Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018 03-14 Planning Commission Packet Agenda Planning Commission City Of Edina, Minnesota City Hall, Council Chambers Wednesday, March 14, 2018 7:00 PM I. Call To Order II. Roll Call Ill. Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission February 28, 2018 V. Public Hearings A. Variance request for 1st floor height/new home 6237 Knoll Dr. B. Rezoning with Variances; 5000 Vernon Avenue for Caribou Coffee and Einstien Bagel • C. 44th and France Small Area Plan D. Public Hearing: Variance Request, 6008 Concord Avenue VI. Community Comment During"Community Comment,"the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking,items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead,the Board/Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VII. Reports/Recommendations VIII. Correspondence And Petitions IX. Chair And Member Comments - Comprehensive Plan Liaison Comments X. Staff Comments Xl. 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 Draft Minutes® Approved MinutesE Approved Date:Chck hei,,: to cantor a date, Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota 1, Planning Commission 11E1 - `j Edina City Hall Council Chambers "'// February 28, 2018, 7:00 P.M. I. Call To Order Vice Chair Nemerov called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. II. Roll Call Answering the roll were: Commissioners Hobbs, Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Hamilton, Berube, Vice Chair Nemerov. Student Members, Mittal. Staff, City Planner, Teague, Support Staff, Hoogenakker Absent from the roll: Olsen, Bennett,Jones III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the February 28, 2018, meeting agenda. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the minutes of the February 14, 2018, meeting minutes. Commissioner Hobbs seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Public Hearings A. Rezoning and Variances— 5000 Vernon Avenue; Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-2 with Variances— Continue Public Hearing to March 14, 2018. Vice Chair Nemerov explained that the Public Hearing would be continued to the March 14, 2018, meeting of the Planning Commission. Nemerov asked for a motion to continue the Public Hearing. Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved to continue the Public Hearing to the March 14, 2018, Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Page 1 of 3 Draft Minutes Approved Minutes El Approved Date: VI. Community Comment Vice Chair Nemerov asked if anyone had comments; being none, Commissioner Thorsen moved to close Community Comment. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. Reports/Recommendations None. VIII.Correspondence And Petitions None. IX. Chair And Member Comments/Comprehensive Plan Liaison Comments Commissioner Berube noted for the public record that the Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on March 14, 2018 on the Final Version of the 44th and France Avenue Small Area Plan. Berube stated all were invited to attend. Commissioner Lee said that on March 15, 2018, she along with Commissioner Hamilton would be attending a Transportation Meeting on the Comprehensive Plan. Lee further recommended that that the public comment on the 44th and France Avenue Small Area Plan. Commissioner Strauss invited the public to attend the third Community Outreach Meeting for the 70th and Cahill Small Area Plan. The meeting date is Saturday, March 3, 2018 from 9:00 — 11:00 at the Edina Public Works Building. Commissioner Lee questioned if a summary was completed on the Greater Southdale Are that could be used by other Small Area Plans. Teague responded that the Guiding Principles have become standard City wide, adding staff continues to work on a summary. Chair Nemerov explained to students in the audience that the Planning Commission was in the middle of the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is a forward vision of how the City may evolve over the next decade. In was noted that this was Commissioner Hobbs last Planning Commission Meeting because of a move to California. Vice Chair Nemerov thanked Commissioner Hobbs for his years of service to the community. Commissioners all agreed that Commissioner Hobbs would be missed. Commissioner Hobbs thanked Commissioners for their words and he added it was his pleasure to serve and to work with great people. Page 2 of 3 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes Approved Date: X. Staff Comments Planner Teague thanked Commissioner Hobbs for his service. Planner Teague updated the Commission on Council actions: • The Council adopted the roof top dining ordinance as recommended by the Commission. • The Council approved the site plan for the water treatment plant on the Southdale campus; however, conditioned approval of an enhanced building. Teague said the water treatment plant would look different from what the Commission recommended, adding the building will be "enhanced" above what was presented. Xl. Adjournment Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission at 7:20 P.M. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Jackie'14 cke,r Respectfully submitted Page 3 of 3 STAFF REPORT (1(0 'f vtir ',I�oRPOF�'��O• 1888 Date: March 14, 2018 To: PLANNING COMMISSION From: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Subject: B-18-03, A 2.02 foot first floor elevation variance request for a new home located at 6237 • Knoll Drive. Recommended Action: Approve a 2.02 foot 1st floor height variance to allow the construction of a new home with a new I St floor more than one foot above, (3.02 feet total), the existing first floor elevation for the property located at 6237 Knoll Drive. Project Description: The applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 3.02 feet higher than the current home's first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 6237 Knoll Drive This property is located in the Parkwood Knolls neighborhood and a portion of the property is located within the floodplain. The City of Edina's Engineering standards require the basement elevation of the new home to be 2 feet higher than the FEMA base flood elevation. The requirement for increased height in basement elevation impacts the ability for the project to conform to the maximum first floor height requirement of I foot. The property is located south of Knoll Drive and backs up to a pond. The existing rambler on the property was built in 1955 prior to the FEMA floodplain study conducted in 1979 to determine flood risk areas. The lowest level of the home is at 917.72, which is approximately 1 foot lower than the minimum flood protection elevation of 916.2. The existing basement is lower than the minimum 2 foot required by ordinance. It is a City and Watershed District goal to elevate and remove homes out of the flood hazard areas when the opportunity presents itself. City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Information / Background: A variance is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. The current home located at 6237 Knoll Drive has a first floor elevation of 925.7 feet above sea level. The established floodplain elevation is 916.2. The minimum basement elevation must be no less than 2 feet above the flood elevation so the minimum basement elevation for the property is at 918.2 feet. The proposed I' floor is to be at 928.72, which after discounting floor trusses, spacers, subfloor, etc. provides a basement ceiling height of between 8.5-9 feet, (typical in new construction). Eligibility Requirements for Issuance of a Variance for I5t floor elevation. City Code allows for the issuance of a variance to increase the first floor elevation of a new home over one foot above the existing home fewer than one of the following circumstances: I) To elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two feet above the 100-year flood elevation, as established by FEMA; 2) To elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to protect from groundwater intrusion; 3) To elevate the first floor elevation to the extent necessary to meet the state building code, city code, or statutory requirements; Furthermore, a variance may only be issued if the proposed project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass. This property is situated at an elevation that is within the floodplain with a portion of the property within the FEMA Flood fringe. Standard setbacks, coverage an height apply to the lot with the proposed home well within the ordinance requirements with the exception of the I'floor height requirement. In staffs analysis, the proposed home fits the character of the neighborhood with regard to height, scale, and massing. There have been several teardown/re-builds in this neighborhood with the proposed home height well below the maximum 40 foot height restriction as measured from average existing grade. No variance is requested for over-all height. The large lots make it easier to keep a comfortable separation from the neighbors on either side. Therefore, staff believes the first floor elevation request meets the eligibility requirements for consideration of a variance. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential/pond. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The existing 30,034 square foot (over a '/2 an acre) lot is located immediately adjacent to single family homes, with a pond to the south. The property is within the flood zone. The existing single story rambler home is to be removed. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-I, Single-Dwelling District Engineering The grading must not impact adjacent neighbors. The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments in the attached memo. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Compliance Table City Standard Proposed Front—Knoll Drive 57.I feet 57.2 feet Side - West 10 feet 12.3 feet Rear—West 50 feet 136.6 feet Building Coverage 25% 15% Building Height 40 feet 35 feet 1" Floor Height 926.7 *928.72 *Variance required PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Does the proposed new home meet the criteria for approval of variances with a with a first floor elevation 2.02 feet higher than the existing home? Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first floor elevation 2.02 feet higher than the existing home for the following four reasons: I. The proposed use is permitted in the R-I Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the new I' floor elevation height. The proposed home design elevates the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation two feet above the I00-year FEMA flood elevation of 916.2 removing it from the flood zone. STAFF REPORT Page 5 2. The variance allows the new home to be elevated out of the flood zone and maintain a comfortable distances from the neighbors to the east and west. 3. The proposed home design project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and the improvements will enhance the property. 4. The new home could actually be taller from existing grade, (40 Ft instead of 35 Ft proposed), and larger in terms of coverage. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: • Survey date stamped February 14, 2018. • Building plans and elevations date stamped February 14, 2018. 2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo dated March 7, 2018. Deadline for a City decision: April 13, 2018. 0 0.11)sit r DATE: March 5, 2018 TO: Cary Teague— Planning Director FROM: Charles Gerk, P.E.— Graduate Engineer RE: 6237 Knoll Drive -Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed include the site plan dated 1/29/18 and the proposed tree protection and erosion control plan dated 2/05/18. Summary of Review The proposed work on the subject property includes the demolition of an existing home and the construction of a new home. The subject property is adjacent to a ponding basin that requires the low floor elevation to be 918.2' or greater. The proposed plans appear to not alter the existing drainage paths. There is a public storm sewer on the east side of the property, care should be taken when working around the infrastructure. The applicant will be required to have an approved Nine Mile Creek Watershed District storm water and erosion and sediment control permit at the time of building permit. Another plan review will be required at the time of building permit to ensure that a final stormwater report has been completed and reviewed and to ensure any additional conditions of the variance have been complied with. Flood Risk To the rear of the subject property is an unnamed body of water that is part of sub-watershed MD_25. According to the 2017 City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, sub-watershed MD_25 is a ponding basin that has a I-percent-annual-chance of flood elevation of 916.2' MSL. The sub- watershed has two piped outlets, one on the south side which ultimately drains through the city public storm sewer utility to Walnut Ridge Park and one on the east side which ultimately drains through the city public storm sewer utility to Bredesen Park. In accordance with section 3.1.2.1(2) of the 2017 City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan: "New principle structures adjacent to a ponding basin must have a lowest floor elevation at least two feet above the ponding basin outlet elevation" Due to the subject property being located adjacent to the ponding basin described above, MD_25, any new structure will be required to have a minimum low floor elevation of 918.2'. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 e:41( )%‘• \J ,„-poi Grading and Drainage Proposed grading and drainage paths will closely mimic existing drainage paths with some exceptions. The front of the home will continue to drain towards Knoll Drive, ultimately being collected in the public storm sewer utility directly in front of the subject property. The public storm sewer utility discharges to the unnamed body of water in the rear of the property. The rear of the property has two drainage paths, with part draining directly to the unnamed body of water and the other part draining to a proposed rain garden with the potential to infiltrate 1,155 cubic feet of runoff from the site, the overflow for the rain garden would be directed to the unnamed body of water. At the time of building permit the applicant will need to provide a final stormwater management report detailing how the site has met both the City of Edina stormwater policy and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District storm water permit requirements. Both the applicant and the City have had discussions with the Watershed District. Erosion and Sediment Control No Comments Street and Curb Cut A curb cut permit will be required prior to construction or relocation of any aprons or curb and gutter. Public Utilities There is an existing 18" public storm sewer on the east property line, the storm sewer is in a public utility easement. Care should be taken when working around the storm sewer. Other Items A Nine Mile Creek Watershed District stormwater and erosion and sediment control permit will be required at building permit. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 MD 25 Drainage Path 3r ,C Zcp , wtl. :w . , ,i Rd Jt, C ' ,' 4n ew'tre- k h, IA- ,NMN 39 _ 4,1 a / � t ", �" j� E ! � :f€ ; Tsr, � rI�' y � * t ,s,..-$; 1 E'1 ° • rri ,, II. „ "3 C • "'. r .ttY -`> v irz+ rli 4-,.., ...-,!+`' t^ +ts.�' /{'i ia,,r a :1 D_24 NMN 50 1F �� ��4 "tlk. i1,', ?. • ',,� ,�lr. }�a i':. c4t. 1 :r. , 111 a` P1'1 1,/ r JAS •,..• 144W 4115, • JA A re • ` t ?iMD 21 M/( ,' • t w ;i to fr. i' .•X ,, 4 '! 4". if 74' �, 11it e' 1f • . *3e tip'. - . ' '� v^ v "" tri Etr1D 20 h ,O. • k'• ' *d am > , r .i t i�,ft�,k, ., 0,w ¢ �t'„ t�k • f l - " or a +�-r•. y a. ,, y .E SMDi 19 1' r '- i • d. 60W q r * i, erF. t <dt r ut r I ti'�Gt` _ • .4 .,1� M. _ t ier 1[ t��0! - '1f 4, f i-031 +, 5hae C _ 4et r q 4 �"` 't_.- ' ' D y3� .. r ,,,„ _ ". !„ l Ly41� rL171 t, y, 0,,,, ;`" + ir,+v'®' " 1EL \ 6. ttl. � it MD_4., 4 y _ lir" Y ��-` �dIrr ti 4^`k,, /� 4. -- „ til 7 e= i. _ �;E' �}.4` .,yid y � ! V. MD(4 t- 4 iiiii,„..-- , N 15 -1 ' ' - .J , ' , T '1,,Ikaauq•lu,lw i[v IC-MOLE',L u l.:..1_t __ ,.i A(J__ Floodzone 1 in=200 ft • 1%Annual Chance for Flood N Storm Gravity Main W+E ,ndrlvi — Collector,Abandoned S • p Gil: The CITY of — Collector,Active ®• Y FDINA ,t( ;...; ,1Jtl f N . i _, +/ O _ � l ly. e e i ,y-,. II rt if IW .'J' = r ra '-' { P. r at; :l • 1I i.� P. •d:9w'�T I] - 14. C i. ` 2, s..r� a :Oi •.` p0 'II nF. ' 1 i • .0 S�1 '�,� I, f£• ,1. •\ 'r'fi `lei• -, � o g • - ,yy,,am `'_ to . r."77.-- ' Y t v , _ 4'+. (•/) fide. . t.4.3' n 4"i.S''Y / 1 t e ie Z .. '., s -� T `t�1: J S L:' ,k... Mrt a� ''''..;1,)e ..w �' • n: f , G. '42' lI / L { L• 5 „,, I , y N 'v 7w s iv 1 rr• ypD' .;ws... g• f ..'ram r4.* I'' I -.`,"-`s d31.,9t`.�;.:f._.. -d78..Z4 - _ ••,, '. d ^, 9 r A,t... , ' i t ` ` , •GIS' i►6 �.Zi b ' t,•.:1/4.,. ..... — i i I, , i ..-"I ,:•410,, ,/,' i/ ' i ''•\''''•• • • ...-.=41,4..._,:.r.s.1., 1 tt'l rt=sci:, ,,,,,, , v*, 1 i., =_ \ .-,' / 1 ,i •,K,,,.. .-' -,aP P. 1{ (( �� vii `� � i' { 1 E -, Fri ,. !; w� i \u 0' `"e • ,...1; ,a0000 . mss'' ; r1..` flet '` J A / e it i pVG / c173_ m F" 4� t'` 0"C to co R • + l0. \I•7i- •A �.?� ,y i . I �+ �'. ',i1 • - �? �. '� i yr _ E N 4 ••..: �— f'- U 7 ( i. 1.. ,..‘, ,.._ \\{ot...x ,, .. 11 U to„sot • _. 4mo . . te 10 �`�f Ali / if�.. .j ' + *� , ' �� IS ` �S(_._%" f t - 7r i%f y 441 ' +IY y ^'4Hy * � Variance Application for 6237 Knoll Drive- Supplement 6237 Knoll Drive has a portion of the property in the backyard that is within the recently established local 100-year elevation of 916.2. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit standards require that the basement floor and low floor entry of a new home must be built 2' above the 100-year flood plain at a height of 918.2. Because of this requirement, the new home's first floor must be built at an elevation of 928.72. This elevation is 3.02' above the original home's first floor elevation of 925.7. The Edina zoning code requires new homes to be built no more than 1' above the first floor of the original home. Therefore, we are requesting a variance of 2.02' from the 1' first floor requirement. The proposed variances will relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and the use is reasonable. The ordinance requires the new home to be no more than 1' above the old home. The local flood plain of 916.2 was established after the homeowner purchased the home. This circumstance was not created by the homeowner and will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. The proposed variance will correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other properties in the vicinity. Many homeowners have been able to build above the floodplain throughout Edina as this an engineering requirement. The proposed variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance.The new home height of 35' from average existing grade is well below the allowable new home height for this property of 40'. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 6237 Knoll Drive is nestled between tall stands of trees. The home was.designed to be wide and shallow so as to not extend deeply into the backyard. In addition, the new home is well under the allowable size for a new home on the site (15% lot coverage vs. 25% allowed) and has less lot coverage than the exiting home on the site. 6237 Knoll Drive new home proposed building materials: • Traditional lap siding • Asphalt roof e`; • Detailed soffit and eves rr. ` x�' • Stone columns �'p ——=' , —_:. ——•: , -ill 1, •. - _ . . -__ I . , ., • •_______ -- •--• -- -- __ -.-„.—.. ...„- --• ) •,?•,' r A -4.-":II,: vi--J— (- in __ ., - m mo rl. , = I ,D t N F-• 0 ,-, . Z.t. :-.7. cc, •cc ,- c cu ec c, 1 = / . } --'----: 7 r- • cr' • , 1 , I • ._---------------------"'"---\::lr'--------- „ . . ; .,. . -_,„ , , . , 1 1 '.i i., ,:.• ,T. , - 0 . , .. . . ) , . _ .. 1. , , , -.-_(• • 1. , i 't • .,,_,L-V -- • , • ' , , \ , , ...- - 1 1 ,, I ', \ 1 L., , (.. 1' ,_- , \ , , :7 1- , , __ - - -- = . r• ,,, j .•.:''= ,, . , a:--•,,. 1., ... . ... •,,.,..,., -., : \ , • ' J l . -- i .. . . ' ' \ . .. ..,; / ..... - .- - —— ; ',...,.,A .•-, : .• / . e 'S.'.- rl . • - 4-4)- ,' . — /- .- J-:7 . , .---" \ \\N------------. cp 1 10 -..--".---- i it .....---- 7;1,I 71 t ' \- -r,L.-' "r-• '', -7, :ZIA '711,Ti.i'''IF :'• „ = / -•-•k\'‘,\N V....," ,„. _-•• -:L.-+----• Nie Jackie Hoogenakker From: Toby McKenna Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 8:45 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Subject: 6237 Knoll Drive Edina, MN (Case file B-18-03) To whom it may concern, My wife Alex and I live at 6241 Knoll Drive next to the future construction site at 6237 Knoll Drive. On Saturday March 3rd, we met with Scott Busyn regarding the project. Scott answered all of our questions and concerns as well as explaining the letter sent to us regarding the height variance. I am writing this email in support of Scott and Great Neighborhood Homes and this project to move forward. Please contact me with any further questions. ,y� Toby McKenna � � •e%'"7 AZA/ o� ` le-/Z-x-5/ Sent from my iPhone 1 Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 3/6/2018 M.3 OkE�'� C '� '�� r F,x 'y � i* �'i' �` # y, smw V ria, ,c,'"'" �. , Y s { u S � y + a ,, i ` l ,� i KYR - f` • t. 7'�'g � � _ '� � �� 1"-''s4. � '''.12P*. fir. _ :° �;, �•a t ,4,,,,it:,--, .--ii-c...----. t'f' _.. • jar '» ''.. I .1 t FA ,...7--" . 4 ;t4:1. ''';4'. ' 4. '' -, 1-‘,,,.; - :_,,,, li[•,,,,. 1, �; r �`;r, 'x"-xa i�, w • ` ' 1 inch 50 feet . F e b PARCEL ID: 3111721110021 Comments: OWNER NAME: PARCEL ADDRESS: 6237 Knoll Dr, Edina MN 55436 PARCEL AR EA: 0.71 acres, 30,889 sq ft A-T-B SALE PRICE: SALE DATA SALE CODE: This data(I)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or ASSESSED 2016, PAYABLE 2017 accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no warranty of any kind;and(iii)is notsuitable PROPERTY TYPE: Residential for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. H OM ESTEAC Hennepin County shall not be liable for any MARKET VALUt: damage,injury orloss resulting from this data. TAX TOTAL: COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN ASSESSED 2017, PAYABLE 2018 COUNTY 2018 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD MARKET VALu t: Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 3/6/2018 It " hi, , .„. - � z' � gyp i}rX.. 4.1 at, °•i. • itolic 444 4'4,„,ii::',1‘i' 1.*:''.1'4,;,,,, ,,''' 11411 n ilki p, € ., '' '. ' '... ' -,-,,,,- , .-''.„ ,..L!....,,,,;:, i ' \1/4,4 tk,.,%. „... ,4„,... ' ' 4 .,4 Ya d�k� yf 74 } 'e 4 tv i, 1 inch = 100 feet PARCEL ID: 3111721110021 Comments: OWNER NAME PARCEL ADDRESS: 6237 Knoll Dr, Edina MN 55436 PARCEL AREA: 0.71 acres, 30,889 sq ft A-T-B SALE PRICE SALE DATA: SALE CODE: This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or ASSESSED 2016, PAYABLE 2017 accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no PROPERTY TYPE: Residential warranty of any kind;and(iii)is no tsuitable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. I H OM ESTEAD: Hennepin County shall not be liable for any MARKET VALUE: damage,injury or loss resulting from this data. TAX TOTAL: ; COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN ASSESSED 2017, PAYABLE 2018 COUNTY 2018 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: MARKET VALUIz: woo uou.uP...X uowa PVI ad An10.l1V4.n I 4 ng 2! s E 1R p,p!1! FJ 6 °F z §` e}i° ;s V1 NCI e• o // U :',R yn S 980 = a4.6 i .\ t4i Qi pi 1:1Iiii Sag `e R LI 1 ? i 5 5 41 : li & `\1\\ ,..., 1 h ) P \ � o2W'�� �� ffiI= SG 1--ci o,--- \ I* i 0 IT \ s �, P c.. ; \4 Z 1.----1 \ - \**\ to,' "dWkti 4.lik i , 0 z .ul,10 Illr-11_Ta • /* 8t114 \ Ci) w F O V144, ; 0 d i-,,, t 41 s 1 R v 3 v 9� is , \ iii \ 4 nil \ \ iii g ! ; ,! , . ,ii 3 3 1 do ritil 2 e CI. R U FA- d % W mg P e„ � c ilres0* 1111, .0 .*P 1; Q V, z .b,, .-,...:-3SSS _ �11 c 2111 \\ \ zdoo \\� 1, C ,, t g; `0 F_ /A'-v v d s o \I - I 1 yJ c -J 9 `\ - 1 __/-\1 / \ 1^111 $ 4. 1` BI Yam I I o "sl I ' ��PYr € Z;Z6osP/9E j 1I ll si en NI 11 tUJ�f� S 1 \ \\ X57^lop MFP54^"/{' `� I I 8\ I I it, 1 e "3.113(16Ca i \ �� 1 „S ,C ....TOP Ld '�' �` 11 11 11 N '� oN i Q Y i'-�{ C \e.✓•'s'�� �.1. I \\ \ 11 t In 11 '1 AW��..$.�[3l] i\\\, z E \��--- 1 ii-r \ - , .1(' p --- a ,_ `\ 4 \ ��„ 1 '� 1,,\,` ,\ 5,15 g..,. \,\ .........- „ ,, ,., % f \ Y 1 \ '`} ` 6 2 \ ''C\ s \� ` ,,,\,, \ \ tl 1 9 t o ` , \ I% I \ \, § ' . \ - \ P HO \\ \ \\i, ,,- i _ \\ :, -\- _,..-- \ . ,.., li 161 ilk\\ \ \\ . \\ ,-., \\I 7 .filirr,\\. -\ \ \ * Ili 1 "\ • 1 V� •• \\\\-7 -..,e.i,.....-,,,?,\ • \\ 1 ,�4�'. �@� �zYo a \l' Ill \ \Y \ 1 a4 \g4.”„--;\ \ ' ,Cs' \ \ S 1 \, Qv- N \ 1 e ego °'�O� \\ \\ m �`\ 1';\ a F. i ',# `E,%,2, !h \ .< \` woa.., a % rd) sii 3'2 U• U -R , 1 I , \ \ 'a \pv n I ' I sem-- -M^ ilR S n ate\ C) Nai c $ —\—�--gee W ��•'.- ___----a-------__• _ a Y. G i 1 0 .' i 1 I j \\ I 11 00 U._ act \ B 5 a. 03 11 ill 9 aa a 8� g. a m t=18 is hh 1 E. Ea€ W S a En e =—g W z s 8i8 -a..,.SaLLJi2 t 1 1 Io o ,iI 1'. t,p, i Lh s b� I i I1 i] 1 Sz ([ 0< I I y rq �}� A 5 i QQ s=f`yy;- i�' Cl.',t "6t. aYl "" 1 g I.=h " Ro ag T °}61 0 R E o o m 8§,g, •o E �« b s e a � a f9 R R :� `_ `e s.=- �IQi �n I I v�i .-7 p 0 1 $gYy �2 1 1 4 1 I b i ITipt sop%uowiw°�uvns we no esu°.`,sv�;wro°a s0ri ,m, SH NIGH iiw•sr•awns so ups ax°,.saoWui•oow ... dp 'r0 a u,0 nouralnrs N➢Q'VHIQa E IF I NJIS34 4 ONINNVId «3a 3w+o35mm�elunrnn a00H110flHJI9N g��Q 7ION%b6Z8 { 5 •d'j•Q x1530 r 00.1.1d149102 o 1.",,c7-- , .",.� S.YflYsJ 3} 3 „1 / itl dM IA., 4.-0dM 14.01 h. i N , In "1 il M. ° ° IVII I„=o,aamr ® 1rn 1111111 11,11111 I rl a :�ii:>`i? 1 I J' Ills I( i,� �II i1 1 1 1 ! '1 •r..;; 3. r 1'11{I 1'1,,11 p011,,!1i z �Ii. ;l , iI . �:� jr I I1 �iIIC�■�s'�Illlllljl O ll,, , 111 1,, ; , k ........... � �l il�Nij',' 11 , a ” 1r ' , 11 I�11s1-�k11' � 11, L11 ii I. I I �2`�2��.Cto 4� Illi 1�0,Ill w �I I I ;, I I I� 1 ;��� S 1}'1 I�I I ,j II 11 ll,i,l, 1 2, 7 , ,I If „ u P 1 1' ,IIIIII I;)+IpILII„!II') —0E1 ,1 IpIII1( 1I ' .� ,.,L.1 il,1 0 1 . 11 I. Il,' _ ilu1 I I _l__-0 1. 1 11 7 ' t— !I a „ L. Z'e p e11 Ill 11 ! I ' i= 49e91'p 7 111 11 {� I1 r. 1 1 1 NgSps V,III��f I 1;0;!11 Ii°' tll lR'FF1 E CCg Ii,1 py d' U. I I IlII Ii MN= 11 � I��i, 1111 , I _.+. 1 f II �Ir��ii��l, I 0771' I � '11 ll ,fuitl -------"---4 11111{II ' i -� f WI! rl l 1 I—, 'i�I�f1111 j --_�13•'11, :� � N tl�,1 ,II ' it lii r i .' l I Li I:1l II y ' ' I iBl�l _- 1 ,111111111111E31 i a 1 7 1 II II 11111111 11l W I ,i1 I III 111; I, 1 1 1�I G=__: -41 III J 4 1:1„ 1, 4 I ��11 t S ul l W li I 0 II!0 � 1 I;" ' NL',iI 1—• 1i1I;IVIIL� 11;11 ;i d ,i I' II 'II„ ' _-------------, _� s 1111i 1111111 III—=II W '1 1 1 1 1 11 11 ® ,,„4. 11 1 1'I, 1 a= 1• I' ., 1illi ® I® m1 { I I ® l I i�lfll.It wo.441••••011�'PM no•facacm•Mx.a mad y,r ixoiwem '�••.....•••• -v,�,..a.v.n:.,xa.:......�r..oa" :its S H Y1O H E NOIS3O 9 ONINNVld V d]LL au do�vuq"x� aooHaonivaa� a&nia lima an Y •d e° =0Ki0,0nxMl,d JO 9/0i 0 .UnietA' g} �3 � I 11 II ll ASN[ ■a ■jig [y{}�' i A.,a[ AY 11Filiin 6 g9fl@{IijII F �, Millii I 1 p r iylgl'ys 4=/ filliall I Rh! 0 49 _ ri k e i� tl 4 . �E E . "seais lit 31:i-6A 1 A[ IP;ht'1iii= pe 1,g I j b- "® II z 0 d — „ n iL I,,; 8� e$ .} a-. .3.E i li ,e �-Irja I KI. 8 ® r-- O 83 I ° € 4g pC Y y., 2 =`,. I 1 1_3 f t;,,..‘ M A,. �—.. I � ,EL�;_ _—J 1 r. --J j1M } r L �r-- Ll } j : I" I °v 1 I ! tuo.in 1 Ili -1- I I I A,. .,r I t +� t – Ian,[i.„, i r --- _I - i — © __ J + f 'v J'� 2 I -11_1-4_] I •pq LA s, —A QBE $ I > I i I O. j I CC I fAda L....1......."....- .. 1:..'e r J LJ r r ( J L 14 ((l 1 } 1 1 I 1 If L LI t. tea”:$ L Ij r. . I, Q �' I _______., I L l_ s. L (- �r L J Mt 1WWI °.. M. 1V,yJ 13 3.11113 .11;:" i2r unuudo2 V.... 5H 1�l O H c 3MNJIS30 91�JNINNdId dip snaudonmirwinrsi DD['YHIOF 4„ m,yaxedoxntlim rnm C2001-1V ',Iva NOVO 1Merl w ddc°isr 0 '44M:,, 11/8110 SAM TIONX LSZS 3}i 1;1 1 , 11.1i I• I g� I a ---- o ' •h• FM ANI IV O 1 1 I tt . al1 I u i 1 ! 1 2 L_ J r irr.o. 11/ II ... 1 a 1— R ~ L -DI iL d,Fl J I. kw —T v r -I ally•., III >p " MI � ` -' -�*- �-aim:-1. all w,.r. 1 V ,lR . iiV €� .- =',.— a 1 _ IY.,..7__ 11 S • s .4,1 •w "I, •84 2 `J ohs , y 4 1• II I auo : r ;IF-- �� ;i i 111 5 1 9 L 01,3 0130tOr40/.., /`o°4=1:1 7r ixauudm ... SOH gnnaa» iorea iVirwFiWri //� *)) nrrnAroiAo+w ..0-0.13,7NJ Rtallaf6T9 3Z i3 i«'djQ � nos.vormnuaeosioo " ¢¢ ti O 1 ill 1 1 ill :I ' 1' o 111; E� $ ;:iii AN Ain AN °hr y� t 8 t _ r 0 ,,,, 44,411,:' rN� y I AiY 4' ALL � ii lip u.. II Ilik ® x _ --, i x e — I r -1 jI c I i t Y.----1 :=. 1. L , _ �' 1 lLL � - ; J ii ip. yiu t p� g t i tf I ii L iA f A 1 -=moi 11 t _ �� ri to h 1 11 t r Mro `--r -ta' J} i - WALL mil Ari Al. AN iY. G t s 1 ..,rt A,u I " AY. I L .i},•-•411,10,-,, ► '1 .: ' 1 ,�gff.0 c ,ill f t` ', dam,41 '0 a,. .t ..: vc , n ';1�,j g°oic g 't, i .. .- ; P/ l Vie;. 8 1 �'; •• r �` dA eP 4. 3T 4 � iia' �� fdx y . t l s� ` ` ` i ! ;fit I '1 ,;�;'P r �� 1 i i i X74 '*--•- tF �' . „vv -. >' eI "4\\t,,'1',',131,.. i-..,,v 0,!:./..,-. 3r W� Yr ( ' 4 1'cII -�: , f I ,V7 '9`' . $ s ii v, - , 114 ,..0,1 e., _fy it �a. r t 1 }} fiw t,It`t` �if•� S. rq,x 101 6.„:....c... .....„,..„.. .„,.T., . ., , . .:,.., ,.... ,,,,_ : 0,„,..,,...., s .1-a•.w."Iir . i ., t-,..-:_,.:-._-..-. t t _� � _ �,, -. . ,g -,?` -. 1 7 '— y},f o ' .fid' 1 1 t.' �.-.. • U tl 7s4 i'- „,.. h: �' 0 s 'If',” Y' 174 t' a.• d .A. ''.*a! r i airy. y k&.k ti�' r` a , y 4....... ..-4-",,,,,;.;--c•07: ii aL1 °F ,e, 'II i �`* 1 _ ' n b'w a x C ; : I � I C 1 1 I e Ilii 11111411 11 t. 0-44-c--1''...4-,-44",-V k..44•, t.5) * „., ..:. •,,,, -- ,, .' 11010610.- 4. a \'`i'1 z 1E 5 5 n E 9 i \\ \ , c� g1z ?4 1!: : : : ! I i ! 11 ‘-\\,t ,.. 1 , ,, „Li ,,, , C) iv F y g _ - v3 •'; -' c__. p 111 r b �, O \9 �a;,,' F^IJ.t \ i IA ff :C4 A N S 1 s S". Ix L g!O RE a N : q \psi � i'\ry,k {�' 5 '� le \,...'''.. .k .-\ 1si ,t.� i \ 1$, z 1111 I I LJ.@/ ',,,, ":',. '!4 ,, ‘ ...,,,,,. „, ,,, \-, , <1 •\\ I W —I I I 2 g i o .a / +. ' F a $ c Iii= ff F,', ,' — '74,,., & 1=111 d r, 1 �,✓' --- �� l 1= III `� f . � '_ ' > i VIII 0 111-_ \ ,e- fie^ 1 si 1II� III II' g — 11111' III,II 1 STAFF REPORT21„1� 0(12. v • lkORPORA` • 1888 Date: March 14, 2018 To: PLANNING COMMISSION From: Emily Bodeker,Assistant City Planner Subject: B-18-02, A 4.5-foot side yard setback variance at 6008 Concord Avenue Information / Background: The subject property is approximately 9,451 square foot in area. The home is a one-story rambler built in 1953. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing first floor, add a 6 foot by 41.71 foot building addition onto the rear of the home, and add a second story to the existing structure. The existing structure does not meet the required 10-foot side yard setback on the north side or south side of the property. A variance was approved in 2008 for the south setback for a garage expansion which sits 3-4.3 feet from the south property line. The current 5.5-6.4 foot setback on the north side of the lot is currently non- conforming. The proposed second floor will match the existing setback but requires a variance. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The existing 9,451 square foot lot is located on the west side of Concord Avenue, north of Valley View Road and South of 60th Street West. The existing first floor of the house will remain and be remodeled. The new proposed second floor will match the exterior walls of the existing first floor on the north and east sides. The existing setback on the north side of the property is 5.5-6.4 feet.The existing setback on the south side of the house is 9.I feet and 3-4.3 feet to the garage. The garage addition received a City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 variance for the south side yard setback. The setback to the house on the south lot line is currently non-conforming. The proposed project is not adding to the non-conforming setback therefore does not need a variance. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-I, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage Any grading must not impact adjacent neighbors. The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in a memorandum. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side— 10 feet 5.5-6.4 feet East Side - 34.3 feet 34.3 feet South— 10 feet principal structure 8.6 (existing non-conforming) 3-4.3 Garage (2008 Variance) West Side— 25 feet 52.6 feet Building Coverage 25% 20.7% plus existing shed (survey 1st Floor Elevation 903.6-905.6 will be updated with building permit) 904.6 feet Building Height 35.4 feet 27 feet four inches *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed variance justified? Minnesota Statues and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The proposed variance will: I) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. STAFF REPORT Page 3 The practical difficulty is that the lot is not squared. The east side of the lot is 80 feet wide and the west side of the lot is 70 feet. The lot lines gradually get closer to the existing structure heading west. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The existing house has existing non-conforming setbacks on the north and south side of the house. The proposed second floor addition is within the non-conforming footprint of the existing first floor and will not be any closer to the lot line on the north side of the house than the existing first floor. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The applicants are hoping to maximize the living space with the proposed project. The addition will be a seamless addition and will look as if it were part of the original plan for the home. There are existing two story homes in the general area of the subject property. Recommended Action: Approve a 4.5 foot side yard setback variance for the north property line at 6008 Concord Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: • Survey date stamped February I, 2018 (applicant will update the lot coverage to include the existing shed & will still be under hardcover requirements) • Elevations and building plans date stamped February I, 2018 • Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo. Deadline for a city decision: April 2, 2018. (0- IQ E, 'j •")y° �,\*;_') `,/ DATE: March 7, 2018 TO: Cary Teague— Planning Director FROM: Charles Gerk, P.E. —Graduate Engineer RE: 6008 Concord Ave. - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed include the site plan dated 1/08/18 and the proposed tree protection and erosion control plan dated 1/25/18. Summary of Review The proposed work on the subject property includes the partial demolition of an existing home and the construction of a new story to an existing structure. The subject property is tributary to a downstream structural drainage issue, but is currently under existing Engineering Policy thresholds required for mitigation. The applicant will be required to have an approved Minnehaha Creek Watershed District erosion and sediment control permit at the time of building permit. Another plan review will be required at the time of building permit to ensure that a final storm water management plan has been completed and to ensure any additional conditions of the variance have been complied with. Grading and Drainage Proposed grading and drainage paths will closely mimic existing drainage paths. The front and rear of the property will continue to drain towards Concord Avenue, remaining on the subject properties parcel until ultimately being discharged to the street and collected in the public storm sewer utility directly in front of the subject property. The public storm sewer utility travels to the northeast and discharges on the north side of Pamela Park. Currently the public storm sewer utility capacity is exceeded and can result structural flooding at the intersection of 58th and Concord Avenue. The proposed project adds approximately 250 square feet in new impervious cover to the lot, which is not proposed to be mitigated. Engineering policy would only require mitigation when the applicant is proposing 600 square foot or more of new impervious cover that drains to a known structural flooding issue. The applicant should consider any other future home additions and landscaping projects at this time and plan appropriately for any mitigation that could be required as a result of those projects. At the time of building permit the applicant will need to provide a final stormwater management plan detailing how the site has met both the City of Edina stormwater policy and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit requirements. Both the applicant and the City have had discussions with the Watershed District. Erosion and Sediment Control No Comments ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 k91/ 'r\ '8(ED �� 6 ® 5.4 O Hyl .7 to,uo,s, Street and Curb Cut A curb cut permit will be required prior to construction or relocation of any aprons or curb and gutter. Public Utilities No comments Other Items A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District erosion and sediment control permit will be required at building permit. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 ;71 #a c . `' ,' '''f C y' 3 m g ., .x i �. .- " �," � o-o o , ts. a 4'.. ..x '. r: O 1\..al Q _ 1• 1 i 1. . � 17r ,'w 2' - ' . 1 l'.,a• L .i I ill -'1, P �1 A {Ifi q I Vy c/1" 1, 6F, j 1., f ', _ *.—. . T I r" 4 ac ( 1 1 ' N -rL i A '' !A �<� L. 4 _.' 1 I. '4 P` q � y i i' .C i'l 1 141.1 .. .j.. 1 i•ti., i,.. be t t y czi C� •4 . :` t . 411 _ :L I 1 t.— 4..4 s.4( L.L_/ 1 1 i 4. ..I_.f., ‘,44.1- 1 t i': i i 1 it. r-L.. o �' ; 11 U t 41 ,, 1. R t. i,. 5 a 1 . `. 1 1.. i lr.F-i.' ' . ' t 1-:i. L , T A. • ,_ t �' -• , , .*,k. '0 .r.4, d. li Q 4., {I 4,.' 1 'Li1 ' l. 1 L`' i -sr. t I, t , l r ',L. . , ,Rfir `f�� j�l. �` .I1.I,�1 1 �:,,- , �j' I 'i 1 -�t 1 ` Fr31.. �� 4. -.. I x: '' -.a, ,#- 1 I. .r o t .t. (73 l] '. • b A R. . l� _-, - . ' % im ) 1 a `#': w ` ( ' , e �11,. 1,... - , 1 N U r ' , • t-1L . 1 O . Iw¢^ (r' . O C N g.e _ z t. 1 C.-0_,-1 ,- I ,.. I I_ ' <.f �_ s c� t, I ' 1_L f ,A.•. 4 s t 4•4 4. (..I Q Iof - c_ L tr .. Lit �. rp,T+0�;1. Variance Request _.. 