Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018 04-25 Planning Commission Packets
Agenda Planning Commission City Of Edina, Minnesota City Hall, Council Chambers Wednesday, April 25, 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, April 11, 2018 V. Public Hearings A. Public Hearing:Variance Request, 5801 Abbott Avenue B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for 7250 France Avenue C. Variance request for setback from Lake Cornelia and no basement continued to the May 9, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting 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 X. Staff Comments XI. Adjournment The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: are Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers April 11, 2018 I. Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. II. Roll Call Answering the roll were: Commissioners Miranda, Thorsen, Strauss, Nemerov, Hamilton, Bennett, Berube, Chair Olsen. Student Members, Mittal,Jones. Staff, City Planner, Teague, Assistant Planner, Aaker, Sr. Support Staff, Wills, Hoogenakker Ill. Approval Of Meeting Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the April I I, 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 March 28, 2018 meeting minutes. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Special Recognitions and Presentations A. Election of Officers Planner Teague told the Commission that new officers need to be elected to the Commission. Teague explained that all sitting officers are eligible to be reelected. Chair Olsen asked for nominations. Commissioner Berube nominated Commissioner Olsen as Chair. Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Chair Olsen thanked the Commission for their support. Commissioner Berube nominated Commissioner Nemerov as Vice-chair. Commissioner Hamilton seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Commissioner Nemerov thanked the Commission for their support. Page 1 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: Commissioner Strauss nominated Commissioner Thorsen as Secretary. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Commissioner Thorsen thanked Commissioners for their support. B. 2018 By Laws Commissioner Thorsen moved to adopt the 2018 Planning Commission By Laws as submitted. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VI. Public Hearings A. Variance. 2 Circle East, Edina, MN Front yard setback variance. Planner Presentation Planner Aaker informed the Commission the subject property is located north of Circle East and is approximately is 64,990 square feet in area. The home on the property is a multi-level home built in 1953. The applicant is requesting a variance to remodel and add onto a portion of the existing garage with bedroom space above. The proposal is to add an addition on the south side, (by adding a garage stall to the existing two car garage and floor space above requiring a setback variance from the south lot line. Planner Aaker explained that the homeowners are requesting a 37.1-foot front yard setback variance to remodel the home and construct an addition to the attached two-car garage with bedroom area above. The addition will add a third garage stall that is proposed to be 13 feet wide. The front yard setback from Circle East is 82.I feet based on the average front yard setback of the homes located adjacent to the subject home. The homeowners propose to provide a 45-foot setback from the lot line adjacent to Circle East. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance based on the following findings: • The property with an addition of the garage and living space above request to deviate from the front yard is a reasonable use of the property. • The home is appropriate in size and scale with the addition of garage and living space allowing reasonable use of the property. It is the least impacting proposal on neighboring properties given other expansion opportunities. • There is a practical difficulty in meeting the ordinance requirements due to the existing floor plan and desire to maintain the character of the home while adding an additional garage stall and bedroom expansion. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: Page 2 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes0 Approved Date: • Architectural site plans date stamped March 16, 2018 • Building plans/ elevations date stamped: March 16, 2018 Appearing for the Applicant Andy Campbell Applicant Presentation Mr. Campbell addressed the Commission and informed them they are excited about their addition and believe their request is reasonable. He noted on his block front yard setbacks vary, adding as Circle East turns into Circle West there are houses that are much closer to the street. Campbell thanked the Commission for their time. Public Hearing Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. David Sieben, I Spur Road, Edina, MN told the Commission he supports the request as submitted. Comments Commissioners indicated their support for the variance noting the addition as presented maintains the character of the neighborhood. Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. B. Variance Request for 6612 Cornelia Drive, Edina, MN tabled to April 25, 2018. VII. Community Comment None. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Page 3 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: VII. Reports/Recommendations A. Sketch Plan Review- 4500 France Avenue, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan request to redevelop the site at 4500 France Avenue. The applicant would tear down the former movie theater and dry cleaners building and build a new 52 unit rental apartment with 6,400 square feet of restaurant and retail space. There would be 77 underground parking stalls for the apartments and 40 covered parking stalls for the retail uses at grade. Amenities for the apartments include a fitness center, rooftop patio, clubroom and an outdoor courtyard with grilling stations, seating and landscaping. Teague noted that the property is I.05 acres (45,738 s.f.) in size. The density proposed in the project would be 50 units per acre. This site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as NN, Neighborhood Node, which allows over 12 units per acre up to a maximum height of 4-stories. The plans are generally consistent with the 44th & France Small Area Plan. The applicant has responding the guiding principles within their narrative. Planner Teague concluded that the request would require the following: A Rezoning from R-I and PCD-I to PUD, Planned Commercial District. He asked the Commission to note that several variances would be required under the existing zoning standards. Flexibility is requested through the PUD concerning setback and height. The PUD Zoning enables the City to require affordable housing. Appearing for the Applicant Ted Carlson, Orion Investments. Gretchen Camp, ESG Discussion/Comments/Questions Planner Teague was asked what the current zoning for the site was. Planner Teague responded that the subject site is zoned PCD-I, Planned Commercial District. Planner Teague was asked if Hennepin County indicated their support for eliminating the "cut through" curve onto France Avenue. Teague reported that so far the County has indicated they do not support this movement. Commissioners noted that incorporating that "cut through curve" helped create the plaza area which could be considered in the "give to get" Teague agreed; however if the County doesn't sign off on eliminating that cut through lane onto France the plaza area would be minimal. Page 4 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes El Approved Date: Commissioners asked Planner Teague how they came up with the building height modification. Teague explained the change took into consideration the allowed building height of single-family homes, adding it was felt that this was a fair approach. Continuing, Teague said in Edina allowed building height for a single family home is between 30 and 40 feet maximum. Building height is based on lot width. Teague was asked if the proposal matches the 44th & France Small Area Plan. Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioners wondered if TIF funds could be applied here. Teague responded in the affirmative. The applicant could ask for TIF Funding for the affordable housing component. In was noted that there are a number of public improvements that need to occur in this area questioning how that would be addressed. Teague agreed; however, noted that the project provides its own parking and is improving the site by burying utility lines, etc. It is also the first redevelopment, adding the public improvements would need to be implemented as time goes on. Applicant Presentation Mr. Carlson addressed the Commission noting that he purchased this site some time ago; however, waited until the 44th and France Small area Plan was complete before submitting a Sketch Plan for consideration. Carlson said during the 44th and France Small Area Plan discussions neighborhood feedback was shared, adding since listening to the concerns raised at those meetings the following changes were implemented to the plan. • The proposal now complies within the suggested height range, which is from three to four stories along France Avenue and two to three stories along Sunnyside Road and 44th Street. • The proposal is also smaller with a lower unit count. • Over 80% of the second lot is proposed as a "pocket" park. • Carlson asked that street parking continue to be permitted on Sunnyside Road. Carlson introduced Gretchen Camp. Ms. Camp highlighted aspects of the proposed apartment building as follows: • Camp noted that there is a grade change on this property from 898 to 906. • As previously mentioned the curb cut onto France Avenue would be incorporated into the site to create an amenity terrace. • Building as proposed is classic in design providing a timeless facade. • Public "pocket park" west of the building. The type of park is still being studied. • As designed one goal of the proposal was to give life to the street front. The front amenity plaza and "pocket park" will allow everyone to enjoy this area; not only Page 5 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: residents of the apartment. The proposed planters along France Avenue will create a safe space. Mr. Carlson continued noting the following: • Outlined for the Commission the Guiding Principles. • Two at grade units are proposed for the disabled. • Parking was enhanced. • Timeless building with brick construction, sustainability elements and a high quality visual. • Allow on-street parking to continue on Sunnyside Road. Carlson explained that on- street parking was a personal preference. He added he believes on-street parking engages the street and helps with traffic calming. Discussion/Comments/Questions Commissioners raised the following: • The applicant was asked the reason for the on-street parking request on Sunnyside Road. Carlson said that on-street parking was his personal preference, adding studies find that on-street parking slows down traffic. • The applicant was asked about turning options. Carlson said they are still studying traffic flow and are not opposed to suggestions on calming measures from City Staff. • The applicant was asked to explain aspects of the "pocket park". Camp explained that their intent was to add an open space "pocket park" abutting the residential homes. This park would be for everyone - not only residents of the apartment building. • It was suggested that the applicant consider sliding the building back toward the southwest to create an area off Sunnyside Road for walk up/townhouse type units. This might impact the size of the "pocket park"; however, walk-up units would better engage Sunnyside Road as the building eases into the residential neighborhood. • Take another look at parking along Sunnyside Road; does it really achieve the desired effect. • It was suggested that the applicant upgrade the exterior materials. It was pointed out that the building across the street was built with brick; this building should follow suit. • The applicant was complimented on the project; however, it was suggested that bike- parking stations be implemented outside and inside. It was also suggested that the applicant revisit the corner to ensure safety between pedestrians, vehicles and bikers. • It was suggested that additional screening be added along the "pocket park". Work with that residential neighbor to ensure that their privacy is maintained. Also, consider the impact the noise from the proposed "pocket park" could have on the adjacent property owner. • It was acknowledged that the subject site was blighted; however, an opinion was expressed that the plan presented was not a "wow". A concern was also expressed that the four-stories were extended along Sunnyside Road. • Consider stepping the building back. Articulate the space along Sunnyside Road better. Page 6 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: r= The discussion ensued on parking and traffic with Carlson noting that they will continue to work with Planning and Engineering on parking, adding he would work closely with staff on handling any unwanted consequences. Continuing, Carlson noted their intent was to create a building that compliments the architecture of the building across the street (Bruegger's) while keeping the building design current. There was further discussion on the transition from the commercial node to the single dwelling neighborhood with Commissioners suggesting that Mr. Carlson be as accommodating as possible within this area. It was again suggested that he take another look at the "pocket park", possibly shifting building, and to have an alternative plan if the County was not willing to eliminate the curve onto France Avenue. Without that curve, the site would need to be redesigned. Chair Olsen thanked the applicant for their presentation. A brief discussion ensued on the 44th and France Small Area Plan and the Sketch Plan presented by Mr. Carlson. It was noted that the timing of the proposed redevelopment was frustrating because not everything has been vetted. B. Greenprint. 50``' and France Small Area Plan Commissioner Nemerov reported that he, along with Commissioner Hamilton are the liaisons for the 50th and France Small Area Plan. Nemerov referred to the Greenprint and explained their intent is to provide an accurate future vision for the area, adding they hope to complete their plan within a 3-month period. Nemerov said at this time working group member applications are being accepted. Commissioner Hamilton encouraged volunteers to serve on the working group that are open to looking into the future of this neighborhood node. He said the goal is to move quickly and efficiently through the small area plan process; with the 3-month end date their goal. Hamilton said 3-months was a place to start, allowing room for more time to complete the Plan if needed. Concluding Hamilton said they look forward to the process and to develop an accurate vision for the area. Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved to adopt the 50th and France Avenue Greenprint. Commissioner Bennett seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VI. Correspondence And Petitions Chair Olsen acknowledged back of packet materials. Page 7 of 8 Draft Minutes® Approved Minutes❑ Approved Date: VII. Chair And Member Comments Commissioner Nemerov reported he attended the annual training program for Commissioners elected to position of Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. Nemerov stated this session was very helpful suggesting that all Commissioners should attend the program. Planner Teague responded that is a good idea, adding he will speak with MJ Lamon, Project Coordinator. Nemerov further stated at this time the Commission is busy with the Comprehensive Plan; however, when time is available it would be great to hear from MJ. VIII.Staff Comments Planner Teague reported that the Council adopted the 44th and France Small Area Plan at their last meeting. Teague said the Council agreed to shift the boundary area to include an additional single-family house. Planner Teague noted that the City Council approved a built in increase to the Comprehensive Plan Consultant contract. Teague further noted that all the work that has occurred in the past on the Grandview Area would be folded into the Comprehensive Plan. IX. Adjournment Commissioner Thorsen moved to adjourn the April I I, 2018, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 10:30 PM. