be changed by any party upon notice to the other party given as herein provided. 5. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to tfie benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, and shall run with the title to the Property and be binding upon all present and future owners of the Property. If, for any reason, the provisions hereof should be determined by the legal counsel for the City, or by a court of competent jurisdiction, not to be binding upon and fully enforceable against --any owner of the Property, then the variance granted by the City in Case No. C-92-1 shall wholly cease and terminate and the Property shall be used and usable only in full compliance with all then applicable ordinances of the City. Xf there be at any future time more than one owner of the property, all of such then owaners, while they are such owners, shall be jointly and severally liable for all obligations under this Agreement. -4- WN IN WrrNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly executed the day and year first above written. EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, INCORPORATED B _r �C= OF EDINA . .. _ By - Its Mayor And Its manager STATE OF MINNESOTA) . )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this X day of .1992, by &A. the sidiw of EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, INCORPORATED, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, on behalf of said corporation. b STEI�i y, FRANK . NOTARYPUBLIC-MINNf�OiA NENN�U COUNTY oaryblic My Coamwk bn EKplrei Qea 21,1992 5 w0jvVVV0AAA&ANVAAVVVAAkAANV0AWx 5- wo K STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ` l%ay of 1992, by A&4,L ,S,, andKe ,e. & the Mayor and Manager, res cdvely, of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said municipal corporation. JOM06 W.PYA El Notary rubiic M+t�IMMMIMNr11M�1:�A►!1y'Nlla c Ibis instrument drafted by; Dorsey & Whitney CIES) 2200 First Bank Place East Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 0 w .-� E i1 r r -! .A7l of the Northwest Quarter (NWS) of the Northeast Quarter (NL}) of the Northeast Quarter (NSq) in Section Nineteen (19), Township Twenty-eight (28), Range Twenty-four (24), except that part thereof 611 platted as Minnehaha Woods A-1 p �j 4/6/92 Q V heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed improvements: PERNANEAT STREET SURFACING,. CURB & 0U'1"1'ER, STORK SEM AND SIDEFA1X ISPROVEl= NO. BA -299 (S.A.P. 120-159703) - Valley Vier Road from West 69th Strest/France Avenue to Crosstown Highway PERUMMTt.STREET SURFACING.- CURB A GUTTER AND SIDEFALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -299 (S.A.P. 130-144-06) - West 66th $=set Francs Avenue to Southdale Lane STORK SEWSB'ZNPBOVMU= NO. STS -219 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 7XPROVENSST N0. TS -21 - Valley View Roa st 66th Street STREET LIGHTING nMMEUZT N0. L-36 (S.A.P. 120 -150 - and at the hearing held at the time and place specified notice, the Council bas duly considered the views of all persons ted, and being fully advised of the pertinent facts, does hereby detezmin oceed with the construction of said improvement including all pro s which may be necessary in'sminent domain for the acquisition of necess ements and rights for construction and maintenance of such improveme t said improvements are hereby designated and shall be referred to subsequent proceedings as: PERMANEXT STREET:SURFACING, CURB & APD SIDEWALK SOVEl�1T 50. BA -293 PERMANENT 8TREET,SURFACING, CURB AND SIDBWALS n1PROVEMT NO. BA -299 STORK SEWER NO. 9 TRAFFIC SIGNAL I)MVEHM -21 . STREET LIGHTING Z!N"80 L-36 The area proposed to be assess a portion of the cost.of the proposed improvements includes: el (Cornelia Park Pool). Lot 1, Blk. 2. Southdale Office Park Se da.; Nests & Bounds Description Southdale Office Center Unplatted, Commen t WE corner of SS 1/4 thence South to lib Corner of South Office Park 1st thence Westerly along Northerly line of said Adds. to its intersection centerlins of Valley View Road, thence Northerly along said centsrl North line of SE 1/4. Thence Easterly to Beginning Except Roads; Lot 10, Blk. 3, Southdale First Addn.; Lots 1 thru 13, Blk. 4.;- Southdale Ada.; Lot 2, Blk. 1 South Office Park First Addn.; tract A, RIS No. 1365; partment Ownership 079 - Point of Francs Condominiums. All units coma th Apartment Ownership #79 (Unit 102 thru 1210 and'Panthouse 1 thru.' Pen 2). Motion w onded by Xember Kelly. , Paulus, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. G�+ CONDITTOI� USE PEUM GRANftD FOB BUILM9 E%PANSION AND REMODEL _r BDINA !61(\�, CONFIRM LymmmCHURCH Planner Larsen reminded Council that at the March 16, 1992, meeting the request for a conditional use permit for building expansion and remodeling at Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, was A0I continued for additional information on two issues: 1) sidewalk along the front of the church property; and 2) parking bays -along the south side of W. 54th Street adjacent to the church. Following that meeting, architects for the church have submitted two site plan for both sidewalk and parking bays. Exhibit "A" illustrates a seven foot wide sidewalk just -inside the existing curb line. The sidewalk would extend from the parking lot curb out on the west to the parsonage . driveway on the east, with no parking bay. Exhibit "B" illustrates both a sidewalk and a parking'bay. The parking bay would stop before the parsonage and would provide space for six cars. Staff would recommend the Exhibit "A" sidewalk only alternative. The bay should A4y 4/6/92 +. 