6008 Concord Ave Support for Conditions of Zoning Variance: • Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. • Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district • Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance • Not alter the essential character of the neighborhood We are Maura&Asif Hasan,the owners of 6008 Concord Ave.since 2008. At that time our family was just the two of us and thoughts of children were far off in the future. But we knew we wanted to move into Edina as we very much enjoy the community, knew the school district would be great for those"future" kids,as well as knew that the purchase of a home here would be an investment. When we moved in we also knew that someday we would want to make some changes to the home as we outgrew it, but it worked for the time being. Fast forward to 2018 and our family is growing as we expected;we currently have two small children and are planning on more. Because our family structure has changed,our needs of our home have changed as well. The compartmentalized layout and structure that seemed perfect for just the two of us when we bought our home is no longer useful for our family's needs. Our current home was built in 1951, has about 1350 sq ft,3 small bedrooms, 1 bath, and a kitchen that is completely closed off from the rest of the house. Our goal with this renovation is to increase the usefulness of our common living space by creating an updated,open floorplan as well as increase our number of bedrooms and bathrooms. We are looking to make these changes as,with a young&growing family,our intent is to stay in our home and community for many years to come. Our oldest is just in 1st grade in Edina Public Schools and we look forward to seeing all of our children graduate from EHS,coming back to visit their"home" long after that with families of their own. And as our children get older,so do our parents. We need space to support their needs when they come to visit. Ultimately,we see ourselves growing old here in our community and want a home that will support us for many, many years to come. To address the usefulness of our common living space,we are planning to redesign the main level of our home to create more of an open great room feel. To do this we are planning to extend the back/West wall of our living space by 6' into our backyard. This portion of the addition extends to the existing southern wall of the living space,which lies about 1' into the current side-yard setback. We are asking for a variance for this to match the addition southern wall with the existing southern wall side-yard setback. We previously applied for a variance allowing our garage to have 2 stalls and a roof overhang consistent with the rest of the house. This garage variance,approved in 2009,allowed our garage to be 3'from the southern property line. As you can see from the proposed plans submitted with our application,our garage is set to the south of our home's living space by several feet. This new variance request is to match the IN back wall of the home, not the garage. To address our bedroom and bathroom space needs,we are planning to add a 2"d story to our•existing home. We've looked at several different design options and styles for a 2'story and have,4elected< one presented. This is the design that is aesthetically the best fit for the style home we warit`'from ar investment standpoint best fits the neighborhood market,and most importantly,fits,ail:of our4ily's needs. To support all of these considerations,the upper level must be a full 2nd story. We plan to follow the same footprint as existing outside walls of the home where possible, including the existing northern wall of our home. The north wall currently extends just under 4.5' into the existing side-yard setback, therefore we are seeking a variance to match the 2nd level addition with our home's existing nonconforming northern wall. Our lot does have extraordinary circumstances that are unique to it. One such circumstance is our lot is not square. The front/east boundary of our lot is about 80'wide,whereas the back/west boundary is just 70', a loss of over 10'across the length of our lot. If the southern lot line were straight versus angling in as it runs to the backyard,we would not need to request a variance for this portion of the plans. If the northern lot line were straight versus angling in,the northwestern corner of our home would not be anywhere near as far into the side-yard setback as it currently is. In addition,the very placement of our home affects our ability to conform to current zoning ordinances. Where it sits on the lot prohibits a full second floor above the existing main level without the benefit of a variance. Our planned addition upholds the general purpose and intent of the current zoning ordinance. We are not exceeding our allowed lot coverage nor are we asking to extend into the side-yard setbacks beyond our home's current footprint. I've mentioned previously that this is not just a house but a home in every sense for our family, but also to the neighborhood. It is important to us that we are not reducing the space currently between our home and our neighbors'homes. Our neighbors to the north at 6004 Concord Ave. will be the most directly affected by our plans as our proposed addition on the north side is right alongside their house. We've reviewed our building plans and elevations with them,discussed the thought process on why this design vs.others, and answered any questions that were raised. They are completely supportive of our plans and excited to see the design come to fruition. While we are first and foremost making decisions for our property based on our needs, it is also an investment and we must make certain we are matching what the neighborhood and community desire as well. As such,we do not want to put several hundred-thousand dollars into a home that does not match the neighborhood,both in character as well as market value and amenities. We've done some detailed analysis to make certain that our home would be in line with similar two story homes in our area. Between January and November 2017, 13 homes sold in zip code 55424 that were comparable in size and amenities to our proposed home. Twelve of these homes had 4 bedrooms on the 2"d story and eleven have at least a full laundry and/or bonus room upstairs. While we personally need a full, 4 bedroom 2"d level to support our family's needs,the housing market also demands a full,4 bedroom 2nd story for a home of similar size. Many homes within the Concord Neighborhood (both on our block and nearby blocks)have already transformed into two story homes,via both additions and rebuilds. We have chosen to pursue an addition vs. a rebuild as we love our home and want to keep much of the character and charm that originally drew us to it- like the original 1950s stone façade,our beautiful stone fireplace surrounds,custom built-ins,and hardwood floors—and marry it with the style of some nearby homes we admire. This also has its setbacks, though, like working with the existing foundation,layout,and lot placement. We also have made deliberate choices so that our home will still fit into our neighborhood,and not feel oversized for the lot or appear too large for the surrounding homes.As stated before,we plan on living in this home for many, many years to come and so are very concerned with its look,style, materials, and overall craftsmanship. Our intent is truly to take our 65+year old home and make it more suitable for a modern family's current and long-term needs while creating a home that feels comfortable in our neighborhood. Additional Support for Hasan Variance Request Homes Sold between 1/1/17& 11/30/17 Zip: 55424 Laundry&/or Bonus Address Type Sq. Ft. Beds Up Room Upstairs 1 5913 Wooddale Ave Two Stories 2740 3 Y 2 4306 Oakdale Ave Two Stories 3000 4 Y 3 4401 Branson St Two Stories 3000 4 Y 4 5825 Kellogg Ave Two Stories 3000 4 Y 5 6029 Kellogg Ave Two Stories 2820 4 N 6 5941 Concord Ave Two Stories 2674 4 Y 7 5912 Wooddale Ave Two Stories 2787 4 Y 8 5816 Fairfax Ave Two Stories 2867 4 Y 9 6020 Ashcroft Ave Two Stories 2790 4 Y 10 6124 Oaklawn Ave Two Stories 2966 4 Y 11 3920 W.44th St Two Stories 2794 4 Y 12 5416 Kellogg Ave Two Stories 2850 4 N 13 6105 Kellogg Ave Two Stories 2987 4 Y 13 two story, comparably sized homes have sold in our zip code between January& November of 2017. Of these: • 12 have 4+bedrooms upstairs • All have 5 or more bedrooms ^' 11 have an upstairs laundry room and/or bonus room C 4 �4�1' Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 3/9/2018 .m. ( ' r ., I4 . ill ri . - a — C 1 z ,_111W is . m F"- iiiWili w ,, _. 1 , s: L- f ,l -j :f, �� .., i ,� ,.. n. s �' "tt TM. 44‘1 .., ,.. w J$jP '''''''''''''' ' ',' t'"7"111',', . ': 7 4 ,,: :d. .'. •, .A..,, , , . .4. r , , ,-,.., ,,.:..,,,,,,,, , _ T _ . , ,,, ...,,, -„.... - .„. , .. .,_.....; ._ ...,,,,..... , -, . :.,,, _. w • `` . 8 .r ,1 .,,..ti,. ~15. . „. ' 4 `,---, inch = 50 feet �" 1 PARCEL ID: 1902824330064 Comments: OWNER NAME:AS M Hasan/M L Stoltz Hasan PARCEL ADDRESS:6008 Concord Ave, Edina MN 55424 PARCEL AREA: 0.22 acres, 9,451 sq ft A-T-B: Torrens SALE DATA: 11/2008 SALE CODE: Other—See Certificate Of This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no Real Estate Value (Cry) representation as to completeness or accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no warranty of any kind;and(iii)is notsuitable ASSESSED 2017, PAYABLE 2018 for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. PROPERTY TYPE: Residential Hennepin County shall not be liable for any HOMESTEAD: Homestead damage,injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN COUNTY 2018 ASSESSED 2018, PAYABLE 2019 PROPERTY TYPE: Unavailable HOMESTEAD: Unavailable MARKET VALUE: Unavailable STAFF REPORT (-1- 1A, (ta.ffill)t=t Nov ? f�z-ORPOfl)`ti 18E38 Date: March 14, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Subject: Rezoning with Variances, 5000 Vernon Avenue for Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagel Information / Background: Ted Carlson on behalf of Caribou Coffee and Einstein Bagels is proposing to tear down the existing 5,000 square foot structure at 5000 Vernon Avenue and construct a new 2,748 square foot Caribou Coffee and Einstein Bagel Shop and drive-through. Per the Grandview Transportation Study, the applicant is proposing to provide a 5-foot easement on both Interlachen and Vernon to provide for future roadway improvements; and is proposing to bury all above ground utility wires/poles. The request requires the following: ➢ Rezoning from Planned Commercial District 4, (PCD-4) to Planned Commercial District 2, (PCD-2) Setback Variances as follows: I. Building Front Yard Setback (Vernon) from 35 to 25 feet 2. Parking/Drive Aisle Setback (Interlachen) from 20 feet to 5 feet (Existing condition) 3. Parking/Drive Aisle Setback (Vernon) from 20 feet to 4 feet (Existing condition) 4. Parking/Drive Aisle Setback (Rear) from 10 feet to 8 feet (Existing condition) The proposed uses would be allowed in the surrounding PCD-2 Zoning Districts and allowed in the MXC-Mixed Use Center designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has responded to the previous Planning Commission comments and the Traffic Impact Study done by Spack Consulting. (See attached Traffic Impact Study.) The revisions include: reduced the width of the drive-through and bypass lane; expanded patio size, added pervious pavers, would add signage to control traffic; designated City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 employee parking spaces as the spaces that would be blocked by the stacking lane; would have traffic guards to control stacking, would install "do not block intersection signs." revised the plans to incorporate future road improvements, and added pedestrian connections across the drive-aisle from the sidewalks along Vernon and Interlachen. (See applicant narrative.) Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Holiday Gas Station; zoned PCD-4, Planned Commercial District and guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. Easterly: Davani's Restaurant; zoned PCD-2, Planned Commercial District and guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. Southerly: Edina Liquor Store: zoned PCD-2, Planned Commercial District and guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. Westerly: High Density Residential Housing & Auto Repair; zoned HDR, High Density Residential & PCD-4, Planned Commercial District; guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. Existing Site Features The subject property is 26,379 square feet in size, and nearly entirely paved. There is a large retaining wall along the west lot line. The proposed project would be an improvement over existing conditions on the site. Planning Guide Plan designation: MXC — Mixed Use Center. Zoning: PCD-4, Planned Commercial District The table on the following page demonstrates the projects compliance against the proposed PCD-2 zoning requirements: STAFF REPORT Page 3 COMPLIANCE TABLE City Standard (PCD-2) Proposed Building Setbacks Front—Interlachen 35 feet 50 feet Front—Vernon 35 feet 25 feet* Side—West 25 feet 29 feet Parking Drive Aisle Front—Interlachen 20 feet 5 feet* Front—Vernon 20 feet 4 feet* Side—West 10 feet 10 feet Building Height Four stories and 48 feet One-story Maximum Floor Area Ratio(FAR) 1.5% .12% Parking Stalls 18 stalls 22 stalls Parking Stall Size 8.5'x 18' 8.5 x 18' Drive Aisle Width 24 feet 24 feet Drive Through Stacking 4 stalls 12 stalls *Variance Required Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed utilities and grading and drainage plans and found them to be generally acceptable. Currently there are no drainage controls on the site. The proposal with underground storage and increase in green space would be an improvement over existing conditions. (See the City Engineer's memo attached.) A condition of approval should include meeting all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer's memo. A permit would also be required from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Parking Based on the square footage of the building, 18 parking stalls are required. The site plan demonstrates 22 built parking stalls. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site 19 over-story trees would be required. The applicant has provided a landscape plan that meets the city code requirement. Extra landscaping is provided around the building and at the intersection. Bike Racks Bike racks are proposed at the north entrance of the building. Minimum code requirement for the number of bicycle spaces within the rack would be one. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Garbage Area Garbage would be collected with the building at the north corner. Garbage trucks would load the trash during off hours and would travel in the one-way portion of the drive-through area. Building Design The new building would be constructed of a variety of brick. (See attached building renderings and materials.) The proposed new building would be a vast improvement over the current buildings on the site. Sidewalks/Living Streets/Multi-Modal Consideration Sec. 36-1274. - Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the city and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (I) 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, STAFF REPORT Page 5 bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. The applicant has revised the site plan from the sketch plan to address concerns. Per the Grandview District Transportation Plan, a bike path is added along Interlachen in addition to the additional turn lane, a sidewalk is added along Vernon and the corner reconfigured with a pedestrian connection across the parking lot in two locations. However, the sidewalks are located adjacent to the roadway which is not a desired in the Grandview District Development Framework. (See attached.) Site Access & Traffic Access would be provided to the site off both Interlachen and Vernon. The driveway entrance on Vernon closest to the stop light would be removed for safety. Spack Consulting completed a traffic study to analyze impacts on the adjacent roadways. (See attached study.) The study concludes that the capacity of the adjacent roadways can support the proposed use. However, the study also concludes that the proposed use could cause the following traffic issues (See page 15 of the study): • Southbound queues on Interlachen could block the drive entrance into the site, even with the construction of an additional southbound turn lane, which is also recommended. • Drive-through circulation will routinely block six parking stalls during peak periods and cause general conflicts. Y Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking suggest an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles. The proposed site plan shows storage for 12 vehicles. One or two additional vehicles, matching the study of other sites, would impact site circulation, the access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard, and potential the Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue intersection during peak periods. • The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. Drive Through A coffee shop with a drive-through facility is a permitted use in the PCD-2 zoning district. While the proposed stacking space complies with the City's minimum code requirements; concern has been raised by the traffic consultant as mentioned. The proposed queues could interfere with parking, site circulation and potentially the Vernon/Interlachen intersection. STAFF REPORT Page 6 Per Sec. 36-1264, drive-through facility standards, the number of stacking spaces shall be at least four. No stacking space shall encroach into any drive aisle necessary for the circulation of vehicles. There is adequate room for 12 cars to be stacked without encroaching on required drive aisles; however, three stalls would be blocked by the drive-through staking. The traffic study indicates that the 85th percentile maximum queue length is 13.5 vehicles. Should traffic reach this volume, which is likely given existing traffic in the area, it could impact Interlachen. Should the City approve this proposal, a duel drive-through should be installed as suggested by the Spack traffic report. Variance — Building & Parking Lot Setback Per the Sec. 36 of 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: Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: I) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. There are practical difficulties with this site, they include: the small size of the lot, the triangular shape, and being located on a corner with two large street frontages. Additionally, the existing building and parking areas are considered legal existing non-conforming uses. The proposed development would be more in conformance than existing conditions and an improvement over existing conditions. The City would also obtain needed right-of-way for future roadway improvements recommended in the Grandview Transportation Study. However, the staff questions the reasonableness of the proposal for this site. The building could be located on the site to meet the required setback. The parking stalls are extended into the required setback due to the need for a drive-through. Cars stacking from the drive-through interfere with parking stalls and could extend into Interlachen. That condition currently exists in this neighborhood on Arcadia with the Starbuck drive-through, which causes an unsafe condition. Given the current traffic conditions at the Interlachen/Vernon Intersection, a coffee and food drive- through may not be an appropriate use for the site. Reasonable use exists on the site with the existing 5,000 square of retail space. The proposed pedestrian STAFF REPORT Page 7 walkways along Vernon and France are not consistent with the Grandview District Framework due to the large drive-through and parking lot areas. Sidewalks would be located right on the curb. If there were no drive-through on the site there could be room on the site to locate sidewalks further away from Interlachen and Vernon and a safer and more convenient sidewalk connection to proposed uses on the site. 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 circumstances of the small and triangular shaped lot on two arterial roadways are unique to similarly zoned property. These conditions were not created by the applicant. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed building and drive-through uses would not alter the character of the neighborhood. Automobile oriented uses have existed on the site (oil change) and retail. There are several automobile oriented uses in this neighborhood including gas stations, auto repair, and a coffee shop with a drive-through. Rezoning Per Section 36-216 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission is asked to consider all Rezoning requests subject to the following: (I) Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; The proposed uses are consistent with the uses suggested in the Comprehensive Plan. The site is guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. See the development guidelines below. MXC Established or emerging mixed use Maintain existing,or create new, 12-100 residential dwelling districts serving areas larger than one pedestrian and streetscape units/acre Mixed-Use Center neighborhood(and beyond city amenities;encourage or require boundaries). structured parking.Buildings Floor to Area Ratio-Per current Current examples: "step down"in height from Zoning Code:maximum of 1.5 Primary uses: Retail,office,service, intersections. • 50th and multifamily residential,institutional uses, France parks and open space. 4 stories at 50th&France;3-6 • Grandview stories at Grandview Vertical mixed use should be encouraged, and may be required on larger sites. The following are the guiding principles of the Grandview District Framework: (See attached.) STAFF REPORT Page 8 I. Leverage publicly-owned parcels and civic presence to create a vibrant and connected District that serves as a catalyst for high quality, integrated public and private development. 2. Enhance the District's economic viability as a neighborhood center with regional connections, recognizing that meeting the needs of both businesses and residents will make the District a good place to do business. 3. Turn perceived barriers into opportunities. Consider layering development over supporting infrastructure and taking advantage of the natural topography of the area. 4. Design for the present and the future by pursuing logical increments of change using key parcels as stepping stones to a more vibrant, walkable, functional, attractive, and life-filled place. 5. Organize parking as an effective resource for the District by linking community parking to public and private destinations while also providing parking that is convenient for businesses and customers. 6. Improve movement within and access to the District for people of all ages by facilitating multiple modes of transportation, and preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor. 7. Create an identity and unique sense of place that incorporates natural spaces into a high quality and sustainable development reflecting Edina's innovative development heritage. The following is one of the three primary goals of the Framework: Completely rethink and reorganize the District's transportation infrastructure to: I. Make the District accessible and inviting to pedestrians and cyclists; 2. Create connections between the different parts of the District; 3. Maintain automobile-friendly access to convenience retail; 4. Create separate pathways for "pass-through" and "destination" automobile traffic; and 5. Preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor in a way that ensures that the kinds of opportunities pursued in the future are consistent with the character we envision for the District and provide benefit to the surrounding neighborhood. One of the primary issues expressed during the preparation of the Grandview District Framework plan was the lack of safe pedestrian and bicycle areas. The area is dominated by the automobile. A primary goal is to create a more pedestrian and bike friendly district. The proposed automobile oriented use that promotes customers to never leave their vehicle is in contrast with that vision. Pedestrians would be in conflict with the drive-through when accessing the proposed new store. The proposal does not create a separate pathway for destination automobile traffic. Pedestrians need to cross through the parking and drive-through areas. (2) Will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract; STAFF REPORT Page 9 The proposed project would not be detrimental to surrounding properties. The use is permitted and consistent with the neighborhood. However, as mentioned, the proposed use would not promote a sense of pedestrian or bicycle oriented use. (3) Will not result in an overly intensive land use; (4) Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards; The proposal is not an overly intensive land use. Spack Consulting concluded that the existing roadway volume capacity can support the proposal. However, the drive through could be in conflict (See attached traffic study.) The study concludes that the proposed use could cause the following traffic issues: y Southbound queues on Interlachen could block the drive entrance into the site, even with the construction of an additional southbound turn lane, which is also recommended. Y Drive-through circulation will routinely block six parking stalls during peak periods and cause general conflicts. y Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking suggest an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles. The proposed site plan shows storage for 12 vehicles. One or two additional vehicles, matching the study of other sites, would impact site circulation, the access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard, and potential the Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue intersection during peak periods. The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. (5) Conforms to the provisions of this section and other applicable provisions of this Code; and Other than the variances requested, the project would conform to PCD-2 zoning regulations. While variances are requested, the conditions of the site would be greatly improved. (6) Provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. As mentioned, the proposed use would be an improvement to the existing conditions on the site, staff has concern over the proposed drive-through and the impacts it could have to traffic in the area and the pedestrian and bicycle experience in the Grandview District. STAFF REPORT Page 10 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed rezoning and development plan reasonable for this site? No. Staff does not support the rezoning for the following reasons: I. The proposal is inconsistent with the Grandview District Development Framework vision of creating a more pedestrian friendly district. While sidewalks and bike lanes are proposed, they would be in conflict with the drive-through, drive-aisles and parking lot when accessing the proposed new store. A Goal of the Grandview Framework and the Grandview Transportation Study is to create a separate pathway for destination automobile traffic. The following goals are highlighted: "Completely rethink and reorganize the District's transportation infrastructure to: • Make the District accessible and inviting to pedestrians and cyclists; • Create connections between the different parts of the District; Maintain automobile-friendly access to convenience retail; • Create separate pathways for "pass-through" and "destination" automobile traffic; and • Preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor in a way that ensures that the kinds of opportunities pursued in the future are consistent with the character we envision for the District and provide benefit to the surrounding neighborhood." The proposed automobile oriented use promotes customers to not have to leave their vehicle is in contrast with the above. Pedestrians would be in conflict with the drive-through and parking areas when accessing the proposed new store. 2. The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. (See attached pages from the Transportation Study.) 3. The proposal could have negative impacts on adjacent roadways. The Spack Consulting Traffic Impact Study identified the following issues: Southbound queues on Interlachen could block the drive entrance into the site, even with the construction of an additional southbound turn lane, which is also recommended. Drive-through circulation will routinely block six parking stalls during peak periods and cause general conflicts. Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking suggest an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles. The proposed site plan shows storage for 12 vehicles. One or two additional vehicles, matching the study of other sites, would impact site circulation, the access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard, STAFF REPORT Page I I and potential the Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue intersection during peak periods. The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. 4. Drive-through circulation would block required parking. 5. If there were no drive-through on the site there could be room on the site to locate sidewalks further away from Interlachen and Vernon and a safer and more convenient sidewalk connection to proposed uses on the site. • Are the proposed Variances reasonable? There are practical difficulties with this site, they include: the small size of the lot, the triangular shape, and being located on a corner with two large street frontages. Additionally, the existing building and parking areas are considered legal existing non- conforming uses. The proposed development would be more in conformance than existing conditions and an improvement over existing conditions. The City would also obtain needed right-of-way for future roadway improvements recommended in the Grandview Transportation Study. However, as mentioned above, staff questions the reasonableness of the proposal for this site. The building could be located on the site to meet the required setback. The parking stalls are extended into the required setback due to the need for a drive-through. Cars stacking from the drive-through interfere with parking stalls and could extend into Interlachen. That condition exists in this neighborhood on Arcadia with the Starbuck drive-through, which causes an unsafe condition. Given the current traffic conditions at the Interlachen/Vernon Intersection, a coffee and food drive-through may not be an appropriate use for the site. Reasonable use exists on the site with the existing 5,000 square of retail space. The proposed pedestrian walkways are not adequate due to the large drive-through and parking lot areas. If there were no drive- through on the site there could be room on the site to locate sidewalks further away from Interlachen and Vernon and a safer and more convenient sidewalk connection to proposed uses on the site, consistent with the Grandview Framework and Transportation Plan. STAFF REPORT Page 12 Conclusion/Recommendation As this is a request for a Rezoning with Variances, the City has discretion as to approving or denying this request. (See the attached pyramid of discretion.) Therefore, staff is providing the Planning Commission and City Council alternative actions to be considered: Approval Recommend that the City Council approve the requested Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-2 with the required Variances. Approval is subject to the following findings: I. The proposed uses are allowed in the PCD-2 Zoning District. 2. The proposed development would be an improvement over the existing use and buildings on the site. 3. The City would receive needed right-of-way along Vernon and Interlachen for future roadway improvements. 4. The existing utility poles and overhead wires would be removed and buried. 5. The proposed variances are reasonable. The practical difficulties for this site include the small lot size, the triangular shape and being a corner lot located on arterial roadways. 6. The existing building and parking areas are considered legal existing non-conforming uses. The proposed development would be more in conformance than existing conditions. 7. Spack consulting has concluded that the existing roadways can support the proposed use, and with proper on site management of the drive-through, including constructing a double drive-through lane, the drive-through stacking should not extend on to public roadways. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Plans must be consistent with the Development Plans dated January 30, 2018, and the revised plans and materials board as presented to the Planning Commission. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. STAFF REPORT Page 13 3. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer's memo dated March 7, 2018. 4. Provision of code compliant bike racks near the building entrances. 5. 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. 6. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent residential property, per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 7. Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum lighting requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. Lighting shall be down lit. 8. Compliance with the recommendations in the Space Traffic Impact Study, including the reconfiguration of the drive-through to be dual lane. Denial Recommend the City Council deny the request for a Rezoning with Variances. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the Grandview District Transportation Plan and Grandview District Development Framework vision of creating a more pedestrian friendly district. A Goal of the Grandview Framework is to create a separate pathway for destination automobile traffic. The following goals are highlighted: "Completely rethink and reorganize the District's transportation infrastructure to: • Make the District accessible and inviting to pedestrians and cyclists; • Create connections between the different parts of the District; • Maintain automobile-friendly access to convenience retail; • Create separate pathways for "pass-through" and "destination" automobile traffic; and Preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor in a way that ensures that the kinds of opportunities pursued in the future are consistent with the character we envision for the District and provide benefit to the surrounding neighborhood." The proposed automobile oriented use promotes customers to never leave their vehicle is in contrast with the above. Pedestrians would be in conflict with the drive- through and parking areas when accessing the proposed new store. 2. The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. STAFF REPORT Page 14 3. The proposal could have negative impacts on adjacent roadways. The Spack Consulting Traffic Impact Study identified the following issues: Y Southbound queues on Interlachen could block the drive entrance into the site, even with the construction of an additional southbound turn lane, which is also recommended. r Drive-through circulation will routinely block six parking stalls during peak periods and cause general conflicts. Y Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking suggest an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles. The proposed site plan shows storage for 12 vehicles. One or two additional vehicles, matching the study of other sites, would impact site circulation, the access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard, and potential the Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue intersection during peak periods. r The sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. 4. Drive-through circulation would block required parking. 5. If there were no drive-through on the site there could be room on the site to locate sidewalks further away from Interlachen and Vernon and a safer and more convenient sidewalk connection to proposed uses on the site. 6. The proposal does not meet the Variance Criteria. The building could be located on the site to meet the required setback. The parking stalls are extended into the required setback due to the need for a drive-through. Cars stacking from the drive- through interfere with parking stalls and could extend into Interlachen. That condition exists in this neighborhood on Arcadia with the Starbuck drive-through, which causes an unsafe condition. Given the current traffic conditions at the Interlachen/Vernon Intersection, a coffee and food drive-through may not be an appropriate use for the site. 7. Reasonable use exists on the site with the existing 5,000 square of retail space. The proposed pedestrian walkways are not adequate due to the large drive-through and parking lot areas. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Rezoning and Variances subject to the findings above. Site Location - 5000 Vernon Avenue :.... -3 _ 0 .... t t 8 L , - 7 I 0 • i I I , ff,_, BtOr6c" Teeeeeee ., 7 - - = 7 Le, 1,10„,.., T,,e1,,i ee e. : • , - 8,41h.,Side Ro i 44th St 4 ii ,,,,. -I,* ,. iiibry i„,°;‘ f 1 6 1 ,• x 4 c o - _ Country(7,i4' Interiachen Blvd .kk. ; -` - A lre AA- e ,i,e, ,.. , SOth StW 7.„- • , tr *lands ''' tie i'V 6 iten* 52nd SI W .Z." Mom, el, , Laec-e.. Mien 'e \ 'r pat* I.!, IP 13 ' ;:. ,,,,,, ,0,,,,, GNI ler .,, ,, „ t- Golf/ old Pr .r, x Ter ,,,„/ and Dr 1 S 0 t: t. ''''' Ave ,.., ./ Lak0k 1001v Or ji e a 0 t 1 fin / o M H y Rti 7.- Keit Ave. , Vernon A,v,' Garden / 56th St W iif / Park .,/,' Yvot v Tel r 'F v .,, t ,.1„ 8 -i ''',4 Tcwtv St Two/St flG 'r.n.CC' 4,'. / 7 i x 0 merti, a > z E t 4 k7 we t• f ; =tore St n 1=.- .311 .; t v 71-58thStIN '''. - Phibm4 Ln 58th St W 4t' .1: ",,.. t 8 "i .. Benton Ave 4 t'-' 0 4•_ Pew:, ,,,i. b4th,I,' Courvystde Rd f ,3,,,,,,, , Highiand Rd - _ Edina,Hennepin,MetroGiS I©WSB&Associates 2013 - F01,1,, ',-, ... 1 in= 1,505 ft The CITY of EDINA N W+E _ s February 9, 21 Map Powered by DataLink Site Location - 5000 Vernon Avenue 5120 5•0. . i 11./ 1 5404 _...„ .... , ...lir 7:(411.09 , ,-. v_....-__.. , , ..,. 13,',-‘ 0"-- 4810 C 4 5.237 23?4522952.7,."21 ; ...521117_1118',..12 4813 . - - • I < l'--- 4 ' 4, t, '"' MillP9rad PI"81 111 , 48 77 ,s4 481.6 , • - ,- - : ,,,, 1 . ., gial , 1,7,.. im_at ,y7.14.- * • ,,...,„. '4, , , . ' 512151W 541 ' ' k• i,„ -- 1 - ‘ ..t. ., : .. N. 4821 " 4825- :* 5220 f: ''). 1. „,-:' L42 v / * ''''Ar rilike,''''' 0. ,- %110 T , 5.'1-21m:3'105111 51o8r 4 ' li' " , , , v p 1 l 'IN4840. 4828 14832 4036 4840 .- , •ir (if k. . -1- 7'1r- : ' 4www. L‘ ...a. 1 5101 -IF, 44 ,4 ..,, 4,. ! 1 -5141 5105; '... I 515221 52115 52.1111:)20%„ .., ...,,,,,. . , ... 4* 5237, 5233 uz2 51f5 1 450074, „A,f0 5200 % . . 't, il .)., ' .. . uf ‘1"50,00 .., . - .,,t-01'34' 501121' • - l"' 1 4 . ,'• ; .1-7117'5°4r,s4.4 \5016110.<> , '- 5-900-4.-P2'2•, 4"-°0c' 44446'1,1'0555-'000-232. H58 -pAw 502° _a50I ") V : $1 . .P..'.. 5124 - 5001 ... 4.* IIIPAPF .. #1 1—#FIC .'• ;41, 4 ii.7,7; uc,45.037 )400 4 -"all11111213. 44 C037 . ...__.: „,,,, - - 4 4,„ (5041 --. _ ,... ,.. ...- 5013 , , • . ....„„,,i ,_ t ,504 ' ,,,,„„ , -*"' : 5041 il*0 ,e' . , ,....t YIR ' ' • *'' * 5224 P . ,„,,,,...%.... i . , I 5049 Nr-, . , % . ... - . -- .. 5021' 5133 ..., '5103*-. , i ' to pt I,' off- 7 4 51157 I s 4 i 01 11 OO 00 ! "5Y11r0 5 0.4.16..., CO 05' .......*.. -vow * . ., P .1, V. ^15104 . ' / t/ * r 1:: - 11 " -1.---,-- . , . - - fs , . • 17-1 ' -, 111111Mik, - # rio9r--- i51,08 q '''' / . 14stea., 3„,„bah ‘4... e • , 11-1 0 ... ,v: _ ,. - ,-...,-pl tistk#410111 5146*„ HI 1)101' :to.. I i511:3 - hL.'112 ; - 51 4p 1 8 7 5116 -_? r" , 1 , l 5116 15117r ...,, ..,, „..,„ , I ..„ . f ,,, .-, .A. ... : - t: 5 1 21 51' 0 *--c ,.., ' , .•, pi fni'%",..*.'..",f4'.,"%.%4 24 5 161.r 28_4t(1u l ‹. 5113 158 . " - Afl 4 X°1 1 in= 188 ft Addresses i..11 ‘0,1444/.