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Ja,c e' dC" Respectfully submitted Page 8 of 8 214. STAFF REPORT o )144 (ta ikeoRpospoc• 11388 Date: April 25, 2018 To: PLANNING COMMISSION From: Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Subject: B-18-08, A 9.3 foot side yard setback variance request to allow a second floor addition above the existing first floor at 5801 Abbott Avenue. Information 1 Background: Ron Sonnek with Sicora Design Build, the applicant, has submitted a 9.3-foot side yard setback variance at 5801 Abbott Avenue on behalf of the homeowners.The proposed project includes a whole house remodel which involves constructing a second story above the existing first floor and building a detached two stall garage. To accommodate the proposed changes the applicant is requesting a variance due to the existing non-conforming setback on the north property line. The existing non-conforming setback on the north side property line is 5.7 feet.The zoning code requires a 15 foot side street setback.The applicant is asking for a variance to maintain the current 5.7 foot setback on the north side of the property while adding a second floor above the existing one story home. 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. City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features The existing 6,397 square foot lot is located at the south east corner of 58th Street West and Abbott Avenue South.The existing first floor will remain and be remodeled. The new proposed second floor will match the exterior walls on the north, south and west sides of the existing home. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-I, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. Generally, the proposed work does not alter existing drainage paths and the public storm sewer utility has capacity to accept the proposed additional run-off. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side— 20/15 feet 5.7 feet* East Side - 25 feet principal structure — 49 feet 3 feet detached garages 4 feet South— 5 feet 5.7 feet West Side— 34.9 feet 34.9 feet Building Coverage 30% 28.88% Building Height 30 feet --29 *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed variance justified? Minnesota Statues and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The proposed variance will: I) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The practical difficulty is caused by the existing location of the home (built in 1951). An addition to on the north side of the home could not be done without variance. The proposed addition is reasonable as it does not encroach further into the setback. 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 an existing non-conforming setback on the north property line. 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 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. There are existing two story homes in the general area of the subject property. Recommended Action: Approve a 9.3 foot side yard setback variance for the north property line at 5801 Abbott 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 dated I-29-18 (emailed to staff April I I, 2018) • Elevations and building plans date stamped March 16, 2018 • Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer's memo. Deadline for a city decision: May 10, 2018. 5801 Abbott Avenue .a ,a" u ' .f;f«" ;P:'!'''''''''';''''''':______.:4' a 5F r` 'fie�` Y., <. . ,:„., it.7. 1. . :;,4,,4 d y y� t Se • t1 ` ! ,ln' M °3 .. t �' �gy� p : 14 ,,.:.,, .4 .. . , . ..."„,.i ... ......... .._... . .,„,, ....„ . . .. _.... . . . . . . . . . ... . .., .•„.. ....... . ,,,, , , , , . .„.t., „ . ., ',:.*: '... * ' '''''''' i ,,t017,40141 . ..,., 7,, ., :, � . ,,,,tiiit.,,,,,74,4:4,,,,,444..%; . / co 8th �M ', ,• 4. ati -''''... '': , 8 ••- )''' ' ''*.4;4-- :' k:- '...,-...- '''' ' :: i,-- , , ,,,,.•. ".,,,A.,,P: •••••••'4 4.*'' 44/". -'— '•••;1;; *- :::''''S. a'k. 4 ; . '. ',. - ''..'7 '•1•:,••,:ata;"'::::-- * ''' 1: ; ' 4. j 4,4 • 4-41111111111.101111.1k. ..1 4.: . ,. . . e fl.. r CO . ..,, ,.,,,, -..t:1•,.. , 2t. • ^....---'-', .1.,.::,,,. • r>. K °we9 QM iO Aw � , L u,t .er 191;1. 1 , ter , 1 a r-flrlC- �Ib lin=50 ft The CITY of EDINA N ®E W E April 20,2018 Map Powered bV DataLink from WSB&Associates IFtit S I G O R FULL-SERVICE Pr HOME JI�,s II Design/Build REMODELING - I WWW.SICORA.COM 952-929-0098 VARIANCE APPLICATION REQUEST PROPERTY ADDRESS 5801 Abbott Ave S., Edina, MN 55410 HOMEOWNERS Kyle and Katie Wardin. PID 20-028-24-31-0070 APPLICANT Ron Sonnek. President at Sicora Design Build on behalf of property owners. DATE 3-14-2018 PROJECT DESCRIPTION—We are proposing a whole house remodel which involves constructing a 2nd story on top of the existing home, along with building a detached 2 stall garage. VARIANCE REQUESTED— We are requesting a variance for North Property Setback from 10' to 5.7' for the addition of the 2nd floor of the home. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL: Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable: The existing home was built 5.7' off of the north property boundary. The request for 2"d floor addition is a reasonable request as it will allow the homeowners to provide the necessary living space for them to remain in this home and would allow the walls of the 2"d floor to remain in line with the existing first level exterior walls.This variance will allow the owner to renovate this home,which is a mat* . environmentally friendly approach in being able to utilize the majority of the original fring materials and structure. Page 1 of 3 Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district: The practical difficulties associated with the home are due to the fact that the home was built in 1951 before the property setbacks were established. Being on a corner lot,the north property boundary is not adversely affecting any neighbors on that side of the property. Therefore,the current non-confirming structure, the lot grade, and the home as it is placed on the lot, make the characteristics of this property unique. These property characteristics create a practical difficulty for the owner when attempting to gain additional square footage for the 2nd level of the home. The current restrictions of the house were not created by the applicant. Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance: The proposed remodel/addition improves the function of the layout for today's modern family,corrects maintenance/repair issues needed to the home, and improves the architectural aesthetic appeal of the home. It is also compatible in building height and mass between existing properties. Not alter the essential character of a neighborhood: The established neighborhood is a tree lined street with most homes built in the 50's. The majority are 1 story homes with a few new 2 story/tear downs mixed in, as homeowner seek to improve and expand their properties. Our proposed remodel/addition will be creating a 2 story home, scaled appropriately to fit with the existing neighborhood. Our renovation approach will be enhance the overall curb appeal and architecture of the home. The clients are looking to be respectful of the neighborhood,the home, and the lot, and feel that the proposed design does a good job of not expanding the footprint of the existing structure, but enhancing its aesthetic appeal through the newly constructed 2nd level. And so the project would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Page 2 of 3 1 Existing Exterior Photo of Home— . y,.. At," ,II,F� . *'+��11 •t '' - ` - ' <�r.. -_'..._. 0.v ,^ ` ~ .J. C Y :/ w .rr` 1 : tet:_. %. - Hand Rendered Sketch of Proposed Exterior— 't •s • • t •' \. .j, k _ _ _ .�...�-- W F _ _ P,..1 r 4" Page 3of3 ‘` ',...:•,.'. ' ,.•' ! •.11!•..,. . ., . . -„; '1 k, H. i • - ..-7, ..:' '.. . . ,. lf. ,.. ., • I .1 . . • ' 4 ,. , c; ! i( ,.,... . .. ,.,--- -.'"1,11' .... - a • . .. r , • . .,..! . . . 1., , 11111 ,,,,... ''... . . , I , ..,..„ . . • t • 1. 6' ' ''' -7 ...i . - -- : , • ' - '. ' .C. '.S,,s i ,,,'' --- i,'. '4'. . •1--' ', 44-, — • ',.' , - r,' ‘ ,• "- -t •-=' ' ••, ,4,,.'i tr,.,:. .. i.r . .. -...,..._ . - 11 a'•. ' . -„,e'l '''--• r--'ita."Sr 7". a.. :r . r: . r . ' .1.,1- -' . t^,,d •- ......... - - . 11. I ra : MI '. •'''f'- MI MB 1 :'.. A ' .. ...'•," -, r.. ; 'Z•a'7.':. - .,,it, .. ,' . - . .ill: e Ar. •:?,1:e,''''';" j•,...:..1.!-- • ' ,•• . • • 1 ••: I: 1 $1 '•:',4 t -?:• ',., ...v.:-:. .. . . ... .;$.' ---4 ':, . . - 2.• • . • ' • . ,• ., . 4, ..- ... . . *3-'!',..... • • - "1-1.'' ' 1'' • 4,. 4., irICS-P, t. ,, . • • - ..• . .. ,,,,,• • • ,, '•• • , , - , . . , • . -t• ,:-•. t-- ' • i' • 'ra r r - - . ... . . • . ',,, ,,,.. ,: l; ' ', k r• , • •f• t • , „,,, .V . • • 4 ,., .1 . • •rkk -y, ...,,,,,.. . , I; , - - 4 . 0 ''''' ' '..C•,'". 4 • , , ...•• ‘ , ,.‘ , ,,I l'-',.. :$.•''.1, • ' • • t ,. - 4 •• . • STAFF REPORT _ \� O tlt et, 0 0 .„„coRpo„,,,,so. 1888 Date: April 25, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Preliminary Rezoning, & Preliminary Development Plan for 7250 France Avenue. Information I Background: The applicant, France Equities LLC is requesting a redevelopment of the 1.68 acre parcel at 7250 France Avenue. As proposed the development would include the following: A 6-7-story, 76-89 foot tall, 135 unit apartment with 320 underground parking spaces. Units would range from I to 3 bedroom units. ➢ Twenty percent (20%) of the unit area would be for affordable housing, which exceeds the City's Affordable Housing Policy. ➢ Retail & Office space totaling 19,000 square feet. Thirty-five (35) surface parking spaces for the retail use. ➢ Sustainability. LEED or Green Globe designation would be pursued. Pedestrian and vehicular access is proposed to the lot to the north (7200 France). ➢ Amenity terrace including a pool. Primary vehicle access points would be off France Avenue and Gallagher Drive. This access road would also serve the 7200 France site to the north to reduce traffic on 72"d, as has been recommended in previous development proposals for that site. The applicant has gone through the sketch plan process, and the Greater Southdale Area Development Principles were shared with the applicant. The City's consultant for the Greater Southdale Area Plan, Mic Johnson of AFO, Architecture Field Office has provided a City of Edina • 4801W 50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 STAFF REPORT Page 2 review as well. The applicant has responded to the development principles, AFO's comments, and feedback received from the sketch plan, and has revised the plans as follows: • Increased the Setback on France Avenue to 50 Feet at the base, retaining podium set back of approximately 10 more feet at floors 2-6 on the majority of the facade. Y Increased setback at rear property (west side) to bring access street out from under the building. ➢ Incorporated a walkway on the west side adjacent to the building and maintained the landscape buffer to the west. • Build steps down along the west side to 5 stories with a setback at the 6th floor. • Overall project size is approximately 8% smaller than the previous iteration. From 2.36 FAR to 2.18. Y North and west facades have greater development and improved pedestrian realm experience. • Increased green roof area at 2nd floor plaza roof. AFO has reviewed the revised plans (See attached memo) and offered the following: • The building is now a "four-sided" building, whereby all four facades are treated as primary. • The building's relationship to the woonerf on the west side of the site is vastly improved, in that the drive is no longer underneath the building. • The pedestrian pattern seems appropriate and thought out. Y The woonerfs on the west and north are pedestrian friendly, suggesting use by pedestrians first, bikes second, cars third and service vehicles fourth. Y The public realm design, including the variety in paving and landscaping depicted in the renderings reinforces the pedestrian experience. Y The scale and treatment of the public realm/pedestrian experience along France and Gallagher is open and flexible. Y The building's northwest corner is better scaled in relation to the adjacent three story buildings. To accommodate the request the following is required: ➢ Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density in the OR, Office Residential District from 30 units per acre to 80 units per acre; and • A Rezoning from POD-I, to PUD, Planned Unit Development. Attached is the city attorney's "pyramid of discretion." This project is within the "green" zone, meaning this is a legislative decision in which the City has complete discretion when reviewing this application. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Office building; zoned POD-I, Planned Office District and guided OR, Office Residential. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Easterly: Macy's Home Store; zoned PCD-3, Planned Commercial District and guided MXC, Mixed Use Center. Southerly: Office building; zoned POD-I, Planned Office District and guided OR, Office Residential. Westerly: Apartments; zoned PRD, Planned Residential District and guided High Density Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 1.68 acres in size, contains an existing 4-story office building and parking ramp. The parking ramp is in an extremely poor condition. Planning Guide Plan designation: OR, Office Residential. Zoning: POD, Planned Office District Parking Based on the City Code requirement, Section 36-131 1, 1.25 fully enclosed spaces and .75 surface spaces are required per dwelling unit. (2 spaces per unit.) Therefore, the 135 unit apartment would require 270 parking spaces. The 19,000 square feet of retail/office would require 76 spaces (4 spaces per 1,000 s.f.). Therefore, 346 spaces are required between the two uses. The project would provide 320 parking stalls, 285 of which would be underground, and 35 on level one. Wenck Associates conducted a parking study and determined that the proposed parking spaces would be adequate for the development. (See attached study.) The study assumed a 4,000 square foot restaurant within the retail space. Site Circulation/Access/Traffic Primary access to the proposed development would be off Gallagher Drive. A right in and right out is proposed off France Avenue. This access would have to be approved by Hennepin County, as France Avenue is a County Road. The County has provided a preliminary review and found they would not grant the access. The spacing between adjacent intersections/driveways would not be adequate. Future access is proposed to the 7200 France property to the north; this would reduce traffic on 72nd Street, which was required as part of a previous development proposal for the 7200 France site. This access road would also serve the 7200 France site to the north to reduce traffic on 72"d, as has been recommended in previous development proposals for that site. To ensure that this access is available to the property to the north, staff would recommend that an access easement be provided over these drive aisles along the west and north lot lines. Wenck Consulting also conducted a traffic study. The study concludes that the existing roadways can be supported by the project. The level of service at adjacent intersections would not be impacted, even if the County does not allow the right-in and right out on France. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, 27 overstory trees would be required. The proposed plans show that 55 trees would be planted. A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are also proposed. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in the attached memo. A site improvement plan agreement would be required to outline public vs. private responsibilities and ownership for private improvement on public property. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City's review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The building materials would be a combination of stucco, architectural metal panels, stone, and glass, with metal panel accents. The applicant will have a materials board for review at the Planning Commission meeting. Mechanical Equipment Any rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Loading Dock/Trash Enclosures Loading area and trash enclosures would be on the inside of the building/parking ramp. Shadow Study As requested at sketch plan, the applicant completed a shadow study to determine impacts the height of the buildings might have. As demonstrated, the biggest impact would be in the winter months. Building Height The building height requirement for this site is 4 stories and 48 feet. (See attached building height overlay district map.) The applicant is requesting flexibility from this standard through the PUD rezoning. Additionally, the City Code requirement for setbacks of buildings over six-stories in height from property zoned R-I, Single Dwelling Unit District would be met for this project. Within the underlying POD zoning district, the Edina City Code requires that buildings seven-stories tall be setback four times the height of the building from the property line of single family homes. The building height is 90 feet in the seven story portion of the building; therefore a 360- STAFF REPORT Page 5 foot setback is required. The distance as proposed would be 520 feet, therefore would be code compliant. 