81 be included in the Proof of Parking Agreement and considered in the future if conditions warrant. Reasons presented in support were: 1) The existing street meets the local and state width standard for a low volume collector street with parking on both sides. The state standard is 38 feet and the existing street is 40 feet wide. 2) The parking bay would not provide additional parking spaces. There is presently parking on both sides of 54th Street. 3) Due to existing grades, additional steps would be required if the parking bay is constructed. 4) The Proof of Parking Agreement will allow the City to address future parking and safety problems. Ben Crabtree, 5428 Wooderest Drive, neighbor and church member, submitted that one parking space would be lost if the bay is constructed. With sidewalk up to the curb, snow left by plowing could be more easily moved onto the church property. He concurred with the staff recommendation for Exhibit "A" sidewalk only. No further comment or objection was heard. RESOLOTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA COMMUNITY IXTHERAN CHURCH WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance) have been not; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Ordinance No. 825 have been satisfied; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby. grants a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Community Lutheran Church at 4113 Nest 54th Street for building expansion and remodeling. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards. Resolution adopted.. SECOND READING 81 - RADIO ANTENNAS AND TOWERS) Planner Larsen recalled theCouncil granted first reading for Ordinance No. 812-A3 on March 16, 19", a only changes to the final draft are to the height of the residential o antennas in Subsection 815.06. Staff would recommend second reading anLon. Ray Voss, 5716 Benton Avenue, representingthe teur radio group, and Dick Casey, 6120 Ashcroft Avenue, said they conc` with the ordinance amendment as presented. Member Belly offered Ordinance No. 81�'for Second Reading and moved adoption as follows: "CB NO. 812-A3 AN ORDINl11DING ORDINANCE NO. 812 TO REGULATE CONSTRU AND BAINTENANCE OF TEL$COlDtUNICATION, TELEVISION AND SIO ANTENNAS, EBTTERIOR DISH ANTENNAS AND SUPPORTING TOWERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH$g;0OF EDINA, NINNESM, ORDAINS: Section 1. Ord ca No. 812 is amended to read as follows: 815.01 Definiti *; Words and phrases used in this Section whichare defined In. Section 850is Code shall be construed in this Section according to their definitions coiEned in Section 850. The following words and terms shall have theowfoll �' ing Savings In this Section: Anton." Equipment used for transmitting or receiving telecommunication, television or radio signals, vhieh is located on the exterior of, or outside of, any building or structure. For purposes of this Section, "antenna" does not include "dish antenna". Dish Antenna. A parabolic shaped antenna (including all supporting 4+s- 3/16/92 .. 59 bathroom/restroom located within a non residential building or within the common areas of a multiple residential building.) Section 460 - Signs (Scheduled for Apra ging.) * Section 470 - Dangerous and Substa ldings (Inco State Law whereby Council may order repair or r of dangerous or dard buildings.) Section 475 - Parking duled for Ap earing.) Section 480 - Exterior gle Dwelling Un Double Dwelling Unit Buildings No public comment or o n was heard on 4. CHAPTER 5 - CIVIL E` The following ons in the exist a have been deleted: SectiF Air Raid Preca' Sections with an asteris significant changes noted: Sect 505 - Civil Dere No public comment or -objection as heard on Chapter 5. Mayor Richards then declared the public hearing closed. ( N /� RXQUZST FOR COPDITIONAL USE COAT MM TO APSIL 6. 1992, FOR BUILDIRG v OilIRMIONaNVULM - EDIRA CO�II�OI�ITYLUTBH M CHURCH, 4113 WEST_ 54TH S Affidavits TRBST of Notice were presented, approved and ordered place on file. presentation bX Planner Planner Larsen recalled that in August, 1988, the Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, requested and received a Conditional Use Permit to construct a new sanctuary addition and to generally remodel the church. The new sanctuary would have seated 210 persons compared to 197 in the existing ' sanctuary. Following approval of the permit, the church decided not to proceed with the addition and renovation. The church has now reapplied for a Conditional Use Permit for a revised and reduced in size plan for expansion and renovation of the church. Phase I would be construction of a 22 x 24 foot addition to the north side of the church for relocation of church offices. The fellowship hall (located in the lower level) would be moved to the main floor and the present fellowship hall would be converted to classrooms: Phase II would be construction of a 16 x 48 foot addition to the sanctuary on the east side to provide improved circulation within the building with no increase in seating capacity. The church presently maintains a setback of approximately 27 feet from West 54th Street. The proposed addition would extend four feet in front of the existing wall and would provide a setback of approximately 23 feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 50 foot