„ . The CITY of ' 1 EDINA,:). ,...... w+E S February 9, 24 Map Powered by DataLink Site Location - 5000 Vernon Avenue 44 41 -4'1:17* ..„, -,Iff.:17.;•.„‘,...„,• 4:4: ',kli• .IN'll.... . ......,,,.. . , . 2w, eN5.- , n 11... „,„,.,1,,,:•:„.7...-..Y.::...1,...I. ,e",":: 17141:4*5- 2.°° ".•,. ,,... .„ - . .e"... co' 1 : ' ',1'.,,, • ,-- . .4-0.-16'4,S89°55112"W p , trosi- . ,N__*It, ‘--) - • . 4 " 160.16 VD rN89D5:12"E , „. vcolu'IrCY Ni N. 2. 32 50 .. . ' . * 1 ., .,,,,„ 4%, ,:,:--,..:-. • ::. Ai ' -;,., . . ,,..., ..,..., ,,,,,,4: "'' ' 5@°° 41 • ' ' (3.) ' . ..k,,itik:': 88.4 . r t rf fl...(f) .. . .. .. ,. .... v . .. .... . ,,,..i. . 1 ..„. in-T , .. .. .. ..... . .ek... . .„.... , • *Ns, ' Co'1'""'' -.„ .....,.,...... .., ' ' '„,' .1/4'' ''',,,‘.1)' 'Cooo fl 3140‘ • -,- 5010 ". ' ••• i'' '''' ' IWIL t c 4.4, ..,,, ,.. . 132.8 , ...01*- NI' ', • - . . . „. ' N ilia . N. . , ci '. , ..k.;:io•vii,.' \s,,,s6.7?-•>'''' 4. - .. . tr, , , - 50085012 178.91 .'„S893551M/AL,- 411210'Xikbe I.,,„,, 158 , . i , 1 tio ,// t 1:1,4 0 29 . . 0. co ' : . • .., . i 4\v. ‘.. ft , 5100 7 ____ 1 , cs), , ,, 28 0) 00 . \ , ) 158 . eZ,, Edina, Hennepilp,.'MetrVVSB&Associates .oll,T,14?1 Pi: '...rI 815 140 iliplipe. (i„\,, lIt, 1 in=47 ft Addresses lhe CITY of .. • ....... _fi ,...,1 , 1:•4 ''''''''': --'4 EDINA N •, ,• W+E s February 9, 2( Map Powered by DataLink Zoning - 5000 Vernon Avenue 5345 4500 4501 4500 4501 4500 4501 4500 4500 < 4515 4610 4601 4505 4504 4505 4509 4504 5225 5217 4504 • - ' 4605 4508 4509 4508 4509 4508 4508 4508 4517 4612 4609 4513 4512 4513 4512 4513 4512 4517 4512 4613 0 4520 4517 4516 45174517 4516 5032 5028 5024 'f4>, - 4521 4520 '' 4521 9--)" 4521 4520 4521 4516 `' ' 4528 4524 4525 4524 ,- 4525 4524 4525 4520 5036 5020 4533 4532 4529 4528 5040 5025 5012 5008'5004 4536 4536 4533.4532 : 4529 4532,, 4529 4524 4537 4537 4536 4533 5044 5029 ' 4540 4541 4540 LL 4537 4528 4544 4545 4544 4545 4544 4545 4544 .:;-, ,4532 5048 5033 5021 5017 5009 4548 5324 5304 5300 5238 5234 5232 5224 5220 5216 4801 5209 5205.5201 1 4801 •• 5121 5113 5105 4805 5332 ,, II ,F,1 4805 4808 4811 4809 4 51 zo 5112 5104 4813 5311 5305 5301 5241'5237 5233 5229 5221 5217 4812 4813 rX x'A ,!'• 4817 5340 5309 n, 4821 5317 = 4817 = 4816 48174816 - F`',''F'' 5101 4825 5348 5319 4816 4821 --±-75220=±- 4820 4821 4825 5121 5113 4833 5324 4832 4837 5340 5332 5316 5312 5240 5236 5230,5224 5120 5112 4841 4828 4832 4840 4840 4845 511 5343 5001 5329 5005 5305 5237 5233 5221 5215 5209� 4900 5101 5 5012 5013 5012 5013 5012 5013 5012 50131-5002 :52 ri, 5016 5017 5016 5017 5016 5017 5017 A 5020 5021 5020 5021 5020 50215016 5021 5024 5024 5025 5024 5025 5024 5025 5010 5028 5029 5028 5029 5028 5029 5028 5029 5•:..10: j 5032 5033 5032 5032 5033 5032 5033:':::` I5124 . 5036 = 5037 5036 5037 5036 5037 5036 5037 5' 5001 iiii040 5040 :• 5041 5040 5040 041 5013,04'';;"'" j 044, 5045 5044 = 5045 5044 5041 5224 5045 I. .- /A'A ; 5101 %//////'a •113 s 5049 / ; . ///// tt 5100 5101 5100 5101 5100 5101 5100 5'105 5 0 / 5125'5103 %5075 5108 5109 5104 5104 5105 5104 = / / .,i��/��, 5108 5109 5108 5109 5108 % / 5146 5112 51135112 51135112 51135112 51.16 ff5116 5146`= 5101 Fran 5116 51175116 5117 TunaF 5124 5125 5124 515124 1 7'511-3 5128 , Xx)i -51:31 5128 5129 5128 5129 5120 ti —51-00 P ►•!•, 5132 5133 5132 5133 5132 '' 1 5146 X5100 ode° t. 1 :�'�'1`5136 5137 5136 5137 1, �° W ° 7 i��ii 5145 5144 51,41 514 ,464 '4 5144 �xx % 5100 ..:...-.•.::.,. -... _ •.;520:1::: 5200] 5203 5150 .: :f5202+ �6�_-- 5203'';i 5220 ':`:5204 5205_ - •.....�/.:.`.: ., / _- - 5205 :` .. ?:5210 :5209_5250= '',,,., .:. .':'.. =. -- ` 5145 521'4 -5215 - 5209 5290 ��:�: /y 'Edina,Hennepin, MetroGiS I©WSB&Associates 2?13 1 in =376 ft Addresses 1 PRD-3 17.9 PCD-4 I APD ;s,r.v.: ,t. Zoning PRD-4 - POD-1 - PSR-4 ig f 4 711e CITY of R-1 PRD-5 POD-2 - - MDD-4 Y- EDINA _ - N R 2 PCD-1 RMD - MDD-5 w+E — PRD-1 PCD-2 PID - MDD-6 S PRD-2 = February 9, 2t PCD-3 PUD Map Powered byDataTink Public Discretion in the Land Use Process Bldg Permit Site Plan -L Review a m C.U.P. / I.U.P. Variance Plats / Subdivisions Zoning Amendment Comprehensive Plans Roger N. Knutson Campbell Knutson, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 City of Edina Grandview District August 31st, 2016 .3.., -.. — .,„ - in* ---. - ,-- 'r., , ,.., . . ,,-, - ... , . :,.• , -1. . # . • - - • ';'," '. -,:: •-• " '711L-' ""•-•, .-- ' : ri•": ", 0,i, .'- ,-. ''9 tti !" * - v, • • --A, , : ,te '1.,,... A ' Artmgt, ,:, . -40 , ' "'. t',.: t ii. 'P'r•:',,.:41:,.. „qv,..,r. ,A,',' 4 • . .... •. . t.4i ''''''... , '. , -.-'„ , , r:.,-4.011.\ ,.., ,•.,,, - ,,..4. ,IJ -V:ti.ii -,•,,e' - . - ,.••• ::—.F:." . "...: 2- -a ., .74- .‘: ? ' . ' . ' .' - '... • •-*.: •'I ' '..:9,, ' -.. 1 -1,e141. -:-..' T.:44•''' '. •':;..,:, ' ‘ee: y IF ave., :, r • .„... . 4 ,,,,.,,,,•-. ---.4 '. . .r , : . 't , .. ,,:i ,., : VT:7:1 :ti P'.. i ' - ,,.' .. f .. ' , ,. • , .. ..., .,,- ,iif .' --r; L' •-,.... s.- '; •• I• , „I' •r,. . , .''',4 A''."."' Ft. \v'.,,, `,.., ••. ;gr''' ' -" ' 4 -., - ,-.-,..,-H ' 1. • :-••• ',ik -.; it ',i': i •••• - . ••••3/4.• ',..-`:-..,...4' -•- -'1:ii-, .• •,,r;••-' • .- - • ,„ f.e.-1, -,, -- - A , 24• .',.. A- - '''.f..,..'• .../\ ',..l': . .t.,...-,...,'...-.'211.:.:'•.-,: ffP, ":.........•' 'i,,,....,,,.,;\:::,,,t e f -,'" 1 1. ,' - tii%, . .. _ . ..7r,*. AL_ ik ill "'-'",". ‘411 % ! 4-:- ' '., „" ' ,,--"•,,— - -'- ,, "•kt.,. , ..jr-, . le . . . .,... ': -.._. i.. i . ,,,!.., , :••...- : ,A.„ • , • - ', '.- ' - 0: , A{:„..,,, :: or' 00-11. _.:4,' - . iv . . .. . , ..„. „.. . . .,. . , Ir- - - .. ItZ .2 Ai '''• Id -- --..- --_-1,rf-ue . 1: Aft- ..* ''41:il " - ''''••• .* ''' ' - :' ft': I.!' • -11 pr . .' 1-2 --''''i.°- ,...f.a....-. T . -. ,e•-,k .1 P - ''.;*' . . .:;.'1. 47 IT'..iir'':' ');''':::1•' ' '''' '''''''.-, '...5.**r.',AIIW'''Aj. ' .1.!:tu" ''': ' :14: _I , :. I TA ) 4 •• r ..:- . ., .mms, . ,'"'fi• - -2........-.. ., ' ...,...7,,, ,:-.-- ..,, • 4, ,:,•c.: -::> . ;,.. . it . . ','.-- . -7. - . ,:. ' .• ,dp..M.\- e! - ' -is. ,• ,_ '' 4 . . - . , , 'h.t....1 „. . , -,•••••1'...- -".'"""v- ., • -,..-.: , s .- !. ; -i.,14-•7 'I,: '. - ..,''''. . - ,'"i4i, ' '*71. . i .- "'. •-t__‘-' , .---- • '''' 47 X . .__,. . .'• 7: .ik ',"' ,,,,4 / .' 'il..., --.'.. 'i: t ,c,.14 l'',:"'-4-' . 't i ' - •Ik. ' 1. - -•7 ...f-, %.,-. - ....,---v- I _ .,..,,:. 4 .1.- ," ,- . .4- 0 . , -- --4,-.:.'. .. ''''i ' : ,• -- '''', • *) ' ' ai,. i' x-; -,.. . f I -, - •:4, , - , ., --- 4T. -4.-:,;34 '4,4 • '', ''''''',:.,,. - .-: °, '..- ' . pm. 'i '-_, . • ,_••-j t„,... . / 1 7'7- ,,- : ,-....1K,,. 'i ,...1'• * ' ,4 ' -f.,:,' 4.11,...1, s s•v'-''' t.- . Iric, '".: "-' •-:' . .. .. ..'. -trA'is-,i,.::,.;>-_,,,' ,,, t * '' --...,•••••.t.,. :'''''",1",","71'''''rr .' - 410, ,. ,,„., - , . .,,.. , 1.-, - .- It ,ift:4"' ;1; •,' :;',",.,- " ---.' ' -f• ''' ; 140%* . , I ' '''' lok, -4, - 1-,•.... - - I's--'• 'lit. , liol_t " I:., '.- : -s:-/ - ,';',4,- 'i....-. 7":', . .44': ',:,-,- L "' 1 I F'7.C 4- .•.:::,t7-- . , It,.it,:. „. „..... „.01 .., ),..... - -,<,..., ' I ' . .r , ::: ::. -.....--. .,•••'' .`'.!.-;, - .; '':-.''''' - __•:- .11"' --- . ' ''' ''• '...1.01 - A 4 ., .....,,,... . _ ,74 - ,!:, ,11 ' 1 'p, -.•,.. riegaik* _ .\\ ,.,-,,,,....,,,,:::.,..„ 11,77-, .,,, • . ,.1 ,.1„. :. . . , . .... ' ..4 1: 0-, •;'. . , . .. 4. - . . .„. e kfi '...7"i',4...,:7,1:1,y‘');:'''Ilittilitit(04;14;'• 1°'''111 —\',8 r.' '''.1::: ::.." . 1LW S.;\ ' k i..,..,,,,.. * • I (4.4,s _.,-- ':-,, ,el. \a: eit .. ... . -,. , .... . . ....., .. , . . . - i• -4 iii-f rt ,'''. • - -', ,',.., ' . , ' . ! 77--- - ..,' •.,,, • ( i . v., , AN, • , •'-', -• r 4 ' • ,44', ., 1 „.4‘(.4 , ",; , 1,•,,f 'i ' 14,,\(7, ":',..•:.t. 44, , - .„,\ , .,,,,,,..,, ,, „,,,,,,, ...„ .,.. ..,....,. i ... „. ..,..,.....,..,..„. ..,.. . ,. , ..„ ,..,,,,, , .. N,,,,466,, ... ; -:. ,. . „. , . . ' ' ,... ) ' - "'".i."t• .'•' -e s' ."'.'; •''.'3', — .!" '' "'.. - : ' -*. • ..:;.;;.tPiAv,AL,„/. - y l'i • -‘1•4A, A,. 1Nalta 1, 1 \\\N„........ ix.s.s PERFORMANCE NELSON Wad DRIVEN DESIGN. NYGAARD PLANNING+DESIGN • Incorporate Complete Streets/Living Streets • Improve experience • Reconnect zones within district for all modes • Motorists • Transit • District parking strategy • Bus routes and access • Reorganize highway ramps • Advocacy for Park and Ride • Explore street and intersection configurations • Consider passenger rail • Consider through-traffic and to-traffic • Pedestrian experience 111111 • Enhance both safety and routing .l. _ _.."" ��.•,� .Jnr FfAvlE-.c' l2. !:>' VAP EZ r 2^' ,Z' tjAQ1P} PRIVI:. IVAVSr •t_t:aAN: Wage— 1:21vC Sxt5T iG -7,..1 tl + ...I. 'i.,.1"- tt,.._ . l 8' ES' 2' tr, ti' IV Z �' �: vv 1>r-14- tt',UJA Fl Va C:C1Ve -tUEA.7 Vaktie- t6 CE- 'al-Vt>. ',,,,ALA,-- 0910 t••.1 ,,-/AUCQ•nQIJ ti < t , Eg 0 ?y' c t itt WALK. t rs� E.vG �' r0� it i� 65' t' F' 1,12lYE. 1uWbWVE Sii-lt, %ia. WALK. 011'n ol 2. , 0 Z 4' 8 Figure 1.6 Example of proposed solutions and scenarios for Vernon Avenue from Imagine Week design concepts. 6 Setting+ Context LEGEND • WALKING AND BIKING ACCESS 0 I) CROSSWALKS 4 4111SEPARATED WALK AND BIKE PATHS i.00. µ4'_~ 4...., VEHICULAR CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AXXX REMOVAL OF REDUNDANT ROADWAYS fI. 2 I� EXISTING HIGHWAY RAMPACCESS 0 IMPROVED INTERSECTION 1 3 '= IMPROVED BUS FACILITIES 4 F 1 - 17., ,. ,' AUTO CIRCULATION AND PARKING R 0 Mid Term Changes I. Create separated bike lanes and pedestrian paths on Vernon Ave 9 3 43 a= nue and Eden Avenue ' P.:' 6 2. Improve pedestrian circulation by Jerry's and general retail X . 3. Create activation zones along streetfront of Vernon Avenue X 4. Add more pedestrian crossings on Vernon Avenue 5 x 1 0 5. Expand walk/bike connections within district interior and improve` x circulation 6. "Right-sizing"design for Vernon Avenue and Eden Avenue k x 1. Integrate highway ramp circulation with district street network 8 x,'7 X 8. Develop district parking strategy ,6 9. free-right turns replaced with controlled intersection onto Highway 100 northbound 10. Remove northbound looping ramp 6 II. Transit schedule and frequency improvements 6 TRANSIT ACCESS AND ENHANCEMENTSe. /7:4, " „..,....._ , • ,-4. ' !s tt X BYT ,,,, .. '4 p Figure 2.6 Diagrams of proposed improvements for walking and biking access,auto circulation and parking,and transit access and enhancements. Diagrams were developed during the Imagine Week phase of the Transportation Study. City of Edina Grandview District Transportation Study 19 '"x'4' " .,;ir''''',1, , »; . 't �§ BROOKS w� . i,_� ., ,. 5 — Interlachen Boulevard `°EAV ' : , ,: The Interlachen Boulevard intersection serves as the primary I; -70 Ili- ti access to the Grandview District and Highway 100 for residents yet. r` �„, ' of Hilldale, Highlands, and other neighborhoods to the west. 's k _" ,, This one lane road in each direction with bike lanes,widens to two lanes and a turn lane at the intersection with Vernon Ave- „ 4 nue(Figure 3.23 and Figure 3.24). It is the only marked crossing ' :, '_' : 3 for pedestrians for several blocks,and acts as a connection for `'"k* ,,if,.,`. ;, �s y ./.4.,.. •7 ,, «yr cyclists,despite the lack of bike lanes to receive them once they k�"a " i cross to Gus Young or turn along Vernon Avenue/50th Street. r ,-y fit `• In recent months and years, the City has made ongoing im- .e, '` .* ,1 ' O *e (.."1' «, " , provements to Interlachen, including extending the bike lanes4i,"4 .la": 'i.4 ,, t Y l and sidewalk treatment to the edge of the intersection (Figure „Ai+ �, r'.-s,., . 3.22). The intersection at Interlachen Boulevard and Vernon Figure 3.22 Plan ofl/ernonAvenue and Interlachen Boulevard intersection, showing redeveloped parcels on the northwest and northeast corners;I" Avenue/50th Street carries the highest traffic volumes in the =200'. R district,save for the Highway 100 interchanges. Modest changes substantial investment in budget, time, and impact—however , in signal timing and access to Gus Young,coupled with improve- the team first sought to understand how this intersection is Iniments at nearby intersections,can help manage traffic flow or used and how traffic patterns flow to and through the District at least reduce the frustration that some drivers feel as they via Interlachen. traverse the Interlachen intersection. As the District grows,it Traffic flow at Interlachen can be improved by noting the origins may be tempting to reconstruct this intersection entirely—a and ultimate destination of travelers in the area. Improvements -it 4, 1*'7.i• f__ r � �L ,7�� ,A•-r it � �� " ........ x« hil x» - Kr. li_ • ..„,,,,--- ''- / -7---- -.1., ltFigure 3.23 Intersection of Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard, Figure 3.24 Bike facilities on Interlachen Boulevard are not clearly looking north. marked. City of Edina Grandview District Transportation Study 41 that will benefit this intersection include: provement is included in the Mid Term Changes scenario. • • Retiming the signal at Interlachen to shift more green time New crossings and bicycle facilities along Vernon (Figure to movements between Interlachen and 50th Street. Im- 3.25 and Figure 3.26). Lack of pedestrian access across Ver- plementing the complete streets project on Vernon will non,and bicycle access along it,forces shoppers to drive to help in this regard,as it will shorten the crossing distance, locations like Jerry's,Starbucks,etc. Providing alternatives returning valuable seconds to other necessary movements. to driving to nearby locations will help encourage some Analysis of this intervention is included in the early action travelers to leave their cars behind when they can. Analysis items and Short Term Changes scenario. of this improvement is included in Mid Term Changes. • Creating a new signal at Jerry's, with a dedicated signal The changes at Interlachen should be seen as a suite of interven- phase and turn pocket. This will encourage southbound tions. No single intervention will create a substantial improve- left-turning vehicles to use that new intersection, rather ment in intersection operations for this location by itself;this than slowing down through-traffic waiting behind them, is a case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. creating queues at the Interlachen intersection. Analysis of Separately these changes have a small,though contributing im- this improvement is included in the early action items and pact on the function of this intersection. When all of these Short Term Changes scenario. interventions are implemented, the synergy created would be • Reopening additional routes (52nd St),and improving the substantial enough that it could likely delay reconstruction of operations of their intersection with Vernon (53rd St). the intersection by many years, if not decades, depending on Lack of alternate access/egress for neighborhoods west of the pace of development and the neighborhood's tolerance of Vernon forces drivers to use Interlachen in greater num- the trade offs. Reconstruction of the Interlachen/50th/Vernon bers than they might otherwise do. Analysis of this im- intersection, for example, would be a costly endeavor lasting ft..i) l i a' f ',nt , * to i , r / Figure 3.25 Example of a pedestrian-friendly crosswalk Photo credit:Carl Figure 3.26 Example of a pedestrian-friendly crosswalk. Photo credit Sundstrom. NAC70. 42 Focus Areas many months or more,and may not be necessary as these other given the existing and projected traffic volumes,the roundabout improvements are pursued. size would be disruptive to both the scale of the district to the Over time, however,it may become necessary to consider re connectivity goals for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. construction of the intersection at Interlachen/50thNernon. Additional improvements in the vicinity of this intersection in- Development beyond the District may impact traffic patterns crude: in this area, or land uses on the existing corner parcels may . Short Term: Rationalizing access to customer parking for change in the future. At present,Interlachen Boulevard widens Walgreen's/Edina Liquor.This can be accomplished through at the intersection,in order to accommodate a turn lane in the delineators on Gus Young Lane that restrict left turns into eastbound direction. If the intersection were reconstructed to and out of the parking area.This will reinforce right-in/ alleviate future congestion,the greatest need is likely an addi- right-out movements,reduce queuing,and further encour- tional left-turn lane,allowing two dedicated left-turn lanes. age use of other intersections.This intervention could also However, the project must also consider how and where to be implemented as an early action item if there is a desire transition to the typical one-lane cross section going north to do so. along Interlachen. Moreover, such an investment should also • Long Term: Redevelopment of the corner parcel (existing consider the need for wider,more comfortable bike lanes and Edina Liquor andWalgreen's building).The Framework Plan improved pedestrian connections.The combination of all these contemplates a new street grid in the District,with a new NM factors could add 28 feet or more to the right of way for a turn street from Vernon Avenue to Arcadia Avenue between the lane(I0'),bike lanes(6'each),plus additional sidewalk space and existing Jerry's and Walgreen's parcels. Unfortunately, the landscaping(and additional 6' or more). The right of way is not physical space is not quite wide enough to accommodate a sufficient to accommodate additional lanes without acquiring typical,vehicular street. Redeveloping this parcel,when the additional land from neighboring parcels on either the south or time is right,would create an opportunity to establish in- north side of Interlachen. ternal circulation connected to existing streets.This would Rather than initiating such a change, reconstruction might in- also enable more active frontage on Vernon,which is a core stead be timed with any potential plans for redevelopment of principle of good urban design and a strong pedestrian en- parcels at this intersection,if pursued.This study also contem- vironment. plated the possibility of a roundabout for this intersection,but City of Edina Grandview District Transportation Study 43 13 .— N N N N N T. , . ''':i."'''''', O v q t 9A ,.,,,-:-:,-i, t.-..4,.^ Q) n R lfl N = q y N M N .Sirif ,�, , t a+ y fC N W ,..''',4i a G v C C C -CI .� ``' �-.. "n (0 _ - —moi 'p •- N N 41 cc cc m w.q' LLJ N O1 41 .r # g , a 4 •it Okt *~° ''` ff 4 0 ). ;...11,,, 4.• ..i,„, ' ,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,-7,--:...416.A . 4,..t. . u : „.7”.7.1t.1/40,0_, .„4...., , ,,,,., .- 4 , . . , ' ''...*r I,, . itlf •� a:.:1. 7, . .-4,7,,-ir..;-.-- .. ', ,. '�. , K ` N „'� i Ea S 0 Z o Z V L. tV .4 ° b U ca Oy a~) ate.+ p 0 ,4 a4 w 0 O 0 `" +' u d to Cr u y .:L'. y c3 a) t O r O p E Q c) w cC (J. 0 L "d u UP Q a °O' C7 � ;2, -:5 cd � cn. c � � o = a, a+ rn �O 'tt a) 'y ,' - G � •c'd 0 0 •'U" G V V 2 �O V •4 E aa" FAQpa Prnn ,I,na, naF-F � g--* 2 aa0Qw �, aa.. L V cL ti Z CU uU f, •1—+ C - o U E U C LQ b a) O V O .- w O O N bOA.�.' ? CD c Q C d y m x G4 4' °' °' o o Q o G� o 0 0 o a fx o t c� . F 4vi c ; 15 .4 •- a `� 7c Q i- O ,ix pa p. 'b U 0 ,_c_,-t 6J ' �., CQ C Q U U pa cV a' V1 th L E WJ ow p. ° .w > G '� Z �'d N v°c� a o o p = o o n v) a44rxUv C.) P4 .. awE-4nPPE--4m ¢ cdo0cnl1 ‹G .-0 4F-aFF V vuxucn N Ln N- M Lfl tO C' 'Cr Lr) i aJ 4-, C 11) N V O -0 O_ O `AO = C d O (6 L) Q 0 C � i a) p, o C (CO p, � z ra ate-, C (C6 -0(d x E L c V v, - Y o o x o t a, - v n v a) —Q) O- O > O_O ao 1-a, I a ' ms x I— w — N M u'1 N ul lf1 O f' a s' 0 z° u c~a [ u u u u o O. 5 to o o N u o V u t+4 2. • E2 r) q Q p 'b T Hca O u O A 0 o'4 Q °� a� aa ca., � _ V u u . E• . u .b � E eAo t . u iCw • b , p u b >, u OM . b u u c n y o . Q u> u "ou w • a. t ce 'b z ., uqo 'u U l oa a x -o 0 wE u .5 •o ,9 u o °° • u ens ° oo bc. g p,Eo5 - • ts "S •ow ° Q 0 ° b � g o a •a u > d x0E O . O 5 acx O O E + u � Q . C v .he u u a, o Q at -0 a u . � u 0 ti u • a .a '5.1 eo e ua E s., b� e g1 .0 .0 u o 0, 0up ►. q c _'' ooo yiQ a p^o « E O : u '° E ^u 'y ; 'a i... 4., Q , p " az u ig C pw m ° u p t.), E u� 'p : u� ,u x Qd �q o a a aE0 00 0. 382 , m 0 o w 0 ^O u u n u a bA •80 ° g o cd Zs.5 " 3 ° g' i •u o u a G co ' goov 0bbu � uu .bo V o: 5y 0 u a a a 0 0 a � g -0• & c4 a t' u uoo " � p u " r w •14-1) v 0 s w o u b ' C Q ° � ' u3Q� EM o u0:4--4 a Cn en cQ g o ' 'au 0 .. t-4 ubru U 0 .0 4-' d • u+.•y cd � ) d yE +' + P+ o 2 P. u Q4. w � • E 0 u ub AO q 0G ° O m u b N O. H 'd x '•' v + U 'i0.1 in .` u ov 0 U ° " O i0 "Q qou vA u ° P. u u u .4 •I3P. b 0 E 4 b°40 pp Q u u u . > -00 up v aA 2 - La u "' � $ ad .0 O oa ' 'a u a, o .x UOOa,ub Q° ^ uo « u Q [ ^v u p � T � •5 o v I_ 0v, C3 .� 5 m g o › Pcd w e 1 " ,u G i.0 -u u ^ Ndu *P 2 73 d O 0 - 'i O vU U00O c O e.0E WCu I I, w v G6 Ob 4... 0 4 4 E . -V N w ao u - 4 4:. o '0 tcopN '+ ^u eA y ti V. . aa ,..9 -0.__▪ -- u r en Gu ° o o `,1•7,, o 0-1 ai° = . v t o ° a o ' 5A � c" O vb4 a ° ° .saa. w u u ' ua « .a c� ,0 °'• H . P" y u t'w bA. , ;a y eC ed • p +' u '> .. Qia -n• o . E -.., b 0 E5 u 5 3 .c • « b 5O ° d u y o aH o ▪ o ° 03 :1Z :^O " e ou.g " i.0 � ou0. oo5vwuo •v 4 0 .t' ' »° o U ddapdaX ¢ AV�• a ° U 5.g0 F° El oU 8 .4A ° U O hw5 a r; A • N in 0 4 a a 0 Z' ,� » x 0� I „t 44,.:=.' . t - t , : . ., C 0 v �.y mai R� Q z _. 10 >. cn 1:11 t3 w a i .0 EU 3 . ' ' o -5 v ° b � a CGb d o « o C uu u u a y x woh °v �o 'i E COw 4. u ,..0 '..4 .0 "0o n of,vi ° NG V u �' C - M u .E a � 0m7 `C Mp .0 0. u Oo a o- b v 'S tav . bo . y � � ` 0., 0 EJ., 0 � N .5c ° 0 `Npo 'C' .a ' ^d °u w .4 u ow FA .. 0) b C ' N w to h v vcd •0 Eau E t- o 5' , 2, E Gni°.0-s uw f3 C °°" 3c xv 4 oC•0 C ac„ , E .5a C g 'u ; ux E E a r2 l ob a u .� •� Q 0 a s.8 Li E 'g , C .2 o . v E T ,G E.� o v .S E E u C r q N •0 y O ca,a u u .b °°' ch-) 'i o u a � o a o ong d ' E u 'aM ;a ° 'v'n E- a uE po -2 N ❑"go E a° aC+ A • Ng+ ''OC , au ° u va Q' QLO C Q O u Q U it G N•Sr Ln 0 0 Z0 +. Z. C a, t' E a, > > > o:. 0 a,.ac ziii ' ,� E R y a, a, C :6 L].73 C Y Y C a, Y N %0 i —sa ..:1. , 1 -y�I\�` ` 40"'""" U C H N > in ea ti ..- \ll 0 1 C u a!-he C a, O. N .4 a,_ O 3•� GE pw vi a `" ----4":0) +' °4- tea° � a,,-- v v° OU W• C N 0 ej't a = a, t_v ,0013 -�;' '+ oc ac E a,aE C a o+rAoa, ya 41 oQa �c . a� ' aEona co au > '^ V d .fVMmiV1c01: 0 cu m vo uV by bcd ty0. ct 'w7w ,,I CI. � a+ 0 a.O Nu "C El - O am — O 0. en• w V 0 CCc ^C Cv 7 u o v O v . '5 040 > C :.. ¢ " U _cli'43 " u`Eou p v a cd Ci Ow .0i. C C 4-,Iv, 0. >. u v 3 u v 7 ^C v^d ac"i O O asi v, 0. C u e.0 ° en C iii u O •d vtd) ac 0 Q p E 11-t V Qi cv. .0 cd " u ° . w cd t, ,C 7 Q C y = O ± O v ¢ a0'5. ' v'C 'v > i v,b 0 ot: 0-. .Ow'u y Oo � `a° D ci 6.i v w ti O - O > 0.. N'd ..-� cd , bq E... t. � n &' u „9 I.,cd '5 d C+ . cd .¢ a4 - vu ' O C N � uX , V w ^O v 0. 0 d ' u a.) . u a' Pa . w a u tn O .0 y O ,-1 w P-to U cod -0 cd O tom. 0�cd U ¢ cn C ,� Q tv. "O 'v, a, v u '" C ai v E".... �n fl-! H C 'a -°� �.,o >, 7 C ti C cd 0. 0 '3 ..' .I] 'b y co /1 0 m CN U H.. •L�. y �Y V fd Q " 4+ v'b Cd •b Li d lex acv . ,u, 3 gi p° -s A g ,,, o E ¢ -d am ¢.^. -d a' C yy,, .u .� ~O be cd 0. 0)-'.,- E. y.v •C Cr C CM N bcQ V., V ° v t O d c` .N U a' +' cd... U nv cd C ' 'O ¢ P- u C 7 p .0 .a bA 'O Y C : 0. 73 N y C 0. -2 p tu. u, v '6 M'w ° E C 0-,..- 0 0 tv, cd v n —— t1 C'b LTa 'bA-0 H v .--' Q cd 0 O E w 0. O O v -= O C v C >w .0 O cd >, 0. U. I— '--1 u cd N t. cd M O O '- u LE vi u P. 0.0 O [- .0'til N In O Ea a x' o 2 .. __... Z uQ - fill) itP 1. 1 1...: ' :. 'p j anyeip• JV Li ,miiii !17 -7-=7 ...fir Nm 5 11k�w -'4T ... . > r1 ,--,,' . , , .. .. ,, .„ .„,. .., , r. z,-.., , -, ---• ,-,.._ - ti '.v , 4 , A Ik.._ . , . i r.,--,_v ,;,,,,,,\, "foe al 8 sr v,,,,, de : i r en ,c es, 4, 4111114VN. .•it 1 no 14',WORAWANItairtiommimomitirns) Mg' `�� -Va. .? . a. :CE1..„,..., F--1u. cos u 'b cd u S cr,rd 1c Eoag ° -o b C7 d3 :a :ate v ,,° .n -0 — 5 0.CS H s- .b° b o c , 'u •0 r a, 1-:, -o c " >, g a , ¢5 C7 u ,_ a a . ) E a = o x o .5 u ,a a S a o .0 v 5 v v o a•v C p Q a en o d o a 3 u m C7 5 > t' u u cd `—° a g C a a u ^O u j o, u [ p, d a -b N y t 71 o c 5 . W.5 a, E �' .� a § 8 :� 3 o 0 o o va° ci iiiv a 3 O -C14111111J11d a_ Vuu� Ho u • • _ C a •u t U ° o. v .y is ani 'y �a�i to oO N 'v y 0 a > Fa 0b u c u O. Z QC7 �ac7 Q u .a a � U a -da p.,'S Q.. a -5 u 2 -E c4 O ••-i U N OA M U O - �" V1 .6 .+ n O.06 N Lf1 0 a x' W z° z= 3 L.;0 b O C u -b -5-g N 3 N Q C Qi.� . Y ¢ > .t ..w u o 'O C E ma8 • > v > o =,..-. C 0 J. I) O C O1 .V 27 O 3 Q v C N C v ,n ¢C 2 v o C Crl ovc o •=' v Q a w >� a Y \ II . 0 U. o = a 2° �.. o CI)6) , ,:i...,. .4,.•7 , \ c Lu i n'1 V L .1 Q 1 R 1 • l y H 11:-..... v C b a> cu `' 'o a c F. Oal z 4, -DI U r I • • V1 a., t. .4 '5 .4 O S. a� .0 ^d 0 W v n ! a' 0 4: e Al N \ fV O v y b O 4 H y) U U Y \ _ '"vo C C ijp 'O � co V O , N \ N V E — d b WI 0 1 At /64(0.111)t DATE: March 7, 2018 TO: 5000 Vernon Avenue, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague— Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner PE - Director of Engineering Charlie Gerk PE—Graduate Engineer RE: 5000 Vernon Avenue— Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, and storm water. Plans reviewed were; Civil, Landscape, and Survey drawings dated 01/29/2018. Details I. Deliver as-build records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. 2. Plat public easements or transfer fee ownership of dedicated public right of way for future pedestrian and utility facilities. Survey 3. A proposed site survey is required. a. Show all easements, public and private. 4. Provide sidewalk, trail-way, drainage, utility, signage, lighting and traffic signal easements as shown on attached graphics. Living Streets 5. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. 6. Sawcut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. 7. Provide a 5-ft sidewalk with a 5-ft boulevard on Vernon Avenue. a. As City and County develop Vernon Avenue, a determination will be made for a sidewalk or multiuse trail. Traffic and Street 8. Clearly denote private sidewalk. Maintenance for non-public sidewalks to be responsibility of property owner. 9. Construction staging, traffic control, and pedestrian access plans will be required. 10. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Fire truck turning template attached. Consider truck overhang when proposing plantings. I I. Coordinate Vernon Avenue pedestrian facilities and concrete curb and gutter with City. a. Developer will be required to install either a 5-ft sidewalk or 10-ft multiuse trail depending on final design of Interlachen / Vernon Intersection completed by the City in 2018/2019. b. Developer to provide space for the future location of the Interlachen /Vernon Intersection signal pole—draft location show on attached graphics. 12. Per traffic study findings ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 �‘vA.4----,;a4 \ r ! F�J Ego a. To address order lane stacking, provide 2 order lanes, speaker posts and menu boards to use during peak hours to reduce stacking back onto Interlachen Boulevard. b. Fire Department does not require by-pass lane open at all times if used as a second order lane. Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations. 14. Clearly indicate private vs public utilities. 15. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer's engineer. Pressure data available upon request. 16. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer's engineer. 17. Provide geotechnical report with soil borings. 18. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with public works. a. Separate meters for fire and domestic services will be required. b. Public works to determine acceptable installation methods. 19. A SAC determination will be required and Met Council and City sewer and water connection fees will be calculated from the determination. 20. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. Storm Water Utility 21. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report. 22. Provide more detailed information for retention system. a. Ensure influence zone of infiltration chamber does not impact underground parking. b. Retention system engineer required to verify construction of the underground retention systems done per plan. c. Confirm retention system is structural designed for Edina's 80,000lb fire truck load and outriggers in parking lot areas. 23. Evidence of watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed is required for building permit. Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 24. A SWPPP consistent with the state general construction site permit is required. Other Agency Coordination 25. Nine Mile Creek and / or Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts permit(s) is required. Property site is in Nine Mile Creek Watershed but water drains to Minnehaha Creek Watershed. 26. Hennepin County, MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 ,, \ \ 3 \ > \ Q Z � w ZQ ., ".- p\ Y' R D — .„ w * ow yci o �� m0 0 0 gF ow o 5� Z r $ : ���' w w w U 2 w of '! U aI- / Wz \� , � �,\\ \ \ \ vN z w w a: it! TI°2(f, 'k', -9' ,',-. 1.,"6 6 ' o 1. 'Z" mss's`) „.,, ‘10:„Ni )a w o i wm °w / w w \ a�= .fta ' f*/ 4 �,O ,,o < iii , Li 9 z� 0 ' �p� / 5 •\ m ��� o �x33r' 3'. w 'o2'. � 0 w r w y U w o w 3 i .i „ ,. �" y, u, Off, N yam'. ^.'y� V < ,' -;a J. V. / i' p 44— '".rs '' 7; 3 o 'tea � i ` / w Ra Na' o ala. ,,k � z ,9 ..:7_, r . Ai 'iF :...,, i, g o L'''w :k; 1 qg e u ( p a A, a 4 cf,LI LO a a N ,t 1 �� CA o N ' ` O N = wo = w , IM .. r , w \ S X— Ip. n a 4, • a o 0 -.: reg vi \\- - w J �.� OffAAC+ ,, -',+ 0 j -/-0,,,-, co o / 76,P ,,, ( Cr) Z +aP z apt N. #1� ♦ ♦ o L ': s _ a w Z _ '' spm s�,"' "" .4 0 gyAttr ` 0 p" i = 7��o w P I � Q w o �, ,aw o w �� : '2:.., ow � STN> m , ,,:,,, :',,,CO w o '\*, ww m mpm° o a w ww o,,,,,4 N " � fl a • -\N L% s co = o El w L?, S w I 0) co ti U) 0) o 4 N CO CO ' t' C O O O O 0 0LO Lf) Lf) LOLO LO I t -- ii+!�-Ol\s0ux,aip-LS1s6sV1 JSL8666L\eW03\3,31,d p&tice Turning Performance Analysis 5/1/2013 Parameters: _----- Inside Cramp Angle: 45.00° Axle Track: 81.92 in. Wheel Offset: 5.25 in. Additional Bumper Depth �' Tread Width: 16.60 in. } •'nodi Axle Track Chassis Overhang: 65.99 in. �, Wheel Offset Additional Bumper Depth: 19.00 in. / Cramp Angle Chassis Overhang / 401 IL. s{ Tread Width Front Overhang 84.99 in. I� Wheelbase: 258.00 in. ,// /4 N 4 _ Calculated Turning Radii: , , , , Inside Turn: 20 ft. 4 in. , , - / / Curb to Curb: 36 ft. 8 in. / / a* Wheelbase ' 1 / �� fOty Wall to Wall: 41 ft. 1 in. ea qv/ I l / to r4, ' °�6�. °'oy Comments: 4/ . 'p I I I , 0� d 1 °�,pda'G°'Q, Truck 12205 I I 1 1 II II ii Inside Turning Radius I I 1 i X Components PRIDE# Description Front Tires 0078244 Tires,Michelin,425/65R22.50 20 ply XZY 3 tread Chassis 0070220 Dash-2000,Chassis,PAP/SkyArm/Midmount Front Bumper 0123625 Bumper, 19"extended,ImpNel Aerial Device 0006900 xxxAerial, 100'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 Turning Performance AnalysisFileilee 5/1/2013 Definitions: 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-line 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 turn. 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 turn. This measurement takes into account any front overhang due to the chassis,bumper extensions and/or aerial devices. Page 2 of 2 Ad'PciA) 1 a EDWARD FARR 1.)hP14-7-lue ARCHITECTS INC 7710(.rr.ldc n Tri:an;;k 1)nvc Tsdtn Prairie 'Minn ,An 55:144 IU 952.943,96W Fay,952-94 3-966 5 www.cdfarrarch.corn March 2, 2018 Cary Teague, Community Development Director City of Edina 4801 W. 50`h Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagels Retail Store—Plan Revisions 5000 Vernon Av. So. Edina, MN Applications for Preliminary Rezoning, Variance and Preliminary Development Plan Cary, Based on feedback from city staff, the Planning Commission and the Traffic Consultant, we have incorporated them into this new revised site plan. Specifically they are as follows. • Our plan now indicates the future road improvements planned by the City along Vernon and Interlachen. Our plan accommodates the requested easements necessary for the sidewalk encroachments into our property by reducing the width of the drive-thru lanes and by-pass lanes down to 8 feet each. • We have improved pedestrian connectivity from the Interlachen and Vernon sidewalks by providing three new points of access, including one of them with a pedestrian ramp for accessibility from the lower roadway elevation. • The customer patio has been enlarged; and we have incorporated a pervious paver system to reduce storm water runoff and decrease our impervious surface area. • As requested, the parking stalls along the drive-thru lane and to the far north are now designated as Employee Parking,thereby not inconvenienced if the queue for the drive-thru blocks them. • The traffic report identified strategies for minimizing car stacking. We have incorporated double pick-up windows to speed the pay/pick-up process; and we have a designated pick-up waiting stall beyond the pick-up windows for large orders that take more time to fill. • Further, if the car stacking becomes a continual /uncontrollable problem,traffic guards will be hired to control the traffic, and ultimately, we have the space to install a double order lane system. We do not feel this solution will be necessary. • As requested in the Traffic Report, we will install a sign for southbound Interlachen that reads "Do Not Block Intersection" located immediately north of our entrance driveway. • At the exit onto Interlachen, we have a STOP sign with additional text stating"No Left Turn Between 6AM and 9AM" (times to be determined). • The developer is offering to pay for the removal of the wood power poles along Interlachen. • We have relocated the trash enclosure adjacent to the building along the drive-thru lane, thus making it less visible from the public way. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 952.943.9660. Thank you, Sincerely, Edward Farr Architects,Inc. Edward A. Farr, AIA President Cc: Ted Carlson, Orion Investments Edina III, LLC — — Page 2 i - W1 q 0 W W N W H @} J Z Q �' o f a � :.UL � lg.oo iKJ I°;BYp '3 w� ±08W—Quiz Oz ,low O. I }E >O Um IZZ UO fy€ Z_ �� 33, _ Ill L3 iea — 1>,:_, =2 1.,?., �P � r?.. £pk q[C. Tj�di 4 I tipUW - NW _ i6 uO - AjId3A 01 1:1OON3A ---- --f "9-'8 "8-2 .0 Al n m K W W 7' p � 6 30 N '''T 44 - N- L'S �5 N _V II I. Z ui kr fr, a 4 zo O I— of v . mII am w ( \ Z, N ) i . 1 i j Z 0 UN wO-3F-� NQ n.) ozswow,-N Fra co ca p N n WZ p Np_ � W0Z O U W O 111 3 i_z 1 1 m Ill Wws JI-- apZJ * W ' fJ • 01 iny ZOO m'Z tv roll F• a z o w W wt • otj olive -0-37 Irn QIIII t 1 QpIW ®!oi.. Ip6Z9m N wNZy w �� a ? w -8: QZIa wu � UZ JQ "' aZ Y Y r pz 4_,, w � U � ZOO v W z� ¢; U Q g z z , :.<"( x mr� W m m �w ,w 30 6m m rn F a.�j„ '� C7 ULL ¢p> =w _ r a r' Ci - a ,3z 3 3w W ' llW LLQ W 3 W a W 7Z U Lii c, ZEC ZPr- W aO N N y a aU a. /�C71✓� 3 6 CZW pm w W2w _8 U• UWZ zW p t. z J V OZ `!1 Z w U U 6 O_> 0 CZ w� qmN ZZ Z a OC7 Z(/J Z N to ��� 1-O �� 7WT^zN 5Z O j O Y Nw 6 7 Z.O WU0 WZ J ' x Z pxW � j5 '6 W3 Nr-? m 'wcc 0 a m CI) ¢2 •Q ag i- 0 5 N w� NU i i / oZ \ oz .c �- [ I 'i W • MfN3Nbvi�asNscaA1as "::-‘r:1 " -1 2 $ 1 i5F 43 a F J L. me1N3Atl 11WWS 031V0VA N �\ K W NZ Z 00 = Jg / I Na ZF H II a }z OW Z ¢m =p' F / y0 u)7 O• w aY g>w a 4Z"" o ozLcici I _ pzO Yz Vic, =w Yo wa aaaa x a� uf0 �z: NN I �N uga.h z w aro I �/ VW 6€N I MUMOOOS III 443P3 406MWW LSOL II'P•loy 11Ag10 t NVId 3dVOSCNV1 I DAE- i I a s s 3 „,�,, Q M3IA3k9 NVId 3115 hist ! ➢ ; �' �qy� 734 ...,, i ^+. 'i J 1 �? NW YN143 I./ Y�j y C �xi3�`' �J J 3AV 20Na3A 000s i`Y.g N 4 0 b 4- . y_ J 5'a S130V9'S098 N131SNI3'8 ANVdWOO 33dd00 f O8RiVO Ii111 li j e d e o s }!i ii i 1i �y , gai a 81 aPi P 2 .4 a iii , a F Y ,i d5@ ysy gg iiia ii i s hit c i q 1)! ii a s yj i i g / i H s 3 4 G i6°i ;�f iiif�61i f!11Hy t'i r xA44 sb'^ ° a H e 5 yys ya i t a i l v :% 1! Is R2AA :"-'R ".„"„b' iY0 a io 48i 3E' Od c i< ;all IN E ia 3333 333 6266681 66” a L 3 M1 I -3 i6 Ili 64 e , a j 'ii ! P 6 4 i. § M 0 2 1 1 p R a 1 o W ) E a s g $33 �yy a gpSg gi g h bi i es 1 1 s i� t!S 9y ;� fg pd ig'a g 1$ s s a i t Y li a $ d l 1 Ye y2 °c i$ sl - r !2 9C 1"S 1ii`1S § a p° �EkaF y3 2e I £tai va 6A 4 i i2 Va Ba; i2 IN' 4N 42 ; 2 r€'2 6F UN§2e$ 99 e. N Js!i i f=Li�l1 111 _ g a. _ I 1 i Iifl is g!ES. 1 II!” li 0111Mii Ilggii i lu X33 3g 33 �3 :nnri� .. 1 lin hihithi i'e oyes q .. a Ttal a€a S80Niam rr p 5 i Cit a h " i; o - # '' '\ ":..i.k.,-4-,..,;_4\47.ixto,.,,,N, 14\/to, ,0 ,1,42\ \ .'k ti4111) a /'tee ly ' `'x 4 &,,1 � ;\‘ 7 sins £ ,,A. . v. swop � z ,s,',"- u alp 9 ��� yre:o� w.,z' 01.441 i ir 44, \-�s 0 8 eee113 ' ,, �k'!., Oji \• '. „ -pp.- do‘ii.,_,,.4', -Awc-- - ` , • a®44 oio3e3s -19 — Alli^ _,..+@1S9,p0 n : -3 s' AII!'i 111010 SISKMC 7 e�T�_:-1r,��+,�r`���r•74525Ter o ..4 _� I 8 - t —0 C8' — R ^ te a 1 j$ $ Bg, ! - d 3JVld 11WWf15 10 iltld) �+�+ � o- & 4 ! 1 T T ba l`k s 1 iii 11 6 dew Fe •.� "5 Il:leI I NI 1 g ",.._ 4 ,1i gy -� W=WII=W=W ( i,.„,. ,,4a x Q M if w r li1iii1 u1- i fit i ;,M �. �i o6 _ s `` �--,,„_,c, nwil4 2 a , "I— I- ii iww f ..is--,,,A Ka ' Lu, d, __-Ir a ` IIIIIII di 4A. ... III 1,111, QB / ,� � (.72/, f#ii iii iIi,, w41 0 ® �~ & I1117=-1 I 1111 i i ' 0 —1 I 3 N Nz g 1 w4LI Zt-BIOZ 'CO tory fi+.o O''I IO t\0Iiw,n5 uoid a�.5\Sl»gS u0I0\46IOL1\(IOZ\% >wou 6u;+,a0 \\ \ \\,,,, On; `\ m' \ \ \ \��UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC. 3227$40 04*CAC V-trlen*PAO \\ \ EXISTIN TREES p.�.I . \1 (( \ : '�II ,11-=.11) T REMAIN ,IN \ ,,_1_R\ /-' �// 1�:. SOD\.,/' \ h \ . III-II J POC`S\EDGER,TYIP \ VIII=IIEHIEHCII m 1IFII_IIIII ������IIL-IIEIIEII J=1--R-17a ♦� / Ex\ uC TREE ElllErIIEII l II _ llEll F� .6_,,,,,,9,6, BOO \ T aEMAI\ h °IIL=IiC=1ILII�II 11=11EIIEIIE ��,,. d . WY J qo do; �� 1_1. �' \ \NJATERMAIN PER CITY • _AWING DETAIL ii4r Q * 10-NF, .4 V AS—BUILT -ROCK MULCH I 0 i `�1� HARDWOOD SHREDDED , OVER FILTER ly f% C( ` MULCH OVER FILTER •\ \ n FABRIC,TYP. -I;QG wlt FABRIC,TYR. \ N REM VE 12' , A � \�\�/ % \ SI ...w.o ..e.o.,. DECIDUO S TREE �p Q" \ \ \ 2';',.3.,\ \\\ TI �'{, EXISTIN TREES f '` ��"� n..�K :aR.I.KITES TO REMAIN Q 3 F \ 7 �� is0 lill..1....“mon0 : ,11, _ „ -- o . ‘s os \i-,-\ \ 2 • relr 'LANTING DETAIL FIELD LOQATE D I :7—.V:,"SM EDDIED MULCH - ``/fes \ PROPOSED TREE IN IIA O.I OVER FILTER 1 J�\ f� EXISTING SHRUB BED. ,• /.� A �c;.FABRIC.ATYP. ♦i ` O 4,, \ ( 400,1. y� _.....< .. ' , illi,:y . '•-• — � ry l \ �sPEPOPPALS TAEC=`ROWS WOPLANT rte M 1. o• ,\-5,/10 \ \ --- 6FG \<•. / i:\ \ h L - OTHERWISE SHOWN W F,.AH rr-;' \ K' \ -tet�� �1ttT7I= g� 3-gH \ \,\ ;♦ \\ J EXISTING ITr---1' • %- P HNtDWDOD MULUI OVFA SHURBS E'• I � ,' W®BARRHR/FILIER FABRIC 0 TO REMAIN "i 13-NG ` O� \• <'� \ \ h III . t SOIL As G.r- ol�;. :1 ''''Y _�` 5-Fc a I 16-Bc a' \ ,IIAISiVReED AND c A ,I 1_ ,.' LIMESTONE ROCK f e OUTCROPPING,TYP, h •\�\/\/\\j \\\,'\%j wmwAnm ss", I 10 1 9-FG /, / MI MULCn O �' ��\�/�`\,t ♦♦6-SR y \ \ \�\.- ..\,,<\•,<\\ \ OVER FlLTER I � w, AL PLANTING RVL 1 lVL FABRIC,TIP. yf���1 9-I'. IIEr .,,. ..,,, i ,\.._ \ '.7-SD � 7�p \ EXISTI G TREES ..1[Ir i 5_I rl >♦_�—�1I� . //� \•„:..� 4-NG �M t` ` S"' / T REMAIN ( SO II Y�`';�.�I '�. 0. T\ 3YHB �e',>i .