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, 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 proposal to add 135 units of housing on France Avenue with extensive pedestrian walkway opportunities around the entire perimeter of the site would enhance the pedestrian experience in the area. The plans are consistent with the vision document for the Greater Southdale Area by providing a 50 foot setback on France and 30 feet on Gallagher Drive. There would be dedicated bike storage and a bike maintenance area on the first level of the project. STAFF REPORT Page 6 COMPLIANCE TABLE While the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to PUD, the following table demonstrates compliance with the underlying zoning: City Standard (POD-I) Proposed Building Setbacks Front— France 90 feet (based on height) 30-40 feet* (50 feet to curb) Front—Gallagher 80 feet (based on height) 30 & 55 feet* Side— North 80 feet (based on height) 35-40 feet* Rear—West 80 feet based on height 20 feet* Four times the height from R-I for 7 story 400 feet building = 320 (based on 80 feet) Building Height Four stories and 48 feet 7 stories and 90 feet* Maximum Floor .50% 2.2%* Area Ratio (FAR) Parking Stalls 270 enclosed (residential) 320 enclosed total 76 surface spaces 35 surface* Council may require surface stalls if deemed necessary. Parking Stall Size 8.5' x 18' 8.5 x 18' *Not code compliant Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment— Density To accommodate the request, the following Comprehensive Plan amendment is requested: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density in the OR, Office Residential District from 30 units per acre to 80 units per acre. The Office Residential area is located west of France Avenue and into the Pentagon Park Area. The OR, Office Residential Area allows up to 30 units per acre. This density is low given the density that has been considered as part of the Greater Southdale Area Study. Densities that have been contemplated to date have been 80-90 units per acre over the whole of the district. The thinking behind that density has been to allow greater densities in between France and York (I 00- I25 units per acre; the CAC, Community Activity Center allows up to 105 units per acre in the existing Comprehensive Plan); and lesser densities 50-80 units per acre west of France and East of York. The City has allowed greater densities on the east side of York (Envi Edina is 105 units per STAFF REPORT Page 7 acre; and the Onyx is 52 units per acre. On the west side of France, the Aurora on France project (senior housing) is 80 units per acre. Below is table of existing high density developments in the City. Note that the trend in multi- family development is higher density. This is due to the high cost of land in Edina, the City's requirement for affordable housing, and the added cost of redeveloping a site with existing buildings. High Density Development in Edina Development Address Units Units Per Acre Yorktown Continental 7151 York 264 45 The Durham 7201 York 264 46 York Plaza Condos 7200-20 York 260 34 York Plaza Apartments 7240-60 York 260 29 Walker Elder Suites 7400 York 72 40 7500 York Cooperative 7500 York 416 36 Edinborough Condos 76xx York 392 36 South Haven 3400 Parklawn 100 42 The Waters Colonial Drive 139 22 6500 France—Senior 6500 France 188 80 Housing Lennar - Onyx 6725 York 240 52 7250 France Project 7250 France 135 80 5000 France 5000 France 23 29 Hazelton Road Apartments 3650 Hazelton 186 150 Road Bus Garage—Trammel Crow Eden Avenue 165 100 The Collaborative Market Street 13 I 46 Gateway Point 66th &York 191 96 The Millennium 66th &York 372 60 Lincoln Residences 5901 Lincoln 250 30 Drive Red—Indicates recent projects STAFF REPORT Page 8 Example Residential Density Ranges in Surrounding City's Comprehensive Plans City Range— Per Acre Bloomington Medium Density Residential 5-10 High Density Residential No limit General Business 0-83 Commercial 0-83 (Community& Regional) High Intense mix use 0-60 Airport South mix use 30-13 I Richfield Medium Density Residential 7-12 High Density Residential Minimum of 24 High Density Res./Office Minimum of 24 Mixed Use 50+ St. Louis Park Medium Density Residential 6-30 High Density Residential 20-75 (PUD for high end) Mixed Use 20-75 (PUD for high end) Commercial 20-50 Minnetonka Medium Density Residential 4-12 High Density Residential 12+ Mixed Use No range established (density based on site location and site conditions.) Minneapolis Medium Density (mixed use) 20-50 High Density (mixed use) 50-120 Very High Density(mixed use) 120+ The site's location on an arterial roadway provides a good location for higher density. The Comprehensive Plan currently suggests allowing higher density subject to proximity to utilities capacity, level of transit service available, and impact on adjacent roads. Other desired items to allow greater density would include: Below grade parking, provision of park or open space, affordable housing, sustainable design principles, pedestrian circulation, and podium height. The proposed project would contain most of these elements. There is adequate utility capacity available. A traffic study was done by Wenck Associates and concludes that there would be minimal impact to the roads, and the existing roads could support the development. (See attached study.) Underground parking would be included; the at-grade parking lot would be behind the retail/office uses on the street; open space/public area is provided along the street fronts and the pedestrian STAFF REPORT Page 9 and vehicle access along the north and west lot lines. Affordable housing is proposed to exceed the City of Edina policy by providing 20% of the units as affordable. The trade-off in allowing more height and density includes: ➢ A more creative site plan with improved site circulation and public space; ➢ Collaborative design with parcel to the north (7200 France). The plans allow access for the 7200 parcel to take traffic to be away from 72"d and the low density residential area to the north and west; ➢ Underground and hidden parking; ➢ Improved pedestrian and vehicle access and connections; ➢ Significant affordable housing provided within the development; ➢ Pedestrian and bicycle oriented design would include bike and pedestrian paths through the site to connect to the north and along France and Gallagher. The amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be accomplished as follows: OR Transitional areas along major Upgrade existing streetscape 12-30 residential dwelling units/acre.The City thoroughfares or between higher- and building appearance, Council may approve a project for up to 80 units per Office-Residential intensity districts and residential improve pedestrian and acre through a PUD rezoning.Criteria to justify greater density includes:Addressing the City's districts. Many existing highway- transit environment. Working Principles for Development Building quality, No current examples in oriented commercial areas are City. Potential examples Encourage structured sustainability,pedestrian oriented development, p anticipated to transition to this g additional public space and public realm,provision of include Pentagon Park more mixed-use character. parking and open space area and other I494 linkages where feasible; more green space,underground parking,provision of affordable housing,proximity to low density uses, corridor locations Primary uses are offices,attached emphasize the enhancement utilities capacity,level of transit service available,and or multifamily housing. of the pedestrian impact on adjacent roads. environment. Secondary uses:Limited retail and Floor to Area Ratio-Per current Zoning Code: service uses(not including"big maximum of 0.5 to 1.0 box"retail),limited industrial (fully enclosed),institutional uses, Floor to Area Ratio may exceed 1.0 on a case by parks and open space.Vertical case basis,subject to proximity to utilities mixed use should be encouraged, capacity,level of transit service available,and and may be required on larger impact on adjacent roads.Other desired items to sites. allow greater density or density on the high end of the residential housing range above,would include:Below grade parking,provision of park or open space,affordable housing,sustainable design principles,provision of public art,pedestrian circulation,and podium height. STAFF REPORT Page 10 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Per Section 36-253 the following are the regulations for a PUD: I. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. The proposal would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD, as most all of the above criteria would be met. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential" which allows for retail, office and housing. The proposal is a high quality residential development that would enhance the surrounding area and add pedestrian activity to the STAFF REPORT Page I I area with housing on France Avenue. The proposed buildings would be a high quality architectural metal, stone and glass. The proposal would exceed the City's affordable housing policy to help provide additional affordable housing within the City. 2. Applicability/Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in this Chapter shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed uses are all consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As mentioned, the site is designated as OR, Office Residential, which encourages a mixture of uses. Uses include: Y Offices, attached or multifamily housing. Y Limited retail and service uses (not including "big box" retail), ➢ Vertical mixed use should be encouraged, and may be required on larger sites. b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (I) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; This project would be a true mixed use development with residential, retail and office uses. ii. any PUD which involves a single land use type or housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; As mentioned, the proposal includes vertical mixed uses. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and As mentioned, the uses allowed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The densities contemplated are consist with discussions by the Greater Southdale Area Visioning. Additionally, the Wenck Traffic study concludes that the surrounding roadways could support the use. STAFF REPORT Page 12 iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1 above. The table on page 6 shows how the proposed new buildings would comply with the POD Zoning Ordinance Standards and the zoning standard in the new PUD-15 District. Flexibility is requested in regard to building height, setbacks, FAR and parking standard. In relaxing these standards, the purpose and intent, as described in #1 above would be met. The area would be vastly improved from existing conditions on the site. The blighted parking ramp would be removed. The provision of housing on France Avenue would increase pedestrian activity on France Avenue. The use will bring more vibrancy to the area with a true mixed use project. The applicant is providing a significant contribution to affordable housing, by providing twenty percent of the units within the project for affordable housing, double the City's policy. PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding density reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposed amendment is reasonable for the following reasons: I. Higher Densities are generally located on arterial roadways. The OR district is generally located on France Avenue, which connects to both Crosstown 62 and I- 494. 2. The densities that have been contemplated as part of the Greater Southdale Area Study have been 80-90 units per acre over the whole of the district. Higher Density is contemplated in between France Avenue and York Avenue (100-150 units per acre...the existing CAC area allows up to 105 units per acre); and lesser densities 50-80 units per acre west of France and East of York. The City has allowed greater densities on the east side of York (Envi Edina is 105 units per acre; and the Onyx is 52 units per acre. On the west side of France, the Aurora on France project (senior housing) is 80 units per acre. 3. Density proposed is similar or less than density for mixed use areas for surrounding communities including Minnetonka, Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. 4. Allowing higher densities allows the City greater opportunity to provide affordable housing units. STAFF REPORT Page 13 5. Traffic studies done by Wenk Associates and WSB conclude that densities contemplated on the west side of France can be supported by the existing roadway system. • Is the proposal reasonable to justify the PUD rezoning of the site? Yes. Staff believes the PUD is justified for the following reasons: I. Addresses the Development Principles established in the Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Vision. The following principles are included: • Division of the property into smaller blocks to include pedestrian and vehicle access and connection north/south and east/west; Improved pedestrian connections to move people through and around the site. This includes an improved sidewalk along all four lot lines; • Provides additional public space along France and Gallagher; • High quality design; ➢ Public art; and ➢ Significant affordable housing within the project. 2. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian- scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) • A Pedestrian-Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities at o infrastructure and that complementneighborhood, andor corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the City, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed-use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. STAFF REPORT Page 14 f. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets creating pedestrian scale. g. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto-oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. i. Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. ii. Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. iii. Encourage storefront design of mixed-use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade. iv. Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. 3. The proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. (See pages 10-12 of this report.) In summary the PUD zoning would: a. Creates a more pedestrian-friendly development with the construction of improved sidewalks and connections to the Promenade. The project would bring vibrancy to the area. b. The building would be of high quality architectural metal, stone, and glass. c. Ensure that the buildings proposed would be the only buildings built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. d. Project would significantly add to the City's affordable housing stock by providing 20% for affordable housing. e. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. f. Enhance green space and landscaping and utilize sustainable concepts. 4. The height increase is justified. The City Code requirement for setbacks of buildings over six-stories in height from property zoned R-I, Single Dwelling Unit District would be met for this project. Within the underlying POD zoning district, the Edina City Code requires that buildings seven-stories tall be setback four times the height of the building from the property line of single family homes. The building height is 90 feet in the seven story portion of the building; therefore a 360-foot setback is required. The distance as proposed would be 520 feet, therefore would be code compliant. 5. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Wenck Associates conducted a traffic and parking impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. STAFF REPORT Page 15 Staff Recommendation Comprehensive Plan Amendment Recommend that the City Council approve the requests for Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase the density in the OR, Office Residential District in the Greater Southdale Area from 30 units per acre to 80 units per acre; and Approval is subject to the following findings: I. Higher Densities are generally located on arterial roadways. The OR district is generally located on France Avenue, which connects to both Crosstown 62 and 1- 494. 