minimum setback; thus a 27 foot setback variance is requested. All other existing and proposed setbacks comply with ordinance requirements. The existing parking is located west and south of the church with a capacity ranging from 25 to 35 vehicles. The lot is improved with a blacktop surface but is tiot striped. The plan anticipates organizing and striping the lot to provide 37 spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires one space for each three seats in the largest place of assembly. The 197 seat sanctuary would require 66 spaces. The plan requests a 37 space parking variance. The church has submitted an alternate parking plan which would increase the total parking count to 44 spaces. This ' plan would require substantial fill and retainage along the creek bank. The church site is 4.73 acres in size, with a majority of the site either flood plain or wetland; the useable area is relatively small. In 1988 the church prepared plans to construct parking in the floodplain area. The plan received approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. This plan was not viewed 3/16/52- 60 favorably by the City or neighbors along the creek. The approved Conditional Use Permit instead included,a proof of parking agreement obligating the church to pursue other parking solutions if a problem arose in the future. The.plan addressed modified service schedules and possible parking bays along 54th Street. Staff believes this approach remains valid. On -street parking has not presented a problem for the neighborhood and continued on -street parking seems to be preferable to disturbance of natural areas adjacent to the creek. Staff would recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit including the requested parking space -variance and building setback variance, subject to a proof of parking agreement for these reasons: 1) The project has been reduced in site from the 1988 plans, 2) Given the characteristics of the site, the plan is the best solution with minimal impact on the. neighborhood and the environmental features on the site, 3) The project will -be an improvement. to the neighborhood. The Planning Commission heard the request at its meeting of February 26,'1992, and unanimously recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit, subject to a proof of parking agreement with the following elements if warranted: 1) Parking bays along West 54th Street, 2) Off-site parking implemented on City property, 3), Additional parking constructed behind the parsonage, 4) Rearrangement of existing parking stalls. The Commission specifically recommended that the alternative parking plan for parking within the floodplain not be considered. It was noted that written correspondence in support of the project had been received from Pastor Erik Strand, Edina Community Church; Steven B. Edwina, of Sovik Mathre Sathrum Quanbeck Architects, 205 So. Water Street, Northfield, MN; and Burton W. Grimes, 5400 Halifax Lane. Correspondence in opposition was received from Merideth/John Hale, 5504 Halifax Lane; Martin/Marion Donnelly, 5332 Halifax Avenue So.; Kathleen Wetherall, 5328'Halifax Avenue So.; Anne/John Crist, 5324 Halifax Avenue So.'; Amy/Tom Donnelly, 5333 Halifax Avenue So.; and Teresa Forliti, 5336 Halifax Avenue•So. Presentation for Proponent Erik Strand, pastor of ;Edina Community Church, submitted that the congregation felt that the plan proposed in 1988 was too ambitious and not in keeping with its desire to maintain a modest size church. Ha elaborated on the current proposal emphasizing that it would allow for .better internal flow of the building and better utilization of space. Further, a sidewalk along the front of the church property is being constdered'if the City and neighborhood concur. Public Comment Burt Grimes, 5400 Halifax Lane, said he favored the sidewalk on church property only. Ray Voss'. 5716 Benton Avenue, said he was a councilmember at Edina Community Lutheran Church and referred to a letter from neighboring property owners regarding problems with church activities. He stated that none of the issues mentioned have come to the attention of the church, that they would not intend to impinge upon'the neighborhood in any way, and would follow-up on the concerns that have been raised. Jim Grotz, 5513 Park Place, asked if the building was used for day care and -also asked about the parking bays. Pastor Stand said space is rented to a nursery school which uses the facilities from 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M.:on weekdays. The church council will be evaluating whether this rental should continue. Planner Larsen said parking bays would essentially be a widening of the street -in front of the church property to allow parallel parking. Tom,McCusker, 5413 Woodcrest Avenue, said he felt the proposal, accommodates the wetlands area and asked about the proposed parking on City property. Planner Larsen explained that, if a parking problem is perceived in the future, one of the solutions may be to improve the City property -adjacent to the creek for church parking. - flv� 3/16/92 61 Council Comment/Action In response to Mayor Richards, Planner Larsen said there is no code requirement nor a commission recommendation that sidewalks or parking bays be included in the proposal, but could be made a condition of the permit. Answering Member Rice about what triggers a proof of parking agreement, Planner Larsen said there are agreements in force with some churches now. However, with the exception of Christ Presbyterian Church, none have been implemented. A proof of parking agreement would give the City the right to determine and institute any action necessary to bring non -conforming parking requirements into compliance. Engineer Hoffman explained that if a sidewalk were installed the church would be responsible for its maintenance: He added that safety would be the main reason for parking bays and/or a sidewalk in the area. Member Smith made a motion to grant a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Commumity Lutheran Church, 4119 pest 54th Street, for building expansion and remodeling, subject to a Proof of Parking agreement. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Council discussion ensued regarding implementation of parking bays and sidewalk into the proposal at this time. Member Paulus amended the motion to continue the public hearing on a Conditional Use Permit for Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4119 Vest 54th Street, for building expansion and remodeling, to April 6, 1992, to allow the church to present pians for parking bays and sidewalk as a condition for issuance of the permit. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. 'TELEVISION ANTENUS A14D ==)Subsequent to the public hearing on the draft City Code, and dr otion 815 specifically, the Council considered an amendment to exists ante No. 812 to incorporate language from draft Section 815 as amended. _ ky Member Smith offered Ordinance No. 812 ""'mFirat Reading In, ft,' the language contained in draft Section 8 emended in the public on the 9�0draft City Code. Motion was seconder Member Rice. Rollcall : AS `' Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith �` " Nays: Richards First Reading granted., AMEMEM AND DISK TO 0 6" or Smith made a motion to continue the hear an amendment to rep ce No. 144 (Moratorium on Construction of T , Antennas and Dish ) to April 6, 1992. Motion was seconded by Mem ace. Ayes: Paul ice, Smith, Richards Motion ca V CA OIC F LO HILLS [ftITION) AND EA PUBLU PARK LOW. PUBLrG OPEN SPACE, S OL PODAADDITION) Grr APMOWD FOR Em EURMT Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation by Engineer Engineer Hoffman advised that the developer of the Lincoln Apartments on Lincoln Drive has petitioned the City to either vacate certain public interests or grant OL 3/16/92 permission for encroachment on public easements on the Lincoln Apartments project. Staff would recommend the following actions by the Council: A. Vacate the southerly two feet of a 35 foot utility easement above the elevation of 889.7, National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. B. Grant execution of an agreement to permit a ventilation shaft on the utility easement. C. Vacate all public interest on east 20 feet of Outlot A, Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition, except to reserve drainage and utility easement rights over the east 22 feet. The first recommendation involves vacating air rights on the southerly two feet of A-35 foot utility easement running parallel to the north wall of the Lincoln Apartments north building. The north building footprint was constructed just south of the easement but after field confirmation it was determined that the bay windows protruded over the easement area. The developer has requested that air rights be granted over this two foot area to resolve issues with the title company resulting from the encroachment. The second recommendation results from the encroachment of a ventilation shaft on the utility easement for sanitary sewer. In this case, staff would recommend not granting a vacation of the easement to allow the ventilation shaft but would recommend granting the execution of an agreement to use the utility easement. The terms of the agreement would hold the City harmless for any damage done by the City during its use;of the utility easement for repair or construction work on the utility system. The third recommendation involves vacating any public interest except for utility and drainage rights over the•east.22 feet of Outlot A, Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition. This area is`part of the parking lot for the south building of the Lincoln Apartments, During.a title examination it was unclear what the City's intent was in 1990 when'it earlier vacated all public interests but retained utility interests over the east 20 feet, Council Comment/Action Mayor Richards raised the issue of who would pay for the relocation and legal costs if in the future the City must relocate the public utility within the easement. Attorney Gilligan explained that language could be added to the draft agreement to include the City's right to relocate the utility and that all costs incurred would be paid by the developer. Norm Bjornnes, Lincoln Drive Partners, affirmed that the partnership would indemnify and hold the City harmless from any loss under the terms of the Agreement and would be liable for any and all costs. No public comment or objection to the proposed Council action was heard. Member Paulus introduced the following resolutions and moved adoption: RESOLUTION VACATING EASEMENT ;FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES IN THE -CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COIINTY, MINNESOTA wHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 18th day