�II` `;1 14i -e I 3T p 41 \ •' 1 ' 11 4• II' HARDWOOD i .± ,. `•4 �/ �i 4) '`�II'• I SHREDDED MULCH OVER MULCH TO BE LEVEL WITH ��\ 10-FG �� ,I I FABRIC,TYP, FINISHED GRADE Al,fi - ' II' 16-FC S-FG 4. 415 10*F HARDWOOD SHREDDED MULCH ('-" ' �7I F> OVER FILTER FABRIC,TYP. �� '! �/�� D'01 II O0 1-SB I1 LIMESTONE ROCK / t. /��'>� LIMESTONE ROCK dlF►1 11\ O `„� OUTCROPPING,TYP. „ OUTCROPPING. 7IF►1 P,. . . ,i ., `Z. /� =111=11 !� /j/'10• TYP. Ilk, ; 3-;Tc.. .,,e ' .:.//'•..M`,.:f,..i 1-Tc HARow000 iI1=1 — I —=11I=1 I .: / SHREDDED MULCH G 4-FG�� C® ` �'` OVER FILTER-1 111_ ,,III 3D + 1-ID ` FABR C. . \FILTER FABRICC �,..1''f� / SPIKE MIRAFI OR EODAL A�/r ,3-SG „! �/ / / u1 rA 4-SR '�J I• / \ J' dULCH AT SOD DETAIL .0 CO./ / '`r'' 9 ROCK MULCH frh•�_,��/ � . OVER FILTER ,7:I ',��.� �� V. / FABRIC.TYP. T�••r //Qv,' / _ �/ / a-SG' r `N 1-R1A 1a-SG a G. GIS `,S MULCH TO BE AT �! / �O/ \x,0,.70 SIDEWALK LEVEL • �{.O� \ \ WOOD MULCH I / / / \�,t'•� \\ SEE NOTES ORIGINAL CONDI ON \ 9/ 1>-\E, G \ / S / \. %% /��/ ,° / o / / `eJ N • - - H / FILTER FABRIC DEPTHI^V RIES / / IjfrL 1 G2SCALE IN FEET \ ' 2�N,,„, � — SIGN"DO NOT BLOCK �� ( ;/' / EXISTING CURB CUT Jr y�2 / /%� FUTURE INTERLACHE LANE IMPROVEMENTS EMPLOYEE PARKING—. �� / \ j '�� ��, \ LO \\ ,,,.// / STOP SIGN and"NO LE TURN BETWEEN 6AM; ---4' 0 4' / \ (HOURS TBD) EMPLOYEE \ I d \ � \ ,` \ • BIKE LANE(FUTURE) PARKING ' € G' EXISTING POWER P01 . \ REMOVED BY OWNER PERf r/ \. CITY SIDEWALK PERVIOUS OUS i „ \. 12)/'x::, PAVEMENT �v PARKING SETBACK r �� • BUILDING SETBACK ` '_,. RETAINING WALL 16' \ SIDEWALK WITH STEP I \ /\ LANDSCAPE ISLAND PRE-ORDER \ ``BIKE RACK/ :` ROOFTOP MENU BOARD,,. wrill MECHANICAL UNITS \z WI © DO NOT �� " k Q ENTER"SIGN ` .; "PICK-UP WAITING" _J\lei ��^ SIGNAGE\ 3R CK 113�,Ijl3 I Q g \\ ` p OIL r �� Il # \ I 1,,,,,,‘ " RETAINING WALL r � „ ','I�I O �` `� LANDSCAPING ��I s!,; is c° �. . ►�� i�� <<v\ `TRASHI .. 40��\�� RAILINGwv ENCLOSUR t.. `.1 �1,*��.® w 4c 11f/ /f,` ' \� \ ' \ ACCESSIBLE SIDEWAI RESIDENTIAL w L„Jr \ ZONE Q W�� • \.)41S3 job._ CROSSWALK STRIPIN .„i PICK-UP -/;4,-- LANDSCAPING _ _ . _ _ — -I — - -- �' WINDOWS , ' = I %/ ^SIDEWALK WITH STEP a -'' ZO tu z. PCD U / ,�,v�,' ZONE > I �s ,,-' `� �Q I \ aQ /" �� SPEAKER POST/ / / EXISTING UR MENU BOARD ` '' REMOVED a. WIDEN EXISTING � / 9. CURB CUT .V" 2 FT.WIDE CITY Z; CLEAR BUFFER ��" 8'WIDE CITY TRAIL At o // J/ ►iP ,' FUTURE VERNON AVE 8 / P�j LANE IMPROVEMENT; � W /INPL 4 d ) ,N O n • Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagels Retail Store • 5000 Vernon Av. So. (corner of Interlachen Blvd.) Project Summary January 22, 2018 Our team is looking forward to working with the City of Edina to obtain the approvals for the exciting addition of Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagels along Vernon Ae. Weill strive to make this building an outstanding addition to the Grandview and Todd Park neighborhoods. Development Team Architect: Ed Farr, Edward Farr Architects Developer/Owner: Ted Carlson, Orion Investments Edina III, LLC Tenant: Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagels Site Information Site Area: 26,194 sq ft/ 0.6 acres Current Zoning: PCD-4 (automobile services, gas stations, car wash) Proposed Zoning: PCD-2 (retail) Proposed Redevelopment: New 2,748 sf retail building for a Caribou —Einstein retail use with drive-thru. (The 5,000 sq ft multi-tenant retail /oil change building will be torn down.) Proposed Parking: 24 Surface Stalls. Overview: This is a rejuvenation of a highly visible corner in the Grandview neighborhood; also adjacent to, and serving,the Todd Park neighborhood. The existing building is obsolete, and structurally vulnerable with its underground vaults and ithwell-establishedretaining busD businesses nearby;-4 zoning ag zoning as station, car wash, auto services) are already satisfied change to PCD-2 would better serve the neighborhood. Redesign of this property is challenged due to its unique triangular shape and limited points of access. balbu building with parking dequabe parking. acks encroach dramatically, leaving a very small footprint available fo Site Circulation Design: The coffee & bagel shop requires a drive-thru, so the circulation of vehicles around the building and proper stacking of vehicles was the primary influence in site layout. The curb cut along Interlachen Blvd is the only access point th at f PCD-1 district requ res a 10 cfers vehicular ccess from nahstack directions; so this has to be our primary entrance. While only the for drive-thru restaurants, we wanted to meet that same standard in our design, even though the PCD- 2 district requires only a 4 car stack. The drive-thru windows therefore need to be located on the south side of the building to meet stacking distance and counter-clockwise circulation secondary access Parking is located on the east side of the building,the only remaining space driveway in the southwest corner is being widened to accommodate two-way (in &out)tr 0o westbound Vernon Ave. " kt,i� 1 Need for Setback Variances: Staying inside of the building setback lines and parking setback lines on this small triangular parcel is nearly impossible. The setbacks chew up a higher percentage of site area than a rectangular site, or larger site, would chew up. Specifically, the Parking Setbacks alone consume 36% of the property; and the Building Setbacks consume 63% of the property! We've created a graphic 'Exhibit 1' demonstrating how a standard rectangular lot would not require any variances. We have created a second graphic 'Exhibit 2' showing the existing setback non-conformities on site. By comparison, our Building Setback non-conformity has been reduced by more than 50%, from 1,100 sf existing down to 538 sf in our new plan. The Parking Setback non-conformity has been reduced slightly. City Standard Building Setbacks (PCD-2) Existing Condition Proposed Front/East (Interlachen Av) 35 ft 42 ft 50 ft Front/South (Vernon Av) 35 ft 39 ft 25 ft** Rear/West (Summit Av) 25 ft 5 ft* 30 ft Parking Setbacks City Standard Existing Condition Proposed Front/East (Interlachen) 20 ft 5 ft* 5 ft** Front/South (Vernon Av) 10 ft 4 ft* 4 ft** Rear/West (Summit Av) 10 ft 6 ft* 8 ft** Around Building 10 ft 0 ft* 2 ft** (for drive-thru) *Existing Non-conformity **Variance required Drive-Thru Design / Screening: Caribou-Einstein requires one menu board /order station and • two pick-up windows. The menu board /order station is situated along the west yard, where a 12 ft tall retaining wall screens this area completely from the adjacent property. The pick-up window lane on the south side of the building will be screened from Vernon Av with a 4 foot tall, solid `ledgestone' screen wall***. This screen wall is very similar to the stone screen wall recently installed for the Bank of America ATM drive-thru along W. 69th St.,just west of France Av. In addition to the screen wall, we are planting coniferous trees and shrubs to screen nighttime headlight glare from the cars lined up in the stacking area and the pick-up windows. We are also planting vines at the bottom of the stone wall. ***Note that this Grandview neighborhood retail corridor along Vernon Av already incorporates a uniform ledgestone wall and wrought iron fence design theme that ties this district visually. Two of these stone monuments and a curving fence exist on our corner of Interlachen Blvd & Vernon Av; so our new stone screen wall will match this existing theme for a consistent look along the street frontage. Building Design: The building complies with the PCD-2 district requirements for exterior materials. Caribou's prototype facade is EIFS, but for this location we've replaced the EIFS with face brick and ledgestone for a high-quality look on all four sides. The pedestrian entrance storefronts feature insulated glass in aluminum frames, with a distinctive wood and glass entrance door. The parapet wall of the building has been extended up vertically to screen the rooftop HVAC units from both Vernon Av and Interlachen Blvd. A picture of a similar facility in a nearby suburb is enclose 4;see 'Ex h WO'. car • pal Y a* 2 f Parking: 24 parking stalls are provided, meeting the zoning requirements and tenant needs. A bike rack is also provided to encourage that alternative mode of transportation. • Site and Building Signage: The existing 2-sided, internally-illuminated, pylon sign located at the street corner will be re-used for the Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagel tenant. The new sign area on this pylon will not exceed the area of the prior signs used by Jiffy-Lube. Three wall signs will be mounted on the building; one on the south, one on the north and one on the west. Directional signage for internal circulation will be ground mounted signs on posts. The drive-thru lane will have one overhead "Max. Height" safety bar and one internally illuminated menu board sign. Note that the menu-board / order area will also have an audio intercom. Refer to Signage Plan for more detail. Public Art & Engagement: Ted Carlson met with Michael Frey, general manager of the Edina Art Center. Michael and Ted discussed various ways to engage the public by incorporating art on the existing and future retaining wall, on the western site boundary. Concept ideas include: a kinetic wall, school art contests, and a graffiti wall. We are awaiting feedback from Caribou on their preference for wall art. The developer is committed to some sort of art concept on this large wall space for the benefit of the community. Excess Vernon Av Right-Of-Way Parcel: We would like to have the city's help to clean up the odd Right-Of-Way in our southwest corner, where the old Summit Av intersection with Vernon is. This odd parcel does offer a secondary means of access to our property, which is very important to us. We understand that this parcel is owned by Hennepin County currently; we would like to acquire it. See graphic below. III , , 3,1.: :::::;...70...ztx \ . '', '-',7 % : . r t y.., �� 1 \_'fir', ,, i .-..ar4--,,• ., ,..,..'t ‘4,,,,t , 'F.K, vo -t I,,,,v:_fir el ,i ,per, ..', r,:3 'i k; p G .fit. . t, • +�Y, , • * . i /OP "44 E 000 Ve on e ` • ,., 5 0...7---. . . f Nms• µ0I ` �, .`a. , , x t igs e 'A Sa 1 % 1r'at` ; 4. ,'� % ,,\: N lin v cess IR.O.W. with. ,•�_ I. , y cess to Vernon Ave. it • 1 _ tt 0 c\,§) ,,, 111 "."), \ ' 0* f} Im' cc\O O ( F ' ' \10, ate' • < "1/4,..' C .. 3 Traffic Study: A traffic study from Spack Consulting is being conducted for the new development. Utilities: The property is served by water and sewer. Storm water management will be s gnifina Illy improved by the addition of an underground storm water treatment system forquality ate control, in full compliance with Nine Mile Creek watershed hautiaty undergrouuirements. nd e apending Xcere also gapproval. to remove the ugly wood electrical power poles an Landscape Design: We have strived to integrate sustainable design principles into our landscape design, such as diversity in plant species, disease and drought resistant native & naturalized plant material and water efficient irrigation. Six existing trees in good conditions are to be saved. We will plant new trees, shrubs and ground covers in the landscaping areas that will soften and enhance the site. Importantly, we are proposing additional plantingsonmg ohe Int rlscreen achen Blg .o .Or pr pe.W. to p roy vide screening of our parking lot from the road. That will resultcomplete the public way. A ledgestone screen wall with green vines redevelod other plt wsil\I inlcprease the amorovide a eunt r to the drive-thru. Refer to the Landscape Plan for details. Theredevelopment of greenspace by 12%. The site currently provides 4,784 S.F. of greenspace and the proposed redevelopment will provide 5,386 S.F. Neighborhood Meeting: We are hosting a Neighborhood meeting on February 1. Support of the Seven Guiding Principles of the Grandview District: Our proposal is supportive in a number of ways. Principle 2- We are enhancing economic viability of the district, meeting the needs of residents and businesses. Principle 3 -We are "turning barriers into opportunities" by taking advantage of the large retaining wall on site for a stunning piece of visual art. iPrinciple 4- Our coffee shop supports the principles of"a more vibrant, walkable, functional, attractive and life-filled place". Principle 6—We are facilitating u ultuple 'senmose des of places i of P n the coon by mmunity ty byng bike rack parking. Principle 7—We are supporting a q hosting local visual art on our west retaining wall. Community Benefits from the New Project 1. Reduction in density at this busy intersection,from 5,000 sq ft retail to 2,748 sq ft. 2. The old retail building is outdated / obsolete and lacks adequate parking.The property is ready for a fresh, new development. 3. Changing zoning from PCD-4 (automobile services) to PCD-2 (retail) offers greater pedestrian engagement, eliminates the auto fluids odor in the air and of generallythe increases the architectural building design opportunities, all adding to the enjoyment esidents. 4. We are improving traffic safety by removing the curb cut along Vernon Av that is very close to the intersection. 5. The project is supportive the Seven Guiding Principles for this district. ✓. , 6. We are increasing the green space by 12% over the existing conditions. 1\',�\�' 7. We are hosting a large scale public art display on the face of the existing west retaining wall. This will energize the neighborhood with a positive sense of place. 8. We are significantly improving the storm water management on this property. o°? 9. The redevelopment uses existing utilities and roads in the community. Urban pla Bing considers this good stewardship to reuse existing sites with current infrastructure. • 4 COM PARTIVE THEORETICAL RETAIL SITE IN PCD-2 DISTRICT 0. • SAME SQ. FOOTAGE AS OUR TRIANGULAR SITE • NO VARIANCES REQUIRED • SITE CAN SUPPORT OUR 2,600 SF BLDG + 22 PARKING STALLS Site Area .1111110' Parkin• Setback 26, 194 SF I — �' B ' •i�Sa = I �I .-- Drive-Thru -�- I —I I I iMI I ` 1111offee Shop iii i ' r' 2,600 SF • III I.I _JI I! ' I =PATIO ., I III 1 ' 35' Buildiii Setback J L 5' Parkins Setback �— SOME STREET, ON Exhibit 1 / Existing Zoning Non-Conformities • i r__ li \ CI tiF 2,G ,,s,r\s's \ ., Existing Parking Setback ', vvNon-conformity; ��`‘\ Rroposed to Remain` • Existing i' L-- \` 1,100 sf Bldg Setback r� Non-Conformity t ,� \ 0`b4 , \I *Note that our new = Pie' 411$ I IBuilding will only ,-, • / have 538 SF .,, E .1e.��° of setback Z y - Non-conformity , Q_ - DOS: �% • -11 D I k; o.P o W al: ' ,-- 4"\ U Q er. <s.,4% .. t,% ___, * , -33 .,,,i:, ... #.0\1- 0,- .,---\)---. .4.,<" ,- .„.A1/4a, • , ,� Exhibit 2 • Caribou Coffee & Einstein Bagels Prototype Store ;, I 'cit. . 3 OF ° :AGEL fi DR�TM� ,� 0 II . lila .� •111. � . �{ r.. 0 I. f t ►� lug! �, _® -- -----,---- eM_- -.. ter""- _ -.'ate'" .s, . ..--. ..,, n More brick will be added on top so that 100% of the 04 facade is brick, stone or glass. �e�� AP4 b., ,,A•1 • R < Exhibit 3 c _ z W =` W wm1.IIh _ ` LL aN a knit: Z £X�F S WJ Om 02 i§1'5 ? _ C j_ A >> j 11 Cr ¢ 2_ 7Z K1 f/1 E '� • - ! W n Oz Ecn oz AES`af ^�' �� OW UW Lo U • 77+ "'x,;. —_ f I'a i }' o t� f z Q g , 0.1 J wiz, i �g z <0z Fr z J I— w Cl. < a0 (O z '' i! o wW� z oOz wcc cnzp7< W50 oz o aW J zg-1- ., IP0 r~gzpacno<>O�D c Q�m wQO-'I-z7 W lH1 W 2 W JOF—i( �' 0wci cnocn0wDoga I- wwco<u) W ,CV C•) J 0000 OOp O I =, <<< a 0000 0(...) ,0_ < QQQQ v 0 I- + t 4 w 3 , '''. w I 0 (1) . . g§ 2 W Irco =Qu MN 2 zCQe U , s C rQnlz U - "i , '.,,, O co FE, � (j) V) 4-1L N W C aj A W WZr�i y s ZZ0P % , , ..i.4. WWW 1W ('�1�N '2 µ`CQ WC J ZaIOW a ,j; h w i:.; Q C 1dz0 Fi '4 �t31IV _Y .5� V ¢NSa 8 6 0 -Z W, 1W _ , / / � V fiT12 z '-"..�. W a�s� z w» W r KOa111 j Q 1, #.'tn ,,,, J f: (.) (2) rowo .h ' �. Q wawa z . = Lll 9 w l'1.4:,..TII., 1,4:,:;' , „,,„ ,, z 0w w O tt z iL) 'i FE r �\ �l N W a0 �J f' " a O V ■ W n zyze ,_0 /D Weld U W ,vli O �p 2 W U Q OOw1 U z > vN9L:61'69L0L6ZIL W'NON....A 0005 III..P3-n c94.0 LSOL L1.1001oy YAW g' o ._._ 4 N .8" z I.3 s Ii w WF!ffu1. S �� >Ozw `�WJ QOZ CCCp >' Um ZZLL d Z_ ZH£ yE Z— ILWE� S 3f OZ ¢Z oz yx o • U ,. gyp; ,deo 410 W U AI ry "4 a.v awu„5 °O. I, Uw �.4A1 - , W - J "Y, W '" c ' ''' a C7 C7 t . a C7 — 11" ' co t o: ._ • w ..‘ 4. s1 2 i (' 1:': *" '''' ‘K ,i / m S W Cr i1St �� +z "' I ) ll:'1..,‘� .. Z I✓ f" ct • .-- — �'��,: m Q Wv CV1L8210U611 WUOti S A000S III.u!V3-0Wu.O LSOLUSVVo.d Yn"\:3 cJ Yi N>? y� € W 7M/ ` W W 1`3' F nowny- NU Ooz Zcc .111,1_ — _ jzW1 o_ °El,: - ZQ ca.– OZiOZ N _% yyI ow Uw nw$ea $ _ r�k°;atse� 11€s§i a • 4 '41•4441r i , *Ilk. dit t* k 1: i fl „ O 0 *- +t. 1► Ilk*, • ''' �q 4 . ! f k, Ilk . . 4 00,01, ./ :441111111111 '''' '''''' .''''''?' .'''''. S'C. \ ' Ct.., ',...' ,4,' ; - IIIL... ,,v \ (fir4i. .,,, ,s ' , '1./z,_ ., ,, • �€ ,u � � 1001 wa .k s I.: 4 Wir '' T IP } • Z a w I- . CO 1W/CLL 8 ai0LBUl W'MON uau•v 0005 Iii tuIP3-^°44•o LSOL1\°P^1°Jd IIA•111'9 mmmmmmmmm I I- g E A3AUf1S a ihg g§g � Z e m>E§§§ $ M31A3U NV1d 3115 £ i,,.€ ! a 3% 0 Z/ la,: ; Y a'"c2i NM'YNI03 Ei=E j W 1 c• ..151,- 6q`,- 3AY NONN3A 0005 `E_:z. i i 6 rr dd U a n f m m . : E' ;31..!.48 d Sl3iJtl9'SORB NI31SNI3 E8 ANtldW00 33dd00 f1091Htl0 : =n g�€;� g Coe -.4/ • 4 5 i SII S6 ell f i s .s g a 3 Fgsfi8 g8 .S -•SF i . 1 „F R a a 3 Y g fi ▪11s fi $ : n ayW s . t s8 a. 'II E S E % :cg„ �gp a €'ilig. a ;!b 1 gE.15 t F `b ge 8 F- xga f' E f ^_ Y y. "'S i.aSs �` E )_ W 6 E f E fi it �',5 _ E� 2 2 a fi.4. 5�`�0 {I 888 i 9 g fp a' E a`iNg I z IE 1 pl 3i S 6 I . ; A F €F i i; I. 1 s ! t b Ssy' IL/ El ii ¢ .1.1.3421!gi � s w €z ' S E o : R .. i 1 . , {r 11 a s g# s` g g K b . NI 133 I 0_ 1pi a I : 31 Al _ 11 a 6 5' 1 e a fi z3 EE-sl!ia� F � ° !;ff11'1 4 I Jble1 II i a f'• AI I' . I : if 6 ,a ba o ' � :.1 s € mg :IL §s ha �H p1 W 1 P✓1A S% ` %14ay11gj^Ir 11g O "'A '' Ip I a- i1 zg8 1 ;i 1 14 1`L 8 . I o I "3 .y ' .1=' U j3 f* 1p{Q ' qi € E e8 J s" 1+- 5E6F Gil. $y ., 2 3tE8a do 1 1 g 1, eP i FA' 111 g E 1i 6!-, PI Wi g._ SrY .89 s : 'I ; 11 12eis 71 fi{£ 11I '€ I3$ i € 1gf, = C - lag 1 .1 QzQ i? L'LEii x 1 fE54E gi i LIE A 111 1 I 1_i E-1� I, J.4 ,„ R/5 Ep `1 it N i 1g Pk Pg W Y f{ F 1. E - ,�§ LI JTj Ef p• . E E S W WII b. { 6 6 c9 '"`B W; ebF I E$5 ` % € 1 i i F €b Z t i 1 f li 9F ' €44 At!'i€€€ 1 i /-1€Hit 5p 5�3R �u€ ¢:a € z ® N® !!,2 a d€1:€!a a 1 F Hi 5 % a d.i:I d _,9 c c . { -1..T' €I. S b H Q €. w e �a iiS a I sa" gy gssa ji 3 a§9.413 $390 a 6 w w > W — I1�1 tib r 4 i i • IIIb 1 .1,1.0004•••••®CJ a*ee>••0 gao IIII1�}II!I 66 a.� - , Ill % i il ,, ., , 1 EC ".., ..0 , 1,5,,,‘ y 17.1., ,,,/\ / \, \ 66 '� S y X �,< ,_... , , � �J 6E, 1 ... ., y. - -1 , _ SII %� •1 yd . „ . yy 1 , -, ,, , :!,_ t8 4\ 9 1. 7 /qr. C/ v'�� D ; �' \y_ • \es ' i . ii / Viz`." ,' a,''„ k l a 54 .,i/ / ,:y; �d ._ i'',01‘s '-1 g iiia Edw/, .s.!C1 .,,,,,e' \ rL� -.1/4-g A \,., b .y 1/ti: V r r, 8i 'a V I , ‘;,.\,...:t.: ' Pj_6s \ ,. \ N R\ I'm 1! J ,A,,_9.,..,....,,:_4,0,1„,,.--,-,t,,\- . ' Via , ,. �E-- CN \ ' ''' x y g Do rs.4„\Y .�1.\44;,s6,6 L• " qor�� �• \:....\ . x 6.•z i! .Gel • �IB,- t1 i `+•4`, 1,� 14/ ' ,�,� y. Q kir j"' AL� '2 E, / re , / -_0., _••�: a.� r _ N Vet -a1.. �, t° i i' _ k- 8 1,s 1 AB T'— Uu»r� a 7k ' J ^v c*aN ,E ''' s I" 1\ 2nt,,,4 , ,e' ,,;x_0-1.., >, `7r;" .-srf - ',. a' w3+:�eV.-. \\ '�ys ( � 1 1 SE •Er � big PI 1 d -L� \ ii a II 41 D 6 w c �\ Ley c2, �, illedmF-.°A 8 •s" MIL': L _L L _iI J An g.lt Zms 4 i1 E n I5 A. E 11t=3�1 wmLL LL-RtOL 'sl us/ 6n0'uo4a86 LLL\Iopplwq s.old.uL\ga.u'uoId86LELI\LIOL\:X:.wou 6.Lo,a F11 = NVId NOI1I1OW30 • ! g i O 3�r\ ��/ ,� Z: u,.18 i '6 M31A3H Mild 3115 she 1.„ gi ? 1 r 3 A a N Q gg NW'tl 003 1 del 3 1 �NAf`i J. m C K 3Atl NONtl3A 0005 I{d[�e� ` /1 a f`°a Sl3DV9'SOH9 N131SN13 38 ANVdIN00 33dd00l091HVO !than W A V a d V _���e E; § c 3e i^ • ?-. o � 6 i ! s e Eh� i _A '0 F 'IMR PIA :14i 7 1 m st tt F 'Ali e "E d4 3 10 1 e hrig S v A 0 h ,4'2! ° Pi ENOe 1 Iler gg �� 0 8E Ali if$ 1-*.‘") a o € e e $ $ a Voh 2 R ' � Ttt 4a sW d n a € o f t o M« M Y ° 1�§ g.,e - `w ..' �° RAL 1'gY ' € et' AO �~ E. X l',.°,-(1. x a s a a e iii 5 a El it i 6 i' a A8„ t n R NIA 4n n i_ le00000000000000q 1 ggggiw . Wo- ooR i W !Mai"€ €ih flif lig gi lilt g x i€si.sa i Xsp ' . tifr.,. ,, _ ,, „ .rr.. *--0 1 s, r,r •/''- , ''‘W4 . 11 ,I' / 1411 III I-- \ ''/ t ti Pit ' 'o '/.2,4< ;ice \�,,, „,. '',,:'7''''''';:V7z. ''/':74");51h:','• 52, % `�, 1 :.„ 4;4.`. (;i % /-J�, z F,G„,,,34,14;:‘... e: O�. 4y'm " 7 j r✓,% s / '� ,• I £� ✓ 0 m74itirtP�,e\\';d +`, ' 0 \ ,�j \ ,„,,,,3,,,,_ • — \ // i r'„ /mss ,„;.,7,----f�_ _ I` Ip lirow,a���` . a-t. \ "\s` 4 L- 9,y„_-1',., s � �* t �!���=w/� q \, ' '.s , r 5^-- �a� ����������-- ',Iho4mAt �imm� _ 1 t \J *\ •9, ',9( AA 90 0 093sL.0 ON _ i e ':` 3�-".”' \.. ;> i ',, a2.--_ ;__. / -- livid 300)d ilwwns 40 Lavd) „ ♦� � \ 1 _. ,ca3�e4vA) 3nN3ndliwwnS \ g$ -__ -- _ a • .eez:u-9Loz 's,OOf a,c,O&,P96Lou\IOnp.ans.Oia.1.s\.m..D aeLoLL\LIOZ\:X:ewe.6,0.0a S Nt/1d311S € $ O ((//' �„/ Q m i S p,= M31A3H NVId 3115Iegff ill i a s CO I, �U '� aaeg NM'tlN103 •fa = g f B;113' J ell VA 3AV NONU3A 0005 ,..1:4 S1391/9'SOUS NI31SNI3 9 ANVdIN00 33dd00 l09IUV0 _k_thug! 5 B c o A i l l • E . y '4 p B 9 6 E 1 1 E 8! ! ! R i z0 R N.. § Pgi ` 7CO o 1 i@ .' ,5i4 111 l so e s G 1e; 1 14$ 1 403 it d ! I Ve @ o Fo Riff g § 'XiBQ g g ¢ o 3 ,,` 'm g R t S Y S Sgt i 121 3�3 g i IWIL g 68 g� 3 g'� 6 W 1 Y LE ,, a r n ' € ! Y f oo f; 8f y ;; . R ! gi $ a d .. R N,„ g g R i sgW a i % s�gg� € E a n n 2 «« 1 1 . 1 W 1 $ 1 ll it i I i l y e /i �� ;5 51 E 1 1 i ! e ! 5W rS;q F7 RRR F � ?; � Ili2 � Y ip € �gggR �� � L• �ffi i� i I g i i g � � li % 6 "'��� a � 2 gx �E �e id ! � � � � � '� �OE i`� �1�1 � � � M�. 1 � g �8a � 1 ---t «5 � � = 4� 'a a ��� � io p� m _ „ . � e � o a � _ „ n d ! m a - - - - y Ilpp 1 I --- `,r \ _ w RvRg,\ \ A"461 o li ;* lyas n) \i .1xU ,' sty'., c@ \,` .� ,„ J . ` '♦ '.��.��a'=�.`'„i, , �"��. ! o � 0„ ,),. ,:��' � � „,, �. /�/ (.0, , ,i#�\ ���� „ .fig ',`:7i•.p`, ‘, t I , , — ' .., , - z ,,.% ..c .,• ,ods\A0,0....” \\\,\c, 4,,, „.41, , ,,,V 1 ,, ,a , 4.1. ,,,,, @ /f- ,...".-i moi e t,'� \ �`` �`t `b�Oi �.. \ Asa® 2W \`\t %� tib .iaoe2s � � ����� • •, '\ . • i'�.:.\♦-s //f1 \V e' �® ' �\ /�. ��. \ \\ � �i� __ _, yyg= o .5t2 ta. , i tD .g_is 3.52 ow H 'yF g �.n hF E �6y gE. „y @E — g9 �1 g! 2$� 1�� .l o-_ -- `t'e — i (1Vld 3391d 11aans i0 iavd) x mpg v +� a _ , (a31V�tlA) 3fN3AV'mins � �6 1 °,at - tl . wosau-sun 'cL oar 6•V.11.86loLL\w.awaf.sold.V.\q..V..id\26iou\uoz\:5:•wo.aa..,] F 8 s NV1d IOHLNOO NOISOH3'8 3JVNIVHO`ONIOVHJ a €_ R V 0 m z l 2 8 s:zp s ee J-(( ® Z_ mFgqo ;IO =3 y` f s Sa ^'� :iii EEM y y`� NW'r 03 S F fr - r F p i d E f:K 3AV NON83A 000S eV/ c gg�gia 3 1 G6. Q �f m e Sl3JVEI.SOH1 N131SNI3'8 ANVdWOO 33JJO3 f1O81Hv3� 11.1 le Cl �j § ,II 1? O ., 8m Y` s 0 € 5 4 c Nb "1 PX 1 „ X: g 3g - l� �dC ESk : 55 F; '® z fig la I g Lug qq 33 eii V r51n T ? t! V.ig :A2 i 1! MT —1 . `1 :,Il ,, a a gig k : it 0 : E e & c60 a �'.'.��b ry S G b Q`s3 �, N q, s a sa as " z led: a�' m2.' ppa ! s 2 Egg El! g 1 ig 2 g i e p l3 �65 € 11,g !.4, c z a3 g u u H ,w2 k k paooad g0 Gs kg gY $ 4 d S pi MillIcc il Z 2i . 0g s f � "hs, od W g „ii liga p 5 a a n. . I ; to 3,=.,; mab,Y c 1 r `I 1«, i gCg `1 h-- Syr\ .,,./.'''' 1 Tk 1 b 1 fid ¢ I I k' r" 0� 1 44';'''..,,4 �k2 ' a i..* \ , 1 \ r N3 y�; as O :-,z ,...)-_ 75 r01,/,'! / VOA // ;.„4,r,,0*-_,,_lcl,2 \Yi� �v' A„.,sU`— \/ Ls v-.2 ,- i` WY- y 7 ,- -f-\-----.-4,.---- ,...t.. 9` I, P.PSE`',-' ,"sa ,A �� \ It g t `\_ , •, �� �� ' y am, \, �r �. �,v j �� � �6, !/ /moi y ` l : ," \.S -R A' h / y� \ 4'. \Y ‘\‘.:71:N7:\:::\\:: -' / .tt%�6g3. .6�r v !1 . e �ll(,,,\\\` \, � `r \\\��\\ ��� spa � v `` j, 9���� 08 ffi3 ey�� gig\ f'' ��1� �"a ��. \\♦,•y Z\\ �\ 'fY�, �� \ � T' :z,4: s 4 \:::\\6_,__,,,,i,.,,,•,, ` P/ j . ,-,-‘7„-,,--____ F1 \\7 i f s .'� \ �A .1� a _- ����—\( S 1 I-1 . A / '9'� 1 " a s ' 's ! $ '\I ]\_ \.;\�'.&, \\\ ' a \ 72: ..I , (Grid 33rd uwwre e0 Lard).d. ! L—� x„,. 1 -� . • \\ _ 1 \\ \ m\ \(a3Ld�vA),3F N3Ab'111N.Wf1S \,-, , ,, ' , . -.1 v rSa,_� \\ /jN� (f) --1- u O I t C) ..Z1n1-210Z 'SL or 640-122J66610LA1onluq`2.old inmWskupi.o/a\C610L1\L106V%auqu 6.Lm0 g NVld Alnlln ' ,g - .1- ;_ $ 0 F Nz �g a / f$�A MAIA3tl NVld 31IS 1;141 S a 3 In / I, �.� a.n Nw'vNla3 -z€- �€ i ' 1 l ^ (J Q J Z` � m 3AV NONtl3A 0005 Fqv E-/°0 ufi.. \,,,. l� 1,,:-DE . sae ill` t `°`° Sl3JV9'S0E19 N131SNI3 V ANVdW00 334300 n0911dV0 ai;1;[2€; '1 • ghIii) ; e E ; _ iF. 11,2 I§III�Yi{ KX . 8 5, I 0 3 o©mo© o . $ Zp a • '¢9 s 3 F . 9. 1 p 11 l�, o2w 5 8 2 W 2 I. G i 6 d g e ,.A,g co& ' n °LY o a ¢ k 115 Pg 5 � g z Ria, ,,,g's �Z , its. - . , s Yt... • a ,� ami_____�� , tY .4 gil o<qj 1 a S s n g s a ` °C5't k'fr ef ' �a a $ p ,r,t�r, .. , �en e g g a iii F `‘..„41- m a��g �� a 066 a ;IR Q $ a ` '' _F. g s c ; �'' 'r0 zs" ...,ii aAe gg s.a,'s a s li s s § ii, \,,,,,i, 7` c. 6,,s ' .4/ 1J Le5 \ 101,1. \ / p 1 i iggr i e / '\/ / �' dey'%/\' ' \ ,\ 2(",, ,,\ \ _ ..i.i:2', 0 % \ \ - , -_...._ ...__ V:::; ; ;� ti: \! / ' `" 31s "g # 7 a f $ h 'r ��aa'7,RV6= v .fid \/� 6� �-!/ \ 3 g_ 'Si /1 FIV''''- ' _,/ w gk' y , �• \r gig 3 e'7 fix- 2 tit R.a91' ` _ g- ' n / • .17 1 � 6- ---\ G 1 4 1,1 e g ti § ., �r • <6 $fie. a J•", // .sem s � ✓ /ot.,,,,, \ g- � �,-7 MV.,t '',r''' •„. ,/,/,-2.1,vel,.,z do ,,,,,,,,,;,...„„ i.,\ 5\ ANN\ ,.. \,, .,,,,,r8g. \ '‘, ,/,., / \ , / _____,M6,44 \i, 4,4410,6,.„ ,..§ .,•41P,'" ••.! ,` t..',',tt„ ,,,, , ,.. \ y / \ X ,, s, • r.\_:1_ AANOVIik".:C) \ ');,4' \,''' ‘ gym, �� e <' s w . , ', � << 33fN3AV II IIS ,,I ii tt 1 day\ xt 1 0 �/ �+ M. gym- L.. 51,48 `:r. m I o , ,,, rr 1 '(() C� g 1 N .r_ C.. ( 1 1 C is r (Ii _ i IIII 0 i oI 1 w•az=u-aIOL 'a\.of F l 6LOLt\I•nwa••OOI n!.\.1.4...id\amou\U0L\X:.w ou 6upkwo a swim e €_ i R Y 0 `la 4 f/,,,,��j,.,,,fie,�,\�,7 Z a iM3IA3d Ntlld 311S Eesg ys y a3 1.6' /�\ ��CY•iC� —'/ 431 !illi NW'VNI03 F'1� i^ 3 V i 3AV NONN3A 0005 seta!, J Ge.. A F°e Sl3`.)V9'SOUS NI31SNI3 V ANVdWO3 I OO nO9IUVO 11 ll; d $ it a.1 i 1$ • 2i 1 1 8„ o fi'aug g "� �o iiE tl ��b p R i3W m 'g BB5 8 « iiic ms° ,..sig twig aq s gr : sao sa= X33»s „ 6 OE sap RI'' o w w „ � a _ _ ^iaa Sao 'u _ 3 _ 3r54a 69 pa 'u `� mg m8 8ao ear Ra mai a Poo: .- 11111 I I Ii''"11=111I I I_ \� 1 1 111=--1o � �I I 111 1 I I ;�;!��!t- \%arti b. h - IIIIIIII :SII-III m �J1 � ii: X111= 1 13cl m1IIIIIIII1J . a� \ 1I U4OD n� .4 1 s "t '= . ��v-� I, II-y ›- rl ;I b II X 11 1 ;IL ® :li� r iL >Q- f i I1u1al hi 11 ik 1 .; k s! ; i/ I V°,1 1 — 111� 11ih l i1li. I @ � ,! L! 1 0 n 1'"'1 h �- ' 1 Iit 1 is 1 �!oil 1 . -.1111.,1 I.* .i; 1II r� I'I °ii. p I v., !SRF I. yT i 011 1 1- llWal . - ! 111�f J, . F •'AD� 1) 7 r 1 to 1 1 Q a ' 1, (e �� 11 li ; F ��� f II ; '1! Ard11 � fl i; lg til! • , . li, c a1_ L { I p 1 ■° pro in. 1,1E % ' " a'; ws.l ti 1 k '',' og E/4:1 1 -- eejpp wr. _• 1 41 �\. 1 � . �a 1 e ! a • n- 4 , r �r 4au 4 Ig lli , III.,it 1 .I X44 1 i q 1 11� 1 1 . I nn u 1 III P,11151. 1i C°a1''1�t 11 ti'i I i - r: E P A 0 11. .I I4ii li x1511 i'I a!rhil i {! i Ib- I ,' I ,�1 1 Il ::lig - i1! i 111' gif,.!.11.,„'11r 1 1 s. 1 I � � I IIP ppllu I,+g1I.111� Ir,� 1 � t.� � 11 l '' Vi\ 111: II 11�111:.g•M ,.. i { X11 ! f i ...11 !i I I ` 50104@ ►lin. '� � �\ 11! ,,I°1.1• l.1••IiY1:1''l.�I! i�@i�y 411'i 1, i , 4 1 1 9 y , 1 I .1 ..='n= .r8 �'” I@i,l ,i3111@�u"Il¢{Io1111.i ¢Q r \ 11b 11; 11 ,..i6 e1 1 I i. ilh i@114i i;1 @ r,I g 1 i, iI ,�I �1 I I 1 I1 I � I lal,1 1 6�.��1 aB{I 1 1 1 .� ',I a if i�. .� 1- 4!I1 9i 3111141 @ @ 1�. G ,,; a lI.gIllgigir I�I�I i. Atit.1,1411,1 @ I a ,4.rlol'I1 ®• Ti 1 ,i 4- 11 i�111.11i111iI'61iiIIiigili!.,l kiegl i II s; ( IIIy1qI111co i,1. . q t1 — I1- II i' 11. 1 1 yii 1 II' �� 1 l , FP 0 i III! it-x .- 1 N111; l �iii ' �� E I X11' �l •1 \ to a $ `v <.a'�1 YD\\� t' alI ha •iHP t yy didli 11 y6p 411 r , I. (Di 1 .1 I'_ ill 1 041 'l 'Edi 1 ,j�SI_orr.,,• 6. '.f -S 11 _ --i__- ■�1i_ it a tR1 "�; l I: .III Ill 1 l r _ —' u ° N�3. ill' iI110 . _ . ,I II I_i��a ,a i o i e + o ‘0111 Milli I, I I' 1 I.ihi" 4 .1 . ( € hq _ �I ©�,,, I I ©I ig g 1 II. 1 I� iii ' 1 g I ,-•-, �I • 14 Y .4 1 al w.ezal-91o3 5l 44 OMP44I4P4610LI\IP1V.w9^•u.ld 4.44.1.44t ooId961oLI\LloA:4..w.0 644443 8 NVId 3dVOSONV1 L €_ 1 I 1 I- yzi:d :.i,- f Ig �`A� �r� d g M3IA38 NVId 311S lig • 9 a 1 a !S17 S�� J mu°i v°im NW'tlN103 .' P. aF� F 0 { rn HV n, 3Atl NONtl3A OOOS s!i�L:< . u 8 0 c :� Q ���� S13OV9'SO99 NI31SNI3'8 ANVdWO333diOO AO91HVO !litiAgi l 1 c3;'s • iii 1 i fl: = G k ^ 0 ' § a .4 l g 4; pm emi liiiIv Ili ii 1 IIi Bili g.s 0 'in g; a 1 i i 24 2 u A '. . a 8 i !" i 0 ma. i.i.i d d d t ud d i�i l ° as .Y8 a E� $ s e -5 W x 0— as 3= Sax « R ^:n e: :'s^ i'l 4 i .'A s=41g q 82 y iia o k E E .e i ao E4 Ca g Msa Agg 3 gd 995 $ yiy £ W�- e ' 3, i 3 3 e a a 0 q e P '42 n „i r �, =s= Sys c a o cs ; Rs �� aa s r • a gi ON o- Wg d Wi 8 j �_ 0 1 e - eg t 6 ,m "'CO `E z a $ k u`�4 ? > P, 12 o- 51 I-„ - V 'g€ IT kW. ?I! ak � 3 e a3 ! _ :; ;a 5 e = a QO W U ii l''•a ;8F'. B' sial W t Cat e 1 gig o f 1 '1 YY i i N i5 Ema r . € 4 > 1 ! e(i 1 !!Xlg -p ti 3~i i a< h3 ^� $ b Ya h3 1 � o yy a 9 3 S. i •Q, g �� 3� 9�� P5 • ki! Ti im Fes: <�. �Y: �3 : i S Cd5 38 d '-e l 9 8 i•9 . _,8 t; �'m�' -�_ r ^ n o o - n ^ . e s r .. 8 ih di Tisthi ,2 A g e e e + a ' W = 1 C E E g@ d g :i. 5 -..g` , sA _ P 8 1 Illj a 3t2 1 11 gig 9 iii /� g1 dil $e 2i 1 0u :6 rtrrgll'' tl oo��# 8 K8s 4Mo„ka9 8992 7 /\ \ Illeacz,160.1 \ �1(' \ o\ Y `� \ u e/ & CRY ig\ z0 R _: 0 s "gDfR ;,�,. c 1.4 I z / 7 i' // No kl kVii; s : . I'\ \ ,� 0 0 • k 3 N i / `,��� //ne� r `.1,/ �k:c ..J744S.''7\ \ \//"(j�� 6`'•'. �.��// \'r , C./..%. .c,_,-'�.:-/ ,. . _ `i \41-- A-> ` . \ . „ N „ , , , \ 7 7 , ,,iii 0;744 1, : 'a ric. ., ,^ p 1 '/�� . R Via -" 8 L �:../\ / ., 7 •4� • '•� t'f l� _ ..i� it - _ \� \ �l h r \at\ \\ /' / '- . •s ..'✓1 1` AS III IS�S�INy{C,1. OMPAW _rePM/j iT\r�f�1,R 1 �i 0 pp 3 31 li...--- — --- _..... � ._ _ --LH3 n � ....... \..-\ ' % d a 30r3a LIWWns 30 Lard) ' 2 ♦. \ N -__ (a�V3tlA) 3n Jnellwwns W T lis Ell E s gW ' ' vIE ''fit{ ---- l \ \\\� = .5 \�\N , a {{ a—Il—a—n (( j \ a ! i{i{ 11=il=a=u=ll i it 7'I\\ \/ �j �g ��\\i 5 \\\� {i,Y til���i1 °n°n°n°n ' Edi a t...:,:® \/ ° % II 0 \ \ • �p it°n" i \\ ti �S I \ \� ` �S /I ISI II�III 1 1 a \ J ' i—ii y . it°L ,—^I; �< \� a III—II �" i--II L,.,„ 71'7L7F— sd . A 0,01;; , 'igl- y& �I' // illi—II -° i i II'II=II-II-II _ ©it!i'e ii3! i=il=it=ilil _ v v4r ® t\ ll s ! II s i • /> --i 1 a wo¢t:01-0102 'sz 00r A.P Dem6LOLl\Io1V.wgns..hi H6\.PW.wid\e.10LI\LIOA-x:....6.p.43 i F,; Ntl-Id OItl13WOlOHd $°i� § ! O Z flhl M31A3k!Ntlld3115 !i'? 11 i ai"€ t I S 3AVEire ip I g:aq ea ,�E§e 1�E. ! g 3o Sl3JtlB'S02l8 NI31SNI3'8 ANtldW00 33dd00 f1091tltl0 _ s i, Ill ea� . z0 , Iz !.:,,,,„2z..„4; Q o Z a m rz2t > z LL 2 Z r>Q2 a pE 2 mar O 3i!.."' ! Wl i.0 kg' dA 'P'5o d� :ii,;�§ Z Z�§gg os )- o. i LL 3 s.g'o iSii i§;; sa . :oi4 ,� 1,-,u"ww s 9 tri t: :;:.�� ; • @` J O soot' o0 V_13,76 °h `Fo "4,A1 , ,A i wawa 51140Ot PA yy) ss ao�ssFa8 y§� ,sT� W §§§§§§§§§ aaooo � ooao pl3 9 yob o3 Ra&R8 \ i' ,`,et. $ z z z z z z�d f ,\t\/ Y �}} s�s��q;yyy� ���++�IVs�..1 +3:YY8Y.:Y88 \ I A aHu .., "' \ 11'7 € 1 1 � < .2 ;1125515i. > \ / P P P \ • w t / .619--,~ / \,o c .o \\\` isrss slwg = / /.z --� _ P ,� \A6 p Ka t,g Zia- �p< , \\ '- _ Ann it � � --J -/ '� p^ / k 6'�' ( �� \Ff•p owl\� b L1/ - ,,,?,. 0 ' P .2 .2 :g`• ...,- •,,„-,-,' ,-- 641 , \7,‘ /.6.. \\\N. T N :s. .2. •'' ';15,4\,L.\ ,,,.4::‘;iv- . -i — k„,1?„ ._. ENO Cf 41�Li? NA ^'' rye` 1.0. A ' b,.- P j n g \. y � y '/ 46'1 - .9.-799 -9J— -/. .. ... .'\ _. @ ' o(' _, }-.__. I_( _.. a o. - o P n b a 4� 96\P o A P o �s .. �\ \ 1 � .e irvnns io ier`d) e:\ p e — S1 1g= \ .......i 0.v3d 3.0r)d P a. y/ J \ a \ CJ III 1 c., ) i 0 1 :..,... r,r) CL ..az:u-aLoz 'aL..r 6.p•)ogdseion\sns..r.••M•1.\Ew•1 .oI\eatocu\uoAVx:..ro.6w.0,o Ai ` s am x _tt4' s i wz w15 m zw se 's 2_. li w>w Um OZ o k�Ea 't -- ZQ mF JQ Q I. L`•€E€° i i3 #1 Oz Em 02 > 0 fill's wa gi I Ow caw Low a w III mj' l, pill CL ill © :1. 0 W LL 2 2 I Y 2 O Ip i � N W ? 0 2 M0 __- v 0 zW N OOe w LL Z w QOII cc cc p w O U W a CC 0~ J aQ 0 I- NW Ww O QQ Qw OJ W ZW , • O2 00 W7 ZSp 2O w zm K O ,�i{� m0 mW 2z w 00—ww w Nm O tI;IV Ym I- ixa .— co "c~izmY w gW o 't QJ U W >>/- m 3 < oqQQW V' 2 g K W �2 22 m 0 LZm00LL m DO z 4,11. e COmm3 wg dog z moa QmZo i-3 5 1 cc3z¢ 3,-..—Eau- g3 3 - i O�¢a=So,�O .. 1 Iii THiJH O 411; .1d -Isim<it ui,N: Goi�� " `..;;4-.:2w I u 8 O 6, A Q W W Q W > ao CL r...0-io I W QN Q -Q.- J { W 9! 9 iI N 1 -4. o • i I, I� 4 s • �' ,7 1 F s' It 1i - ( l• .41 i;e 4 S 7 I $ s • k1 � 4{ � Ili .I � 6! : III E - .§ �4 3% CO© : • p } .1 I ,. ,. ,. d0 © © ' w r' .„1,,,i. ,1,,, S i w ® 1r �___ £ u.4 LL 4 it 111 A +l+ Z � Y. Z X9.7 1I Oii �: O Z IF it} > IA > -.. Q — Y W b , w 1 '_ w 2 j 2 IA W © H F- 6, ® 19.; (1' � Z 1,- O III w 1U wvssn:dl eta/stn.I W UCN1 uowsA 0005 III 0043^W44s0 LSOLIASP*]d W%.UA:0 n cC 1 co ¢ s z ati ` f W w'3 >o v Zg Q .21414 ¢ 0 tpZ r I- WU ZW OU- $5-_ Z Al }1IJ111i1 '� - P• li EN ' OZ gi 4L it UW NW lu Ji .^- • W P. -1U E [�T� a LWi ZW x CO SC U 6 a / /r ONIdVOSONV1 'c) 0_ a. U 0 Z 1 so Y 5 .�Eci to p 0 • L!!I 4:114114 a N 0 I 3 3 ll 5 p U W M O O CCC10 o LA u u O /�'4.0 . /\ NMOOdWVH 1 1 I ..N ‘ / 40,1114°'4# f rin------- I.. U,----„ci-J----) J co O0 3 CC 0 25\o3 U, rrN K U Z to II III ir O Q O U LL CI) @, MV>O.D1L BLOUSL/t I. -...•A 0005111 N1P3-40409LSOLt1tPNoN 1..uvo cn 1Ib g E Z ot1 i 'b W WN w~3 2 2 W J >p CO 4 -— !- IWi0 Zw Z •1 a �- L.%)_,0 0m $Z O ii __ D ¢g w 'a yE }' ugg j- ti Z OW N n ,°111 g€x vd 5 - jj �Z �N WoZ w 1.0O Mewe g 5 �... 3 a'- Z Y n ill w8 g OW U W 8W N 0 1 r la I:. I \ Ila W UZ a_ F-¢ �' f0 Ig�7L MZ 7 D Ill W t/3 J • J Q Z\ W }' a f uI_ Z H \ W 6�,0 9 d*9 G�� �¢� �6 �\ '• ��q�P� ��-.�' ��� � ,� day \ A • a� \tV ,4 U , U � \ ��ss�t= \ fig I o W --- W . a 1 Mill z n ' N � 3Nv_limns 3 \ wJ123d0lid t 0 w v CO— lii— ' fr co 0 m o m QLL >Q> p Ja 3 ® UD Z> m 77 Z O Om Q. ,a C/3 t11 FQ- Z W Z N._ . J Z R %J II�I1 Q zw ~w W ZZ LL U � CC W iN ,I� V CO N 1 Q I`\ ■ aU_ \tii a0 Iii j0 �t UW ii a3 L,' z° U i W 3z IIID �_ Jz � w� w > a 3 LT-______---- W !gill co p� <9 �. m9 07 ' o Z - Z \a m p II 'M'O'H - O O 11 "-` 0- JJ NC zw w� MOii w� al Q Q Q 0 7 tow rn w W Q H 3 W W W QCC e �0 WV SU[V:L I BLOUSIII 1.11031,.../1 0005111 N11,3-noq1,•0 LSOLM.40,111�oJ 9 Z a m O WV' - roi LL ZW 115 til Es i- ig w� Oa Oz n 8`�£ L.Nii VA k - 11 Oul wcc� FZ ' k k P OZ N oZ ow ow .. A aro g ,^- • AJI83A 01 800N3A .0-.l ..9-.8 ..8-.8 ..0-.01 xz �N (i- i IF w ln. 3o W ❑ N co O: 2 CC QQ ZO HwII U N agQ W Ufq Wp-IHa NZ wzujf� G ❑Oi_O- 1 H Q n 11111 j wZ 0WO y F- I I ;i O� WJF - N Z=1 WZ? ®CP CC M r W LLI I I O W j S U Z W L'.4 !Ij n W zeal OZ fl ®* W U w o s+ 0O w W Q z J Q 4 W ❑N t 2 N znL-.l 01^ rel I .0-.4 x u • J LU s tlsIV ,,���' ¢y OF :® R 5 Y Y < N I, c0 b z z o z: EZ D0 W ¢ (35 •oz 0g Na y N x Z Oz Z OZ Z3 Za ZH Za Zw QO w I 2 o u-x i-z To N... -z PO\F"J U W X�000 O XXO XU xx0,. XA `LQ ~ a =N.K M W N W N W a W N W¢ v .,81'/1 �2� N. ��� �\ �� ice,. '14!'j3 �.� O\ \ _ \ a . <� 0. x'11 �'cA\ . '1,, \ Z\ ®� - /. i__.% moi` 0YieNVI JNINOVIS Rote. wait ow...�L� N ����� 3NV1 SSVd-A9 2 m i —. -.1 —II -.2 I u ii=r---------- ---- , —iwgiii )-V-- w 3f N3AVlIWWf1S031VOVA m Li.. i _ J 4 N oz , o J v a z �� • O Ce ill h I N� w U E ,�, Q UZ wmw . , u! aN Z�F m 4 � N w U WO LO CV Bt0USW w"a0 u...A 0005 111 eu93.nWurO LSOLl1WrOAd 1..1A;0 I ' w „�, axw tm•.f� 2 2 T W . . iii-; . \ !:!J z Ce D , gS t 3 J z , . LLQ p A° \ wo�\ wooho 2 W°w ' at' n ,.7.,? J W \ a/ u12 K Er H s\ I ' /1 \ - ,f_,7, z l — w I . a ; 0 6[1 8 LL w � d--- / / - 4-°�Zd . „ ° !0� \ ,Ow — � j . 1 ' rP '� Qvzi w , _ fi ® , ## g.- Z' o\p �t + v - ego ?A EE jO °q � 5ai :a *�. 1� ,L,,,,-!.1 w .3gs At m ° .Ni1 �I % ,L,_,,, Wo g/ .go L,, i I G* 0 `-`',.°:u2., iz- v !,9:11 E• d< yf?< 3 §„E / LL _ Z— '''''''' - L, At, a <icc lid y > r ' 3 �U. ', ,� � ` '� �o 7. �a 2 , ,... l, it �j 4 o,., _ ,, „, ,, _ ,..,::„......,,,_, ft..f30._ , ,,,, •., ,...,_ , - 1, -,,„„ : , tit -8' < o- it . , CD O O i aY+^ rc0 O O N• O o LO LO LOLOO O O N 0 LU • 1 1 o00 5, .., 4 \ . \ ''',' , ' 044 4 4 \ ''.4,:, 1 \ , ' \ \ ''' --.:-.."'-._ - --,. " , .. 4 , :\\\\\\\\\\‘ \ kit* , \ e , Cr)\ \ . \ a`„ 'fie 0 "" 7 44. .„.-- 0# \ ''''''' ,e" \ - ''' \ ''''' 0 .„ , '-'' ..--"/ * ,,Y.' 4 ..,...- '''''''''' 414. , ' \., ' ..•\, a"' 4 7/ a ;.;,, 9 .Y ,. d t ..,‘. ,. . „.. ,,,,,,. „*.,,,,..0,,,, , \, h , rec _ i,, , az b , 'E 1 °i, �, �: .1 . vt CO S w vfivVz, cY W1. A r Wti G N c \ \ . \,'\\'\ \ . , '03 • : , e; , l , e ., , „, '') '1111.1/ \ '''''''''' ' .(al , ,. „,,, \ I' ''''k s4 'lb ..... , III!. .- 49 10!„„, il f fa; ,! `' ,' ' ” �tt S • ack CONSULTING ENGINEERING TRAFFIC FORWARD Traffic Impact Study 5000 VERNON AVENUE COFFEE SHOP EDINA, MINNESOTA •. . I _ 1 ' . ,.-. • ' ''. ' i, • .. , , .. .,.. , • , . •, I , I hereby certify this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and I am a duly Li ensed Professional Engineer under thz laws of the State of Minnesota. By: Bryant J. F cek, P.E., P.T.O.E. License No.42802 I ' i . ' Date: ________________________ Executive Summary Background: Carlson Commercial is proposing the 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop development located on the northwest corner of the Interlachen Boulevard and Vernon Avenue South associatedhis y is to etermine the ts intersection with the build out of the proposed development don the sdtudy roads and r intersections oic cns where significant impact is anticipated. Results:The principal findings of this study are: • The proposed 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop development is expected to generate 226 new trips during an average weekday, 32 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 26 new trips during the Saturday a.m. peak hour. • The actual driveway trips, when accounting for pass-by trips, are 2,050 daily trips, 287 a.m. peak hour trips, and 234 Saturday peak hour trips. • This expected traffic is more than the existing land uses or general retail would generate for the site. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable delays based on the capacity analysis. However, the southbound queues on Interlachen Boulevard at the Vernon Avenue intersection often extend past the main site access. • The proposed improvements at Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue (southbound dual lefts and westbound left turn lane)will help limit conflicts with the site access. • The proposed site plan reduces the number of access points from three to two by removing the right in/right out on Vernon Avenue. • Drive-thru circulation will routinely block up to six parking stalls during peak periods and cause conflicts in the general parking area. • Pedestrian connections to the sidewalks along Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard are lacking. Similarly, the sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. • Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking show an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles,which is more than the proposed site plan storage of 12 vehicles. Recommendations:The following items are recommended based on the analyses contained in this study: • Continue to plan for a second southbound left turn lane on Interlachen Boulevard at the Vernon Avenue intersection. • Install a"Do Not Block Intersection"sign for southbound traffic on Interlachen Boulevard at the main site access. • Consider options to reduce the number of drive-thru trips through the parking area. • Designate some or all of the parking spots accessible through the drive-thru or at the Interlachen Boulevard access for employees. • Designate pedestrian crossings from the Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard sidewalks to connect to the building. • Provide a boulevard buffer between the sidewalk and driving/parking areas. • Provide ADA compliant curb ramps with the pedestrian crossing areas. • ru storage,such as dual drive-thru ordering lanes oigusing parking aallow nd run ne sr more to serve customers outside of the stacking area. Ian p This study is based upon a concept development plan dated January 9, 2018. Assuming the general characteristics of the proposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study. Traffic Impact Study S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 12 2. Existing Conditions 3 3. Forecasted Traffic 4. Analyses 3 156 5. Conclusions and Recommendations 17 6. Appendix LIST OF TABLES & CHARTS Table 1 — Study Corridor Characteristics 2 Table 2 — Trip Generation' 4 Table 3 — Existing Land Use Trip Generation 4 4 Chart 1 — Study Corridor Volume to Capacity Chart 2 — A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections 8 Chart 3 — Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled 8 Intersections Chart 4 — A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled 9 Intersections Chart 5 — Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign 10 Controlled Intersections Table 4 — Southbound Vehicle Queues on Interlachen Blvd at Vernon 10 Ave Chart 6 — A.M. Peak Hour Southbound Queues on Vernon Ave at 11 Interlachen Blvd Chart 7 — Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Southbound Queues on Vernon Ave1 at Interlachen Blvd 2 Traffic Impact Study ii S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop 1. Introduction a. Proposed Development Carlson Commercial is proposing the 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop development located on the northwest corner of the Interlachen Boulevard and Vernon Avenue South intersection in Edina, Minnesota. Following are proposal's key attributes: i. Access to the site will be provided via existing driveways on Summit Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard per the concept development plan shown in the Appendix. A third existing access on Vernon Avenue will be closed. ii. The proposed development will be a 2,662 square feet coffee shop. iii. The development is expected to be fully occupied by 2019. iv. 24 parking stalls are proposed per the site plan included in this document. b. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development. The traffic impacts are studied on the roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated and improvements are recommended where mitigation is needed. For those not familiar with the general concepts and terms associated with traffic engineering, The Language of Traffic Engineering guide is included in the Appendix. c. Study Objectives The objectives of this study are: i. Document how the study intersections and roadways currently operate. ii. Forecast the amount of traffic expected to/from the proposed development. iii. Determine how the study intersections and roadways will operate in the future with and without the proposed development. iv. Recommend appropriate mitigation measures if poor operations are identified. The roadways corridors studied in this document include those surrounding the proposed site, which are: i. Vernon Avenue South ii. Interlachen Boulevard iii. Summit Avenue For the purposes of this traffic study, the study intersections closest to the proposed development and where the greatest impact is expected were chosen for review and include: i. Vernon Avenue South & Interlachen Boulevard ii. Vernon Avenue South & Summit Avenue iii. Interlachen Boulevard & Summit Avenue iv. Three existing site driveways, changed to two with the proposed site plan Furthermore, this study does not account for the existing roadway conditions such as pavement quality or appropriate drainage. Traffic Impact Study 1 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop S•ack CONSULTING 2. Existing Conditions a. Corridor Characteristics As mentioned, the proposed site is located on the northwest corner of the Vernon Avenue South and Interlachen Boulevard intersection. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the key roadway corridors around this site and within the study area. Table 1 — Study Corridor Characteristics Speed Peds/ Name Designation' Classification2 Limit Lanes Transit3 Bicycles Vernon Avenue 30 3 Sidewalks South CSAH 158 B Minor Arterial mph 4 Divided 30 Min Both Sides Interlachen 30 2 3 Sidewalks Boulevard MSAS 177 Major Collector Both mph Undivided 30 Min Sides Local/Private 2 Sidewalk Summit Avenue Local Road N/A Undivided None on West Side 1 CSAH =County State Aid Highway, MSAS = Municipal State Aid Street. 2 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Map. 3 Number of routes around the proposed site followed by the frequency of transit service during the peak periods. b. Traffic Volumes Intersection video was collected at the existing study intersections under normal weekday conditions and on a Saturday in January 2018. Using these videos, 48- hour turning movement counts were obtained at the study intersections on the weekdays and 24-hour turning movement counts were obtained at the study intersections on the weekend. The data from the two days was averaged to provide the base traffic for a "typical weekday". The average weekday a.m. and weekend a.m. peak hours were found to be from 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. and 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. The a.m. peak hours are the focus for this study reflecting the time when coffee shops have the highest amount of traffic (the p.m. peak site traffic is expected to be less than half of the a.m. peak). The counts from these two peak hours were used at the study intersections for analysis. The turning movement count data from the counts are contained in fifteen-minute intervals in the Appendix. Based on the "typical day" turning movement volumes, the current daily traffic volumes on each study corridor are: i. 18,000 vehicles per day on Vernon Avenue South ii. 12,700 vehicles per day on Interlachen Boulevard iii. 400 vehicles per day on Summit Avenue Traffic Impact Study 2 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop 3. Forecasted Traffic a. Site Traffic Forecasting A trip generation analysis was performed for the development site based on the methods published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 90th Edition. Trip generation rates are provided by the same ITE manual as well as local data collected by Spack Consulting. The ITE manual compiles studies from across the country to provide a national average traffic for various land uses. Spack Consulting collects current average traffic volumes for various land uses in the Twin Cities regional area for use in our studies. Local data is considered more relevant than the ITE national data as it is generally newer and accounts for our area's specific characteristics. Per the procedure in the Trip Generation Manual, local trip generation data is used when possible and supplemented with national ITE data when local data is not available. For each analysis, the raw trip generation was divided among three types of trips — new, pass-by, and internal. Pass-by trips are those vehicles already on the roads which will stop at the development site in the future. Internal trips are those vehicles within the site visiting two or more stores. New trips represent traffic increasing the overall number of vehicles at the intersections. For the purposes of this study, the breakdown between these types of trip generation is: • 89% Pass-By Trips. • 11% New Trips. Table 2 shows the raw trip generation for each source type, the selected trip generation for use in this study, and the breakdown between the new and pass-by trips. A detailed trip generation table showing the exact breakdowns is provided in the Appendix. It should be noted that the developer suggests their proposed coffee shop will not generate the same numbers as the ITE or the local data presented here. For comparison purposes, the existing land uses were examined. The three businesses are the site are: • A fitness studio (still in operation) • A tailor and cleaners (now closed) • A quick serve oil change (now closed) A trip generation review, similar to proposed coffee shop, was completed using the count data for the existing fitness studio and ITE data for the other two uses. As a secondary check, a general retail estimate from ITE data was also applied to the entire site. Table 3 shows these trip generation comparisons. Traffic Impact Study 3 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop Table 2 — Trip Generation' Land Use Daily AM Peak Saturday AM Code— Hour Peak Hour Source2 Description &Size In Out In Out In Out 937- ITE Coffee/Donut Shop w/Drive-Thru 1,092 1,092 121 116 117 117 (2,662 units) Local Coffee Shop w/Drive-Thru 1,025 1,025 152 134 N/A N/A (2,662 sq ft) RAW TRIP GENERATION TOTAL TO USE 1,025 1,025 152 134 117 117 New Trips(11%) 113 113 17 15 13 13 Pass-by Trips(89%) 912 912 135 119 104 104 ' The raw trip generation is shown before sub-dividing into new(11%) and pass-by (89%) trips. New trips will increase traffic in the area. Pass-by trips are drivers already on the road in this area that will stop at the development in the future. 2 Local =Trip generation data collected by Spack Consulting in this regional area. Table 3 — Existing Land Use Trip Generation Land Use Daily AM Peak Saturday AM Code— Hour Peak Hour Source2 Description &Size In Out In Out In Out Counts Fitness Studio 35 35 2 5 4 3 814- ITE Variety Store (Tailor) 32 32 2 2 5 5 941— ITE Quick Lubrication Vehicle Stop 80 80 4 2 4 5 (Oil Change) RAW TRIP GENERATION TOTAL' 147 147 8 9 13 13 820— ITE Shopping Center' 94 94 3 2 12 11 1 The raw trip generation for the three businesses previously occupying the site, two of which (tailors and quick lube oil change) are now closed. 2 The raw trip generation of the existing site using estimated traffic for the entire development. As the tables show, the existing or general retail land uses have less traffic than expected at the proposed coffee shop. A trip distribution pattern was developed for the generated traffic going to and from the proposed development. This pattern is based on the existing traffic volumes, site access, competing land uses, and access to the regional transportation system. The general trip distribution pattern for this study is: • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the west on Vernon Avenue South. • 20% of the generated traffic to/from the northwest on Interlachen Boulevard. • 10% of the generated traffic to/from the northeast on Brookside Avenue. • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the east on Vernon Avenue South. Traffic generated by the site development was assigned to the area roadways per this distribution pattern. Traffic Impact Study 4 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting To forecast future traffic volumes for the future build-out year of 2019 in the study area outside of the proposed development's traffic, general growth in traffic was added. Using MnDOT's provided AADT volume history, the past roadway volumes along the study intersection were examined. These volumes show relatively stable or decreasing volumes within the study area, with the exception of some increased volumes during periods of construction along TH 100, which drove more vehicles through the study corridors slightly increasing traffic volumes. Also, Edina is a relatively built up city, and is expected to experience a lower growth rate than more suburban areas based solely on the availability of developable land. From this information, a conservative 1.0% annual growth rate was applied to the existing volumes to generate the forecast year 2019 traffic volumes (2% growth total). This growth was applied to all existing movements in the study network to establish the No-Build forecasts. c. Total Traffic Traffic forecasts were developed for the 2019 Build scenarios by adding the traffic generated by the proposed residential development to the No-Build forecast volumes. Peak hour forecasts are shown in the Appendix. Traffic Impact Study 5 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop 4. Analyses a. Corridor Vehicular Analysis While many factors contribute to a road feeling congested, the two biggest factors are volume, how many vehicles are using the road, and capacity, how many vehicles the road can accommodate a day. Transportation professionals use these pieces of information to create a ratio of volume to capacity. For example, a road with a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0, where the traffic demand is nearly equal to the traffic supply, will feel congested to motorists. Below is a rough guide of the daily traffic volumes different types of roads can accommodate based on Exhibits 16-16 and 12-39 of the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. If the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on a roadway is below the threshold, then it is considered un-congested. If the daily volume falls inside the range, the road is almost congested, and if the daily volume is over the threshold the road is congested. • 2-Lane (one in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), undivided street, are considered congested with a volume between 8,900 to 18,300 vehicles per day. • 4-Lane, undivided street (two in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), — 18,600 to 36,800 vehicles per day. • 6-Lane, divided street (three in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), —29,100 to 55,300 vehicles per day. The above capacities represent physical capacity in ideal roadway conditions. Research from UC Berkley, for example, indicates quality of life along a residential street is negatively impacted when the ADT exceeds 1,000 vehicles per day. Therefore, the 1,000 vehicle per day threshold is used for the capacity along neighborhood two lane roads even though its physical capacity is approximately ten times larger. To provide an initial planning level screening, Chart 1 provides volume to capacity ratios of the study corridors during each of the study years to determine if any of the roadway corridors are candidates for additional through lanes. As shown, on a planning-level analysis, the study roadways can accommodate the expected increase in traffic. The results also show a minimal increase in daily traffic volumes to the projected year 2019 compared to existing volumes. Traffic Impact Study 6 Si.ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop Chart 1 — Study Corridor Volume to Capacity 1.2 Congested: volume/capacity of 1.0 or greater 1 ° Nearing Conmestion:volumeeap_cituf 0.85-1.0 p cc 0.8 U co0 R3 0.6 0 v 0.4 0 0.2 0 Vernon Avenue Interlachen Boulevard Summit Avenue ti Existing a 2019 Build b. Intersection Vehicular Analysis Individual intersections can perform poorly during peak periods while the overall roadway corridor is operating with an uncongested daily volume to capacity ratio lower than 1.0. Therefore, capacity analyses are performed for the study intersections to determine if they need improvements such as turn lanes or an upgrade in traffic control. The existing and forecasted turning movement volumes along with the existing intersection configurations and traffic control were used to develop the average delay per intersection in each study scenario. The delay calculations were done in accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition using the Vistro software package. The full calculations for each study scenario, including Level of Service (LOS) grades and queue lengths, are included in the Appendix. Also, included in the Appendix is a guide explaining the Level of Service grade concept. Chart 2 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 3 (Saturday a.m. peak hour) show the average peak hour delay per traffic signal-controlled intersection for each study scenario. The LOS D/E boundary of 55 seconds of delay per vehicle is considered the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable traffic signal operation in Minnesota. The initial signal timing for the existing conditions was provided by Hennepin County. Based on ITE's recommendation of updating traffic signal timing plans every three to five years, the signal timing plans used in the 2019 analyses were optimized to best accommodate the forecasted traffic volumes. Traffic Impact Study 7S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop Chart 2 — A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections 60 Congested at LOS D/E Boundary(55 seconds) 50 0 40 u v a Tu 30 a) a a) on 20 > 10 rvil***.otilk 0 Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Existing a 2019 Build Chart 3 — Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections 60 S,uiecct 1.4S.12/UOZIci t V1553e4411 — — — 50 0 40 a1 a To 30 a� a a) on 20 10 0 • .• . ;.OMA Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd 11 Existing ■2019 Build Chart 4 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 5 (Saturday a.m. peak hour) show the 95th percentile queue lengths on the busiest stop sign controlled approach at intersections with side street stop sign control. Average delays are not considered a quality metric for intersections with side street stop sign control because the vast Traffic Impact Study 8 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop majority of vehicles going through the intersection are on the main roadway and have zero delay, which leads to low overall average delays. At side street stop sign controlled approaches to busy roadways, the average delay for all the vehicles on the approach often exceeds 60 seconds. This can be the case for a few vehicles waiting at the stop sign where improvements would not be justified for the low traffic volume. Instead of reporting average approach delays like the previous charts, Charts 4 and 5 show the 95th percentile queue as the measure of effectiveness at intersections with side street stop sign control. Based on our experience, improvements are not warranted at these types of intersections until the 95th percentile queue at a stop sign is in the five to ten vehicle range. Chart 4—A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections 12 �, 10 Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue(5-10 Vehicles v 8 a 6 u 4 a t ., 2 rn 0 ,,,, Vernon Ave& Interlachen Blvd& Summit Ave&Site Vernon Ave&Site Interlachen Blvd& Summit Ave Summit Ave Access Access Site Access Existing 112019 Build Traffic Impact Study 9 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop Chart 5—Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections 12 v 10 Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue(5-10 Vehicle L a) 8 Q1 Q1 7 a 6 v u 4 a a �^ 2 rn 0 — — _ • Vernon Ave& Interlachen Blvd& Summit Ave&Site Vernon Ave&Site Interlachen Blvd& Summit Ave Summit Ave Access Access Site Access fi Existing ■2019 Build Per the above analyses, most of the study intersections and corridors will operate acceptably throughout the study scenarios. However, not shown in the charts is the vehicle queues at the Vernon Avenue & Interlachen Boulevard intersection. The primary access to the proposed development on Interlachen Boulevard is approximately 170 feet from the Vernon Avenue intersection. The southbound queues on Interlachen Boulevard currently extend to and beyond the site access during the peak periods. Observations at the site confirmed these queues. Table 4 shows the 50th percentile (average) and 95th percentile queues for this southbound approach, standard metrics for these analyses. Table 4— Southbound Vehicle Queues on Interlachen Blvd at Vernon Ave Time Period Scenario 50th Percentile 95th Percentile Queue (ft.)1 Queue (ft.)2 AM Peak Hour Existing 144 242 Build 173 281 Saturday AM Existing 75 134 Peak Hour Build 88 159 1 50th Percentile Queues are the vehicle stacking occurring about half the time, or on average, at an intersection. 2 95th Percentile Queues are the vehicle stacking only exceeded five percent of the time,a metric commonly used in evaluating vehicle queues. The vehicle queues in Table 4 show that while the site access intersection is physically capable of accommodating the traffic volumes expected, the southbound queuing on Interlachen Boulevard may disrupt operations. This situation is an issue Traffic Impact Study 10 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop S•ack CONSULTING as the northbound left turn movement into the proposed site may be blocked, which then causes queuing on Interlachen Boulevard. With higher volumes headed to the proposed site, the northbound queue could stretch back to Vernon Avenue, further causing traffic confusion and disruption. These queuing issues at the intersection are an existing issue and well documented in the Grandview District Transportation Study. It should be noted that the p.m. peak hour has a greater issue compared to the a.m. peak hour, although less site traffic and conflicts are expected during the afternoon period. c. Vehicular Mitigation Analysis Per discussions with the City and review of the Grandview Transportation Study, the Interlachen Boulevard/Vernon Avenue intersection is expected to be improved in the near future. These improvements are expected to include a second southbound left turn lane, a westbound left turn lane, and signal timing adjustments. Assuming these improvements, the intersection was re-analyzed with the Build volumes. Chart 6 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 7 (Saturday a.m. peak hour) show the queues on the southbound leg of the intersection in comparison to the distance away from the site access during the existing condition, the 2019 build condition, and the 2019 build condition with mitigation. Chart 6 — A.M. Peak Hour Southbound Queues on Vernon Ave at Interlachen Blvd 300 �, 250 u LE v 200 Distance to Site Access(170 Feet) a 1501,14 cu 100qt, 8rffi : v .;, ,. ez AP 4 cn 50 0 Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd SB Left Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd-SB Thru/Right ■Existing ■2019 Build 1112019 Build With Mitigation Traffic Impact Study 11 S•aCk CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop Chart 7 — Saturday A.M. Peak Hour Southbound Queues on Vernon Ave at Interlachen Blvd 300 • 250 a) u LE a) 200 Distance to Site Access(170 Feet) a a 150 a c • 100 ai a • cn• 50 $' 0 Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd-SB Left Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd-SB Thru/Right Existing ■2019 Build a 2019 Build With Mitigation As seen in Chart 6, the 95th percentile queue lengths for southbound approach on Interlachen Boulevard at Vernon Avenue extend beyond the site access. With the dual left turn lanes, the additional stacking space reduces the length of the queues and they are roughly clear of the site access (the combined through/right turn lane 95th percentile queues remain close to the access). From Chart 7, the forecast 95th percentile queues in the Saturday a.m. peak are not expected to extend to the site access with or without the dual left turn lanes on Interlachen Boulevard at Vernon Avenue. These results show that having dual left turn lanes on southbound Interlachen Boulevard at Vernon Avenue will reduce weekday blockage of the site access on Interlachen Boulevard. The p.m. peak hour operations, which have longer queues based on observations, may still have vehicle stacking that conflict with movements to/from the site access on Interlachen Boulevard. However, the proposed development is expected to have less traffic during this time. Installing a "Do Not Block Intersection" sign could also help alleviate potential conflicts at the site access. Traffic Impact Study 12 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop d. Concept Site Plan & Multi-Modal Review The concept site plan contained in the Appendix was reviewed to determine if the plan meets city requirement's, provides appropriate circulation, and minimizes conflicts. Following are key transportation elements of the concept site plan: i. Vehicle Circulation: The site uses two of the three existing access points. The full access on Interlachen Boulevard and entrance only on Summit Avenue will remain open while the existing right-in/right-out access on Vernon Avenue will be closed. This closure is good in that it helps protect the traffic flow on Vernon Avenue, a B-Minor Arterial. There is one-way circulation along the west and south sides of the coffee shop where the drive thru is located. Two-way circulation is provided for the parking area on the east side of the building. Along with the entrance only access from Summit Avenue, this set-up puts all drive-thru traffic into the parking area. Customers parking will likely have difficulty during the peak times completing their parking maneuvers. While not unlike many other sites, the parking conflicts still represent an issue. Options like making the Summit Avenue access an exit only should be considered to reduce these conflicts. Per the attached site plan, there are 24 parking stalls shown on site. Three of these parking stalls are accessible only from the drive-thru lane. Another three spots are adjacent to the access to/from Interlachen Boulevard. Especially during peak periods, these parking stalls will be virtually unusable due to the difficult of entering and exiting the spots. A possible mitigation is designating some or all of these stalls for employee parking. ii. Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure: The site plan shows maintaining the existing sidewalks along Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard with the new building. However, the site plan also shows fencing along Vernon Avenue, directing pedestrians destined for the new coffee shop to Interlachen Boulevard. In addition, no crossing areas from either sidewalk are provided to facilitate pedestrians between the building and the sidewalks. We recommend providing a break in the fencing directly from the Vernon Avenue sidewalk to the building sidewalk, just east of the drive-thru pick-up window. Besides a direct connection, drivers are already stopped or just starting to accelerate and should yield to pedestrians. A pedestrian connection is also recommended from the sidewalk on Interlachen Boulevard. To minimize any loss of parking, the crossing could connect to the open space between the handicap stalls. ADA compliant curb ramps should be provided with each crossing. The Grandview Transportation Study recommends reconstructing Vernon Avenue to provide for vehicle drive lanes, separate off-street bike lanes, and sidewalks all separated with proper buffers. While this redevelopment does Traffic Impact Study 13 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop not impact the potential reconstruction, we agree with the idea of a buffer to the sidewalk to increase pedestrian comfort and improve the walkability of the site. We recommend a boulevard to separate the sidewalk from the driving lanes and the parking lanes. Bicycle parking will be provided near the entrance to the coffee shop based on the site plan. A curb ramp may be necessary to ensure easy access to the bicycle parking, although a ramp in the open space between the handicap stalls could serve this purpose. iii. Drive-Thru Area: According to the attached Drive-Thru Queue Generation study completed by Counting Cars, the 851h percentile maximum drive-thru queue for a coffee shop is 13.5 vehicles. The Twin Cities sites studied in this document had maximum drive-thru stacking between seven and 16 vehicles, depending upon the site. Two of these sites studied were Caribou Coffee shops, one located in St. Louis Park and the other located in south Minneapolis. These specific Caribou Coffee sites had maximum drive-thru queues of 12 and 11 vehicles, respectively. Per the site plan, the drive-thru for the proposed coffee shop has stacking distance for 12 vehicles. One additional vehicle (13 total) would impact the operations to/from the parking area from the site access to Interlachen Boulevard. Two additional vehicles (14 total) would impact the site access to Interlachen Boulevard. During the peak periods, the Drive-Thru Queue Generation study suggests the parking operations and potentially the site access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard would be impact. Back-ups in the drive-thru that reach the public roadways would create queuing issues from vehicles waiting to enter the site, either for the drive-thru or the parking area. As with the southbound queue issues on Interlachen Boulevard at Vernon Avenue, these conflicts could extend to other public intersections creating larger issues. At a minimum, the drive-thru stacking should be monitored to determine the peak stacking and whether the queues reach the public area. Ideally, reconfiguring the site will allow for more drive-thru storage to reduce the risks of impacts to site circulation and to the public roadways. Other options to improve traffic operations and reduce potential queuing issues include: • Utilizing dual drive-thru ordering lanes to increase the stacking. As currently configured, this would eliminate the by-pass lane. While not desirable, other entities including coffee shops provide a drive-thru without an escape lane. • Utilizing parking and runners to serve drive-thru customers without having them wait in the stacking area. Either option could be utilized to reduce the length of the stacking and avoid conflict issues with the parking operations or the public road intersections. Traffic Impact Study 14 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop 5. Conclusions and Recommendations The traffic impacts of the proposed development were thoroughly studied and the principal findings are: • The proposed 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop development is expected to generate 226 new trips during an average weekday, 32 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 26 new trips during the Saturday a.m. peak hour. • The actual driveway trips, when accounting for pass-by trips, are 2,050 daily trips, 287 a.m. peak hour trips, and 234 Saturday peak hour trips. • This expected traffic is more than the existing land uses (one open and counted, two now closed and estimated) or general retail would generate. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable delays based on the capacity analysis. However, the southbound queues on Interlachen Boulevard at the Vernon Avenue intersection often extend past the main site access. This situation creates a conflict zone that will impact operations to/from the proposed as well as on the public roads. The p.m. peak has longer existing queuing than the a.m. peak, but is not a peak period of the proposed coffee shop. This existing issue was previously documented in the Grandview District Transportation Study and will get worse with additional traffic to/from the site. • The City's proposed intersection improvements at Interlachen BoulevardNernon Avenue will provide for two southbound left turn lanes, a westbound left turn lane and signal timing updates, which will nearly eliminate this condition during the a.m. peak hour. Queuing issues may remain during the p.m. peak hour, but with less traffic to/from the proposed coffee shop will have fewer potential conflicts. • The proposed site plan reduces the number of access points from three to two by removing the right in/right out on Vernon Avenue, which will improve the traffic flow on Vernon Avenue. • Drive-thru circulation will routinely block up to six parking stalls during peak periods and solely routed through the parking area, which will likely cause conflicts in the general parking area. While this situation does occur at other sites, it remains a concern. • Pedestrian connections to the sidewalks along Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard are lacking. Similarly, the sidewalk design lacks boulevard separation from the driving and parking areas, which decreases pedestrian comfort. The Grandview Transportation Study recognizes buffers as a key component to improved walkability. • Studies of other coffee shop drive-thru stacking suggest an 85th percentile maximum queue length of 13.5 vehicles. The proposed site plan shows storage for 12 vehicles. One or two additional vehicles, matching the study of other sites, would impact site circulation, the access intersection with Interlachen Boulevard, and potential the Interlachen BoulevardNernon Avenue intersection during peak periods. The following recommendations are made based on the above findings: Traffic Impact Study 15 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop • Continue planning for improvements at the Interlachen Boulevard intersection with Vernon Avenue, including dual southbound left turn lanes and a westbound left turn lane. The geometric improvements will help limit the times vehicle queueing blocks the main site access on Interlachen Boulevard. • Install a "Do Not Block Intersection" sign for southbound traffic on Interlachen Boulevard at the main site access. • Consider options to reduce the number of drive-thru trips through the parking area, like turning the Summit Avenue access to exit only. These options may require reconfiguring the site plan. • Designate some or all of the parking spots accessible only through the drive-thru or at the Interlachen Boulevard access for employees to limit their use during peak periods. During these busy times, customers would have difficulty with parking operations into or out of these stalls. • Designate pedestrian crossings from the Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard sidewalks to connect to the building. The Vernon Avenue crossing could be at the end of the drive-thru area, where drivers are already stopped or just starting to move, and will require a break in the planned fencing. The Interlachen Boulevard connection could use the space between handicap stalls to minimize any reduction in parking. • Provide a boulevard buffer between the sidewalk and driving/parking areas to increase pedestrian comfort and walkability. • Provide ADA compliant curb ramps with the pedestrian crossing areas. • Reconfigure the site to allow for more drive-thru storage to help reduce/eliminate the impacts to site circulation and possible impacts to the public roadways. Two options are to utilize dual drive-thru ordering lanes, which would eliminate the by-pass or escape lane in the current site plan, or using parking and runners to serve customers without having them wait in the stacking area. Either option could be utilized to reduce the length of the stacking and avoid conflict issues with the parking operations or the public road intersections. Traffic Impact Study 16 S•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop 6. Appendix A. Site Plan B. The Language of Traffic Engineering C. Traffic Counts D. Trip Generation Table E. Level of Service (LOS) F. Capacity Analysis Backup ▪ AM Existing • Saturday AM Existing • AM 2019 Build • Saturday AM 2019 Build • AM 2019 Build with Mitigation • Saturday AM 2019 Build with Mitigation G. Drive-Thru Queue Generation Study Traffic Impact Study 17 s•ack CONSULTING 5000 Vernon Avenue Coffee Shop ;11h | _ ) U- ) )\ §\ -i * :L!''' LU ] ! g\\t -Zig Eli / \ o o 2 / \ _!-iii i A \ c c -� ,[ c 0_ ` [ CD --/< . \ 6 \\s z«:$�-<\,...� {i»\�0 C ,:x° � ~ § , 1. i .\ CI- _Q � ^ �^ "� • ¥ ^ _ , \ /..,,-- \=� « . �� 1 ;y, • « \ e �' ° s • G 1 . : .I - - - - --- / �� � V1311113AV_a031m. @ r ® % E Cn - ] w \ o / % ® 5 \ in § P Appendix B - Language of Traffic Engineering The Language of Traffic Engineering Traffic Engineering, and Traffic Engineers, often use technical terms or jargon that may be confusing or tough to understand even within the context of a sentence. Key terms and acronyms that can generally be found in all types of traffic studies are defined in this document. Types of Studies ', Access Management - The practice of government , wControl ; agencies limiting the amount of intersections (both public intro-mod,A" safety roadway crossings and private driveways)along a roadway lrtrerocrto 4.corridor based on the function of the roadway to improve safety and mobility while streamlining access. �c �' Corridor Study - A transportation review and analysis Traffic Fs� �' of the existing and future traffic operations of a roadway Engineering Multi-modal' Technology Interactions segment. Varies in length from a couple blocks to a few miles and typically covers all modes of travel. >. Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Report - A document that examines and determines the most Urban appropriate type of control (stop sign, signal, roundabout, Parking Structure or other)at one or more intersections. Source:ETH Zurich Safety Study -An examination of crash records to identify Traffic Engineering is a branch of civil engineering potential trends, issues, and problem intersections/ that focuses on the safe and efficient movement corridors. Usually includes potential mitigation options expected to decrease crash rates in the future. of people and vehicles. It is part science and part art, requiring not only technical skills for analysis Speed Study-A review of existing travel speeds and the but an understanding of motivations in choosing corridor characteristics to determine if speeding is an issue, travel routes. the appropriate speed to post as the limit, and/or areas to provide reduced speed warnings. Key Organizations Traffic Impact Study(TIS) - A document that addresses AASHTO-American Association of State Highway and the expected traffic impacts of a development and, if Transportation Officials.A nonprofit,nonpartisan association necessary, mitigation options that will reduce or eliminate representing transportation departments with a primary goal negative impacts. Also referred to as a Traffic Impact of fostering the development,operation,and maintenance of Analysis. an integrated national transportation system. DOT-Department of Transportation.Government Transportation Plan - A document developed by a organizations government agency to take inventory of their transportation within federal and state agencies dedicated to serving network,identify concerns or issues and lay out the path for the transportation needs of the community and typically improvement of the system. responsible for study,design,operation,and maintenance of Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP) - A plan all facets of transportation. that documents the existing infrastructure around a site, FHWA-Federal Highway Administration.An agency within the including transit and non-motorized vehicle options, and US Department of Transportation that supports State and local develops measures to be implemented to encourage those governments in the design,construction,and maintenance of alternative modes of travel. the highway system. Warrant Evaluation - Review of traffic volumes and other ITE-Institute of Transportation Engineers.An international educational and scientific association of transportation characteristics at an intersection against thresholds to who are responsible for meeting mobility and determine if a traffic signal or other traffic control option isprofessionalspaes needs. needed/warranted. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS B1 Spack Consulting Appendix B - Language of Traffic Engineering Results 85th Percentile Speed — Speed at which 85 percent of Queue—Length of line of cars waiting at an intersection or drivers are traveling at or below. Speed limits are typically at a bottleneck in a corridor, typically measured for each set at the 85th percentile speed. individual lane of traffic in feet or number of vehicles. 95th Percentile Queue—The distance, generally measured Volume to Capacity (v/c) ratio — the number of vehicles in feet or number of vehicles, which will be exceeded in through an intersection or roadway segment in a specific a lane, typically at an intersection, only five percent of the amount of time divided by the expected capacity of the time. Usually used to help determine intersection turn lane road. Less than 1.0 indicates available capacity and above lengths. 1.0 indicates more vehicles than can be accommodated. Control Delay—The total amount of time a motorist takes Typically,a v/c ratio above 0.85 suggests operational issues. to get through a road segment or intersection minus the Trip Generation —The amount of vehicle traffic generated time it would take without stopping due to traffic controls by a land use. One trip is equal to one vehicle traveling from (like stop signs or traffic signals). Control delay includes an origin to a destination(traveling to and from work equals decelerating and accelerating back to full driving speed. two trips). Functional Classification — the grouping of streets and Warrants—Criteria based on volumes and other Measures highways into categories according to their characteristics of Effectiveness for determining when all way stop signs, and emphasis on mobility or access. Generally, categories roundabouts,traffic signals, or other type of control should include arterials(emphasizing mobility and fast travel), local be installed. roads (emphasizing access to adjoining properties), and collector roads (emphasizing a balance between the two and usually connecting arterials to local roads). Intersection Delay—The average amount of time, usually Important Manuals/Guides expressed in seconds,experienced by any vehicle traveling HCM—Highway Capacity Manual(released by the through an intersection. Transportation Research Board,or TRB).The guide for Level of Service (LOS) — Qualitative measure of traffic engineers and planners to assess traffic and environmental operations related to the amount of average delay effects of highway projects.This manual presents the experienced. Expressed in letter grades with LOS A foundation of traffic analysis procedures in the US. representing the best operations with little to no delay and LOS F representing the worst operations with excessive MUTCD—Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. delays and congestion. A document that sets minimum standards and provides Measures of Effectiveness — Performance measures that guidance to ensure uniformity of traffic control devices(such define how well traffic is moving along a corridor or thru an as messages,location,size,shapes,and colors)across the intersection. The common MOEs are travel time, corridor nation.All roads are subject to its jurisdiction. speed, delay, and queues. Mitigation — Measures intended to reduce the impact of a HSM—Highway Safety Manual(released by AASHTO). development or improve an identified traffic issue by either A guide that presents a variety of methods for quantitatively improving capacity (like adding lanes) or reducing demand estimating crash frequency or severity. (like encouraging carpooling). Resources Highway Capacity Manual, HCM2010 MUTCD,2009 Edition, published by FHWA Highway Safety Manual, HSM About This Brief Spack Consulting prepared this brief as part of our company's vision to significantly improve the practice of traffic engineering and transportation planning. Transportation professionals from around the world have assisted us in developing this document. We are providing this brief under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Feel free to use-modify-share this guide, but please give us some credit in your document. To request our whole series of Design Briefs and to be included on our distribution list for new materials, please email mspack@spackconsulting.com. And please reach out if you have any comments or questions related to this Design Brief. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS B2 Spack Consulting C I- 0 M f- M VI17M 0) ,.LA w �-i a W + as W o C CU 2 I- c L W O M W W 0 co Z H N i Z Z I- rn 0 -Y Z "' Z Z 0 r A, W W W Q CO LI m LA V IA m en m C 0 O y a N a N Om Q may. Q1 00 a C N N Q N O �L a ~ a ~ a C O N w o o U 01 01 N W o O''''. N W o o U 01 01 W IR a W W W a W W W a W CO W .0 "E ✓ a a a al M CD ..17.O F2J J J C d L Q w Q N Q N m oZ[ ° o o ° 0 0 oZc a o 0 - C_ Z 2 Z u1 C W _ _ _ L C J H J {- J H ° O a)_ Z w Z w Z w N f6 W c4 0 0 W ce 0 0 W = 0 0 N t' C 0 Z a Z a Z a O 0. I— C 6 C H H I•- • O 0 C Z z F w o o C H O X U o 0 X U N X U O m W O C• '� W a� Lf) u1 W V W a' in a L 0 C ° W W W N +� a 0. a c a) W W o op w W o 0o W W * o L. C C C H 0 0 0 H U .--i M H U O n co Q' co — Z Vl 111 Z C Ln IA Z a' 1l1 l.f) C • ^, LU W LU W W W W a a a •�., C O fI� C R a9 V w d 2,- 1° J rn m N a ..-- CZ .4 MI 0 Zr H o o 2 H Q N H N m C L Zr CC CO n a z m o 'R .0 CO 2 I— }} R C I F a CIL C ra Q Z N N Z N N Z N N 'a+ N Q N N Q N N < N N C M 7 O C _ Cr Cr Cr C O H XO ° 0 fl H H H N V y L Y C/1) W W W w W tn 1 F w LL a H w LL IA 1 F LL LL N Q d C CD_ O Z_ Y Y O 2 Y Y O Z Y Y C N N ° CL W W W 73 N w w > • 6 C fn 0 0 0 O d 0 a V ° F --a,.E. U) ¢ U w ^ U w ^ LU W m d R -� Z j 0 m u O rn u m 0 en o C ° C _ O w 0 O O w 0 O O w o O v 0 L O o u 1= J O u 1- J 0 u 1 (� °' uv1 ,n Un am 00 d J LL L a D Q - ° R O N z N m a1 a — r CO 0 H 2 2 i .0 ° n 0. �7 In _c 3 t 1-- N « rft- 0 r' L U W O W v O W v 0 w v CO wN > Q C C 43 O O ? O .? ,_ I O C ° ° en 0 illie O Z O\ 6; t6 Z L ~ R Z O f0`0 R N O g a ">_ w g Q > a g a v LL m m m a 0 V -al o o N0 � � s 0 2 L D C t p N C p1 0 0 3 Q `" 3 Q 3Iff 0) a ° E N �// cTo co 0 r>fta 0n. m 0 >, 00 0 a w I- O • 'O 0 h D , 0 vLi fn Q .`+ t4 7 O v w y vy! Y v v HC7 � JQa o� (0 U U U U V1 0 U Z r N M 4 Lci Appendix E - Level of Service Level of Service (LOS) Level of Service(LOS)is a qualitative description,similar to typical school grades, that traffic engineers use to communi- cate how good or bad traffic operations are on a corridor, intersection, or interchange. Common Factors Traffic can be a hard thing to quantify as everyone has a Level of Service criteria have been developed for multiple different tolerance for congestion.What seems excessively types of traffic operations including: long to one person may seem good enough for another. • Intersections These differences are readily apparent when comparing , Urban Corridors small towns or rural areas, where five cars an hour can be the norm, to big cities or downtowns, where less than • Freeways hundred cars an hour, even in the middle of night, is rare. •Transit Service • Bicycle Operations To combat this issue and provide a consistent measuring . Pedestrian Operations tool for traffic studies, a "Level of Service" rating was developed. Level of Service ratings are based on the The most common LOS criteria used is for car operations roadway or intersection characteristics and the amount of at intersections; both signalized and unsignalized. For an traffic. Just like grade school, LOS A represents the best intersection Level of Service analysis, average delay for traffic operations, where traffic flows freely. LOS F, on the cars travelling through the intersection is used to determine other hand, represents failing operations, where the road the appropriate grade. A high delay results in a poor LOS or intersection is congested and running beyond maximum rating and equates to poor operations. Similarly, low delay capacity. LOS E is typically considered "at capacity"which results in a good LOS rating and equates to good or great means the amount of traffic is right at the level the roadway operations. or intersection can adequately accommodate. Using Level of Service letter grades provides an easy way to convey LOS can be determined for the intersection as a whole, or road operations to the general public and has been adopted for individual movements.It is common during peak periods across the United States. in major population areas for an intersection to have an acceptable overall LOS rating, but fail to achieve a good grade for individual movements. Common Factors Impacting Level of Service •Number of Lanes. •Traffic Volumes. •Intersection Control (stop sign, signal, roundabout, . interchange.) •Amount of access on a corridor. •Percentage of turning traffic. a F, Loa Lose •Traffic signal cycle length (green time devoted to each so " approach) and phasing (one green for all approach a0 __ Loco movements or separate green arrows.) LOSE 30 •Percentage of heavy trucks. LOS •Roadway Grades. 20 LOS Lose � LOS a •Distribution of traffic within a peak hour as well as over the �° LOSA course of a day. __-- 0 nsign�lizad Saiiu gnd •Pedestrian activity. Uin'i'n"1O Intersection •Bicycle activity. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS El Spack Consulting Appendix E - Level of Service Although a Level of Service There are many tools and guidelines used to determine a '4 rating of A represents the best roads Level of Service rating. Simple tools like generalized "`°-,:-30.--:-*,,,:--,‘„,,,,:;"r traffic operations,itis not always roadway capacities allow for planning-level efforts. While i = °.. the most desirable. Providing inexpensive and quick to complete,they are not as accurate LOS A for all corridors and all as other options. More complicated tools, such as mi- '`°° operations at all times would cro-simulations, provide more accurate results, but cost require a significant amount of more and take more time. It is important to understand the LOS A land to be devoted to the road trade-offs between the analysis types as well as the purpose infrastructure, which makes it of the study. extremely costly to build and maintain. During non-peak ,uk, a "_`" A r times, like overnight, much of 3+7` '- that infrastructure would sit .. ; -- unused. ..al.-- :iiiisidif .as 1"" On the opposite side of the LOS C spectrum, a Level of Service rating of E and F represent traffic Detailed Analysis operations close to breaking A signal Timing,Corridor Evaluation down, or that already have. (Mico-Scopic * ,tiN t .� ;- These ratings mean high delays, a - Operational Analysts ! a o Intersection Needs,Geometric Dedslons gs long queues, and slow speeds, (Macro-scopic Analysis) not to mention driver frustration. 1 AI preliminary Engineering _-- "- --__--- other, government raft one or the Js reaesheet/FomwlaAnalysls) Instead of trying to achieve ROW Needs,Cost Estimates' LOS D = Acceptable agencies try to strike a balance ?tannins(Level between rovidin acce table Long Term wens,ROW Needs p g p (Generalized tosTables) operations, neither falling nor ` flowing too freely. Because Effort/Complexity omm+ t1k4 -_ . i' of this, LOS D is typically Source:Florida Deptarment of Transportation r. , 4 considered the lowest LOS ..,....,,t1'.›�.W •_ -�-- acceptable by government ,- .41-3/.- agencies and is reflective of a .' ,',..y balanced approach between LOS F = Unacceptable cost and benefit. Source:City of San Jose,CA. Resources • Florida Department of Transportation Quality/Level of Service •Highway Capacity Manual,fifth edition Handbook • • Nation Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 616; http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programslsm/ Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets los/odfs/2009FDOTQLOS Handbook.pdf • http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlineoubs/nchrp/nchrp rpt 616. pdf About This Brief Spack Consulting prepared this brief as part of our company's vision to significantly improve the practice of traffic engineering and transportation planning. Transportation professionals from around the world have assisted us in developing this document. We are providing this brief under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Feel free to use-modify-share this guide, but please give us some credit in your document. To request our whole series of Design Briefs and to be included on our distribution list for new materials, please email mspack@spackconsulting.com. And please reach out if you have any comments or questions related to this Design Brief. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS E2 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup CM Generated withG is VISTRO coNsuLnNc Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM Scenario 1 Existing Weekend AM Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro 2/13/2018endA Report File: C:\...\Existing Weekend AM.pdf Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Vernon Ave & Interlachen HCM 6th NEB Left 0.459 22.0 C 1 Blvd Signalized Edition HCM 6th SB Thru 0.011 9.5 A 2 Vernon Ave &Summit Ave Two-way stop Edition Interlachen Blvd &Summit HCM 6th SWB Thru 0.000 16.4 C Two-way stop 3 Ave/Brookside Ave Edition HCM 6th EB Thru 0.000 9.3 A 4 Summit Ave &Site Access Two-way stop Edition HCM 6th SEB Right 0.000 9.5 A 5 Vernon Ave &Site Access Two-way stop Edition Interlachen Blvd &Site HCM 6th 6 Two-way stop Edition NEB Left 0.003 14.1 B Access V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop,these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest) delay value.for all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 1 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS Fl Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with lan VISTRO E, IM Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 22.0 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.459 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration )Y 1(1► 1 I. ) 1 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 0 ' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 108 258 169 88 298 48 24 57 27 239 82 108 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 0 C 34 10 5 C. , 22 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 108 258 135 88 298 38 24 57 22 239 82 86 Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 28 67 35 23 78 10 6 15 6 62 21 22 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 113 269 141 92 310 40 25 59 23 249 85 90 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] 0 Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossin,t 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F2 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withEin VISTRO ego Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Located in CBD No Signal Coordination Group - Cycle Length[s] 80 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 0.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group 4 3 8 2 0 0 6 C Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead/Lag Lead Minimum Green[s] 5 5 5 5 5 fi Maximum Green[s] 0 30 0 30 30 30 30 0 Amber[s] 0-0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0 3.0 C C ( ' 3.0 C All red[s] 0-J 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0 . 1.0 ',2 1.0 Split[s] 0 35 16 51 C 29 ., 29 Vehicle Extension[s] )C0 3.0 u_0 3.0 3.0 0 C C 5 3.0 0(: 0 0 3.0 0 Walk[s] 5 0 5 5 c C 5 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 10 ,. 10 10 10 Rest In Walk No No No No 11,Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.0 0 0 2.0 2.0 0 C, 2.0 2.0 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 0 t 2.0 C.0 2.0 2.0 C n 2.0 C , C 2.0 Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No Detector Location[ft] `,tC € , C , Ci C . . C 0 Detector Length[ft] C 0 5 0 i C ,,' I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group 0 Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F3 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Mg VISTRO `; Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSOLING Lane Group Calculations Lane Group C C L C C L C L C C,Cycle Length[s] 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 L,Total Lost Time per Cycle[s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 (:0A? 2.00 2.00 :;, 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 21 21 5 30 30 42 42 42 42 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.26 0.26 0.07 0.38 0.38 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 (v/s)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.22 0.19 0.05 0.09 0.10 0.02 0.05 0.19 0.10 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1037 1570 1781 1870 1796 1209 1782 1316 1714 c,Capacity[veh/h] 340 413 120 712 684 624 925 712 890 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 29.43 26.77 36.71 16.96 16.98 12.76 9.69 13.72 10.30 k,delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 2.24 2.34 9.74 0.18 0.19 0.12 0.19 1.35 0.49 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capacity 0.67 0.72 0.77 0.25 0.25 0.04 0.09 0.35 0.20 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 31.67 29.11 46.45 17.14 17.17 12.88 9.88 15.08 10.79 Lane Group LOS C C D B B B A B B Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 4.25 5.20 2.06 2.17 2.11 0.26 0.72 2.98 1.64 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 106.27 129.91 51.42 54.27 52.86 6.60 17.96 74.49 41.03 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 7.63 8.93 3.70 3.91 3.81 0.48 1.29 5.36 2.95 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 190.80 223.37 92.55 97.69 95.15 11.89 32.33 134.08 I 73.85 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F4 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withgis VISTRO CONSULTINGI Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM Version 5.00-00 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 31.67 30.19 29.11 46.45 17.15 17.17 12.8 C C C D B B 9..88 9..88 15.08 10.79 10B 30 .22 23 .25 9 Movement LOS 10.58 13.31 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] B B I Approach LOS C C d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] C 21.96 I Intersection LOS 0.459 Intersection V/C Other Modes 9.0 9 0 9.0 g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[Wiped_ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[ft'/ped 0.00 31.51 31.51 31.51 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 31.51 2 221 2.218 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 2.808 2.513B B B Crosswalk LOS C 2000 2000 2000 s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 1175 625 625 c_b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicycles/I-] 775 01 6.81 18.91 18.91 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 15. 1.744 2.296 I 1.933 b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.019 A B Bicycle LOS B A Sequence - - - - - - - Ring 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 2 6 - 8 - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - Ring 3 - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - Ring 4 - - - - - - - r I X0. " � � '` 0011,:2'; ��g 4 �� o-�, �5 •,,'-„,;,,,,,,:,-.,..,:,,,;,',,,,,,,;",'„,,'.,4.,.ki,�p 'arc'� 156 1 __.__-__..__ .. ..l 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F5 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup cm Generated with rill VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 2:Vernon Ave&Summit Ave 9.5 Two-waystopDelay(sec/veh): Control Type: Level Of Service: A Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition 0.011A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): Intersection Setup Vernon Ave Summit Ave Vernon Ave Name Vernon Approach Southbound Northeastbound Lane Configuration r i i i I Turning Movement Left Thru Left Thru Thru Right 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width[ft] 0 0 0 0 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.0,_ Pocket Length[ft] 100.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Speed[mph] 0.00 0.00 Grade ph] 0.00 Yes Yes Crosswalk Yes VolumesVernon Ave Summit Ave Vernon Ave I Name 369 21 0 9 0 433 Base Volume Input[veh/h] 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 2 00 2 00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 1.00 1.00 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Rate I 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 l Diverted Trips[vehlh] 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 o I 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[vehlh] 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 Other Volume[vehlh] 433 369 21 1 0 9 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 1.0000 0.9600 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0 1.0000 Other Adjustment Factor113 96 5 0 a 2 Total 15-Minute Volume[vehlh] 451 384 22 0 g 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 0 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 1.0000 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F6 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 9.53 ; t' Movement LOS A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.030.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.85 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 9.53 0.00 0.00 Approach LOS A A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.10 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F7 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO Qgm Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSUL TnNG Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 3:Interlachen Blvd&Summit Ave/Brookside Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 16.4 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration t it 4 r it Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 PocketLength[ft] (2202 i; ' '( ,r 10( 50.00 (2 21 r,_ .1 1J2([, Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 (° 2 108 0 16 2 189 83 17 283 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor , (..",' 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] ; I 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.�J(, 2, I' , 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] ., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 2, C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 C 2 108 0 16 2 189 83 17 283 0 Peak Hour Factor 1 02((: 61100 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 Other Adjustment Factor 1.(( 112 `x.221(1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 0 ii 1 29 0 4 1 51 23 5 77 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 0 2 117 I 0 I 17 2 205 I 90 18 I 308 I 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F8 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] G Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 9.93 16.39 16.45 12.43 7.88 7.88 C c' Movement LOS A C C B A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.01 1.19 1.19 1.19 0.59 0.59 0.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] C C ; I C 0.21 29.64 29.64 129.64 14.78 14.78 0.00 25.77 I 25.77 25.77 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 9.93 15.89 0.05 0.44 Approach LOS A C A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 3.04 Intersection LOS C 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F9 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO [No Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 4:Summit Ave&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 9.3 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 E:_>6.. No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 C 0 0 0 00 C; C Pocket Length[ft] r, : :t A1C 10r C; 1' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 13 7 0 0 2 0 16 0 6 0 C Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I : );; i Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 ,. _ Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 C0 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C- L Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C C Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 13 7 0 0 2 0 16 0 6 0 C Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 1 L,", C Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 _ Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 3 2 0 0 1 0 4 0 2 U CC 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 14 I 7 I 0 0 I 2 I 0 17 0 I 6 C C C Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F10 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with CM VISTRO CONSULTINGs3 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM Intersection Settings Stop Priority Scheme Free Free Stop No Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] No Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.o. 8.83 9.33 8.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 7.24 0,00 0.00 7.23 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 1.78 1.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 4.83 0.00 8.72 0.00 A A A Approach LOS A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 6.56 A Intersection LOS 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F11 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO irm coNsuLT,NG Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1: 1 Existing Weekend AM Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 5:Vernon Ave&Site Access (sec/veh): 9.5 Control Type: Two-way stop Delay A Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup 1 Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Site Access IApproach Northeastbound Southwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration III IF r Turning Movement Left I Thru Thru I Right Left I Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 I 12.00 I No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 I o _ 1l Pocket Length[ft] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Speed[mph] I 0.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 1 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 433 387 I 1 9 0 I Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0'7 0".17 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 09 1.0000 o ?in.i 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.09 2.00 I Heavy Vehicles Percentage[/o] Growth Rate 1 0 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 'i_9:: 1.00 0 0 0 G 0 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 ,, 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 r, 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 9 0 o 0 Ii 0 1 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 C 0 I 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 433 387 1 0 Peak Hour Factor i.:i_,"i I 0.9600 0.9600 I 0.9600 :W. 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor - 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 in 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 113 101 0 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] ,, 451 403 1 0 I 0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F12 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO =El Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSVLTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median .. Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio �0 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] ( .O 9.47 Movement LOS A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.00 0.00 0.00 r: 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 n) I 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 0.00 0.00 9.47 Approach LOS A A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.00 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F13 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with ag VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 6:Interlachen Blvd&Site Access 14.1 Two-waystop Delay(sec/veh): Control Type: Level Of Service: B Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.003 Intersection Setup ISite Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd I! Name Southeastbound Approach Northeastbound Northwestbound Lane Configuration li I Turning Movement Left I Right Left I Thru Thru I Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 I 12.00 12.00 I 12.00 I No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 o I o o I o I Pocket Length[ft] .- I, '" ('`' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 0.00 I Grade[% 0.00 ] 0.00I Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Name 272 412 1 Base Volume Input[veh/h] 1 0 p I Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 I 0 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 !I I 0 I Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 272 412 I 1 0 I Other Volume[veh/h] 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 1 I Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 I 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I 1.00000 I 71 107 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 1 I0 0 I 283 429 I 1 I 0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F14 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Win VISTRO 12733 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1: 1 Existing Weekend AM coNsut.,NG Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ r , 5 ( (,:' d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 14.05 10.78 8.19 ( p ;,; Movement LOS B B A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.19 I 0.19 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 14.05 0.00 0.00 Approach LOS B A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.02 Intersection LOS B 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F15 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Cal VISTRO =Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM CONSUL TING Lane Configuration and Traffic Control ,. ; • 1 .. P ' V:IANs . „.4 4 Nor.. . _ { F r - , r a""4 ,#mak k w. + ' ' 'ir ' . ' - — 11". i4 0 , ' '* pio4 • k - . — 1 '," . 11-'2'77'',f`::;,4: ril—-1, '-',4... . ' , ...y., . et.vv, ' , , - -� :. r i �} � 3 7 i i F+l. \ ''" , 4 .... "_. .' . a '•`^ eta (:4\::: ------:.>" 77------ ------;/ (C\--- . IC)r+tio ....<.01 _ /,_://' __ \\, ___ r 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F16 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with VISTRO �; Version 5.00-00 Scenario 1:1 Existing Weekend AM ccNsu . o Traffic Volume- Base Volume i s- cru ' ' a' �. • ,.. o oelk1 f ,. 111.0 0< :if 41-110,,,, , . ,,, ; ,4 n_ry IA ' . r; F. �c1. a <ti b Cii ,0,49 C) to '1.N,,-.3 C) 0 CVO , \...._. % ,____ A 5g 1°g (-----------) \. ) ,... 5„ 7 \ o 6 ( r �ggg i.':)-4c)rOje»M N�o-a ,) 0 a C) p Z.°. N ,The, ..,__,\I„...„2 O 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F17 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO 7 23 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro Scenario 2 Existing Weekday AM Report File: C:\...\Existing Weekday AM.pdf 2/13/2018 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 Vernon Ave & Interlachen Signalized HCM 6th NEB Left 0.573 25.5 C Blvd Edition 2 Vernon Ave & Summit Ave Two-way stop HCM 6th Edition SB Thru 0.013 10.3 B 3 Interlachen Blvd &Summit HCM 6th Two-way stop SWB Left 0.678 40.4 E Ave/Brookside Ave Edition 4 Summit Ave &Site Access Two-way stopHCM 6th y Edition EB Thru 0.000 9.2 A 5 Vernon Ave &Site Access Two-way stop HCM 6th Edition SEB Right 0.001 10.3 B 6 Interlachen Blvd &Site HCM 6th Two-way stop NEB Left 0.000 19.2 C Access Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop,these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest)delay value.for all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F18 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with en VISTRO cm Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 25.5 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.573 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration r( 1( 1 _ 11' )F Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left ThruRight Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] ,e,:' (., . r ' .;0 r0 0. ;0. , 1(0,r 100 0 10:.100 1.0';0 1 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 72 389 244 93 335 40 39 76 8 347 131 169 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 49 8 2 c H, 34 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 72 389 195 93 335 32 39 76 6 347 131 135 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 19 102 51 24 88 8 10 20 2 91 34 36 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 76 409 205 98 353 34 41 80 6 365 138 142 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] , 0 Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0 C r, 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing n 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F19 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis �����U� Backup , Generated with �0�I v|sTno ��N�� �� ��� Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM "ONSU`""° Intersection Settings Located in COD No Signal Coordination Group Cycle Length[s] 90 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 2.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group 4 u 3 8 ^ . 2 o o 6 C Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead!Lag Lead Minimum GreepV o 5 n 5 5 o 5 : o 5 . Maximum n 30 o 30 30 '. ^ 30o u 30o Amber[s] ^" 3.0 no 3.0 3.0 nn ,c 3.0 n' nc 3.0 cu _ All red[s] no 1.0 C 1.0 1.0 no 1.0 on no 1.0 oc Split[s] u 37 n 16 53 n u 37 o 0 37 o Vehicle Extensio [s] on 3.0 oo 3.0 3.0 0o uo 3.0 oo 0n 3.0 oo Walk[s] ^ 5 o n 5 u c 5 o ^ 5 o Pedestrian Clearance[s[ u 10 o u 10 u u 10 o ,, 10 o Rest In Walk No No No No n.Start-Up Lost Time[s] o'` 2.0 nr 2.0 2.0 ,n uo 2.0 c'. uu 2.0 co 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] o' 2.0 o 2.0 2.0 uo oo 2.0 o,' uu 2.0 vu ^ Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No . Detector Location[ft] ou oo co ^n oo po Y co no an uo no Detector Length[ft] oo un uv , n , ' oz uo ou . o . , po I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1z0 1z0 1.00 1z0 1.00 1z0 1z0 1z0 1z0 1z0 1z0 1z0 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group » Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F20 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrig VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM coNwinae Lane Group Calculations ILane Group C C L C C L C L I C 1 C,Cycle Length[s] 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 1L,Total Lost Time per Cycle Es] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 : ii,,, c 2.00 2.00 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 25 25 6 35 35 47 47 47 47 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.28 0.28 0.07 0.39 0.39 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 (v/s)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.24 0.23 0.06 0.10 0.11 0.04 0.05 0.28 0.16 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1382 1546 1781 1870 1813 1099 1847 1311 1716 c,Capacity[veh/h] 429 425 129 732 710 521 960 699 892 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 31.71 30.84 41.03 18.63 18.65 16.77 10.90 17.38 12.42 k,delay calibration 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 3.71 5.24 8.94 0.19 0.20 0.29 0.18 2.77 0.92 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capacity 0.77 0.84 0.76 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.09 0.52 I 0.31 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 35.42 36.08 49.97 18.82 18.85 17.07 11.08 20.15 13.34 Lane Group LOS D D D B B B B C B Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 7.18 7.74 2.43 2.74 2.68 0.56 0.87 5.75 I 3.28 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 179.54 193.58 60.73 68.50 67.02 13.92 21.78 143.70 81.94 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 11.58 12.31 4.37 4.93 4.83 1.00 1.57 9.68 5.90 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 289.41 307.67 109.31 123.30 120.64 25.06 39.21 241.99 147.49 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F21 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with IVi11 VISTRO emo Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 35.42 35.67 36.08 49.97 18.83 18.85 17.07 11.08 11.08 20.15 13.34 13.34 Movement LOS D I D D D B B B B B CIBIB d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 35.77 25.13 13.02 17.19 Approach LOS D C B B d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 25.48 Intersection LOS C Intersection V/C 0.573 Other Modes g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[ftp/ped; 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[ftp/ped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 3.079 2.589 2.178 2.351 Crosswalk LOS C B B B s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicycles/r] 733 1089 733 733 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 18.05 9.34 18.05 18.05 I_b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.169 1.966 1.772 2.680 Bicycle LOS B A A B Sequence Ring 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 2 6 - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I :a 1 s h 4i , I1,:':',':,;:-.".-44.7t,5 7 ..4, 1111111).§_s_____] -15$ l 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F22 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO Qp:13 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 2:Vernon Ave&Summit Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 10.3 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: B Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.013 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Approach Southbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Lane Configuration ( I I I I Turning Movement Left Thru Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.0012.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 9 0 476 573 14 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1,0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehides Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 a Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] a 9 0 476 573 14 Peak Hour Factor 1.00. 0.9500 1.0000 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 0 2 0 125 151 4 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 0 9 0 501 603 15 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F23 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withprig VISTRO .,. Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 r� d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 10.31 I ^. Movement LOS B A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 10.31 0.00 0.00 Approach LOS B A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.08 Intersection LOS B 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F24 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Mil VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 3:Interlachen Blvd&Summit Ave/Brookside Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 40.4 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: E Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.678 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration F it d r if Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket _. _ 0 0 ., 0 0 1 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] i C; .;.`, , o 50.00 1;;-J 0.) 1,0 0 1, !.,. Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 2 190 1 20 2 272 93 15 431 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor i.OC `,uC ri. 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2 00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.CC i,1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 r,, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] ., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] C, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 1 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] o ii 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 0 2 190 i 1 20 2 272 93 15 431 0 Peak Hour Factor Cr,1 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 Other Adjustment Factor I C. 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 1 51 0 5 1 73 25 4 116 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] iI I 2 204 I 1 I 22 2 I 292 I 100 16 463 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F25 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mg VISTRO c1 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 0.00 0.00 11.03 40.36 39.82 33.22 8.28 0.00 0.00 8.13 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B E E D A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.00 0.00 0.01 5.10 5.10 5.10 1.09 1.09 0.00 2.04 2.04 2.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.00 0.00 0.25 127.57 127.57 127.57 27.13 27.13 0.00 51.04 51.04 51.04 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 11.03 39.66 0.04 0.27 Approach LOS B E A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 8.32 Intersection LOS E 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F26 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrzi VISTRO goo Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 4:Summit Ave&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 9.2 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration I . Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 2. No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 r. r Pocket Length[ft] i,.r "' r.:', i L i 0 ,' ,;,_it 1 ,r, Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 ?_',,i Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 r ,' Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 11 3 0 0 4 0 6 0 4 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I ; 2i" ; :,2, 1 ; Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _. Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i r. Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r (, Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 11 3 0 0 4 0 6 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 3 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 12 I 3 I 0 0 4 0 6 0 4 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F27 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mi VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2'2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 7.24 0.00 0.00 7.22 0.00 0.00 8.74 9.24 8.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 5.79 0.00 8.59 0.00 Approach LOS A A A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 5.96 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F28 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with lain VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 5:Vernon Ave&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 10.3 Analysis Method. HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: B Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.001 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Site Access Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration I I I I I' r Turning Movement Left Thru Thru Right Left Right Lane Width[ft] : 12.00 12.00 12.00 2 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] „, ,,0 :, ,l:, Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 476 588 1 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor ` 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 OH" 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2:o 2.00 2.00 2.00 .. 2.00 Growth Rate x.01) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] (2 0 0 0 t 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] .. 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] t. 0 0 0 (1 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 476 588 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0 ,: 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 a 0'....,` 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 125 155 0 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 501 619 1 I 1 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F29 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with TM VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio u0 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 0 00 ( 10.26 Movement LOS A A A B 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] C uO 0.00 0.00 0.00 rs,r?,i 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 0.11 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 0.00 0.00 10.26 Approach LOS A A B d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.01 Intersection LOS B 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F30 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with IMI VISTROf! Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 6:Interlachen Blvd&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 19.2 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration j 1 Turning Movement Left Right Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket o 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] i;,.00 ,, , ,00 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 0 1 361 630 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 0 1 361 630 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 95 166 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 0 0 1 380 663 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F31 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrig VISTRO emu Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTNG Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,,:' d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 19.23 12.81 8.89 ii') Movement LOS C B A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.00 0.00 2.04 2.04 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.00 I 0.00 50.93 50.93 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 16.02 0.02 0.00 Approach LOS C A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.01 Intersection LOS C 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F32 Spack Consulting / Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with EMI VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSULTING Lane Configuration and Traffic Control " fit .. ' • . ..+ s ' / l ..:., ...,....,,.., . ____ . . • ., , ,, . , . i.., 4 ' tM1�, k ‘ — ___ . , . . , it, , . . t, a iN, j<Tft)iiissar, .'. r ` NiLI F 0 . , �H. y P -r- , i a a } . t' . t (-----1,1, +------ (-----) -----k (------ r 0 v • ** * A ---r -Ir_ Y.-- \(' /zv ___ _ 4•,\r (I) ) .--- * •, --- (----)\ /.-'' '''' __) )---.O 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F33 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with glia VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 2:2 Existing Weekday AM CONSVrnNG Traffic Volume- Base Volume y ;t uA « im' x ➢ i :. ntY f rRN ih , 1116: sV 4 0;;041) '''' \ r ' - * " '' . '' N % w.i, t'''' Si &t {i`i ;, r: €t ' 2 3 O1ol,9T o *...R.3 a2 6 ) 6L. %;‘'b 0-1 ••••_11 i 0 ---. 35o -Th4 "'t9a'� a N dc� o ‘'N''''"---:, ---- w IC) o � ! Opp 1R___... 580 ) \ f A'16 O )::_...A \:5_.,>i u6 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F34 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO am Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSVLPNG Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro Scenario 3 Build Weekend AM Report File: C:\...\Build Weekend AM.pdf 2/13/2018 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 Vernon Ave & Interlachen Signalized HCM 6th NEB Left 0.494 22.3 C Blvd Edition 2 Vernon Ave &Summit Ave Two-way stop HCM 6th Edition SB Thru 0.011 9.6 A 3 Interlachen Blvd & Summit Two-way stop HCM 6th SWB Thru 0.000 16.6 C Ave/Brookside Ave Edition 4 Summit Ave & Site Access Two-way stop HCM 6th Edition EB Thru 0.000 9.4 A 6 Interlachen Blvd &Site Two-way stop HCM 6th NEB Left 0.086 18.5 C Access Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest)delay value. for all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F35 Spack Consulting 1 Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with 1211 VISTRO emp Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 22.3 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.494 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration Yr 7(14 11 1 )I Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 0 .: o; I I i:: . 1(:r_ 10 0 i:'-), ;: Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 108 258 169 88 298 48 24 57 27 239 82 108 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 -22 22 15 -15 0 0 0 0 15 0 26 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 40 10 6 1. L 28 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 110 241 159 110 289 39 24 58 22 264 84 112 Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 29 63 41 29 75 10 6 15 6 69 22 29 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 115 251 166 115 301 41 25 60 23 275 88 117 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] i Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0, 0 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F36 Spack Consulting 1/4 Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Mg VISTRO Emu Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Located in CBD No Signal Coordination Group - Cycle Length[s] 80 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 0.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group 4 3 8 2 I 6 Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead/Lag Lead Minimum Green[s] 5 5 5 5 C 5 Maximum Green[s] C 30 30 30 .. C. 30 C 30 Amber[s] C C 3.0 3.0 3.0 C C C 3.0 ."Ci C C 3.0 Allred[s] CC 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 CCC ,It1.0 C4 Split[s] C 35 16 51 CC 29 ., 29 Vehicle Extension[s] C C 3.0 3.0 3.0 - 3.0 3.0 C C Walk[s] 5 .. ,. 5 0 _ 5 5 C. Pedestrian Clearance[s] _ 10 C 10 CC 0 10 0 10 Rest In Walk No No No No 11,Start-Up Lost Time[s] CC 2 2.0 C C 2.0 2.0 0 0 C C 2.0 : C 2.0 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] C C 2.0 b 2.0 2.0 C C C.0 2.0 . .. 2.0 Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No Detector Location[ft] C c..0 '-( ..C Detector Length[ft] C C : . ,I I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group 0 Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F37 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with UM VISTRO CM Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM coNSV r N Lane Group Calculations Lane Group C C L C C L C L C C,Cycle Length[s] 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 L,Total Lost Time per Cycle[s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 ��� 2.00 5_e 2.00 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 21 21 7 32 32 40 40 40 40 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 (v/5)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.22 0.19 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.05 0.21 0.12 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1065 1549 1781 1870 1793 1177 1783 1315 1699 c,Capacity[veh/h] 346 406 149 739 709 576 900 691 857 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 29.47 27.00 35.95 16.14 16.15 14.09 10.30 14.92 11.17 k,delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 2.33 2.58 8.22 0.16 0.17 0.14 0.20 1.71 0.66 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capacity 0.68 0.73 0.77 0.23 0.24 0.04 0.09 0.40 0.24 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 31.80 29.58 44.17 16.30 16.33 14.23 10.51 16.63 11.83 Lane Group LOS C C D B B B B B B Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 4.40 5.26 2.49 2.05 1.99 0.28 0.76 3.53 2.05 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 110.11 131.53 62.30 51.29 49.85 7.07 18.99 88.18 51.37 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 7.85 9.02 4.49 3.69 3.59 0.51 1.37 6.35 3.70 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 196.16 I 225.58 112.13 92.32 89.73 12.72 34.18 158.72 92.46 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F38 Speck Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mg VISTRO c;!23 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 31.80 30.64 29.58 44.17 16.31 16.33 14.23 10.51 10.51 16.63 11.83 11.83 Movement LOS C I C I C D I B I B B I B I B BIB IB d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 30.56 23.32 11.37 14.58 Approach LOS C C B B d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 22.28 Intersection LOS C Intersection V/C 0.494 Other Modes g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[ft'/ped; 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[ft'/ped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 2.862 2.518 2.228 2.265 Crosswalk LOS C B B B s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicycles/11 775 1175 625 625 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 15.01 6.81 18.91 18.91 I_b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.032 1.945 1.748 2.398 Bicycle LOS B A A B Sequence Ring 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 2 6 - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4 - i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - """:4:",-;,‘..-444„, ,;'-'"---147,`',41,..W-,:,‘,4:,--,",--,• „;::,'„,„,',,:';'.7 5s,-i4'',.----.•,,--';'7„',:::-7,": ill inrifrt' , 15tt -15s 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F39 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 2:Vernon Ave&Summit Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 9.6 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.011 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Approach Southbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Lane Configuration 1 i 1 I I. Turning Movement Left Thru Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 2, 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 1 ; : O. Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Base Volume Input[veh/h] o 9 0 433 369 21 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1 0 J ,, 1.0000 ����,; 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2 0, 2.00 2 OG 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1 01 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] _ 0 t: 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 5 4 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 1-1 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] ' 0 0 0 0 4 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 e 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 r 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 2 9 447 380 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 2 116 99 7 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 9 I 466 396 26 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F40 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with IMEI VISTRO C733 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULrWG Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 9.58 , , Movement LOS A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.86 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 9.58 0.00 0.00 Approach LOS A A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.10 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F41 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Cala VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 3:Interlachen Blvd&Summit Ave/Brookside Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 16.6 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration F -41r 4r if Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 2(. 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 0 2 108 0 16 2 189 83 17 283 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1 C00 1.2200: 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 't 1i 2 20 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1 ,, 1 00 1.00 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 t.! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 2 111 0 16 2 196 86 17 292 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 0.9400 Other Adjustment Factor _ 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 1 30 0 4 1 52 23 5 78 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] I 2 118 0 17 2 209 91 18 311 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F42 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withgig VISTRO um Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio r)0 0,00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] U.O3 0.00 9.95 16.60 16.64 12.57 7.89 0,00 0.00 7.90 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A C C B A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.00 0.00 0.01 1.22 1.22 1.22 0.61 0.61 0.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.00 0.00 0.21 30.38 30.38 30.38 15.17 15.17 0.00 26.24 26.24 26.24 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 9.95 16.09 0.05 0.43 Approach LOS A C A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 3.06 Intersection LOS C 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F43 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Mg VISTRO •�� Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 4:Summit Ave&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 9.4 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration + +F► Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 u %C No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 1. 0 0 0 0 0 r, 0 C Pocket Length[ft] : 1'' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 13 7 0 0 2 0 16 0 6 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 :', 1 ; " Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2 z Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 , In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 r Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 _ Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 13 7 4 0 2 0 16 0 6 r C Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 i Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 3 2 1 0 1 0 4 0 2 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 14 I 7 I 4 0 I 2 I 0 17 0 6 v Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F44 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrim VISTRO R+ Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 7.24 0.00 0.00 7.24 0.00 0.00 8.84 9.35 8.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 1.17 1.17 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.79 1.79 1.79 0.00 0.00 0 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 4.06 0.00 8.73 0.00 Approach LOS A A A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 6.04 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F45 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mi VISTRO 'r Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 6:Interlachen Blvd&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 18.5 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.086 Intersection Setup Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration I 1 Turning Movement Left Right Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 33 0,0 C 0 = : 133 0' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 1 0 0 272 412 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 4 9 10 0 0 4 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 21 83 58 -21 -42 42 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 26 92 68 256 378 47 Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 7 24 18 67 98 12 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 27 96 71 I 267 394 49 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F46 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withcin VISTRO Elm Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.09 0.15 0.06 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 18.54 12.81 8.44 Movement LOS C B A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.91 0.91 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 22.85 I 22.85 32.12 I 32.12 0.00 I 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 14.07 1.77 0.00 Approach LOS B A A d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 2.58 Intersection LOS C 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F47 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withara VISTRO (2 �' Version 5.00 00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CONSULTING Lane Configuration and Traffic Control I,.. i, irit I Y G.. a.rs'4'k ff x. Yf 33 I In,. ' 4. „,,,to , i., i , :,,, '° • ,'., ,,,,\ 1, iii LA -,...Q.,„•,:,,, , a » .,. i 4 ' ' *N." illik 4 ' .1.'1.4?" 1 1 -ilk i,„ ,. q, q4, W 1 _ w tf+ • + es • t tri faltlQ- n.xJ €_ -,` .w y, 0 . ,.-- C) 'it. ( --\___-:, ----'' (--------4() ,/, .)\ ..>___ C)\:)t" _ ..,\:\___y /_,:// r 'N (-----)\ 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F48 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withinll VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CON5V1 nNG Traffic Volume- Base Volume a ' ,fir mw v i.. � 1IC , � l +�•" 1'##. �5 , yam, 'k0,‘,.., f R, r°e m, a y pp t _ 1M , v_ ;,. .. j$ i i f 4 '- —."?"4s„1.,'-' „,lM $ L.y :,,,4:::;:'''''''*„... 4.0 1 * f ' y Rpt, k” c v til F ...„,.., ,. „, , , ,,, .„ #s. w rw ., .„., , .„� , 1` ; r t? , . a Es �C Ihl C) (-0 C) (0 ICD((----Z? 1;\c) s.e „. —if( iri °,„\10 ) k..„ 4, 256 �j. 61 ....)°1-' aa� ” e).9 w,-lo -(....----) s C) Q 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F49 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrifill VISTRO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM cohsvu NG Traffic Volume- Net New Site Trips as r4,4 3 A 4• ` I r t V } ;wig,. ri } ( . awe ; "M a i� . 1 8 1,1 a ' ,. O/ \ C) ® 0 ® C'0To ''' V li( 0 21 ) 7 0 \\ ° Jt zo5 � V J� R\ i.\ ( '\ (P. h / 0 CP) 001' o �'a i cl- 0`)i 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F50 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO �; Version 5.00-00 Scenario 3:3 Build Weekend AM CO SU TN-, Traffic Volume- Future Total Volume .a. ." r a �,. , W. t , W. ,1 • -. r ik- 01. ��41 • _ v .m ` roc c _ /" ". �s API - ! n dfa r' c�' r„� �.} �,+ ,.-,ma�,yy � ,.. ,.ai .. fey".: S+a.� � �+�"'. ,'* n igr'd_ 1 S i q °i wn rV1i 4 ' .,1 L �F I r �r -)% s '. ' l s i - v. i res. 1 ,.♦ F µ. rst: t! , iSr, oak o o .o- o ONO 'o \_, 3 � zoo 09? � � .. � ( 6 -- 4 106 i 1.% '- \ \ 9�a� Qp c'45. WJ} SC) '''.4 f'j 1J8 -'..-''''''\\\\I 4ti *2 as s s F51 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrzei VISTRO CM Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSUL TWG Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro Scenario 4 Build Weekday AM Report File: C:\...\Build Weekday AM.pdf 2/13/2018 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 Vernon Ave & Interlachen Signalized HCM 6th NEB Left 0.618 26.5 C Blvd Edition 2 Vernon Ave &Summit Ave Two-waystopHCM 6th Edition SB Thru 0.013 10.4 B 3 Interlachen Blvd & Summit HCM 6th Two-way stop SWB Left 0.725 46.3 E Ave/Brookside Ave Edition 4 Summit Ave &Site Access Two-way stopHCM 6th y Edition EB Thru 0.000 9.3 A 6 Interlachen Blvd &Site HCM 6th Two-way stop NEB Left 0.181 32.5 D Access Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest) delay value. for all other control types,they are taken for the whole intersection. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F52 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with rila VISTRO IMO Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 26.5 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.618 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration 1Y 11 44 )1* Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] ,(. , , „C, i Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 72 389 244 93 335 40 39 76 8 347 131 169 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 -27 27 19 -19 0 0 0 0 19 0 32 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 0 _ 56 .. 8 2 :. G 42 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 73 370 226 120 323 33 40 78 6 378 134 167 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 ' 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 19 97 59 32 85 9 11 21 2 99 35 44 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 77 389 238 126 340 35 42 82 6 398 141 176 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] 0 - `' C Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0 `' c 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing n 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing ni 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F53 Spack Consulting I Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with cm VISTRO , Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Located in CBD No Signal Coordination Group - Cycle Length[s] 90 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 2.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group (. 4 3 8 _ 2 C 6 , Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead/Lag Lead Minimum Green[s] C 5 5 5 5 C, 5 in Maximum Green[s] C 30 30 30 30 C 30 0 Amber[s] C 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 C.0 G.0 3.0 0 0 All red[s] ti(i 1.0 0 1.0 1.0 0 0 C.0 1.0 CO J0 1.0 C C Split[s] 37 C 16 53 0 37 0 0 37 Vehicle Extension[s] 3.0 _ 3.0 3.0 3.0 C C 0 0 3.0 C C Walk[s] 0 5 0 C. 5 5 0 0 5 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 10 C 0 10 0 10 0 C 10 0 Rest In Walk No No No No I1,Start-Up Lost Time Es] 0 0 2.0 0 0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 C C 2.0 C 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] CC 2.0 2.0 2.0 _, C _ 2.0 0.0 C C 2.0 n C Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No Detector Location[ft] C_:) .,0 C 0 C 0 0 C 0.0 C 0 Detector Length[ft] „0 L. 0 . _ C 0 C C C r C.0 C i'_Q I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group 0 Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F54 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with gm VISTRO EMI CONSULTINGVersion 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM Lane Group Calculations Lane Group C C L C C L C L C C,Cycle Length[s] 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 L,Total Lost Time per Cycle[s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.i , 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 25 25 8 37 37 45 45 45 45 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.41 0.41 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 (v/s)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.24 0.24 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.05 0.30 0.19 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1419 1524 1781 1870 1810 1062 1848 1309 1703 c,Capacity[veh/h] 442 423 160 770 745 463 923 670 851 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 31.57 30.79 40.14 17.35 17.36 19.19 11.85 19.53 13.87 k,delay calibration 0.16 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 4.35 6.48 8.19 0.17 0.17 0.39 0.21 3.85 1.25 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capadty 0.78 0.85 0.79 0.25 0.25 0.09 0.10 0.59 0.37 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 35.92 37.27 48.33 17.51 17.54 19.58 12.06 23.38 15.12 Lane Group LOS D D D B _ B B B C B Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 7.53 7.91 3.06 2.54 2.48 0.62 0.94 6.91 4.04 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 188.32 197.71 76.56 63.47 61.98 15.57 23.54 172.87 101.07 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 12.03 12.52 5.51 4.57 4.46 1.12 1.69 11.23 7.28 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 300.85 313.01 137.82 114.25 111.56 28.02 42.37 280.68 181.92 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F55 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 35.92 36.34 F 37.27 48.33 17.52 17.54 19.58 12.06 12.06 23.38 15.12 15.12 Movement LOS D D D D I B I B B B I B C B I B d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 36.61 25.27 14.49 19.72 Approach LOS D C B B d_I,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 26.54 Intersection LOS C Intersection V/C 0.618 Other Modes g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[ft2/ped, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[ft2/ped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 3.145 2.598 2.182 2.411 Crosswalk LOS C B B B s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicyclesfr] 733 1089 733 733 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 18.05 9.34 18.05 18.05 l_b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.187 1.980 1.777 2.809 Bicycle LOS B A A C Sequence Ring 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 2 6 - 8 - - - - - - - Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r- � M r:.4462,,, 14 ''',,--, i Mt �•a ..k a I 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F56 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup , Generated with go VISTRO 'i SI Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 2:Vernon Ave&Summit Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 10.4 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: B Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.013 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Approach Southbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Lane Configuration r I I 11" Turning Movement Left Thru Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket Pocket Length[ft] 0 0 00.00 0 0 0 100.00 100.00 10100.00 100.00100.00 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 9 0 476 573 14 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.00 1.02 1.00 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 6 5 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 5 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 9 0 492 589 19 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 0.9500 1.0000 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 0 2 0 129 155 5 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 0 9 0 518 620 20 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F57 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mi VISTRO ©j ii Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane Storage Area[veil] Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 i U C(?,- d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 10.40 , rU -'''3 Movement LOS B A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.04 C i 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] I 1.01 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 10.40 0.00 0.00 Approach LOS B A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 0.08 Intersection LOS B 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F58 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO MS CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 3:Interlachen Blvd&Summit Ave/Brookside Ave Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 46.3 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: E Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.725 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound' Lane Configuration I. 4Sr r • Turning Movement Left I Thru I Right Left I Thru I Right Left I Thru I Right Left I Thru I Right Lane Width[ft] . . . 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0 C: 0 Pocket Length[ft] (D, ,-; ‘7 t_ 1. 50.00 10'12.; 1 V' -v Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[°A] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Brookside Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 2 190 1 20 2 272 93 15 431 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1 0,0,: i0.-G': 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2 00 2(.0 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.03 1.r.1 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] c? 0 2 0 0 0 3 2 0 3 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] :C1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 ,- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] o _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 0 C 2 196 1 20 2 280 97 15 443 0 Peak Hour Factor 1.0CC 1 1 0 3 1 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 Other Adjustment Factor 1 C!`.il 0 1"! 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 1 53 0 5 1 75 26 4 119 0 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] r, I2 2 211 I 1 22 2 301 104 16 476 0 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F59 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mg j i Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 0 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 0.00 0.00 11.13 46.32 45.71 38.82 8.32 0.00 0.00 8.16 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B E E E A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.00 0.00 0.01 5.80 5.80 5.80 1.15 1.15 0.00 2.17 2.17 2.17 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.00 0.00 0.26 145.12 145.12 145.12 28.68 28.68 0.00 54.34 54.34 54.34 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 11.13 45.61 0.04 0.27 Approach LOS B E A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 9.55 Intersection LOS E 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F60 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withEgg VISTRO C=3 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULfNG Intersection Level Of Service Report. Intersection 4:Summit Ave&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 9.3 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: A Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.000 Intersection Setup Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration + + 1 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 ... 0 , )0 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 _ 1 Pocket Length[ft] r tin : C,' r,:) i', r , i. _ 1 : ,,:. 11c 1 1 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 C C.. Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Summit Ave Summit Ave Site Access Base Volume Input[veh/h] 11 3 0 0 4 0 6 0 4 0 G Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 )2 1 1 C`, Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2'" . , _. Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 C Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . t 0 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 C Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C C Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 11 3 5 0 4 0 6 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 i I V Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 ._,.., 1 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 3 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 12 I 3 5 0 I 4 I 0 6 I 0 I 4 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F61 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mom Erm Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area[vehj 0 0 0 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 7.24 0.00 0.00 7.23 0.00 0.00 8.75 9.27 8.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 4.35 0.00 8.60 0.00 Approach LOS A A A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 5.09 Intersection LOS A 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F62 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO gm Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 6:Interlachen Blvd&Site Access Control Type: Two-way stop Delay(sec/veh): 32.5 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: D Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.181 Intersection Setup Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration sr 1 1* • Turning Movement Left Right Left Thru Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100,00 100.00 Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Site Access Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 0 0 1 361 630 0 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 5 10 12 0 0 5 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 26 102 72 -26 -51 51 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 31 112 85 342 592 56 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 8 29 22 90 156 15 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 33 I 118 89 360 623 59 Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F63 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with ICIEME Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Stop Free Free Flared Lane No Storage Area[veh] 0 0 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results V/C,Movement V/C Ratio 0.18 0.25 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.00 d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 32.48 20.39 9.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS D C A A A A 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 2.12 2.12 2.78 2.78 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 52.91 52.91 69.57 69.57 0.00 0.00 d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 23.03 1.86 0.00 Approach LOS C A A d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 3.36 Intersection LOS D 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F64 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Elmo Generated with Era VISTRO Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Lane Configuration and Traffic Control V /:„'� ; .w '• y ' i) t ....„;., „ ,,, , 10:,,,, .iirioT„...„ .;,-- :_c...„ .„, 21, ,,, ,..., ,, i,‘ . ... ' � � i r aas i 9 r ew X A. Y .MIT s + ^'tie �" ' r4 a _ - ( ) _ (,)sy,/ o (r4-- rg i ,iii --<----c) I.) �, r 0 Spack Consulting 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F65 Appendix F - mi Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with VISTRO 12 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM corsuL.wC, Traffic Volume Base Volume L ''''''''''''',12::: :lir :111. „,41.;$4::4,, '''''''''''''":11. 444"1 : :. 4 ii riti: '.°I I 1":14:4.44::774'''. ii '4 -::j'''' '.. .'.: '4 .1 i / , .a. c, . M _` !+. +$ t G i a Al' 4rill 4,-.1 on L:.J , 2 4.03 (*(4....Rt CisSr > f244 z 7 i 11o v\(.4?/ 310 ftp a� N c3 1"") ��O 0 (1)(0-6-------4' \ 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F66 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withgas VISTRO (4 123 Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Traffic Volume- Net New Site Trips "v. ,sr M :�,'a ,� a.. Tr 0 . O 3 ��, i! illi � v At k 1 ''''''- ' 6". 0 '''' 4 tii , x j• .. r, l}$ ,- • 0o4 l G ' p 1 .7 ) iZ ry O oao 7 el •,) : 10,...