2. The densities that have been contemplated as part of the Greater Southdale Area Study have been 80-90 units per acre over the whole of the district. Higher Density is contemplated in between France Avenue and York Avenue (I 00-150 units per acre...the existing CAC area allows up to 105 units per acre); and lesser densities 50-80 units per acre west of France and East of York. The City has allowed greater densities on the east side of York (Envi Edina is 105 units per acre; and the Onyx is 52 units per acre. On the west side of France, the Aurora on France project (senior housing) is 80 units per acre. 3. Density proposed is similar or less than density for mixed use areas for surrounding communities including Minnetonka, Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. 4. Allowing higher densities allows the City greater opportunity to provide affordable housing units. 5. The traffic study done by Wenk Associates concludes that densities contemplated on the west side of France can be supported by the existing roadway system. Preliminary Rezoning to PUD, & Preliminary Development Plan Recommend that the City Council approve the Preliminary Rezoning from POD, Planned Office District to PUD-I5, Planned Unit Development District, including Preliminary Development Plan to construct the proposed mixed use development with future connections to adjacent property at 7250 France Avenue. Approval is subject to the following findings: I. The proposed land use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REPORT Page 16 2. The proposed buildings would be a high quality brick, stone and glass. They are designed to mix and blend with the existing buildings in the area. 3. The PUD would ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 4. Addresses the Development Principles established in the Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Vision. The following principles are included: • Division of the property into smaller blocks to include pedestrian and vehicle access and connection north/south and east/west; ➢ Improved pedestrian connections to move people through and around the site. This includes an improved sidewalk along all four lot lines; • Provides additional public space along France and Gallagher; ➢ High quality design; ➢ Public art; and ➢ Significant affordable housing within the project. 5. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian- scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) • A Pedestrian-Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. b. Encourage infill/redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of City infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and/or corridor context and character. c. Support and enhance commercial areas that serve the neighborhoods, the City, and the larger region. d. Increase mixed-use development where supported by adequate infrastructure to minimize traffic congestion, support transit, and diversify the tax base. e. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods, and with other communities, to improve transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on the car. f. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets creating pedestrian scale. g. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto-oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. v. Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. vi. Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. STAFF REPORT Page 17 vii. Encourage storefront design of mixed-use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade. viii.Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. 6. The height increase is justified. The City Code requirement for setbacks of buildings over six-stories in height from property zoned R-I, Single Dwelling Unit District would be met for this project. Within the underlying POD zoning district, the Edina City Code requires that buildings seven-stories tall be setback four times the height of the building from the property line of single family homes. The building height is 90 feet in the seven story portion of the building; therefore a 360-foot setback is required. The distance as proposed would be 520 feet, therefore would be code compliant. 7. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Wenck Consulting conducted a traffic and parking impact study, and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. 8. The proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. The PUD zoning would: a. Create a more pedestrian-friendly development with the construction of improved sidewalks and connections to the Promenade. The project would bring vibrancy to the area. b. The building would be of high quality architectural metal, stone, and glass. c. Ensure that the buildings proposed would be the only buildings built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. d. Project would significantly add to the City's affordable housing stock by providing 20% for affordable housing. e. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. f. Enhance green space and landscaping and utilize sustainable concepts. 9. The proposed uses would be a significant upgrade to the current buildings on the site. The existing parking ramp is in a very poor state of repair. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated March 28, 2018, and the 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. 3. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances. STAFF REPORT Page 18 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 5. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 7. A Developer's Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 8. Of the proposed housing units, 20% must be dedicated for affordable housing and meet the conditions of the City's affordable housing policy. 9. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated April 18, 2018. 10. Compliance with the Wenck Associates Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. II. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment creating the PUD-I5, Planned Unit Development for this site. 12. Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding, height and density. 13. Dedication of public access easements along the west and north lot line subject to review and approval of the city engineer. The easement shall provide pedestrian and vehicular access to the property to the north, 7200 France Avenue. Deadline for a city decision: June 19, 2018 Site Location - 725o France Avenue 17 66th St st,t 53 6651 St Vi G'1 < „, ,... ,„,, . < - it Elaltanr.o ii , ...,.. r .1 •5 'P6' 44. w ,7 ,iy at ! E a 69th St W cPi 6 .,.. Dunt,t. Ln li zo f 70th St'A A,•,,,,,, --- , --. t. ir... Art*,V'Rd 7f, kt r 31 Ci, e ;A dc7 I*4 kx 11, ti5 4*,Ett t)' 12nd St+A.,' 'J C r C Ttt7.xr*o i8 g,4' 13 a ft Promenade YOlkt04 73d StWPark H1-wA Pootl n t Gifford Dr Giltord Dr t 'Ave t , 77th St W Minnesota Dr orP':10 '...- Edina,Hennepin,MetroGISI©WSB&Associates 2013 1 in = 1,505 ft The CITY ... of ( EDINAW+E S February 8, 2t Map Powered by DataLink Site Location - 7250 France Avenue ..p r,- 1� -''''`In.., i _, } *i _.�. ', p • R• _�.�•,:n -.-"S...,.,17. " . _ .,, 1 , i ''_ I N'A;Xi 1 _ _ t ' (--I; ." - (,-. „,.., ' 1 ' i . ftlt it-ri,....( , .tr,„ . . ,,,,,, , 0 �Y i , , ,. _ i ‘ , - rl , , - ' 'w i 1 _ r,..... .. t, „,,j tk — y w• r ' 4 Mil kt€ 1` �~ r „'� r' - ,- , — r ti s 5 17 -- t. • --' y .� Vit' ' ►' f ..� ra: h. h ✓ � � „ r 2p r ' r'' .4-az-I' ..... — .� ;t4 .- `N4 ,► _At, - rr., ,it 1 �� '._ �., ` ' ,i • r- ,.a 0'^ ' .A.mss '1 .t ,i,- " i ..r ,f_ , 'II ' y I.. m, „,, :,,,,,,,,, ; 0 r 4 ', ‘'*, ':, .3.-1, 'IT...I?. s it. ttr— 1.- 2„ ” ' 104.4444 , ,„*:, :- ,,,t,t,,, ,,.... ix i • . " . 1.' `,...„ji , ii G" 4ft e * '*** tr'''. i* t ;*. r.„. , -- - --- �* Vis►" }+ ii 1 iE�` lkt� s ..._INIkk ' .%,_T_ .. } ya. , it...7" 47"-- ' ' __,,, _ ,. , ,-, `, ir:iiissa, 1.7 ',.v .h. ' ',- A. MO",,A . r— , . ,. 1..* "***`**-- rkPaillW I x ., f• \ "'‘. '/ r- ..-- r,plipep.,.... ra ,,. ,,,,,,,,,;ter i'.'.1.1...." " 1 oh ,r,, :::ii: 1G .r X a+ 4h ,;. •Edina. Hepnepin. MetroGiS I©WSB.&Associate y „ V1?1, r 1/�- 1L 1 I in=376 ft :49"- -' .'i; The CITY of . ,DIl�,A W+E S February 8, 21 Map Powered by DataLink Site Location - 7250 France Avenue . - lf r< , t 4. , , v., �_ Friff16118. I — i - t,...ilt-r1„.„,.. ii,,....... ,, , ... , , ...... .. , vr .I, 77141 h G T , Y lG v r x. aa. . Pi's” , , gilt _ t. .� ,_1 , t. , 114 1....„, ,,, .04 1 , , tor ,,,,,,,,... _ .4., ii„ �, -- Fran- man t e... i` „„ ;�_ '_ s, , : Zoning - 7250 France Avenue ,,.....,__,v -.,. , - ritY;TA .r r 9,-.44441....r.._ y - +. Orr r- a t'S', .;. " M r i •,. .'.w ^ ,�� � a r , '�"c�. a. .� ., M � � _moi..-,ai . c e _� 7r. e.,, a ., 1.7 r �; ._ � alp t �' " r ?'' � t y J�` ""...""' 'M -41 pp .�. i y• p. ". n('s ''* p i , - M` e 4 ,. r a � z z . '3..AMiw *r. . z . a _ .. 7 v'� 1 ,- < • I ' ' ► r: , r J 1St pp ,+ _ , - '''' '-. 7— 7 _ Q ,a�.17 � v;"4, n '// .a / 'r r e it M - - t 1f;.,ti t A .. ..� -w.� r 1 x. r 4- 3 4 a I i �� ''' r,. ' ! .* __ • 4 ii ls ..1°--.474,igr ` 1 �.�•.—s, a .: ,,.ddd ,w F�� k s . a n .. , T. t71,aa.., i C V to t Fr s , �.' ,i i . . tifny r /!/Y 31 x �J . i I Edina,Henn p"nM "~ C�+ B 8,Ass., r r_.,c, ua Aenal 2015 ' . 1 in=752 ft Zoning ri PRD-4 i POD-1 WI' ipa PSR-4 L��ny*,a,, R 1 PRD-5 - POD-2 MDD-4 '.4. —0.111‘. �. CITY Q The of _ R-2 ` PCD-1 RMD — MDD-5 N �•�� F. EDINA — PRD-1 - PID MDD-6 w E PCD-2 . PRD-2 - PCD-3 — PUD February 8, 21 PRD-3 PCD-4 APD Map Powered byDataLink CITY OF EDINA C>(0.1/3114 : ......c:r4A,A, O . . uo.fla IDR-Low DensM Residential OR-Alike Residential IIIIII RM-Regional MeikA OSP-Open Space and Parks WAR-Low Density Attached Residential0-Office MHDR High Densly Reskter/lal CR-MeClumOensltyResitleneal InMAC-Mixed°.Center ,i y PSP-Pubic/Semi-Pudic _________ CRC ComenmleActis ly CenCenterr ]tAHR Urine tlAccess Hg1WAY a _ s 11.111NC-Neighborhood Commercial 11111I-Indisirial ll,A, 8 111 �5 <g W 64tn St._ HDR 4 "- 65th St i"oo 12 RM W 861h St _t y 8 12 i12 3-5 OR � ('-1(_' W bell%St 2 —• 10 �) 3 a r^ w coin At - -- ;-: Ili\ 2 ye 4 4 Height Limits at2 2 Stories:24' LV6. ` 3 Stories:36' S Ae o " 4 Stories:48' a E 5 Stories:60' _ 8 Stories:96' 9 Stories:108' 4 IIDR , 4 w t 10 Stones:120' Per Al A t? 2 --- 12 Stories:144' inn{ Standard HeightI�II)R s Podium Height w 76th Si o 'Th I _ 12 OR g \ 1� lnnc.cta p[ - OR 12 Future Land Use Plan with � � Building Heights o�� Yi City of Edina Southeast Quadrant •- ' 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Figure 4.6B Data Source:URS 0 0 5 Miles *Height may be increased to six stories&75 feet if podium height is utilized on York and Xerxes subject to review and approval of the City Council. City of Edina • 4801 W.50th St. • Edina,MN 55424 ctiy. i ; y _U ye _ C t m z w�/ • Y Nki. (S m I w t a i t r .. y I ¢ u r s"'�• P "� �; ,Y .�.� air �ea- � _ �� _ � :° Mme- . ,�i p .... fid' 't.. Vi '"d'R lee .,, ,, }Nt-.--r, '''f' m� • ,x r,` 'cf p ., . z • i �'1i,,,,,,.,..,1,,:; s . .„ , , , ,.,, . 1_, ..4.....-3.. .# d *R j r i, ,. y 4 • .�r r. r7. --k# .- :. J f9 iii. !k fig[ p t t il 'iliiiiiifromarmil .,, tt U '' 4.„.'4.;.,..ii-r. ''. `y 0. Zii a. as 43 0 a LL U a o o m do>. =a;m UHN .t. 17% % : _DN u L ..f.-' .s ; Hm 11 C1 C 3 N 0D b0 U C C) a -aa CO to a o,;,. 03 O o a V Q C)t � .3 N c v Y O ¢rd a N 'ate m U C C C7 N 2 d co O O a LLL .' r j C1 ~O V C f tlpw N (n n.C o o¢ 4 iT , ....,... ... .. . St* VP i. rr -'-'1,--..-1, & a . O Mfg:,. } #V{.t1bVit ,L''' j " 1 1 y[�yI1 # N 0 ? � M )) 4 4. v ii• 1M LoN »° '`.ny{ f {. : it ` .I r 4 A.•4 tt e fn J iii , ,.....,,,,,,.., ,, . tr cr ,, ,.. � .. Y 0 E m to m 0 to c `s 10 h V {I] �y^; fr' V V W . 0 \ 5 $ iinglil -.., 0., 1 a , ;ha #041., „A. I i 1 L l ��`�\wt��:�ti��i���j k 11,-:Ni b y 14 r■►`it 40/_ 74:41.40, \ . ...„...\:\ \ --.......4#+s. \ k\ .11\wirlia"-----.1147.$ . tea.• \ 1 i 4 _1 %tel%!I iii —/ ;1 � 1 Iii „�, �i�'�� , ` t = , ana —mi `1 11�i it �G ���11'� i C 11117111011117 r =lir rr /��'�440# Iv m0 a fiw� ' �';.o 0 0 ��,; I liareol r, r�r y 4 n ii\li\-1\vt i sio t th - till 17.24,1,4%,,r# cni \\I rt•Vioo a Et ‘\ ' O n . Ho ,• a\ C , .m� ,` , Qp,, s LL �t i ri� r..F #, Oil w ' 1r; . '''01:9-lig.----at ilk ���Via----^, ,/ iiiii\ ji /% E \ ry i T. to co s M (1 Al.: ') A x 0 1U i Architecture Field Office 2200 Zane Ave N I Minneapolis,MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.com City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street To Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date February 12, 2018 Cary: At your request, we reviewed the Sketch Plan submission for the proposed development at 7250 France Avenue South based on our experience working with the Greater Southdale Work Group to craft a physical vision for how their working principles may translate to the built environment. The proposed development does have a few attributes that support the Work Group's vision, including: • The integration of outdoor public space. • Transparency at the street level. • Providing a mix of uses. • Integration of below grade parking. We also have a few comments related to the details set forth in the plan as they relate to the overall Southdale District Framework. We have characterized our comments based on the visual information provided by DJR Architecture. Site Plan and Streets 1. The proposed development does not seem to meet the overall setback goal along France Avenue. The Southdale Framework plan calls for 50' setbacks along France Avenue. 2. The framework plan calls for the introduction of new intersections and future road extensions, and new streets.While the proposed development does attempt to address this, we don't believe it meets the expectations of the plan for the following reasons: o The narrative describes future connections and synergy between this development and future development to the north, partially accomplished via the new street on the west side of the site. We agree that there should be a street however have significant concerns with how this "street" is being integrated into this development. o The proposed building overhangs the "street" on the west side of the site. The intent of the road on the west is to act as a woonerf—a street that is shared by peds/bikes/cars—connecting multiple buildings from north to south. The intent is not to introduce vehicular-only streets and separate bike/ped paths. This will be an important transition between the Southdale district and the neighborhoods to the west. Architecture Field Office o Buildings that overhang streets negate future access by pedestrians and vehicles other than those serving the new building. o Driveways and streets under buildings are generally very unhospitable—cold, dark and unwelcoming—and perceived as unsafe for pedestrians. There are several examples of this in downtown Minneapolis. This demonstrates a"back door" approach to the site plan. 3. Access for below grade and ground level parking could be from Gallagher Drive, creating more open space. Alternatively, the geometry of the building could shift to open up the west side drive to the sky—supporting the idea of the Woonerf, connecting more buildings together for all vehicular access for both parking drop off and service. 4. Service access and service areas are not shown on the plan. 5. Addressing stormwater is necessary to the viability of development on this site. This is a baseline necessity, not an "innovation"as characterized in the narrative. 6. How does the proposed development address the 9-Mile Creek Regional Trail? Scale 7. The scale of the building along France Avenue could be 8 stories, thereby reducing the west side scale to 3-4 stories and better transitioning to the residential neighborhood context. This move would also create a more varied architectural form. 8. The north side of the building is a long, six-story wall and does not appear to meet the goal of creating a more refined grain with building walls of no greater than 200' before changing direction. Since we consider buildings to have four sides facing the public realm, we would need to see the proposed north and west facades to fully understand how the building fits into its context. 9. The entry drive on the north side should be considered as a potential street to be shared by adjacent development to the north, thereby eliminating redundant roads. Identity 10. Buildings need to be seen as having four primary facades. This proposal shows two facades — France and Gallagher. 11. The material palette of the Southdale area has traditionally been stone, brick and precast. Recent larger buildings within the district have included metal panel as a primary façade material and the community does not like these buildings in terms of their color, flatness and execution. The material does not meet their expectations of quality. Program 1. The diagrams and location of primary program elements seem to be unresolved. The "stacking diagram" shows office on France and retail/commercial on Gallagher. While the "floorplan level 1" and renderings show retail on France. If the office space is on France, there can be less hardscape with landscaping on both sides and a double row of trees. 