of February, 1992, fixed a date, for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of easement for drainage and utility purposes; and pgEgF.AR, two weeks published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the hearing was held on the 16th day of March, 1992, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and wHRRFAR, the Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City and of the public that said easement vacation be made; and pHKRF.AC, the Council has considered the extent to which the vacation affects existing easements within the area of the vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning 9/19/88 259 View Road contain between two and five units. Lot sizes range between 10,000 and 15,000 square feet. The R-2 lot immediately to the south of the subject property as an area of 11,500 square feet. Planner Larsen explained that despite the nor deficiencies from the ordinance requirements, staff believes there are ral reasons to support the proposal. Lot Size - The area of the double Ing unit lot is below the requirement, however, it is compatible with the o -2 properties in the vicinity. The R-1 lot exceeds the ordinance minimum as sed and is larger than several other R-1 lots on Brookview. The streetscape along Brookview Avenue will remain unchanged. The R props long Brookview are not impacted by the proposal. The new double dwell in lley View Road will appropriately fill in a noticeable gap, Ew unit will vsloped within all required setbacks and orients logically valley view Community Plannin¢ - The proposed plat and rezoning consistent w principles and land use designations not forth in Comprehensive Planner Larsen advised that the proposal was cons ed by the Community De' nt and Planning Commission on September 7, 19 d recommendad prel rezoning and plat approval, subject to fin zoning, final plat, subdivi edication, curb out location approval a crate utility connections.ted that the proponents, Ronald and t Erhardt were present to answer ques Ronald Erhardt gave a brief his of the subject property which was the h his maternal grandparents. H ated that in the summer of 1987 they made iss as to the possibility o tructing a double bungalow on the rear of the With the decease of tha other earlier this N year, they are now pursuing t oject with plans to 1 n this property when Lo they retire. Member Turner as" the Planning C on discussed the u) substantial variances that are i d. Mr. Erhard id the variances were discussed and the Commission's qu were an Member Turner then asked Mr. Ehrhardt to support their.reque varianc Mr. Erhardt explained that m most of the lots along Valley View s foot& as are smaller than the ,Q variance on the square footage on the ed fronting on Valley View. In discussions with City staff and the su as determined that the proposal was the bast use of that lot. Member Tur d the use makes sense but that she had trouble finding justification for the cos and that she was concerned about the impact on the single family no d. Member Smith suggested that if the lot line were drawn perpendicul o B ew Avenue instead of diagonally that the variance needed for the sin amily Ld not be as great and it would maintain a rectangular lot on okvLow or Richards commented that he did not feel there is justificatio r the reque I ariances so that there could be three dwelling units wh now just one a Mr. Erhardt said that one of the questions raised at Planning Commissi sting was how many units would the square footage of ubject property hen the answer was a• minimum of three. The issu n was should the exist`" use be removed in, order to construct three u The reponse was where t is an existing single family house that fits Br law why not build a double o back portion of the lot which would front o ley View. There was further d ion on re -orienting the propo lot line to eliminate the setback nee for the single family lot an w a double could be sited on the new`ronting Valley View Road. Member ds made a motion to continue the hear r approval of the resoning to A bia Dwelling Unit District and prelimina t for Erhardt Addition to the lag of October 17, 1988 to give the proponent :: ,,e to revise the pro at and provide information on the sixes and dim of other lots in the Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Kel Smith, Richards, Turner, Courtney x Motion c ad. * ADDITION8. N�;�r made by ![ember Rally and seconded by Nsmbor Turner to contiiu e ��^, hpreliminary plat approval for Edina HIghlands 2nd Addition to t jO1988. as requested by the proponent. Mot bn carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED FOR EDINA COMMLRITTY LUTHERAN CHURCH. Notion was made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Turner for adoption of the following resolution, subject to an executed Proof of Parking Agreement prior to issuance of a building permit: R1[iCnTIPPrpN GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PBRxTT WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance) have been met; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by ordinance No. 825 have been satisfied; NOV. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina Ctiy Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Community Lntheran Church, 4119 Vast 54th Street, for construction of a new sanctuary and conversion of the existing sanctuary to a fellowship hall. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. A} o 225 RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PIAT FOR OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION, platted by Hichael Halley Homes, Inc, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 15, 1988 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Smith R olution adopted. PRELIMI Y PLAT APPROVED FOR HED ADDI ION. Affidavits o notice were presented, approved aA4,ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen pre ented the request for preliminary p t approval for the Hed Addition, locate at 6625 West Trail, Lot 1, Block 10, India Hills. The subject property is a d eloped single family lot with an area of 7 07 square feet. The proponent s submitted a preliminary plat which would ere a one new buildable lot. T existing house would remain as it is today. The new t would contain 34,277 a are feet, and the lot for the existing house would con in 44,930 square feet The new house is proposed to front on Iroquois Trail. th lots comply or xceed all Zoning Ordinance requirements -for single fam. lots. A grap c of the proposed plat was shown indicating the'existing house d driveway d proposed house to be constructed on Nthe new lot. In support of thei pplica on, the proponents have submitted an u/ analysis and survey of 40 lots in t we ern portion of Indians to determine lot Lo size. The existing lot (Lot 1, Block , Indian Hills) is the largest in the area and following the subdivision the res g lots would remain among the largest lots in this area of Indian Hills. anne3t Larsen explained that, normally, staff M would want to see the property spli more ev y than is proposed. However, in C( this case a more even division of a proper ould require removing the existing house. The present proposal max izes the size f Lot 2 while saving the existing house. The entire property is avily wooded and he existing house is barely visible from the street. A di sion which would re mi�tire removing the existing house may disturb the site moire than the present prop a al. He advised that at its meeting of July 27, 1988, th Community Development an lanning Commission reviewed the proposal and r commended preliminary approva subject to: 1) final plat approval, 2) subdivis on dedication, and 3) utility co ection charges. He stated that Virgil Had, proponent, was present to answer ques ons. Member Smith ' asked questions about tl& retaining wall adjacent to Iroquois ail. Planner Larsen said that it wa/s/an existing private retaining wall on the property. Member Smith commented that the lots in the proposed plat are consistent in size with the n"hborhoo /with the exception of the large lots to the east. No other comment being heard Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved adoption,subject : 1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, and 3) utility connectio changes: RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PIAT FOR BED ADDITION BE IT RESOLVE by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat ntitled "HED ADDITION", platted by Virgil and Sharon Red, husband and wife, presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 15, 1988 be an.Pis hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH EXPANSION CONTINUED. Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen presented the request of Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, for a conditional use permit. Edina Community Lutheran Church, generally located south of West 54th Street and west of Halifax Avenue, has applied for a conditional use permit to build a new sanctuary and convert the existing sanctuary into a fellowship hall. The new sanctuary will seat 210 people which is an increase of 23 seats over the present sanctuary. The project includes remodeling the interior of the existing building. The exterior of the new sanctuary will be finished with cedar shakes and stone trim to match the stone on the existing church. The existing building will be re -sided with cedar shakes to match the new addition. Discussion at the Community Development and Planning Commission meeting centered upon where additional parking would be located on the church site. The church property measures 4.73 acres in size. However, much of the area is within the flood plain of Minnehaha Creek. No building or other obstructions may be placed in the flood plain. Consequently, the only buildable area is the northeasterly portion of the site. All of the proposed construction is above the flood plain elevation. Under certain circumstances, parking could be developed within the flood plain area. However, from staff's point of view it is not a desirable alternative. In looking at other alternatives, it was determined to develop as much parking as possible on the upper area of the church .ground and if parking overflowed the capacity of that lot it could locate on West 54th Street where there is adequate street width for parking on both sides and very few homes. 