___ 3S ) 4, .21 'N ,k . )t l) �--- 0 \\N-s-------14 .."-' \ y 0 o O QpV, �1C) -S --\�J1 \ i i np....,,, .."--.111 ...-. ...,,,,,//) 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F67 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withrifia VISTRO QJ Version 5.00-00 Scenario 4:4 Build Weekday AM CONSULTING Traffic Volume- Future Total Volume t ,' "tis ; �. t; °" ,� W . ... : 333} 4+ a e ,� i� J x"� r� e M1 i W .xY Q � T " L , r , rr,, ()‘'01`P sr 1S .9 ..,........, ) bt .)\ *„. 202 310 ()(7-----: '--------'s./7 (----r,\----- ---/--f---,-----\\\h-Ao °40 ___,_, , _...... , 0 .... \,, , r ..____._„) .\,..,........._ f-,44N \:____,..„) V N c�O 1W� (--1‘1-' 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F68 Spack Consulting III Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withE al VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro Scenario 5 Build Weekend AM with Mitigation Report File: C:\...\Build Weekend AM with Mitigation - 2/23/2018 Vernon&I nterlachenpdf.pdf Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Vernon Ave & Interlachen HCM 6th NEB Left 0.306 21.1 C 1 Blvd Signalized Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest) delay value. for all other control types,they are taken for the whole intersection. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F69 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mg VISTRO ems CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 21.1 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.306 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestboundt` Southeastbound Lane Configuration 1)Y "at 11. I Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 Pocket Length[ft] _:, 1.; . :_,, o, ,.C. I ,.L' 100 0 CO00 190( 09 Cl' Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 108 258 169 88 298 48 24 57 27 239 82 108 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 -22 22 15 -15 0 0 0 0 15 0 26 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 0 C 40 10 6 28 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 110 241 159 110 289 39 24 58 22 264 84 112 Peak Hour Factor 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 29 63 41 29 75 10 6 15 6 69 22 29 Total Analysis Volume[vehlh] 115 251 166 115 301 41 25 60 23 275 88 117 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] C Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 00 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing rni 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F70 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withIsm VISTRO CPO CONSULTINGVersion 5.00-00 Intersection Settings Located in CBD No Signal Coordination Group - Cycle Length[s] 80 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 0.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group 0 4 0 3 8 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead/Lag - - - Lead - - - - - - - - Minimum Green[s] 0 5 0 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 Maximum Green[s] 0 30 0 30 30 0 0 30 0 0 30 0 Amber[s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 All red[s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0,0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Split[s] 0 39 0 16 55 0 0 25 0 0 25 0 Vehicle Extension[s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Walk[s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 Rest In Walk No No No No 11,Start-Up Lost Time[s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No Detector Location[ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Length[ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group 0 Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F71 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO ern Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Lane Group Calculations Lane Group L C C L C C L C L C C,Cycle Length[s] 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 L,Total Lost Time per Cycle[s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 I . 2.00 2.00 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 19 19 19 7 30 30 42 42 42 42 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.37 0.37 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 (v/s)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.05 0.11 0.12 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1038 1870 1628 1781 1870 1793 1177 1783 2553 1699 c,Capacity[veh/h] 246 445 388 147 693 664 605 944 1314 899 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 32.51 26.32 26.42 36.00 17.47 17.49 12.93 9.29 12.14 10.07 k,delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 1.39 0.85 1.03 8.76 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.18 0.36 0.59 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capacity 0.47 0.49 0.51 0.78 0.25 0.25 0.04 0.09 0.21 0.23 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 33.89 27.17 27.45 44.76 i 17.66 17.69 13.06 9.47 12.51 10.66 Lane Group LOS C C C D B B B A B B Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No No Yes 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 2.17 3.61 3.26 2.51 2.16 2.10 0.27 i 0.71 1.40 1.91 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 54.16 90.35 81.51 62.74 54.10 52.58 6.67 17.65 35.04 47.73 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 3.90 6.51 5.87 4.52 3.90 3.79 0.48 i 1.27 2.52 3.44 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 97.49 162.64 146.72 112.93 I 97.38 94.65 12.00 31.77 63.07 I 85.91 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F72 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with VISTRO Q Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 33.89 27.21 27.45 44.76 17.67 17.69 13.06 9.47 9.47 12.51 10.66 10.66 Movement LOS C I C I C D I B I B B I A A B 1 B I B d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 28.73 24.49 10.30 11.72 Approach LOS C C B B d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 21.06 Intersection LOS C Intersection V/C 0.306 Other Modes g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[ft2/ped: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[ft2/ped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 2.973 2.518 2.228 2.383 Crosswalk LOS C B B B s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicycles/t] 875 1275 525 525 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 12.66 5.26 21.76 21.76 1_b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.032 1.945 1.748 2.398 Bicycle LOS B A A B Sequence Ring 1 2 3 4 =_ -- == =- 1 - -- -- Ring 2 6 8 Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - •a 2 i SG.3 '[£ SG 4 3 3` '-n 1'."' ''` 'it .,'...,.C. St.:.A ' ii ,1111M 155 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F73 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Qjsza Generated with MI VISTRO Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Lane Configuration and Traffic Control 4446 S 6+ * s + r 44 trY lq R r � - .rte`allii 1.; �a.. *y `•, a . wr, r Ea* Yw .ym ys .N p k - sY", ' ,r f.''''im. gw -. '?� p ,kr «, �.L I �.4ww #.'.! t •. is 3' i .mer «' a, 9 �g.� _ A :4 i r O r,:l r1 ...< ...--\(' 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F74 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with VISTRO ma Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Traffic Volume- Base Volume x .t •f .. M: + . ♦ a e 1 z F 3 1 - ti.. y • il '4,i4 r f.6' 'II I s L.J :)?d .)\ •L___ 258 �� j clb —Thi a ga-' n 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F75 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated withing VISTRO ': CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Traffic Volume- Net New Site Trips Z..,..7.3 t z: I *, k fid. r -. 44.....77::T., W""6 :' A ' w t ..J.. ,, a}°,,,, a O a' i - - , I` s *.....I y it a' _ } E c _ ,t? Ms r f cr0 \,..._. ........_ 2:22. f0 z15 \ r 0 �0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F76 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MI VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Traffic Volume- Future Total Volume : ' �. s ` V .,"' s " WO • • �} Mn se.,w ca +► t. *r tam 1 , lei 7q� r 1,o 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F77 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mg VISTRO CONSULT3NG Version 5.00-00 Vistro File: C:\...\Vernon Coffee Shop.vistro Scenario 6 Build Weekday AM with Mitigation Report File: C:\...\Build Weekday AM with Mitigation- 2/23/2018 Vernon&I nterlachen pdf.pdf Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Vernon Ave & Interlachen HCM 6th NEB Left 0.437 25.2 C 1 Blvd Signalized Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst(highest) delay value.for all other control types,they are taken for the whole intersection. 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F78 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with MEI VISTRO elm CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1:Vernon Ave&Interlachen Blvd Control Type: Signalized Delay(sec/veh): 25.2 Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition Level Of Service: C Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity(v/c): 0.437 Intersection Setup Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Approach Westbound Northeastbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Lane Configuration 1)Y i1 4 11. » 1- Turning Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left ' Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width[ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No.of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 0 C 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 Pocket Length[ft] ;' . _. C .i, ,ri 1s,i0', i_,.,... Speed[mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade[%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Curb Present No No No No Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes Volumes Name Vernon Ave Vernon Ave Interlachen Blvd Interlachen Blvd Base Volume Input[veh/h] 72 389 244 93 335 40 39 76 8 347 131 169 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage[%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Growth Rate 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 In-Process Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips[veh/h] 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 Diverted Trips[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips[veh/h] 0 -27 27 19 -19 0 0 0 0 19 0 32 Existing Site Adjustment Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume[veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume[veh/h] 0 99 56 8 ,- 2 0 42 Total Hourly Volume[veh/h] 73 370 226 120 323 33 40 78 6 378 134 167 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total 15-Minute Volume[veh/h] 19 97 59 32 85 9 11 21 2 99 35 44 Total Analysis Volume[veh/h] 77 389 238 126 340 35 42 82 6 398 141 176 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate[/h] , Local Bus Stopping Rate[/h] 0 0 0, 0 0 v_do,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_di,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0 v_co,Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0 v_ci,Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0 v_ab,Corner Pedestrian Volume[ped/h] 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Volume[bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F79 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with Mg VISTRO Version 5.00-00 CONSULTING Intersection Settings Located in CBD No Signal Coordination Group - Cycle Length[s] 90 Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated Actuation Type Fully actuated Offset[s] 2.0 Offset Reference LeadGreen Permissive Mode SingleBand Lost time[s] 0.00 Phasing&Timing Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Signal group 0 4 3 8 2 C, 6 C Auxiliary Signal Groups Lead/Lag Lead Minimum Green[s] 0 5 _ 5 5 5 5 0 Maximum Green[5] C 30 0 0 30 30 ,- 30 30 Amber[s] u 0 3.0 C-0 3.0 3.0 0-. 3.0 C-C 3.0 All red[s] C C 1.0 0 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 _ 1.0 Split[s] 0 40 C 17 57 C- 33 C 33 C Vehicle Extension[s] C C 3.0 C C 3.0 3.0 3.0 0 C 3.0 Walk[s] 5 0 05 5 C 5 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 10 0 0 10 0 •0 10 C 10 0 Rest In Walk No No No No 11,Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 C 2.0 2.0 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] CC 2.0 0. 2.0 2.0 C-C 0-0 2.0 C-0 2.0 C_C Minimum Recall No No No No No Maximum Recall No No No No No Pedestrian Recall No No No No No Detector Location[ft] Ci.0 C o_u �_ 0 s C C .._i) 0.0 Detector Length[ft] 0 C 0 C C C 0 0 u 0 0 C 0 0 0 0-C I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Exclusive Pedestrian Phase Pedestrian Signal Group 0 Pedestrian Walk[s] 0 Pedestrian Clearance[s] 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F80 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with 112131 VISTRO Version 5.00-00 CONSOLING Lane Group Calculations Lane Group L C C L C C L C L C C,Cycle Length[s] 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 L,Total Lost Time per Cycle[s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 11_p,Permitted Start-Up Lost Time[s] 2.00 i ( C':, 2.00 2.00 i,' 12,Clearance Lost Time[s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 g_i,Effective Green Time[s] 19 19 19 8 31 31 51 51 51 51 g/C,Green/Cycle 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.35 0.35 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 (v/s)_i Volume/Saturation Flow Rate 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.05 0.16 0.19 s,saturation flow rate[veh/h] 1007 1870 1636 1781 1870 1810 1062 1848 2542 1703 c,Capacity[veh/h] 204 403 353 161 655 634 536 1037 1378 r 955 dl,Uniform Delay[s] 37.47 33.72 33.79 40.12 21.17 21.19 15.26 9.11 12.79 10.67 k,delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 I,Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d2,Incremental Delay[s] 1.15 4.33 5.17 8.12 0.24 0.25 0.28 0.16 0.53 0.93 d3,Initial Queue Delay[s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rp,platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF,progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Group Results X,volume/capacity 0.38 0.83 0.83 0.78 0.29 0.29 0.08 0.08 0.29 0.33 d,Delay for Lane Group[s/veh] 38.61 38.06 38.97 48.24 21.41 21.44 15.54 9.28 13.32 11.60 Lane Group LOS D D D D C C B A B B Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No No Yes 50th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 1.65 7.27 6.51 3.06 2.87 2.81 0.54 0.79 2.30 3.39 50th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 41.33 181.67 162.76 76.49 71.87 70.18 13.48 19.80 57.57 84.77 95th-Percentile Queue Length[veh] 2.98 11.69 10.70 5.51 5.17 5.05 0.97 1.43 4.15 6.10 95th-Percentile Queue Length[ft] 74.39 1292.19 267.38 137.68 129.37 126.33 24.26 35.64 103.63 I 152.59 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F81 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with EEO VISTRO CONSVITING Version 5.00-00 Movement,Approach,&Intersection Results d_M,Delay for Movement[s/veh] 38.61 38.19 38.97 48.24 21.43 21.44 15.54 9.28 9.28 13.32 11.60 I 11.60 Movement LOS DDDDCCB A A B B BI d_A,Approach Delay[s/veh] 38.50 28.17 11.30 12.56 Approach LOS D C B B d_l,Intersection Delay[s/veh] 25.20 Intersection LOS C Intersection V/C 0.437 Other Modes g_Walk,mi,Effective Walk Time[s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 M_corner,Corner Circulation Area[ftp/ped: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW,Crosswalk Circulation Area[Piped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p,Pedestrian Delay[s] 36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45 I_p,int,Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersecticn 3.241 2.598 2.182 2.499 Crosswalk LOS C B B B s_b,Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b,Capacity of the bicycle lane[bicycles/h] 800 1178 644 644 d_b,Bicycle Delay[s] 16.20 7.61 20.67 20.67 1_b,int,Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.187 1.980 1.777 2.809 Bicycle LOS B A A C Sequence Ring 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - Ring 2 6 - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a 1s.°4, 14 i 8•$:,."v•v'4 IIIII4 m +.r.TC p § 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F82 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with El11 VISTRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 Lane Configuration and Traffic Control a„p ♦F rt 1,./1\ • � r trNli ^ r r" ,-r 42'...,7,4 , ..A . �_. Clis "....\\(_________„) 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F83 Spack Consulting 1 Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup ErgzaGenerated with CO11 VISTRO CONSUL TIN& Version 5.00-00 Traffic Volume- Base Volume r , t ► • }a'"-' , ' fi"""t 4+,'"''''. � ��,. rwwri7rlr _ "' �. _ .. � 0 r w• , „i ., "� •a c aw* ' . v +s • ! i ,�Yik / ' e, M �' f fii. g C;) °I i�� N.,...... 3a2 R g3 R" 3A( '~ \ 1 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F84 Spack Consulting 143) Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Generated with mgV15TRO CONSULTING Version 5.00-00 .„,,. Traffic Volume- Net New Site Trips . _ ...., &o, '' / ifi 3,„r . 4 • „,,..„„ . , i � 'r :'"a • ., - , ."''M yl ,! fx A.' ,. ,�»,' mow. .. ?, r .. . ,.,„ .fit 1 •, sem .+,,,< ., . ' r . , ICD ?o y qA o 29 \ �-o � oo0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F85 Spack Consulting Appendix F - Capacity Analysis Backup Erpo Generated withmi 3 VISTRO CONSvAnNG Version 5.00-00 Traffic Volume- Future Total Volume , : ) 4,1 T M • f k WitIOW . . o All f VIII R Sr: . :•,...... .•J 1 k sp e �: M ..,_. _ wrr .t' tt f.x 1 4 :„.1 .,,,., . , ,- ... , . , , A 5VI g fs /tt w 'r ,,«� i • (Drt, f� �3 0 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS F86 Spack Consulting Appppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUNTINGCOrs.com Drive-Through Queue Generation Mike Spack, PE, PTOE, Max Moreland, EIT, Lindsay de Leeuw, Nate Hood 1.0 Introduction This report provides queuing data for businesses with drive-through services. It is intended to be an aid for site designers and reviewers, similar to the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation and Parking Generation reports. The data presentation is modeled on the Parking Generation report and data is provided based on at least six sites, similar to data sets marked as statistically significant in Trip Generation. Businesses with drive-through lanes are very common in the United States and having data that gives usage information for drive-through lanes will assist designers as well as cities in determining the appropriate amount of storage needed for proposed drive-through businesses. Data for drive-through queues was published by the ITE Technical Council Committee 5D-10 in 1995 based on information collected between the late 1960's and the 1990's. A paper was also published in 2009 by Mark Stuecheli, PTP giving updated information for bank and coffee shop drive-through lanes. The results from the 2009 study are incorporated into this paper (thank you Mark for your assistance). 2.0 Data Collection Data was collected using COUNTcam video recording systems at a total of 30 drive-through locations in Minneapolis, MN and several surrounding suburbs between 2010 and 2012 (26 of the 30 videos were recorded in February of 2012, which should represent peak usage in the cold Minnesota winter). Videos of drive-through lanes were collected at banks, car washes, coffee shops, fast food restaurants and pharmacies. A total of six locations were selected for each of the five different land uses. Each location was recorded for between one and five days where the majority of locations were recorded for two consecutive days. The days of the week that each video was recorded on varies. The 24-hour videos were watched at high speeds with the PC-TAS counting software and maximum queues throughout the day were noted. Most of the COUNTcams were set up such that the entire queue lane could be seen, but at a few locations the drive-through lanes wrapped around the building in a way that the entire queue length would not be able to be seen. For these situations, the COUNTcams were set up so that the ordering window and back of the queue could be seen and it was noted how many vehicles could fit between the ordering window and the front of the queue. For drive-through locations with multiple lanes, the number of lanes was noted but the maximum queue is defined as the sum of the queues at each lane for any given point in time, not the queue per lane. This approach provides overall demand, which may assist designers in determining how many drive through lanes are appropriate in addition to determining how long they should be. Drive-Through Queue Generation 1 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G1 Spack Consulting A ppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study CG�UNITINGcar5.com Once the maximum queue for each day at each location was determined, the data was compiled and statistics for each land use were calculated. The average maximum queue, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, range, 85th percentile and 33rd percentile were calculated for each land use. Data for drive-through coffee shops and banks from the Kansas City, Kansas metropolitan area was published in the 2009 paper New Drive-Through Stacking Information for Banks and Coffee Shops by Mark Stuecheli. This data is included in the analysis. 3.0 Data Analysis Based on the peak queue lengths, it is apparent that each land use will require a different minimum drive through stacking distance. The results for each land use can be found below. The peak queue lengths for each location, broken down by land use and day of the week, can be found in the Appendix. 3.1 Banks Data collection was done at six banks with drive-through services (including one credit union) in August 2011 and February 2012. Twelve days of data were collected. The banks were located in the cities of Minneapolis, Robbinsdale and St. Louis Park, MN. All of the locations had a lane with a drive-through ATM and at least two other lanes. Though service times may differ for ATM lanes compared to the regular lanes, the maximum queues were counted together. This is because based upon what was observed, vehicles would occasionally switch the lane they were in. For example, a vehicle waiting in the ATM line with a queue of three vehicles may move over to a regular line with a queue of only one vehicle. Much of what can be done at the bank's drive-through lane can also be accomplished at that bank's ATM and vice versa. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Nine days of data from the Kansas City, Kansas area is also included. This data does not factor in vehicles in ATM lanes. Table 3.1—Drive-Through Bank Maximum Queue Statistics Minnesota Data Minnesota+Kansas Data Number of Data Points 12 21 Average Maximum Queue(Vehicles) 5.83 5.76 Standard Deviation(Vehicles) 1.85 2.21 Coefficient of Variation 32% 38% Range(Vehicles) 3 to 8 1 to 10 85th Percentile(Vehicles) 8.00 8.00 33rd Percentile(Vehicles) 5.00 5.00 Drive-Through Queue Generation 2 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G2 Spack Consulting Appppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUN1flNGCOr5.com 4 3 2 LL 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.1.1—Drive-Through Bank Maximum Queue Frequency—Minnesota Data 5 4 ), 3 a LL 2 1 0 I I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.1.2—Drive-Through Bank Maximum Queue Frequency—Minnesota +Kansas Data Drive-Through Queue Generation 3 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G3 Spack Consulting Appppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study C( UNTI'INGcorS.com The data for Kansas banks was collected between 4:30pm and 6:00pm. While many of the maximum queues for the data collected in Minnesota were between these times, maximum queues occurred between 8:30am and 5:30pm so it is possible that some of the Kansas data does not capture the actual maximum queues for the day. The number of available lanes at banks, not including the ATM lane, ranged from two to seven lanes (though the most open at one time was five lanes). Even though plenty of lanes were available, cars often stacked at the lane closest to the building,thus additional lanes may not result in shorter queues. With an 85th percentile maximum queue of eight vehicles, the data suggests that banks with drive-through lanes should be able to accommodate 160 feet of vehicle stacking. 3.2 Car Washes Data collection was done at six car washes with drive-through services (including one full- service car wash) in February 2012. Twelve days of data were collected. The car washes were located in the cities of Falcon Heights, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Roseville and St. Louis Park, MN. Five of the six car washes (excluding the full-service car wash) were located at gas stations. Only the vehicles waiting in line were counted; vehicles being washed were not added to the queue. Table 3.2—Drive-Through Car Wash Maximum Queue Statistics Number of Data Points 12 Average Maximum Queue(Vehicles) 4.42 Standard Deviation(Vehicles) 2.31 Coefficient of Variation 52% Range(Vehicles) 1 to 10 85th Percentile(Vehicles) 6.20 33rd Percentile(Vehicles) 3.00 Drive-Through Queue Generation 4 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G4 Spack Consulting Appendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study Ct•UN1rINGcor .com 5 4 > 3 V C 3 CT G1 u 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.2—Drive-Through Car Wash Maximum Queue Frequency Two of the car washes had two lanes while the other four were one lane car washes. The full- service car wash had two lanes and also produced the highest maximum queue of 10 vehicles. The maximum queues for car washes were spread throughout the afternoon from 12:30pm to 8:30pm. With an 85th percentile maximum queue of more than six vehicles, the data suggests that car washes with drive-through lanes should be able to accommodate 140 feet of vehicle stacking throughout the day. 3.3 Coffee Shops Data collection was done at six coffee shops with drive-through services in November 2010, August 2011 and February 2012. Fourteen days of data were collected. The coffee shops were located in the cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Roseville and St. Louis Park, MN. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Twelve days of data from the Kansas City, Kansas area is also included. Table 3.3—Drive-Through Coffee Shop Maximum Queue Statistics Minnesota Data Minnesota+Kansas Data Number of Data Points 14 26 Average Maximum Queue(Vehicles) 11.00 10.23 Standard Deviation(Vehicles) 2.25 2.76 Coefficient of Variation 20% 27% Range(Vehicles) 7 to 16 3 to 16 85th Percentile(Vehicles) 13.50 13.00 33rd Percentile(Vehicles) 10.00 9.91 Drive-Through Queue Generation 5 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G5 Spack Consulting Appppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUNTINGcors.com 5 4 >, 3 U c CL) 3 Cr al LL 2 1 0 ALA 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.3.1—Drive-Through Coffee Shop Maximum Queue Frequency—Minnesota Data 6 5 4 3 ar LL 2 \./ 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.3.2—Drive-Through Coffee Shop Maximum Queue Frequency—MN +KS Data Drive-Through Queue Generation 6 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G6 Spack Consulting Appppendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUNTINGcors.com Coffee shops produced the longest maximum queues of any of the land uses in this study with all of the maximum queues occurring in the morning. In four of the six cases, the queues spilled out of the parking lot and into the street. These spillovers would typically only happen once or twice a day and last only a few minutes, however, one location had stacking into the street for about 15 minutes in addition to multiple periods of several minutes where cars would queue in the street. With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 13 vehicles, the data suggests that coffee shops with drive-through lanes should be able to accommodate at least 260 feet of vehicle stacking during morning hours. 3.4 Fast Food Restaurants Data collection was done at six fast food restaurants with drive-through services in August 2011 and February 2012. Fourteen days of data were collected. The restaurants were located in the cities of Golden Valley, Hopkins, Minneapolis and St. Louis Park, MN. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Table 3.4—Drive-Through Fast Food Restaurant Maximum Queue Statistics Number of Data Points 14 Average Maximum Queue(Vehicles) 8.50 Standard Deviation(Vehicles) 2.68 Coefficient of Variation 32% Range(Vehicles) 5-13 85th Percentile(Vehicles) 12.00 33rd Percentile(Vehicles) 7.90 Drive-Through Queue Generation 7 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G7 Spack Consulting Appendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study CC UN` rINGcor5.com 5 4 >• 3 u C11 CT a '- 2 1 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.4—Drive-Through Fast Food Restaurant Maximum Queue Frequency The maximum queues for fast food restaurants were spread throughout the day from 8:00am to 10:00pm. With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 12 vehicles, the data suggests that fast food restaurants with drive-through lanes should be able to accommodate 240 feet of vehicle stacking throughout the day. 3.5 Pharmacies Data collection was done at six pharmacies with drive-through services in February 2012. Twelve days of data were collected. The pharmacies were located in the cities of Hopkins, Minneapolis, New Hope and Robbinsdale, MN. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Table 3.5—Drive-Through Pharmacy Maximum Queue Statistics Number of Data Points 12 Average Maximum Queue(Vehicles) 2.92 Standard Deviation(Vehicles) 1.16 Coefficient of Variation 40% Range(Vehicles) 1-5 85th Percentile(Vehicles) 4.05 33rd Percentile(Vehicles) 2.00 Drive-Through Queue Generation 8 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G8 Spack Consulting Appendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUN1rINGCAracom 5 4 a 3 N 3 CT LL 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Maximum Queue Length(Vehicles) Figure 3.5—Drive-Through Pharmacy Maximum Queue Frequency The maximum queues for pharmacies were spread throughout the day from 8:00am to 10:00pm. With an 85th percentile maximum queue of more than 4 vehicles, the data suggests that pharmacies with drive-through lanes should be able to accommodate 100 feet of vehicle stacking throughout the day. 4.0 Conclusions The 85th percentile maximum queue lengths for each land use are: 160 feet for banks (eight vehicles), 140 feet for car washes (seven vehicles), 260 feet for coffee shops (13 vehicles), 240 feet for fast food restaurants (12 vehicles) and 100 feet for pharmacies (five vehicles). While some of the locations observed have an excess of space dedicated to drive-through lanes (i.e. some banks and pharmacies), others could occasionally use additional space for drive- through lanes (i.e. coffee shops in the morning). Fast food restaurants and coffee shops have the longest maximum queues of the five land uses observed. Coffee shops have a tendency for the morning queues to build so long that they spill out onto the street, though, as is expected, their afternoon and evening queues are minimal. Fast food restaurants also have large queues, but they tended to have enough dedicated space that stacking did not go beyond the designated queuing area. Drive-Through Queue Generation 9 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G9 Spack Consulting Appendix G - Drive Thru Queue Generation Study COUN1rINGcors.com The data collected for this paper along with the data from the papers by Mark Stuecheli and the ITE Technical Committee 5D-10 (see Appendix for both of these) will hopefully provide useful data for traffic engineers and others trying to analyze drive-through queuing storage areas. 5.0 Labor Savings of the COUNTkit Deploying people in the field to perform this data collection would not have been feasible. Using the COUNTcam video system made it possible to observe the drive through lanes 24 hours a day and the PC-TAS software made the data reduction practical. One location was recorded in November 2010 for 6 hours, three locations were recorded in August 2011 for a total of 202 hours and 26 locations were recorded in February 2012 for a total of 1012 hours. These 1220 hours of video were counted with a total of 120 hours of labor, meaning the videos were watched at approximately 10x speed. Installation of a COUNTcam takes approximately 10 minutes and retrieval takes approximately 5 minutes. This whole project was completed in approximately 3 weeks. 6.0 References 1. Stuecheli, M. (2009). New Drive-Through Stacking Information for Banks and Coffee Shops. 1TE 2009 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Print. 2. ITE Technical Committee 5D-10. "Queuing Areas for Drive-Thru Facilities." 1TE Journal (May 1995): 38-42. Print. 3. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Parking Generation. 4th ed. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2010. Print. 4. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation. 8th ed. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2008. Print. 7.0 Appendix A—Day of Week Maximum Queues B—New Drive-Through Stacking Information for Banks and Coffee Shops C—ITE Technical Committee 5D-10: Queuing Areas for Drive-Thru Facilities D—Drive-Through Data Forms Drive-Through Queue Generation 10 February 2012 5000 Vernon Coffee Shop TIS G10 Spack Consulting w91��j� STAFF REPORT o to. 4-4t, •I,VCORP08 Tti0• Date: March 14, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Kris Aaker Subject: 44th and France Small Area Plan Public Hearing. Information/ Background: On February 28, 2018, the Planning Commission held a Work Session that introduced the 44th and France Small Area Plan. Planning Commission directed City Staff to craft language allowing for height flexibility in the 44th and France Small Area Plan. Attached is Director Cary Teague's Memo proposing possible language alternatives as requested at the Work Session. A hard copy of the Small Area Plan was included in the Work Session Packet for the February 28th meeting. No changes have been made to the plan since the Work Session so staff is not providing an additional hard copy within this packet. If Commissioners need a paper copy please contact Jackie or myself and we can arrange to have a copy made for you. Kris Aaker: Kaaker@edinamn.gov 962-826-0461 Jackie Hoogenakker:Ihoogenakker c( edinamn.gov 952-826-0465 City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 CITY OF EDINA MEMO City Hall• Phone 952-927-88612 Fax 952-826-0389•www.CityofEdina.com v "-•®lo y • '�d-ntoticwo Date: March 14, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Alternative Building Height Language—44th & France Small Area Plan At the Planning Commission Work Session held February 28, 2018, the Commission directed staff to draft an option for the Commission to review that would allow consideration of building heights above four stories in the Small Area Plan for 446 and France. Below is that language for the Planning Commission to consider. Using this as guidance would not eliminate the four-story recommendation, but would allow the Planning Commission and City Council to consider proposals over it; it would not entitle any developer to exceed four stories. Two-stories remain the current height limitation for the district. The revision language is in "red." Stricken Language is removed. 44th & France Guiding Principle 6: Height and Size of Buildings (Page vii) .- - developer agrees to implement study existing zoning ordinance will be considered for approvalifa p g . . Building heights are regulated by the Zoning Ordinance. Building heights above the two-story limit detailed in the existing Zoning Ordinance may be considered for approval if a developer agrees to implement study-area-wide and project-specific improvements that are detailed in this small area plan. Building heights up to four stories at approximately 15 feet per story may be considered, depending on building location and its relationship to other buildings near them. Additionally, for consideration of building heights above four stories, developers would have to provide improvements above and beyond those listed in the recommended "give-to-get" investment commitment categories. a. MN 55424 FF REPORT STA rii4A„.21 4-tr\ o 0 •ikcORPORPO' 1888 Date: March 14, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Kris Aaker Subject: 44th and France Small Area Plan Public Hearing. Information / Background: On February 28, 2018, the Planning Commission held a Work Session that introduced the 44th and France Small Area Plan. Planning Commission directed City Staff to craft language allowing for height flexibility in the 44th and France Small Area Plan. Attached is Director Cary Teague's Memo proposing possible language alternatives as requested at the Work Session. A hard copy of the Small Area Plan was included in the Work Session Packet for the February 28th meeting. No changes have been made to the plan since the Work Session so staff is not providing an additional hard copy within this packet. If Commissioners need a paper copy please contact Jackie or myself and we can arrange to have a copy made for you. Kris Aaker: Kaaker(a_edinamn.gov 962-826-0461 Jackie Hoogenakker:Jhoogenakker(a�edinamn.gov 952-826-0465 City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 o r o` co z H az, C r O CD co D m `N° n co 01 ,=,.' 3 � ° o rD " — 7 CD N o 3 c C LA N vii Q' 3 v+ 3 (D fD N N N N (D e--' (D C Q Vs , c m Q m c� `- X 0 7 C. Cr) " ° o` 3 ° Z n 0 V7 ((D O *G_ _ r• rr rf (p�D CO ° p O 3 Q C m V1 N 3 p O Z (D CD CD CD V+ C' CO O c -s v H N p c 3 .. 3 0 a o 3 c 3 c c 3 `^ c m 3 L. '3 CD -o "p U U 'D 0 N CD CD c D N O N (D (D ( --a -, 1 p N - Q _� -1 CO N 7 C C C C C M — 1 - ' 1 —k vi 3 m 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 O_ O_ Q Q Q N CD n S C N CD (D CD (D 7 N 6 3 3 CC 3 3 (.1).. M cn N N (D (D (D C (D (D - .y, D CDE m ,< 3 3 ;� 3 3 D 3 13 0 0 � 0 0 m O 'O N o g D O CD 00 7 07 N. 07 0 O. E Z s o ° O 3 z D' 7' 3 3 = 3 3 z 3 L N �, CD CD CD O CD CD N Z a d 3 3 3 7 3 3 m C Cm m_ CD CD 0 CD m_ g L n 3 ` j 7 7 3 7 7 Z O CD N (O (O CO (O (O Q- - D CNNN7N N 3' ( Cl) r C CT) - m CO 3 Cn cn co m co a O 3 (D (D Z CL H co mRD al N H `< `< `< `G `G a v 0 - CD 0 "p "O 0 O CCD .rtr Z CD p' N (D CD (D (D N c co a .p = _ _ _ = a 3 F = N 0_ _.. 0 O 7 C C C C C O a 3 0 7 7 7 7 7 N n N 3 7 a a Q Q O_ C CD CD (D CD CD XJ 11) Ch 0, NN36 St St N N < (D CD On 0 w O o oo03o F (D 11. w W A 41. 41. .P N A W 41. a �, -O 7 7 (n 7 7 rr ...f 3 m ar OD CD N O_ 3 7" N 3 S O DV VI (D 3 p m O O 5 O O Z N 7 to D 3 v w m 0 1- CU03 3 3 o m 3 D' (D o' v m v r+ (D CD 6 3 CD 0 0 CO 7 3 7 7 .� C - -I J ', ' 3 m (D Q w O- 0- D) O (TI tri 0 0 0 0 0 0 cm 0 O_ N 7 7 7 r N O \ \ 0 0 0 0 p O o c DJ (O (D (O co Z (D e 0 0 0 ,...31:," 0� 0 0 co 3 n_ 3 3 rn v 2 N CD 7 CD CD C O o 3 (0 3 3 (D 3 (D (D 3 3 M Q n CD 0.1 'G