2. If the parking on the northwest corner of the building is truly going to be considered as future retail/commercial space, the architects need to show how that space connects to other commercial space within the building, its impact on the north and west facades of the building, and its impact on the facing streets. Architecture Field Office 3. The rendered plan shows a trellis and outdoor seating with tables along Gallagher Drive. Is this intended to be private street level space for use by office tenants? We also have a few comments related to General Considerations for the City as it relates to the Southdale District: 1. Basic dimensions throughout the sketch plan should be provided to fully understand a proposal. 2. Diagrams of each primary level should be provided to describe how the project will fit in the overall district and how it will promote shared use of streets, and understand existing and future and service locations and access. 3. Primary streets should be identified as well as planned streets—dimensions, public realm characteristics, etc. should be described in more detail. 4. Renderings that are well detailed with materials should also indicate the level of quality of material characteristics on all four sides of the building. 5. Landscaping over above parking structures or below grade parking needs to be clearly identified. 6. Transparency on all four building sides is essential to a continuous and safe public realm. 7. Proposed new streets should meet the minimum of 60'width. Less that that will compromise the continuity of secondary streets across the district. 8. Recognizing that a healthy and safe public realm is emerging in the Southdale district, continuity of the elements that make up the design is critical in both consistency and quality of materials and lighting. 9. New north-south connector streets on the east and west sides of the Greater Southdale District (adjacent to residential neighborhoods) are envisioned to carry pedestrian, bike, parking, vehicular and service loads, and are being defined as"woonerfs"for greater pedestrian focus. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mic Architecture Field Office ROO f- NP 1�4✓� S 2200 Zane Ave N I Minneapolis,MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.corn City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street To Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date April 18, 2018 Cary: At your request, we reviewed the revised submission for the mixed-use development proposed for the 7250 France property. Having had the opportunity to review comment on the initial sketch plan submission in February, we were pleased to look at this revised proposal and see that the design team has incorporated feedback received at that stage in the process. We believe the building's design has evolved in a positive way, and is now more closely aligned with the development with the planning and design ideas set forth in the Greater Southdale District Planning Framework—Phase 2 work effort. In particular, we note the following attributes: • The building is now a"four-sided" building,whereby all four facades are treated as primary. • The building's relationship to the woonerf on the west side of the site is vastly improved, in that the drive is no longer underneath the building. • The pedestrian pattern seems appropriate and thought out. • The woonerfs on the west and north are pedestrian friendly, suggesting use by pedestrians first, bikes second, cars third and service vehicles fourth. • The public realm design, including the variety in paving and landscaping depicted in the renderings reinforces the pedestrian experience. • The scale and treatment of the public realm/pedestrian experience along France and Gallagher is open and flexible. • The building's northwest corner is better scaled in relation to the adjacent three story buildings. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mic DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION MAY 15, 2018 ORDINANCE NO. 2018- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE PUD-I5, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-15 ZONING DISTRICT The City Of Edina Ordains: Section I. Chapter 36, Article VIII, Division 4 is hereby amended to add the following: Sec. 36-507 Planned Unit Development District-I5 (PUD-I5) (a) Legal description: Lot 44, Block I, Oscar Roberts IST Addition, Hennepin County. (b) Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the re-development plans, including the master development plan for the site received by the City on , 2018 except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2018- on file in the Office of the Planning Department. (c) Principal Uses: All uses allowed in the PCD-2 Zoning District Multi-family Apartments/Condos. (d) Accessory Uses: All accessory uses allowed in the PCD-2 Zoning District. (e) Conditional Uses: All conditional uses allowed in the PCD-2 Zoning District. (0 Development Standards. In addition to the development standards per the PCD-2 Zoning District, the following shall apply: Required Building Setbacks Front— France 30-40 feet Side — Gallagher 30-55 feet Side— North 35-40 feet Rear—West 20 feet Building Height 7 stories and 90 feet Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.5% Parking Stalls 320 stall Parking Stall Size 8.5 x 18' Drive Aisle Width 24 feet (g) Signs shall be regulated per the PCD Zoning District. (h) Twenty percent (20%) of the dwelling units in the building shall be dedicated for affordable housing for a minimum of 15 years from the date of certificate of occupancy. Section 2. This ordinance is effective upon approval by the Metropolitan Council of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. First Reading: May 15, 2018 Second Reading: Published: Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk 2 '114 ta DATE: April 18, 2018 TO: 7250 France Avenue, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague— Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner PE— Director of Engineering Charlie Gerk PE—Graduate Engineer RE: 7250 France 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 03/26/2018. Review Comment Required For General I. Executed site improvement agreement that outlines public vs private responsibilities and ownership for private improvements Grading/Building Permit on public property. I.I Fulfill any requirements for rights to proceed with work. Grading/Building Permit 1.2 Fulfill all outstanding requirements. Certificate of Occupancy 2. From the discussion with City Council during the sketch plan process, provide public or private driveway access easements to 7200 France Avenue from Gallagher Drive and France Avenue Grading/Building Permit over the west and north sides of the property in the areas labeled specialty pavement over roof deck. 3. Deliver as-built records of public and private utility infrastructure Certificate of Occupancy post construction. Survey 4. An existing and proposed site condition survey is required. Grading/Building Permit 4.I Show all existing and proposed public and private easements. Discuss possible vacation of easements in locations of competing Grading/Building Permit interests. 5. Clearly denote private sidewalk. Maintenance for non-public Grading/Building Permit sidewalks to be responsibility of property owner. 6. Clearly indicate private vs public utilities. Grading/Building Permit Living Streets 7. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371 •Fax 952-826-0392 ti1.111 o fJ ir.d Si 8. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit 9. Public sidewalk shall not be colored or stamped. Grading/Building Permit 10. Public sidewalks along France Avenue to be minimum 8' in width Grading/Building Permit with 8' planted boulevard. II. Public sidewalk along Gallagher Drive to be minimum 5' in width with 5' planted boulevard or other integrated with south area of Grading/Building Permit building. 2. Provide Canto style light fixtures along France Avenue if lighting Grading/Building Permit is proposed. Traffic and Street 13. Hennepin County's initial review of the project states the right-in right-out access from France Avenue will not be allowed. Details Grading/Building Permit provided in the attached email from Hennepin County. 14. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Fire truck Grading/Building Permit turning template attached. 15. Per the traffic study, no improvements are needed at the Grading/Building Permit intersections analyzed to accommodate the proposed project. 16. Curb cut permit required for entrance movement/ Prior to Reconstructing Entrance reconstruction. 17. Road patching shall conform to Edina Standard Plates 540-545. Certificate of Occupancy Sanitary and Water Utilities 18. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations. Grading/Building Permit 19. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer's engineer. Grading/Building Permit 20. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer's engineer. Grading/Building Permit 21. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with public Prior to Starting Utility Work works. 21.1 Meter required for building service line and combined lines. No Grading/Building Permit meter required for fire only service line. 21.2 Public works to determine acceptable installation methods. Grading/Building Permit 22. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. Certificate of Occupancy As-built records show potentially 3 existing water services. 23. A SAC determination will be required by the Metropolitan Council. The SAC determination will be used by the city to Grading/Building Permit calculate sewer and water connection charges ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371•Fax 952-826-0392 �col o J ra Sys' ‘,.....:,,,,,,,,,,r-_,,-/ Storm Water Utility 24. Provide geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 25. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and Grading/Building Permit state construction site permit requirements. 26. Provide more detailed information for retention system. Grading/Building Permit 26.1 Ensure influence zone of infiltration chamber does not impact Grading/Building Permit underground parking. 26.2 Retention system engineer required to verify construction of the Certificate of Occupancy underground retention systems done per plan. 26.3 Confirm retention system and/or underground parking facilities is structural designed for Edina's 80,000lb fire truck load and Grading/Building Permit outriggers in parking lot areas. 27. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private Grading/Building Permit maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 28. A SWPPP consistent with the state general construction site Grading/Building Permit stormwater permit is required. Constructability and Safety 29. Construction staging, traffic control, and pedestrian access plans Grading/Building Permit will be required. Other Agency Coordination 30. Hennepin County, MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as Grading/Building Permit needed. 31. Nine Mile Creek and / or Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts Grading/Building Permit permit(s) are required. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard•Edina,Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov•952-826-0371 •Fax 952-826-0392 Charles Gerk From: Chad Ellos <Chad.Ellos@hennepin.us> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 10:10 AM To: Chad Miliner Cc: Jason D Gottfried; Robert H. Byers Subject: 7250 France Ave - Concept Plan Chad Millner, P.E. Edina Engineering Director: Our plat review committee submitted comments to city staff on August 22, 2017 in regards to redeveloping 7250 France Avenue South. At that time,we noted that a mid-block right-in/out access will not meet our access spacing guidelines and will unnecessarily add another point of conflict on the France Avenue corridor. More recently we were made aware of a revised concept plan which also proposes a similar mid-block right-in/out access.This proposed access falls considerably short of meeting our access spacing guidelines and would introduce a new conflict point on the high- volume corridor with the potential for vehicles to weave across three lanes in the southbound direction to make left or U-turns at Gallagher Drive. All traffic from the site should be directed to Gallagher Drive, similar to the existing condition,which has a full access traffic signal at France Avenue. If connections and access for the 7200 property are also being considered, another potential alternative may be to provide for an internal backage road, on the west side of this site, between 7200 and 7250 connecting both parcels to Gallagher Drive.This will provide a safe,direct connection to France Avenue for all movements from both sites and may also mitigate neighborhood traffic concerns on 72nd Street and Lynmar Lane. Another potential option for this connection may be to work with the adjacent 7300 Gallagher Drive property on joint access. While there is an existing, low volume driveway access on the 7200 parcel with access to France Avenue,we do not recommend that such an access remain with the traffic anticipated upon redevelopment of the 7200 site.With respect to previous discussions over the years on various site plans and proposed access at this location,we will review, analyze, and comment on any new development concepts based on current county policies and practices.This will ensure we are considering the most recent conditions and planning for safety and operations now and in the future. We appreciate your continued partnership through review of developments impacting county infrastructure in a joint effort to promote safety and mobility on our roadways. Sincerely, Chad Ellos, P.E. Transportation Planning Division Manager Hennepin County Public Works 1600 Prairie Drive I Medina, MN 55340 612-596-0395 I Chad.Ellos@hennepin.us I www.hennepin.us Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. AoecicifiLir DJR ARCHITECTURE,INC. 333 Washington Avenue North,Suite 210,Union Plaza,Minneapolis,MN 55401 T: 612.676.2700 F:612.676.2796 www.djr-inc.com March 26, 2018 Cary Teague, Planning Director �Y Planning Department Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Q` 'ON eckok Project: Mixed Use Development CV Location: 7250 France Avenue South Subject: Preliminary Development This presentation for Preliminary Development Review, PUD (Rezoning) and Comprehensive Plan Amendment illustrates the redevelopment of the Office Building and failing parking garage the NW corner of Gallagher and France Avenue to a mixed-use development containing 19,000 square feet of retail and office uses and 135 units of market rate and affordable housing with underground parking and associated site improvements and amenities. Current Use & Reasons for Redevelopment: The current use is a four-story office building and associated parking garage constructed in approximately 1973. The existing office structure is in great need up updating and the current structure does not support renovation for modern medical office use. More importantly, the parking garage, which does extend under the office building structure is in serious disrepair due to failing structural stability of the concrete construction. The site is ideally located for redevelopment into a mixed-use project as it fronts a major vehicular transit corridor and the proposed uses can take full advantage of the surrounding retail, service and entertainment businesses in the area. Proposed Development: The proposed project is a six-story mixed-use building with and office and retail uses. The building is sited to offer a better pedestrian environment via streetscape improvements, active storefront uses and pedestrian and bike amenities such as improved landscaping, lighting and pathways. The ground floor is a designed for retail and office uses with a small residential lobby. The residential portion of the project on floors 2-6 is a mixture of market rate and affordable housing. The building exterior will be a combination of stone, architectural metal siding stucco and aluminum storefront. The building is set back 50 feet from France Avenue and 28-53 feet on Gallagher. City & Neighborhood Betterment: The proposed development will benefit the City of Edina and the project's neighbors in the following ways: • Create a pedestrian-friendly development with the building oriented to the street and sidewalk with parking to the rear of the building, supporting initiatives from the Comprehensive Plan and Southdale / France Avenue working principles. • Improve traffic in the area with a right-in/right out access on France Avenue at the mid-block, which can provide access to this project and the site to the north. • Resolve the issue of a failing garage and improvement to the building stock. • Create a greener and more environmentally friendly development improving storm water rates and quality through storm water retention and infiltration. • Provides small scale office and retail. • Provide affordable housing near commercial nodes and on a transit corridor. Comprehensive Plan Amendment& Rezoning: The project proposes to change the zoning of the site from POD-1 to PUD. The current comprehensive plan indicates OR use in this area, but the Greater Southdale Area Final Land Use and Transportation Study Report identifies the area as a Mixed-Use area with an emphasis on housing. The proposed uses for this site are in keeping with the most current visioning of the area. The proposed use is consistent with neighboring uses and reinforces the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan by siting the building to address the street, engage pedestrians, cyclists and transit users. Cordially, Sheldon Berg, AIA, Leed AP, Principal ,o;lac76 C\ DJR ARCHITECTURE,INC. 333 Washington Avenue North,Suite 210,Union Plaza,Minneapolis,MN 55401 T: 612.676.2700 F:612.676.2796 www.dir-inc.com Cary Teague, Planning Director Planning Department Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 RE: 7250 France Ave—Site Plan Review Please see the following responses regarding planned sustainability aspects for the project. Sustainable Design & Energy I. Have you utilized Xcel Energy's Energy Design Assistance and/or Centerpoint Energy's Builder and Developer programs for this development? We are utilizing Energy Design Assistance through Xcel Energy in coordination with Centerpoint Energy. 