8/15/88 226 The church's proposal calls for rebuilding the existing parking area to the south and west of the church'to accommodate 41 cars. The existing parking'area is unstriped and accommodates 25-35 cars. With seating for 210 persons; the Zoning Ordinance requires 70 parking spaces. In order to provide the required parking the church would need to locate the.additional parking within the flood plain area. The church has elected to request a parking variance of 29 spaces to avoid disturbing the natural:conditions existing adjacent to the creek. According to church officials the intent of the addition and renovation project is to better accommodate existing needs and not to prepare for any significant increase in congregation size. The seating capacity increase is very modest and*the existing building would benefit from the proposed renovation. The building design and the soft, natural materials seem appropriate for the site. The Planning Commission members discussed at length whether to recommend the parking variance and the conditional use permit.or to require a proof of parking agreement. The question arose if there is a proof of parking agrehment in place and additional parking is required in the future,. where would those 29 spaces be located. The answer would be in the flood plain which both the church'and staff have been trying to avoid. At its meeting of July:27, 1988, the Planning Commission recommended'approval of the conditional use permit, with a 29 space parking variance as recommended by staff, and that the City and church enter into a proof of parking agreement. Planner Larsen stated that the Planning Commission, staff,.the church, and neighbors all supported the proposed parking variance to avoid disturbing the flood plain areas on the church property. He explained that staff did not recommend the proof of'parking agreement for these reasons: 1) The increase in seating capacity is small, only 23 seats. 2). The flood plain area is'the only place to develop more parking. This area is approximately 16 feet lower than the existing parking lot make it undesirable parking. 3) Cars can park on both sides of'West 54th Street without disrupting traffic flow. 4) Present church activities have not caused problems for the neighborhood. Planner Larsen said that representatives of•the'church were present,.as well as John Cunningham, project architect. Member Turner asked if all alternatives for parking have been considered. Planner'Larsen.said there may be room for additional parking in the future if the existing parsonage were removed. Staff also.looked at the possibility of a parking bay adjacent to West 54th Street. However, the level of traffic and the existing width of the street did not seem to warrant -that alternative. Staff also looked at public.park land on the south side of West 54th Street and west'of Minnehaha Creek as off-site parking; however, that is rather remote to the church. Member Smith asked how a proof of parking agreement would be handled. Planner Larsen said the standard procedure with regard to a proof of. parking.agreement is that the City would hope it would not need to be enforced. The problem with an agreement is 'if additional parking is proved to be needed the City would require that parking be provided somehow on the site. Here the only. place would be down on;the flood plain. Planner Larsen added that the City and church could enter into a general agreement; similar to that with Colonial Church, whereby the church would work with the City to solve parking problems should they occur in the future. Ann Bishop, 5324 Halifax Avenue,_asked about the impact of traffic in the neighborhood if both sanctuaries are used to capacity. Planner Larsen explained that the Zoning Ordinance says you calculate the demand on traffic and parking based on the largest use assembly which in this case would be so modest that there would be no noticeable increase in traffic. If in the future, both structures were used concurrently, it could have some impact. When the City reviews requests for conditional use permits from schools and churches, staff relies on those institutions telling staff how they operate. Mark Brethein, 5429 Woodcrest Drive, said he was supportive of the church's plan and in favor of the parking variance. He said he was concerned about any option to build parking in'the flood plain as that would be across the creek from his property. Member Smith commented•that he would.like to see•some kind'of agreement with the church regarding future parking needs. Member Turner said she would not support putting parking in the -flood plain. She added that the Council has been tough with churches in recent years regarding their parking requirements; that we should not make an exception dere and that there should be some type of agreement. Member Richards made a.motiou that approval.of the Conditional Use Permit for Edina Community Lutheran Church be continued to September 19, 1988 and that staff be directed to bring back an agreement regarding future parking needs for approval before the ConditionaliUse Permit is granted. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF AUGUST 9. 1988 APPROVED. Because of the number of persons present regarding Agenda Item VIII.A (Approval of Traffic Safety Committee Minutes), Mayor Courtney declared:this the next item to be heard. Engineer Hoffman reviewed the discussion held at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting of August 9, 1988 regarding the traffic issues on Halifax Avenue, West 51st through West 54th.Streets and the temporary traffic barricade that had been installed at Halifax and West 51st Street. He recalled that at the July meeting the Committee had recommended that the Council conduct a public hearing on this matter to get input from the residents of Halifax Avenue and the affected surrounding neighborhoods. At its meeting of August 9, 1988, the members