2. Will there be a sustainable design certification used (ex. LEED)?The project will be designed using LEED for Homes Midrise as a design guideline, but we do not anticipate the cost and time for certification for the project.The developer would rather use the expenses add energy efficiency and durability to the project. 3. Will the buildings meet SB2030 energy goals and/or will they be Energy Star certified? These goals are not being specifically pursued. 4. Will you be optimizing the roof by installing a green roof?Yes, a green roof area is planned. 5. Will there be any renewable energy generation on site? The project is pursuing some level of renewable energy at the upper roofs. PV panels are the most likely type that will be used. 6. Will there be purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs)? RECs will not be purchased. Sustainable Transportation 7. Will there be bike parking near main entrance for guests? There is bike parking on site at the western commercial space. 8. How many stalls will have Level 2 or Fast Charge EV Charging Stations for renters? For retail clients? Fast charging stations will be planned but not installed at the present time. See question#9 below. 9. What percent of parking spaces will be ready for future EV Charger installation? 20 residential spaces (minimum) will be equipped with EV charging capacity with the opportunity to upgrade the spaces to Rapid EV charging in the future as demand increases. 10. Will there be parking spaces provided for car-sharing vehicles to reduce the overall number of cars?Yes. A specific number has not been confirmed yet. Managing Water II. What percent of the property is pervious surface before the redevelopment?What is the percent post development? Current Pervious surface is 41%of the site. Post development, the site will be 18% pervious. I 2. What new surfaces will be pervious? (i.e. Sidewalks, driveways, overflow parking) No pervious paving is being considered due to long term maintenance concerns. 13. How will the landscaping support the natural ecosystem? (i.e. Rain gardens, % native plants, % bee friendly pollinator plants) We have sizable rain gardens along the east and south street fronts of the project. In addition, we are planning for approximately 90% + Minnesota native cultivar perennials, shrubs, and trees that will create a pollinator friendly matrix of varied bloom times and critical woody plant material for refuge. plant as part of the development. Managing Tree Canopy 14. What percent of the property is covered by tree canopy before redevelopment? 10%What is the percent post development? 21 15. Will you be replanting/replacing trees at least four to five inches in diameter to positively impact the tree canopy (ordinance requirement is only 2.5 inches in diameter)? The replanting and replacement of trees will occur at the more typical 2.5-3" size as this size has proven better for establishment of the root system and long-term survivability of the trees. Managing Waste I 6. Will an organic (i.e. food waste) recycling service be provided to all businesses on site? Organic recycling will depend on the individual tenants in the commercial spaces. Organic recycling will be provided if commercial service is available. 17. Will an organic (i.e. food waste) recycling service be provided to all residents on site? Organic recycling can be provided if commercial service is available. 18. Is there enough space in the room labelled 'Trash/Recycling' for three separate trash, recycling, and organics recycling bins for haulers to pick up? Yes, there would be enough room to allow for organics recycling. 7250 France Ave S-Edina,MN\Word\Design\Zoning&Planning\City Comments\Sustainability\18-0418-Ltr Sustainability 7250 France.docx 2 DJR ARCHITECTURE,INC. 333 Washington Avenue North,Suite 210,Union Plaza,Minneapolis,MN 55401 T: 612.676.2700 F:612.676.2796 www.djr-inc.com April 18, 2018 Cary Teague, Planning Director Planning Department Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Project: Mixed Use Development Location: 7250 France Avenue South Subject: Changes from Sketch Plan review to Preliminary Development Submission Cary, I've itemized the more impactful changes in the proposed development from our initial sketch plan submittal to the current preliminary development plans. Please call with any questions. Site Plan: • Increased the Setback on France Avenue to 50 Feet at the base, retaining podium set back of approximately 10 more feet at floors 2-6 on the majority of the façade. This allows more landscaping and pedestrian amenities on France Avenue. • Increased setback at rear property (west side) to bring access street out from under the building. Incorporated a walkway on the west side adjacent to the building and maintained our landscape buffer to the west. Building Design, Scale and Massing: • Build steps down along the west side to 5 stories with a setback at the 6' floor • Overall project size is approximately 8% smaller than the previous iteration. From 2.36 FAR to 2.18. • North and west facades have greater development and improved pedestrian realm experience. • Increased green roof area at 2"floor plaza roof. Cordially, 81/L-cl Sheldon Berg, AIA, Leed AP, Principal - co - = t c Lo o N in . " Z o � m )1. a `Yam �� L Z � � �'� , _ -�-.411S" 0 t _. U '6 i. Is ' _ 11, 71.4.-.2 2 -i 2O , P �' - N O �4? ''(^;* '- f 011111111 W (I) 4p.... a1 -.7 , ,. S .:,_.„D , -..-,..,..1-11,-4t., .. r� W erU,• a.: 2 , .. k mmiall. "' ►,- tr `I 0 , . itiot t Y 4116.. $. -.• r V — J 100410.. k _ CO r. e w ! Q) 0 1 U tilt L CB LL 0 O U o aaa N 1T3' N N t.° N m ° 1- -Y <t m rn N0 coFto V y:6t` C N -.F,o �o cr o cn m E n�Ii °) 2 00 - an. Occnm o , 47. .0 U 3 ...• as E c 4) 2 In a N co 6) W Li 2 a) I, Pt t° a cn --' oa. Y d C c d m U C N O O Lo Y Cc .mir, _ 4 m nm C Ii ! :,,,;`;. , l ' 2 r O 1 ea ma as Q a �� `m U 0. C t (X �� c� • i .iii is �� ,,, i Ip' a l iW il,,, c. t :( :,: . 14„ Wil_...-, :?.,...1.7, .......'41....;07rbillik, •:. • :, , , ,_... .,. .:„ ..,. ...,, :„,,,,,...... , • , _.,,•,‘,. . .. _..,.. , ,, , ,. . , ,,..,,,.., _ _,,,,,.... ,..„,, .ta 1� 1 ('^ .C 4 Jkfripa---: : N.b le, aa" ri^ :-.i-.1 N'..,:;',----, r4".r 1 ,t; s-� ?r 4 ti . y! ,4.k�l *-f-'4','.7... s :-A,-,' :; a ( ' z +. a w z,b t • r • a, 1 I c d iq 2.E a oa oE v 0 j crnc m Q,�Ya Em n �� =m a2 o c� cza _ c '.o a m a 9 N 8 es _ E8 om c 2 c`0mpNnoZa °L '0t ' a o• m ` ' til m 2z- grU w 4' N 4 a) O N U Eco a m E y p y m°? ti m w0cNf‘)-2 2m M i> mb mC - E.c.y upmm •44m lw p E c -. N1 me 2 m o O Ac .c ° n-.9, C- aaha ` o 8mcL -:=.,;13 yo ' ct « -o- c r to w o 5 c o Q S o m m NC7 o 40 gL9 6 O.4 V°lt)N a N U C C N i EC! _ p NC N C 2 40.p.40E C m u a m a O*E y m h N E o N 4q d.O N• U d Y O U • h!i = E X UN3 Om • O O p Cr I U O v) S. o o�O o aalg a m w am m 12 po`op (Q O''. 2 p a.Ha • - c C"O 2 N U a Y N ili CyNmmmE La oo £ ° 3 0` c aO * g t° "=0n4- -. ••0a L N) z a 2° . • m V 15 : a* O a Nw mp• cO y to > % m aa) f v 8 m c m 2 c° ai 42 x io 0m aampN8CO omEm'n> c `aNoN aN 4m 2 a o y d p a : 2-p p b °o o 8 pd . o •-52 h O • oc ampC = oi >m en;4 «Y a a) 2 m Q p UWa=y n aO4_ a N • u LL Z • aEa cNy c ti n( EEi ic ce � uNa 6.1-... s, 26 h ,NM m m y m M a o m .So c t c., z cn ti m N'm °.2.. .,5, d' N `N M. to a'cv, `.° y 3 �a unY m o = cL cL d d 0 c,_ Cl)CL N CDc 0 cw ::a., ; ` �� U.' "h ". , \\\ \ I ar n I - N ii . liI. IllPllIllIll1 _.. 0 Q • cam., .. —0 dit N w 7.' ,--- ,g‘,4.,G.LCRs I 1'T I, kd ,« 0 E�{ � a vi • "7 i 1r�.D1 L...' : .9�W 0f ir '11:-;....1 m m m i -, , TT Ill[_717/1 1.-.c f:r., 13 g f7,3 Cli LI ' p n w m YD ' -e•A•-'———'mr ' ' 1 tr � 4y ooa� Q s5 o"%." 1tia �L �� 111111 tp ryq ... _, . , '. rel __ -- iET 0 • 2 r. il- a- z �u ^, o N _ [-_n _ N �� o r Y.w . ✓ C�- J pip • r r _ +: E �q ® .. •''''.i. 2c:1- N r.....401 ',L., - 5' • +• --1*ce'1 I. • v .^. ;p" I�' { ` p, u w• 4 ixI - 4i� 2. ii 1-5 + F- _ 1 { 4} i ice{. II:isy 0 M i y i f / I y�. N U ,�' , z . Cf r I - - -.. _' • i .,41','74.-4 i a, ,.. 23 +.Yw a ig 10. Sa E v ;� E co F1 _ ` f I f m a ewe 0 ‘,....r .. f •''-.ra'` =' H y a -92 Iii U }" 4N ` to Z y E c as I,IY R� � ,i4 ,u j V1 'q t m L ,��_ a N C c m U U 2 LL 0 up CI 6) r ,. .......:., 1 ,,, :, •,.,.., .„ . . . „ ,, ,.. ,,,,,. : .,.., . . , ., ,.., . ‘,.. ,,,... , ... ....._...„ ,_.,. .., ..,....-.4.;..i . .. ;,. :',... ... 1 y.... .. : ., i,, t...... „. .. , ... 1 :.,,..:,_ ____ . , i . ___ .,. w ..._, -T� o a) ”-.. —T EL 0 a co # J Fa ',lir.: — ,14 i',,'„.* > a o 0 U -C 45 .0 00 by m m 0 u. m 0 ° m 0 i) E E N 2 0 N cb N a E p 0 c z O cn co d c6 v It 0I t d S , ,4$g � L '£ ;;)s O Y H .s, i ULLrFd oul'ainoailgodtl Na iI FI a r b > Wit ' l• *� sgip >i Yo li IV- Csi ii to r v ii any aauead 05ZL yam 4.: - a 11 anVaTal.17d;�IC i E 8il. iiii /5$g i1::\0' flL 1A v11I0 ii t:, 'r" 1 \'t \ g s \ ?I l`a,�,••}°T`cif C Fr,--1I �` 1 4x I',a(1 1 1 I 1 I s t--ii-1- I .� i is a d 1IA !' t 8 5 .F '/---t-tr.11 x JI"I,,� 8 IF. 1.. a a1 11``1 i f" YI a I 4 a \I a - � \ i II r_ I e 4; 1 - a e �•.'` 1R z 'yam,....\ �\ aa„�x ,, , \ x , _' 4, , I I I y A \ :\ o 1�•1I '� a S\ *i .` \ 1 '' '''', 1,'1{ '6� °. 1 I 1 a �i _ ,'`� I.411 - � • I1jYFI I i is �. y.. 1". I I, y a _ 1. a. a � \ a \ x'44 J1 I ' t§ \\y\ \ FF {{ 11 i E 0 11cD .i .- [ 1J11 \vtiii 111 it i g:gil 1 1111 la F \ \ Q 1 I g} 1 11 1' F: i; F llx'4 1i i ;t F F it flip_,\ ,_:\ \ N IF• I 1 $= � in 1�.�1 a FF dF � di i4 p 5 it -3f jj(f $d irdi`ii hII11 11 $i;F Atl6 i i ; !1; Y 1:i1 ii ti di d'd ty1 Fp,} \ \ Lt. 7d 3 teEE� fit' FldIi ii12 3e \ ri ! 11 , 1 1 , x I. i 1 111 .;x;11 li `ii.III IIIIII ;II 13I li1 \ F d ij a d d d F. \d4g1, s1 i4fvFF�>j \} �' 1 1 I I F 1, 1i I. 1ll,1i 6 1 [i{1d11F t,1. 101 liii ili 1 \ \ $ € a F} [! l ata a. ia, 1 w ;I Z 9 # @ gg4 F 1' }I I2I 1 SEFlF"F1al..Iela i 413 ?Pi \N ' ', ' 9 1- i i 1 if § 1 ;fill! F 1 d+• . . . . . _ v 4='= ij7 1 E � FFfaillldl $¢$ 11 t� i; ii; iii . . . . . . €F1_i 1 v :, LL E ----- O � j 1 o_ N U O ) 0 Q. 2CV I LO c 0,1�m-I 1 ` _ Y 7 1, ,,, y1+r�, , tl� / (I� ,, ..,, ,f,, ,:i;,,,,,...41, ,` r 1 ` '1:: t' 17 siY i'. I, Fri,:I �" r '(�r '� { d' TMI' AIS f ,II w :l •4 L�( v,li' may. f ' 1 Fn r y4 • r - -. N 1. { •J .Yr. .� to .. i .i.. i. %l. V : S•;"'4- 0YUrI ',,' f ' �, � ,rr _ r 1- - I F ''..,•(-4%.'"t"......•:'„-..-:', r>t' ,* f it;• r° \ii `i , ,�., .? ii , • it'. r. Ail% 1*' ' j ic',',1' , , _ r,. ,... . .. r t 4 Yuf �_ ,FBF +' i F�i.:. =� ' - .....,se %z`•tY w ... . n '4 t. r gt e •It j' , -. 1 , y -L t4Xl r • 4 — ilf,„. \ ,, - ......r. ii,i';\\ .-:-- V 7 . li .:, , " ,, , -,,,,,.:.:1,:.:s-ar_.:,. 7, 1ii• d y I � ., , ', 111'. ii // •'/ / {- .. I ''FFF f L1� .1,111 I +I _ s ' r 1 �} , is it � �i 'j, yk. J, 1, ... ... .... . . '�. J I` f� ,F, :�..t j p / ti� ik ) lF 7 ':1"x ; 1 Illi -F f c,� 4' mfr £/ ,� M ti f' ' I P v t 6+ h 1, c 1 t`,, N� 1,,U 1 A It'' ! �'a� 1'4 � 4r EKJ� aI 0"..,..i,...•1 ,4.,'', ' t.,,;A: '-, : 4 • Q-1 n N. • in•NEFA via . ? • MI WM MI iiiiill1 ... an um, Irak 11E1 Pik ..-. , ..:1.1,, . .... CZ 2_4 ... _ ili c CV r ,ui z / , a la \milli- .. '", I• ;:: NM ')1• " ...... , . .: ' /- • ., . . . .. , zard 1 _ 1.1111.1111r0%' •"".'" i i \ 4 =MUM it _ ,,, ---MWA 1 ' '\\I' ,,-I , 1 ' I 1 • i-i -- 1 ''; '---I, V-.: _ air T,1 t . •,-..,, „.....,, i- 1..... ' t J. 4.1 ttt/ MMENI MINE IIIII, '' ra_ivin, mil - , , — k. iKiir'17—:,T., , ' • % 1....-111M - v apq, 5- .67.. ----minow-wor v-w,ti • 'i. -- :II- y 4 , --t ;r/ - 14 - - , 1.2fiur:_ gm Nori... n"-: rt ' a - / AffillM1-15, ' t' MI kw!" 5,. ' , / — 11111/11111Nr/ . _i ' , - ,,.-.,--,--.--,t, ',----. , \ • . ) ,. 7 , maw . ..!4, ‘\ I\ j 3 ajmnr,vii _..i, ,,,.. ,werv.! • ..N, , . L.-....ut viii r , !..4. ', . NI Ea3 mini+!,, 11----1=1 , ro :7 •-..' H ,. • LIM Ili IA ,,,:..,,,..iiiii ''.-=---' ' '‘ :: 11111 A y ,...r_, ,,,,,, . •\ ... , . .74.1., , . ,J.tA- 4„--' L 1 1 1 I i, \ :.1.1. . •7:'' ,/,' ,ir ik,-,wi,,-.4.1., ......„....-,,,r.„-... fffi i, I ' IM11:1 4111 t -', ';,'''''''V't ,i,"..,..,.. i"<110" -II_ - :WI -' *". - III a -- Ma‘77 11 II\1 iv i__Ltzt.' ==a =Mr , %. :t e?1 .. I=EFI NM ',•.';''..-; :- ,,,,-,, :` d' 4.°, "-7 'S, ',.;‘' j ,,,,w,f''."'.„-,---.' • • „,. . „0, cz - oittlte '''' ,gr” I •hr ';''' ' .1,t jt ''',\V': **,"' ' ..,./ t , ,-- -,, '''' ',4 ''''' `.'zt - 1 •i41,;:r+4.. '* ‘.,4 '„`..elt` •;iii.i-c.4 . ' '4:1 %t., t' 4`. : vr Ct -' a .• • iik.. IP i'•, . it,, ., I IC 2 • 6) , N •rt 4 T. u.. S Ja1111111111111 'Y N(3, N -1 \\\ \ po- - . . .. , , .,....,.., . .:, . ,..,....4., ...,,,..,,.,.... . , ,,.... ...„,,, „..,.,..„ • ., :.,, ...--...- ,:,•,„, ..-.... , ....., . ., . •, ,.... _ ... ... . , 0,4, 1 ___-_ •--., -?,. ife.. ._w•.. . . , .....--. -.....-9; t- ,,-!' I 1 1 I 1 1--- 1 I _ Adii I 1 N . 1 ' H I ;; I II , I i .. ! II ' I 1------±- - - • II . , , '•, ' .,• .;`, - -4; • -; , ; s i 1 '. , - AA 41 t • ' '' ,_ .4.4-. ! ' — --*!!" • 01,. w......... ;;:- . ,..'1,. 4 , .,. .. •, ,,, , i _ ,,,: ..• ...., ....„ ,.._ , .. • , -, .... - .0.o i if..•"'f • 4 , ' c -' v' • 0 1 ;f"-' ' . ..k- c> ,....., • - ,._ .. - '2 Y.• ' _____.-- . •, .. .. 0 . ' :,;N:: - , • ....";i, ' .. - -- t it-0-1-:. ' _ • ,-,..-„, ...._.„ „ .:•...• -1 17, :4;-•'' . . .., ,., • • ol ' --'-leit'ct(it -11 • . -,':;.4-'4„ .. i,,,!...,..;,' •: ,; . ..:'.:: 1 ••••'' s' ';',4,..,,. :- ..... ..IR ' `, / ....'Y ' .. ' , ' co •r"" i`- , /IL .. .:J .a" k_KA,.i . • ‘, • CC . . - 0 - +C 1 ' .••,' I * ., ;,•.- ...,...,. • _.4v..-, .. ., . a - . , r ; 3 • ' * I, _ . .,, - , ... 1 1 --a .,_ .... Ai .. 1I , __ — nil . a7_ ' .':• _ _ , .... . . --• -...,„..., . . • 1 IF .,- . 1\\ Ls r-N E ...,-.._ 1, _._............. IiiiikH. • , -MIR sir iv L„ • 11;1 --., a '.. 11111111,11. . „„r , 1 _ .. ... . , i 1 ,.,11Y F1114 a ' willk- lifr" Ik‘WMIll\ 1/4 • --,41 Fa .... 1,4 1 " __,4._\ ''' - ''' .,'......,la • . , I ; •fir ,, , ., ' •' __II ' . :.. ' t t• x \ - '—L, \_ \ La... • ' L.. i i..c- _ "ftwill. .: '''-;'''• \-- \ V i r ''''''' 1,,,r-rrtr., '.' --7,,,-• .---a- Fr: \ir\111 -.. ,.... \ N.\ \ \\ \ ‘ \ '-‘ •.,.. ._., - Vt. -. . . . - ." • ' -1 - '- ,:ccy,,:f.1 .-i; • , „,',3. ,,,. h -. 3i•Zr ---,:i7 - ' ' ;,4141 . • • , .-\.:1......' , — LL:k -- ; 4'.L . .... 't,. • : . V ,L-•,,,,--.L.L'...:e....e...L.,1,,. -,.::, .'• 4,..14,..;L5 1;-.;:'-... . AL:-- .:.,r, .tt ..,....L,,:i : r •ef , 0 ' cu > -.,,`,:'' ',.,.;,,9 i,' ' .•,,' .^ ,.."t ! v . . .":' ft,' 'ts,,.7.' _ •.... i3, 8 ''''',;•-'•'..,.,;; ;-'...i'''''', ,' ",,,i3O`'',0, '\, „ ;-' ',' ',. co ,P,4-AF'‘,',.'4.t.• :',111,Y ,'.',.-'L 'c'''' .'4 - N.% C' '' el: L ,• ,., ii1,..,,„ 4:.:", -l'''' 00 C- --. ..-- C _ .1.3g.w3422 C DNI i)Yg.13511!e-gie eiLs . - C H rci ......,.,....„...t.,,, -,,......,...„,,,,,.. 3sn a3xwil 33NVIld OSZL . I I - I - I NOlionaisNoo 1,10d ION-.1.JVNI1411731,1d ggAggq I g ming flg i LI :;;! .2.2 1 5 — . , 1 ... II 1111 lif iim i hi 111:lul 1y 101 !NM in 'ili 1I.11 i g;11 Id ail 11, lig!le g 1 g i — 7 a Angtg b. ig! .11 11:3 i 11 q' — — i 3 d'll i 111111 Hi 111 11 III 4 1 tr, 1 k A /kill . i mn ___ _ I -11 Iffld Ili ,ggiasnmEm 1---3 -0 ' EMI 1 lmm n gmaaganiiiiii i t.' , , ... t• I : 1 •gr ill, P 1 " ' '1 rlig Ok Oil gi "'• i ` i I ' 9 C-170 :--in, CM P , ' ) Pr . 44 4 , EB , ,,7.1rg i,„ .•, t ..., 1116; IL ) " i r 1 "I , ,1 .5.. '.! Jig in IM EH ..4ait mg 1 i I i iim m• s•• g ....... i. I II 1. t / • l .- ma: r . .o L 14 ,a L_LI = CMI . D MI ism \—' I // EB EN 1 Ii ,,,,,v 1. / [ ,.. \ Ilk I • ricyt, , \ , a: '''''-'7- 7,..-„PA- •- I ..-' I - ' I 1 ^ i -."• %1 Ii. ..-1 -= 1111"111W - jl /1 2,....._- _Ni` o eI za� r rivi�a ' 'an"zgorte — �a 3S(1 a3XIW 3JN��05ZL ._ ,,,, a - N0lIOf1211SN00 HOd ION-1,TJHNIWIl321d O I' I I II I'I 1' I I1 'L"—L---j--j---L--L---L--LI 1 I I I I I I 1I I � I I II Iq I , 1 '1 1 I I I I F \ ° I 2 - I , ' --.4r.___,i1.7_4_---i w I4iIHI I — 1 \-r.4 tq —rt I >m I j 1 I w I 1 1 ® . i 1 1 1 i E4 o- I -- I -1- g I 1 r 1 1 aN d I 1 1 I cu, ifj - ° I I 1 I I I Il 1 I — 1 i - - - I I it �� ° III 1 - 1 I I ' 1 1 , ____ _ _ 1 _______r____,______.! �I . . FT liL_____,_ , 1 ° qp �_1 u 0 �`�`^�����I�kk,,,,3333,,,.JJJJ�.�;.,.., ...m,.., lam_1Ld'13h31-�Yld 11.x. 0 ONV(1�11H�23V aniL.N.S?,:2 < ] , 3Sf1 a3XIW 3ONV' h109ZL a 1 - I - 1 I 1 NOIIOf H.SNOO iiOd ION-ALIVNI01I13Jd o—� I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I' — 1 III I 1 � �� I --- I I I1 o I. I?� ws1 d I. O.—_--_._ —_1—_— —_—_—rte___:,,., __I_—_ --r_-z-_-r-_-_-_-_-_f-_- I I I - 1 I 1 a i —.---TI g III }I } j —j --T,I I I d ',T, 1 1- a 1 --F. I I I I o 1 0 1 1 . 1 1: w¢ w I 51 m I I B L 1 1 1 _— 1 1 1 1 1 z I. II Y fn *--t a< 0--- - ---� — '�-— - --!— — -- -teas a —tee � ---- 1-- I I I I I I I I -9 l. I I I I I I d 1 1: _1 M O----tHH!ii±_JI4 -_ s I I II I I g <.�� r., k .., k u Jr .0 k u k k 1 u k .. 4±-- ';r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. w .. ....... o 9N1'3al10311N3 VOf1,���a1S .. � Q I � � 1 ®asn a3XIW 33NVHA OSIL 1 1 I I - 1 - NOLLOf1aISNOO aOJ ION-A2IVNIWIliad 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 nn 1 [. \ I nen n ° I . . b 1 1 1 Cr— III, —_—_"-1_—_—__4_—_—_-I-___—_- 4-_—_ —_I--_— k , rir I I I F o I. 1 1 •I t y� I �� I N 3: I I 'I'; J 1 1 1 Zm I I I I -0 1 1 —L ' - - 1' J ' I I I1 1 . 1 1 I� 1 71 1 Ip 1 m 1 1 1 I 11 1 i w I a, . 1) 1 II I �w liE8 I • 1 I I I I I IJ I- 1 1 R 1 ON ONd Oi NMoa i :: ::. 1 1 1 �T 1 1 1 1 1ONIMltld 3)119 1 1 0--+- 1- — — �— — — — — — 7------i — -- — k 4 — W p 4 I s s , I I I I 1 '1 I 1 1 -., 1 I I' b b b b b b _ . b b b 0 0 -. :7L::::\ Z13/31-Nyld 210021 r. ONIL'FacuO3111-1 -- 3S(1 a3XIW 3�NY&I OSZL ra - NOIIOIiaisN00 NOA ION-ANVNIINIl321d 0 1 1 II II I I O - 1 ___.J_______________ , - �t---I \------1----- r jamIII_-- 'I I III I I ° -,- __ • I I � �__I P.' QR" � ;m < Iw_ 11 4 r. W_O SII II N K I I; RR immwital C-_-t-- It - Ll rl I� 1 I _I I I I --I — I r I 1 I ® �1 III iJ I I `I I I1 y 11 _ J - II — I -- - I I I I I s L. J I I. I 11 i I L ---_ J !t!UL4L11L]I L Q J J I 'I ,_ 1�L _, III I I r I o- + • r II -- 11 b 1 b b 1 . , , 1 C .,.—.. - Co) oa.31,V;i:thlii-oIfiv -- E 13A31-Nyld 100 d ' als ' 1 r a7.....tz..±...... -. 3sn aaxm 3ONVIIA 00 NounnaisNoo HOA ION-AIIVNIV11131d Q ' Q1 I - I a-- -Or I I -- -I . D.MMIIIIMill • c—--1---—--- 1-—-—---4- 1 1 111\_:_,Ot 1 rl is r cari I ff-- Lit! mil L_d ir ill 1 - , UTII 1 s' 1 _ I Il LI .„, rl , L_ J , -1 , - LT 4; 1 .40 , , cii III 7 Illi___ , -' - 1 ' 0— i a, 2 s LIIIMIL _IIIMIL _- JIM— __ AIM I= 11 1 1 I i I 1 1 1 v- .....,,...., cc) J -av 3sn CI3X1W 33NVIIA OSIL NO119111,11SNO0 bOd ION-MVNIIA11131,1d,, --- L )1, 1 ) ---- ----i ‘.,) / \)),)--------11 ' --) --. —../ ---g . .... MI 1 hillihx=,... el , MINI IIIIII 1 ' 1 Lrli r 77: tailiiL ] A , r. . • , ----- \\ L_IIL, ,. ...,... I , ,.....) J„.... ,.,, , ,,, ,.„_, =________ii ..... - CV ) —) i‘- ...---•- -, --))) iir 7 \ ,1L‘‘`I' LI c‘-'-' —I 1.\ In _____j \ 1. Isl J \' 2 ,..______ _ _.. — _ § -- - ( ------- .,,, ,_—______, i_c ..e,Th, - / MOW LIMII i MIL -----i -r . -, , • \ II \\ - ft . , -' Allinillti Aar gi --------_- _,, 1_ \ _1 1 r t c::"..' —_______-1 — ELIE:1 ------I A . ..__ , „., lit g ____ __________ „ _, C 1 Flarinii I ) ) L \ r/ taia ______) , __ , ) \ , , ‘ \ ,_ , \ , \ 11; ‘ , , , i, \ . \\ -- -m, L .. , A" It SNI-'3ilfll03Th-ro iV b1S SNOLLVA3132101a31Ya csi 0 rf 1No 3sn a3XIW 3ONVIIA OSZL I I - 1 - I - I - NOIIOflaLSNOO 2JOd ION-A2IVNINIllaJd . r r n �' 1 i 5 Y i 1 g s t. G . 1 � G., �5 hh G GS \ ' NA xi �� �! I !€IMI!_ ; 1 — m liIliI■ , .1I ell 1 I 0— — I — ;- ..i. zL ,- - �, : rim o i ,E — ._ _ e ® m : Imo' •I. p ij i ■ 'I_ •• Iii Iii i : •= m WE' ilIE 11 1 O - _ =, MI 121 Mt =I eugi HI EH 7,.-±1-2,N E 1 1 =,CD CD CO • i •• _ . :_ o -- - - - if El3 Eg Ei LI I i =ffILIF— L . _1 ° - _� 1li ------ 7 F F F r� o - , : _ � o----ter— - - - :�_ ! i i 1 11 11 lill i i t, EJ I rIrril 4 ..1 I 2 LL P V ---- o - -- 7 - ---- iI 1 a === ■ .\A 111111111- – 11 I g . 1 11 Il 1.14C i MI — Es !1 j 1 ; _ � m ®; g - -.CD CO o- ,� o E ! — - J ® = > r. n®nn O r �®�� Li EH EH Uj= P. --- m �mFF -- - -_o-.� ! __ 111.2 -i _ -nom Al m = _ i mmmmQ ® 1m� ='i ES®11 O II 11L 7 � .., ........ .,. . O • SNI'32if11�31IHD V "'•�"""a�N3 n rio� rOI:PJ a 1—� ' •w --. �'" Wild 30.yaS_NVI 30u3111duo�. w'-•, 3Sf1 a xm 3ONV Id OSZL NO11Of1N1SNOO HOd ION-AHVNIWllald B 111 1 11111 ii §Ni1§ 111i:i Y 00000000000 I- ® , -• - 1 1111E/M121111111111111111=1111111=1_;M-0 _- - - -I .- , le irmwsismairastsms,imam.aisamil . T. °IMlle- ®®®M�®®��MI a r 1111 16 o • 077 •� • - - - - - - - - - - -a- --= e _i. .......--m- V-, IIII °® 0 ; a $ I °° — ow a ♦ , •m ` `1 • +7.-j, g C 0Is n a n I. 1 : it VI o � II] °#' ®® N11 aWN 0,........... . t0 oWg o<, Oa z fooo IQ Ca LS 0 O p411 i po .n O', O ] 1 Fr111,00111110 , , 1 __J , .L .. i IIIS 1 1 die �1.,__ i , , 1 ., , 1 0, iip.)„ ,. - !\ r_ .a: _ , . 1 0 0 \.:,,„, \ Z w - - — —� Wil; w 66'S9Z_3..16.II0.0DS CD �.�""„ mom...,.,•. S31ON • ------ ONtl SlIV130 3_dtl—S-NtlI NI' ifJ HONV "`" oNorroryals_ . :Irci s aouamduoo 3Sf1 a3XIW 30Ntald OSZL - NOIIOf12ilSNOO 203 ION-AL1VNMIl3eld eigaapam§: eirgiigi fed p na 1'sl p el' [ a °g g ' e 1RE4filli9iil Ili Y51 5 I 3 C CE ,d q 1, 1;2!2"I!' '9( 1xs}1 ei 1j 1 § ly '- 114 o 1 3 3 iE d i Y C 5 §� 5 '1 li 1 ' 1g a ° i Cy l �rig,106 -Ca ,l2 gg '-" € v° e i i3 y3 dC 3 � jafS�5.3 �°y 5.Y€ ai�� 3 �5g €`� � ���� � �s6 s tl' � b i 1232' ; SCE lq�a T DI i3�: § I! 9C�" �'@` �y=.f� g pm �4@�6 s x� �p s i ° ,_, �jIJ1 1 1$ 13" � ee j ;! J 5 ig m i °C "I glpr 1: +a 91 iai € I E •I; i i 1 RY CCCIpi 5•°c5 i° R8€ q py6qq � 4 p a i2 VII 41 eC piled, 2� 61121 e2v e 19 lv 4 Ri `4y 1d i� i g{{i" qq4.'10 6if"�aj'Fpi�i f 3 4-y6 6" ii 1 Ygaii Y2i !Y )p4 6 i �x 7g 1e E 1�f�`f 2+116 Ya a I i°€ER#7 - d �ifi 4�1e_ 11:11111i Sxi e] 4 �.= }i4 I 4g6511-0g19 esei€SfS g1gg �gRx €� a5c �� �° — iie m s BCx B- 3 ypp i C 11-. i e9s 1R ig111 �1 a1 612' ipgril l�a Reg Y gp:p9 C� }q-qsg� g i'E6r A I '1;114 Q2 ey 1 � =aa yf 5 2a k kbi 6� t'6r g 93 °€ @ Cv t R4,- 1 11 "'S 66 4€ex ¢¢i i i ii i gl '49° g r/og 9 'g - a hg 3igg ( i_`i s Pi i@ - g 39 s8 liiiilii ii a.l19 @li ggati ae hbab igiblio:Li C!1 �9 A 219 lil yi3 �ig51 �xi1p i 5 �g R5 1? p' • .11�@p@ €6'� "gy R e i9 is g= € Y �€lis!°, f �� �€ it, x: if ' k'. fl g 1111(IV ; id5iigh81i ! If! ne : milli = riri ill /so,fi�rh e ' \ .�ll a „ r P .y i4ilrx 'rri � If � r o 1 a F. ay :''If tltl 1 i I § Cai!i2i I! i 3! °igi 5 5 81 w - , r ( - ;1 m !ugh 'i 6g a 'l Ell 9j e s1. � '' ' is _ � t E s F i 1 i 2233 3359 '1,10,,,) p 3 .11 1 a �'n ` I i Eiki Qa z ;8 1 I e'O 3Y 4 6 S a ✓ !i5 r� 6/* ,f R. y CO CPC) i 4226 g e g gia IP ii 6 3331 @e it ;�; s s iQe 69f i J?0S •..- ," a3 252 s '2664 046 ci 51 Ip fil o a 111014 3 d4 5 i w ;oe 3GIL p ag §. -� 8 � 7 .pp�;i g w g :f 101 11 a 1 9a§� ax 4 � �6 •;;1� a 1 1N11d ii it C 3 g9yg !3 •=k' -g 99919iS -ii $8 0; iid .. .9! 3 1- OA., �g9 955 is ea aim e _� 4F �7 of U (6 )1) O a, O U N °) Y N d U C R U. O N CO N r N 0 O t m EC m o C�„ _m N C w anuany aaueJl zED- IY aaa;ozz U 1 ` I in 1 1 ç 1 1 N I 1■ 1 . i i 01 L I LIN 1 I cct i 15 1 MW n313 (9 N Iul0.1 a y 1 o 2 M I I u I w f o N 1 I U (� 1 U 2 Q Q 2 1 LL F __. _. _1 I 11 1' vg NO r z�xK 1 ui 1 u. 3`JVilO1S 3N18 1 AVMNIVM NVIdIS303d r 1 •.i ! 1 1 • • • ._ • - . _. -1 > 1 t, M < 55 11 L - - - - - - - - - - - - - -u-NIL - - - - - - :I rn c NI1 AlH3d°Lid 0 0 `0 0 L 14,000 NW.311103N,'Mn))))ONWill WM !I i CD. 1.1.4 S31.1.113d0Hd NV3I'N09 gold 4. . Cl']Ci5E h 5.,1 ...40 Ur n a'II 06,66 NW.0003.6 3,`,/.30N'al4 OM allill 1'.I i: 8 ",5i.i!'2 0'i 111 MN a' M r: l'• LP 3ONVNJ OSZL 1 , g g gt g g._, gig gggg gg i di. gi 1 Ii111111111111 '1 111 l!g! li g 1;1 1 gl i S!!„, 1111111111111 11 11 111 1111 11 1 11:1111 1 0 ge Eg Ig 6 1 g lig Vw i ! ii 10 I 1 1 1 L g Iii; !i'.1.il ill lifi !; 1 ' Iilill i 1 il i Ei i Igo 1 l; 'ii;ill 1;11,il 11 E 2. , ? 1 i . t 9 E 11 i 1 i ii i ! i 11 g,il 11 ill 4! Ili!ii li i i E .>",.NI= ,ox --hii - . . .1:.a§ I:, gg 5g Ig!ggl! illi I. i i !i gi 1;11 qi h?i!11 gl.ff15-li.1 I! , ! ''''i § ., --- E, Itili il i f!Iv ill li;1 ig It;114 ilill i!r A i is pc, _ '1 i q—1 1=i gig ° li il ii hl il 11 li Ili 11 ii il Ili 1111!Iii 11!I '0 gi i _ ., _'. .•'., '.. , . . . ,.. e :.- e 5- n • . ., , . — -- - 1 — ' 8 t i $AN li 11 _li ill EV g any aa .e., I ot 1_ . 'I. I/1E 111 ' , - ,, -, _ ,...... . -,,,,,- wegioNa.*:%A:\ N..,,.N.-oktAan...1.41,\N\NN.I.s--A,N&N....ii-i-v,•.,---_,-...--. ._.., _ - . tr.-J.!,7• , .,,'*!7."...'`...‘-- -Vrbr -4, '..--ti'''''-_7---r'-=rt,--1,.'.''',-,,-.:"V.-.-.,-=.-- -...--.•- ,-...,... '' ,. - - -- -.1fri" •P.4 . '•• - _ '--....";_i"-,.2,..--...,•- , • . . ,,_ _.- ",,, ,.1,,,,i7.1",...11;i: i:,.., f. ,,,,,;:_.:1. ., ,..E,,, /•,,i; ,k,,, l• ' -',••'•••' 'Si, i:::,,.:•:-:':..:;•:.i..:•:::•i,:::::::•::-:::::-..:*-;i::::,;i•::::::::::::::":::::::?-;-•::•:.:::::;.:-k::"3!,.':I i ,,',. 4,,'• s 1 t...,', ' ' ' - ; _ ..24ii-siy.i..*;y::::.:::•::::*.:::::* :::::•: :::::Wg':**:**k la,:' ' - '1''. - ..-1001.A.:10.1%tw-1:7. 14.14v0010.4Alowe::: ,. :5 - , N c ' -I - : ,,..7;:i5a:_c•A:.*:i:4-41:41,4,,,,.1"q.c.:Vik:•::::%:4%ilit.t:.,t , ,1 I ... .2,:..1:::I:n.f',g•:c.i:..:;):".:..3:1?Pift.1,4*.fft:":::.fi".:•*§:.:::ti::::.0?:.*:: . ',',1 \ , ' I ' ''.•F:.e.f.1.-,."4:1.:::.t:.:::.:Z:illAt':".'1.:.1. :.t:f.f:::':e.*:::::.**.':',lz.': '-I 1' ks, 2 l'p kiittittligititatiVg.alatittitgaIMM , 1 1:' r,' ',.',' .,,,,,:.-,,, „.1 , , .!..***-..;,;e::1•.;,•:.*:**-*;:•:A:::t*SzgAN'A;XN:*.V.-A•tt'AS:-W:- -i0 '' : v'',- - --, ' . kw.4A4sIggtoxisg*.it,sisozzow.:.i§v31:.;:%sigfiz:: - ,._,N 1 -,..-_ : 1 1 tii•-?..issil.t*:4,:"...,*,,i;.*F:ii-**.z-Foiii:31,::•:-i-isl§:{:*-4.1:isl.:03,-isAis.-:iiir.8i,..3.:Iiiiilm 41:::...":::::*:v*Asslt:xw:s.1::.45e:xw*v*::::5,.::$-.,:cs::.s.::nolsososs;•;:out, ii _ ,.1 • 4.4,::*•:::::::**:.:::::•:::::go,vp:):::::::..,0:**.:::***,::*::::.:,0:*::::*;,,,,,,,,......,, g ' i .,,,t.*:::is*K.,x:::*:,::$411,x:::::I*4.:.:say.t.:;*-4:,*:;.•:$4**s..:----..--:---•- lir -,_-,t__-[..,,1 &;•_aly:::x::::$:::$.*::::,(::::*:0::41e.ws:::9::,%:Ar:**;:c.:::.*:;osA;Ile:::**, V 1 !' , tP - I i I 'I LNWR:O.::::::*::.:4a1***4: ::,,:.*A*4*.*::44*:;:,-*:1:-T.ISS3',0:::**•;.'1 . -., 4,-' ' , ; , ;i' if i I ?-:?:V•Sttt:::14V:iiglaISSIViti.*AttikM:40:03*.:WO:',OSIAlt:4 ,,..C*.',7-A,t, ,, \ 1 L'i 1111 ! ,, 'Si,!:11,.$5:.5.114:4i13-..ii:Siitgit.:454.1.'...V."1:W•litit40.4.:14X:1$1,45ciAtil 12• 111`VV. \ 1, 11 , . .1 .„1, .sliispivti-g:*Otsttionilitiv:300.0k.,:11.ilgigfiaNsWit:V4 r• ,A s'.11 '..'''.' ' / • ,N 1..ro4Aal*:::.,:..>.:/04:: .**:-. .,..1:ivni-at4/VA:: ::.0*/ 1 — ' - Vssiltsty....m.r45.14:.A.A.WW.k.1.1*}:01:::$:.;*.-A/::$:/.$:,:sigIS:N•14,0 f 1 -=,,' 1,• "i4k-A.:::skistivoii.s.iirst.nifet:414;;A'AISsit45.f:Atittf:.:;:51:10 r-ifs,: , :.-a rr ,, '.. p .,,,-;: RI v.it,..414.3:-',Awsv.4.:::::i:t:41.,A41,-*::Alksso•sitowisatg::*::-E.$!.i 0 i vl.,-,:., , .,, , I..= --,,-• :, -, zt:.*::•,:****.:::01,::::::::A::::*:::****;5v.teor*:::.*:•::.:::::***:::: Fi 1( ' A".• 1 \ \ , i '',I'' '';",;40:4:41:',S101,::0::.:*::•144.1**::'*,Ni':::*'::**1:§f4c::11:**it:.:**OX: E i '',‘J.;,' 1 t, ., 11 ''-, i il.00:41:411:001,,,•:,:•114.10:1444,,:,41,1,0:4ei,v,:•:01410:-:.*.v.v.v.10 ,,, t,,,... Lg.. . . • • re tlh‘relt:#::%,!:;.*:•A CIP:V:01A.,PA...:0:::114%.:WS1.0::::1110:::41.::*?•Vi'M - ,,---.-';-•'%'.:.- i I I-, ' ' I i- 0:1/44:1:1:14NAV P A Si"At`i.:::44::::::10'..W.,0:41,:•;:W.:-.:,;,;:,0 01,,,:1:1",:44.0:0 _L.,;Ai/rig:Al:,IS. , , \ , V§ " • 4'**::::::;**:•:4;,.*:****Se00,::1::::::0*::**14:::MA C.I,SSI::::::****::::`P:04SAS:::::*:::4:::. ''. \ , , I', -' "4-51'4:51:WE.S:•;.:45:00:ft.tttl.011:51AISS3:0,i,M.tf5.0:04)*::"§:.:"$;5::*:"1". f:rci...,:Rfir:;s:3.4ssitTai:FisliSi*i.siiiistrAget.O.aztattlAziv.41:1.k:,:g40,----,... 11 — .(, . ... , ,.. „ . , . . . • d0 N MSS MI 311,3NV1'M 133111S ONS.96,01 O H.11 Cd ill S311N3d021d NY3fN09 QM §c w (Ni i �t 1. lit SEOSS NW VNIS3S SAV SOWS,OM 1 I Ib ill '16' 7 (l 1 u'~ 1. 0 a BONV IA OSZL Ig lsl . :; f o gg GIS i !" 1. a if I I e 11 I g b $ m 01e 0 bs 5 i 7 � 0 I H 1 S g lid Ag e1 o ' g1g r i I S E PIN €I 3g`-1 ,1 1 b zIg g d Igg1,- pal ii 1 it I t,! I @I g g 6 I 3 Ill a10.1H11I13i€1 € l"1 I 1�; $1111 ab3 pg t ° 1 a e Ohl eg_gI= lib @' s lg:11 I g it 1 7§ 1 0 1t$ . 1 $;a I o -$ <sap 22168¢1 i Igisp1 a Ii . va„a �I[ 111116¢ 10114 g g wT1 oII it Fa= 1 121iEe 022V 1 ' 1y _ i. l ilii¢ I x gilOg' i ! 1g Illi, x Ig5 a 8 b 1;g et111;2 I e 11 i s, 1.Ni eR; 1 ail; 9F1 ° 11I 1SI 188 t11IeI`1 e ° 9 x> . :E1y Ig.d' I i``�1111;12 't1; 1 1== °5` 1 1 i 11 liIt! I Il€!Il €19 g xrta rt acd c 611 ^g91121;11!1i11;1;0;2 ; s. 0 Ii 111 y 1,.;,4 i- 1 1 1I l;IielH6lx!an9�3$1 F54;51;1 01 H 1 2 d o �S �pR `: Ig3a d 4s a i C 4 F e a 's e 0 1` a 1 z1t € 1 aII 71°I:tiiiI5ii 1 n a e 7a m E 1 aIn slkc! l w IV g a e I"s l III 7's �1` a I �� f I� � Y� � 5 �Y 21g s 1111 lsl ; o1.�1Eg1 16111 11£11Es91 allls1a11 zl —' Ai, a ��II l y- a =i' -1- g gs#w�gr, gBI li E 50, -401 1 i IIIE $3ia6tl e1j g1 E 1c u hn,, Vi ai:� ;-9 % � `t►\9_L.i/®a�i4f gi... g �n�1 r� •• ....4fHF1®m Ot 94 1g55gE .,Emi II.Ii �,e111■111\,11_] its. 17 i liliut u••I r I.I a tulle,¢ i v .� ■�i.E' �. �i� (�m •�ll/1 1�il X111�o TV i- 1 ( ®I II 71■ ®1'® �I■ lt._i 1i■ n1 I _ .. ■1�1 ii 1 , �'.�lill 1 p 18 1 E Il_m1 l I! 11...0 ;` 9 19 ti I ;Llb I i(I;mil■II 1 111 0 li 1 .Ior, 'tit ° g mil Iti ,T Salmiill1„ Y led w UI li ;F - ,'a , :c E 11■ I . t :.1 .11 al 'i i, 1•i 1: g E 1 ■ •I 1"Ig ii is 11 iniu ' 11 11 IE 'LIII-1' t 1- E IN 1®,®mil .I ii @� ;i1 jll s 11€� ;11(1.11 I 91 „1uii�L g. ..jiII 1 C ' IV — wipe111101:111 I -1 — ---. 1 ° 1E g:. I. \1 -.:.0 1n 11 115 I.II hi 11.E II� I 1• s -- 111&51.i'�,1 9 111 ill Pi €11 iii -Nen 1� I I1 la�l aIII • ' 11■it ■ �l ■-\I■ .P .111 MI■ II1■r Intl■ \Iu�Q II I'®.Imp �0t11iiin �lv(i0.!sE. �11D'llir! g.i■ �lf«!•(.���� E 51 {19•i!�,2r.r.•l:®..I itdP'.;ni r.tel•1®Il m.r inii,.��:a ��� 1, II■Ilii•1i\illibi(1e®si(lli•mspi.sispiiivriitl■L..i I JI0 I$N4 1= .° c s �7� 9� �!d Com' i I e O '244,-.5441, ; E gg E g ---E .. jeE 666E F v98 --- :11 8111 ` 15 Ilii ° 61055 NW'3llln3M51'551331115 ONZEW 56504 �N ¢i i I Cn°ai' L. e�� S3a 3d021d NV3fN09 £'as3g`' I"H ?a.1 QU !1 ' 1 5 a 9 a 8 Ua 33NV2JH OSZL op T 1 E a f b ill 1!1' f 110§as1` 4 11 !rl. : q � TJ Ns T$ s: 6 € € li 11 ai M 1. is s!6l 11 h b a a g , $ : WI. MSS NW'311,3)1,1'AN 1.3381$0.2.6ZOL CD 1 :14 i' (I:2 li S31.1113d0Ud NV3rNOEI illii; 1 a ., crfah lit SUSS NW'VNIC3'S 3AV...A OM iliTIA'A .:7 .1-; 30Mill U' 14)MA OSZL ' 1 h N. g illi V g Fi Igi 1 liWi ill g5 N ll '77 ;1 1 1011 PP i 0 El ; I! d i E 01 11 ; HA Id rg 1 p 4 1.1'i 11 Oil Illi i i 11 1 1 1!!-I1 i i 01 1,1 L i 1 1 Nil,Ili 1 11 1111 11 Iiii:111 1 1 ilh 11vilg4 lid 1 ga:Pi i i 10 hi i 1 ii/;!II 1 't ri.45 hi i il h li,13 § it' '21 Ati-41-^;',4 hp .i 111ril 1 11 ill 1 115!II 1 /gill gii 1 h i ; 1111 Hi i S.'t i-1 1 1,1 1. r;i! i 0 righri,ii; 11;Ir 1 E g /Igo il v./1,1 a ag ig_g 1g,gg mg 3;1 g ml gling:i /1 On ii ' g .i c —ill i ii:.!pp;$ii hr 1 pi lq I !E H!11 liP i il lixiiiR 40 i MI;,1!,,,% 6 i hil"10 1;ii 11 gl 11d;111 1 il Pi ii il 1 44 1314;lia 1 ply,ig 11, t hgl WA'a!!;!g a id gh a it ili li A i 11 ii gi.m ail ai h!;El vil . : • . • 7,7tr— 11 t4 1 IR;pi i Oanv aDueu , 1 5it P, ' ‘,..b. 11 . bpe 1,: , IR g 1 -1,, :'.'- '=It .4.:-....... • ................ '.,' A;',',: " I, , ..- . . --- - 1 1ReK _1 15 L'AiP k 0 SIE,ihihi Mli 1g 101r1 iiq 11' )H I; illiT ' lejV .1 ZN11° - MP : :1 16 ilglh ! :4. JUIlidll 11 1 , ,4gpx1114tt I JA g - ie-t.l hi g _. 1 !:.: 1 gill :k1!!!t_pt r I if,g41,1 .?, r. , ' - blE 5 VCE ,14.' '------t--.------___,-;---- 1 : 1', t - . I ..' . ' 1 ------------'------"M 1 A ' 1 10 ... MP li b .III 1 141 'll Pli .,,,..„„ H-- ' t, lot , • po I;1 IV p EP' , ..-„,_ ,_ I Ili, cop.-1( ql, ' A ,, Klilli "\ \ ' 7 • - , Alle il11%1l,,. -gli-ki ; ;;t, • q ',„1 Ili lo,.. l'011 1'1 . . . , 4 _, _ MSS NIN 311.NV1 M133.1S 01.0l DSZOl Fg .1 c), 41111 .!J S311213dOlid NV3N10171 •,-i a, rt211 !Hifa-J.,. ,.- 1 M T-i Cif i Ili Set.N.,^,VNIC13 S 3AV SOW,.OM V i 8 MliP a 1:: i I, g u) -.Qv!, --),,,, Mill , 1 : *5 •13‘ 05 IF ,, .4 0 13NV21 OSZL g 1 O 1 1 111 i 40P'l PW 11111 i 'is5iii 1 P illi 1 I ',' , •Piii st in ll VI "*. i IN --1410 41 W 1 ,ig ;' eri gi lIggli 5 iii lg ! ii P't` iii IN 1 i ti .i g Ao ill 11 1 li 1 I lig vil il I,u A.t lir ET ilf Ur ig.-',1 illi ;h 1 II-4 - ____L i I 1 : :— j. anv aDualA I T ,6 1 ! _ .--_---t72 .1-' "-.,,-. ---;.'......., ..:'.1.L___,..„!.,..:,...i.....,-__ __:...,- .7. ..4•S•NNIIII.,_ ' •-••-._,:, i virnr-1=-7'k----- 'S_-_,-- ---.•'---=7.,L' ---- • 1‘-ct l.g.•*14"•; : \:2-:• , H ' '-4- -----'- -------0----c.,)7 t--"'N1( \1 • k li jr. /, -, -. .,.,.-..• i - , 0„,.R, r\s, ---"T" .,• ' - „ --;- \ 12 \I-4,_1, d i,r_.._.,/ ,-----------.-..,,,„,.-. ., . r...\--4:.__, Ai NI°\-y-1 / ,, - to i ,.,-i---_. -44r,--f..,k -, , s%s. 1 t. ' , S§. ; E , .1 , I.1 L' :, ;.,i ,, 1 1 i‘i • cl-_ 27 1i +_,, 0— ); ,,,.J- .:: :: •Ar,.•-...:,.., - .-. •• ,,.,.-. :,--., - \,,,, ,., ! k 1 \ —1.- \ „ , -.„--,--:.v, ...,-,. :... ,,,,- . . -, A.-.r..,. :' i41%, k ,,,;lit,,,,. ..N,. :.i -•:• '‘::..:..:. .:%,..:.',..i.',...tp.:si :.H:1 i:: .. \ \'I \ —,....., 1:7‘.‘• ..1•.: ,!\....,,,..A...........,_.„\;...„.L... .__.:...,_,....,J,I.;....::::„.,;..:..„, . c:,•_/\,,, N'Lis.:. . ::.; :,... ° \ \ \ \ \ ' -..1-*-1-1 -I: '.'''''''' ' ' lk- .,--- .;* ''5-'- ''. \ \ \ — : -----v • —..,-, 7' '',.:.:. :. "-: .:.:' •i'%'':.1 ':.'•1 .15ett:i \ \ ... ' ... , ••"';''''!"r"... : ..:-: ••• tr '. ' , ), IlitattfiltAa ;\ \ .---\-----\ ! ; ,1, ,% „x :;E1/4x.wa..*es,A*Niloia. .,,-.F+-Na•- - , iffer48,, \ \ ..3 II L-- -----:4 .._______ ''''',7,1 \ i. --lt, 1--gC:::---- ", \ \ 11 \ \ \ - ggv, , \ , , ; , \ \ , --„-I-vi , \. , \ \ 41:04, 1,0053 NN 3111A3NY1 AN.1.3383.5 ONIZ81 86Z01 •1.,ii Et,pi S31.1.213d0Ud NV3rNO9 OM 1 r;oz •,— ,4 0 5 • :"4°VP 111 SCVS3 NNIVN1103 S DAV 30NYtld OSZL illi I!1 Si [ 1 Ci „,,..4 12 g I• Ire °.. • k U* AONVIIJ OSZL li i 1 ; 1 co i 11 I I i g ' 111 ; i g i Vg r-. g 811 1 P' 1 tI I U ... , 61 6j I f2 0 6 ,Eg 6 E i 8 ill lig E 1 li ;g g i! 64 I 6 66 0 i 11 IP ii E 11 E,, gill ill% ii 11 11;,L:1 Nil E t 11 — /ke DD1.1 atj _5 ........... — -- - — MIIII - `gr,-, gill — IgE 1 ; 216 ii r MI 1 r — -En' 1 - , -.. ,,, I ,1 , , I - s ' I ' • \''' • 1 , [ I AfrAl Alik*I Pliffif4:-Z2thait 0_____ _D__ ELEl .2a, ..,„_n_ --- wtostiwato - - t. i__.—- --_ _ _____ —_,..., • SA -A 18 WENCK File #3022-09 April 2, 2018 Traffic Impact Study for 7250 France Avenue in Edina, MN Prepared for: 4801 W. 50th Street City of Edina Edina, MN 55424 VIr ^ Prepared by: WENCK WENCK Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center ASSOCIATES Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963-479-4200 Responsive partner. Fax: 763-479-4242 Exceptional outcomes. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5-1 6.0 PARKING ANALYSIS 6-1 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7-1 8.0 APPENDIX 8-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2-2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3-2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 4-3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 4-4 FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE 5-5 FIGURE 7 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE 5-6 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. DATE: April 2, 2018 Edward F.Terhaar License No. 24441 April 2018 i Vjtv WENCK vAv 11133 Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 1 .0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed new residential and retail/office development located at 7250 France Avenue in Edina, MN. The project site is located in the northwest corner of the France Avenue/Gallagher Drive intersection. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking structure. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • France Avenue/Hazelton Road • France Avenue/72nd Street • France Avenue/Gallagher Drive • France Avenue/Parklawn Avenue • Parklawn Avenue/Gallagher Drive • France Avenue/proposed access • Gallagher Drive/proposed access The proposed project will involve removal of the existing office building and constructing a new residential and retail/office building. The project includes 316 on-site parking spaces. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2019. As shown in the site plan, the project includes access on both Gallagher Drive and France Avenue. The access on Gallagher Drive is a full movement access. The access on France Avenue is restricted to right turns in and out by the existing center median. In order to account for concerns expressed by Hennepin County, the study also includes analysis of an alternative with access provided solely on Gallagher Drive. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to generate 33 net trips during the weekday a.m. peak hour, 65 net trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour, and 931 net weekday daily trips. • Traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at the intersections analyzed to accommodate the proposed project. • From a traffic operations perspective, both access options result in minimal impacts to operations on France Avenue. The option with all access on Gallagher Drive results in slightly higher volumes at the Gallagher access location, but these increases are minimal from an operations standpoint. • France Avenue is under the jurisdiction of Hennepin County. City staff shared the project sketch plan with Hennepin County staff who responded with concerns about the proposed access on France Avenue. Specifically, Hennepin County staff commented that the proposed access falls short of meeting access spacing guidelines April 2018 1-1 ^Y WENCK Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. and would introduce a new conflict point on the high-volume corridor with the potential for vehicles to weave across three lanes in the southbound direction to make left or U-turns at Gallagher Drive. From these comments it appears Hennepin County will likely not allow access on France Avenue. • The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and bicycle operations. • The proposed number of parking spaces can accommodate the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. April 2018 1-2 V^�WENCK y Nomarsm Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed new residential and retail/office development located at 7250 France Avenue in Edina, MN. The project site is located in the northwest corner of the France Avenue/Gallagher Drive intersection. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking structure. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • France Avenue/Hazelton Road • France Avenue/72nd Street • France Avenue/Gallagher Drive • France Avenue/Parklawn Avenue • Parklawn Avenue/Gallagher Drive • France Avenue/proposed access • Gallagher Drive/proposed access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve removal of the existing office building and constructing a new residential and retail/office building. The project includes 316 on-site parking spaces. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2019. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. The proposed land uses and sizes are shown in Table 2-1. Table 2-1 Proposed Land Uses and Sizes Land Use Size Unit Apartments 135 DU Sit-down restaurant 4,000 SF General retail 7,000 SF Office 8,000 SF SF = square feet, DU = dwelling units As shown in the site plan, the project includes access on both Gallagher Drive and France Avenue. The access on Gallagher Drive is a full movement access. The access on France Avenue is restricted to right turns in and out by the existing center median. France Avenue is under the jurisdiction of Hennepin County. City staff shared the project sketch plan with Hennepin County staff who responded with concerns about the proposed access on France Avenue. Specifically, Hennepin County staff commented that the proposed access falls short of meeting access spacing guidelines and would introduce a new conflict point on the high-volume corridor with the potential for vehicles to weave across three lanes in the southbound direction to make left or U-turns at Gallagher Drive. In order to account for these concerns, the study also includes analysis of an alternative with access provided solely on Gallagher Drive. April 2018 2-1 V^"WENCK v Karmos Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. �� � vv1 V7R�G "�� / a ¢ �f\�� Lill i� C �4WE1 ," �,fQJ `z tti; N (2_,. W liCURVE �` f1 ! ST ,---//i v"ti- _ �z W. 6' nd STS I ''� ll I 41. �� tiN QRp.I SC>N1 w d ) m FFiRITADRGE c_. \r- G �(�$� W x 3., s„ .„. w Vi �......:"J' v a �/ Fri ,�F ,y:) I V'�,A�35.� 35. w" 8 w 1; 17 / I u � c ✓�� :\t I z a v fG m W b4 _fp__ ST. ` 'f 6 • .. 64��th �ST.I w �r'�/�,F r a I I z W. I W < a a r. ,,,..„_____ , W. v o W. io 65l th ST. """,. n " .M t —L E"th ST. ( r3 3 =-4 d \ , til �JJ 14 v) �l_ t°: -..J.,.,,. eG W. 66th L)tut---.. L�._ ST. _ /.-�1_... _ _qac oto r. ,�7, a Cornelia ", ct E —SOUT iI�ALE ''''.1‘...; w a �y" \ PGUs� f o a€L CIR. to fl M 0 ) "... t 6)L1fi7. t�.i iLR{7YCAR u-, BMFAN2 " ,Io sy\ IP CION 1 RD. �,7.7 ' -� 4� \.y' U >,- w/4,,R�TER (_, , •BUD s�N w /i �69th t�, Q CA,. q4, c.t \ 1, W. 69th ST. r ST.---..\''''''''`'V"-.,--'4'-3.L-.F-R1-''''°4 0 o 7 > ' Q Q�z o c a c per. i'��ERRY�.�c''''.--'-:-.:4---d -Js `r z�4 ,r—: i 5 .1 W. 1__` 74th o w"----.,., "b.' .._, [ .UJ.., ,i T. w W t1. o va "CP i°r--___'°' v ANDOVERR0. > a a d z LAR�I a - 4 MAVEIICE m J d a I ASp SGS C BEL 2VIDERE otil; ~l >- J� rE AS�4 CZ r <4REq. 0 LN. ct w DR. �I IHAZELTON�f ��,---F r TR1'�' `I' ASPASIa E Ct. C4R4_ acD cr Il ---*N tuN 4'C,'F W. n 72 nd 1ST PROJECT LOCATION 39.:\.:14fL CIR. 1-- y4,y D� "--- 'Pe,.... `"''HIBISCU ou u 4iS"ORTH I/ DR. n1Q I SW y I AVE. F H _ ,'� J Q r- U` r ON DR. �a a /� DR. 2..-t' 31 m � 71::::\:.UXGILFORD DR. Z c x sa # w a • a Et ! '* w 74th HIBISCUS > } <z �' CT o a Lake _...._ . a d c.a PARKLAItiN u pdF 4} ST: V AVE. o �- �.__ L_ — u ` / Edina U4M tea P>, a W,; \\,„ _ (c,,,,,/,?,0;\:. Q0PP.t, ., / SNORE �N PLAZA o// U DR. I 1 �� 2W. 76th ST. 1 7----'-' n In) 1 1S VD. , A J 0 `` ce o /� `; � 77th Si. as n N W APPROXIMATE SCALE MINNESOTA DR. l VIKING El DR. 'E 1A' T29 a 0 1350' a. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 1 WENCK FOR 7250 FRANCE AVENUE IN EDINA, MN PROJECT LOCATION Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Oman''aaueJJ r. - - _ _ - - - - --,,,,, , CSI z • b I CZ O- I D 0 1 --------------------- i< i 1 1 i r 1 Iy 1 Q 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 t / • 1El 1 cu'i 1.' W t tat A313 I—u)a> I ,- I > F--W M t O <ZZz LI Lcr LL Q 03 V W I z �Nz tuI(iUIX IX I LLp t g \ I t 0 Z Q Q Z i -I m C 1 t N 1 1 aN NO i. i1 1 0 1 L.Z1 r 3JVilO1S 33119 1 t t ---1 AVMN1VM NVI81S303d I I ��] __- 1 M < .SCJ • Jit ► V t' �/ > 3NI1 A183d02id W Eo y n vd a x z 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site is currently occupied by an office building and parking structure. The site is bounded by France Avenue to the east, Gallagher Drive to the south, office uses to the north, and residential areas to the west. Near the site location, France Avenue is a six-lane divided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. Gallagher Drive is a two-lane roadway. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. France Avenue/Hazelton Road (traffic signal control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The eastbound approach proves one left turn and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. France Avenue/72nd Street (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the eastbound 72" Street approach. The eastbound approach provides one right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane and three through lanes. The southbound approach provides two through lanes and one through/right turn lane. Left turns are not allowed from 72"d Street onto France Avenue. France Avenue/Gallagher Drive (traffic signal control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane and one through/right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one through/right turn lane. France Avenue/Parklawn Avenue (traffic signal control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The eastbound approach proves one left turn and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one right turn lane. Parklawn Avenue/Gallagher Drive (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the southbound Gallagher Drive approach. All approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. Turn movement data for the intersections was collected during the weekday a.m. (7:00 - 9:00 a.m.) and p.m. (4:00 - 6:00 p.m.) peak periods in March 2018. April 2018 3-1 V^'WENCK v Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 0 w co o P 4 ' D. Cl) . - - - i . ti 1 • z ..,......) „0., ,.. .:.„,,. . k ILI Z li 4* CL 17- „.,, .;.„,7,...., ,,,..„ , t Off D CO '''' ' : 2,-- "*] !., ';',- 1 4 sr ,.... il la 0 I ., , :-., l'olt - ri.- w ..4u. •• ,,,,,,w,3. ?..,4,. - E- --'7, 7 , ! k„„,„„,,, .. ...:4 :, , 4,”:%,' i I tereereet rt err .' fiz . L t ,, ft ottrt r I 1 . J, .,4'..4 lreazoof,.9(eittirer arel .. , , It- les LP- t 1 Q ' 1 ;.., .,. :: r Fre ‘ r ' LU 0 r [terrier(1 r , „ .., , r„, r, ,..,,,./ , . . P IL> Elio-tette a t ... . _ . .., , . Z , ... — : . .., to<z - . . t! t IL it- r. e r 1st ,git r re I f-trtr e if 1- tcrit ' „ -- . ---------- - I-Li.' la Eti 1 yi. <Z< CL.ct i; .., 2 W p env eouelA -U w 4, , 1,. f,- . , . t (r, itAl a fii i tfii' CO I fiiC Et Le '.. ii t 11.4r. 2 1 , %I 3'3 ' ' e Fi 3. , f , „ 1 I i . .,„,, ‘ I 0 t w ..,. 1 \ .,. , _.„, i-...„ Li ,Q611 , „, , ft I if[ireila i ',4 '',, Is , II it Irv- net rfrt,er ri tc itiir t m it i 71 ;,' 77 t ei Lboi iirtilit et t oei 7 1 I ii :. „,., 1.cl,f11,‘,.,!fi \ . . I " I '' -,- (Witt ,.6(' t. 4„. 1 -V l'• '- ifa, .*-Ltt'14411-2,.filt".2.4 •p, c 4 4, , .:i. 4%.- p , . ... . ,„ - lo, • - rt -„, , .,,,°"4 7; "nt a ' 't ' 4: ' kt,,)• 41 -, U i 6 1st\ , 1 A ,..,„.._:4 , :, : 4 -4 *P-M. Aj Il ,, t. ' .06 1 ( .4°4" '41Ik' 'At raiti° ' 4 ,y,-fr r,i ',,A.,,t ireit„irwr ‘,.' .&''' 4 t— ' t '1 ', : t '4 ce,r ,4",,,, t , I • re.**4 f 1 Z 4441.11.11. 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2020. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2018 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses currently on the site. • 2020 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2020 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth in the area. • 2020 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2020 No-Build volumes to determine 2020 Build volumes. In addition, existing trips generated by the uses currently on the site were subtracted from the total volume. Trip Generation Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation for the proposed development were calculated based on data presented in the tenth edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trips generated by the existing uses were based on the traffic count data. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Trip Generation for Proposed Project Weekday Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Proposed Project Apartments 135 DU 13 36 49 36 23 59 734 Office 8,000 SF 8 1 9 1 8 9 78 Restaurant 4,000 SF 22 18 40 24 15 39 449 General Retail 7,000 SF 4 3 7 13 14 27 264 Existing Uses Removed _ Medical office 55,000 SF (58) (14) (72) (25) (44) (69) (594) Net Trips (11) 44 33 49 16 65 931 DU=dwelling unit, SF=square feet Table 1 shows the net number of trips generated by the proposed development including reductions for existing trips. As shown, the project adds 33 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 65 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 931 net trips daily. April 2018 4-1 VALI,WENCK v micsrams Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 55 percent to/from the north on France Avenue • 30 percent to/from the south on France Avenue • 10 percent to/from the west on Parklawn Avenue • 5 percent to/from the east on Gallagher Drive Site Access Options As shown in the site plan, the project includes access on both Gallagher Drive and France Avenue. The access on Gallagher Drive is a full movement access. The access on France Avenue is restricted to right turns in and out by the existing center median. In addition to the proposed access configuration, this study also reviewed the impacts of eliminating the access on France Avenue and providing all access on Gallagher Drive. It was assumed that under this scenario the access on Gallagher Drive would be the same configuration as shown on the site plan. Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figures 4 and 5. April 2018 4-2 V^V WENCK A Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 0)C4 0)M 2ai ma t2 C rn N 75/77/77/77 r-- -•- E—14/14/14/14 Hazelion Rd 4' 4, Lj ;'78/80/80/80 13/13/13/13-+ 1 t r 16/16/16/16—> `,73f',�o 2/2/2/2—4, C r i3 8l CD co-- 99. M co • co U) ,--ama ,- a -03 8 8 72nd St +I .Ir LL 75!77/14/74--I, 1 t 0)14, M Spp gico A Lo vn _z 4-8 e(0 COf 2 rp m Access -/-117/-—3, N 1 N 0 w PROJECT -c�,- C sN) LOCATION c(92rn a;vot?- gt� m :tam Q • o v 24/24/24/43 ti,as: 5/5/5/5 • c v E—62/63/63/63 C • 4 ''•8/8/8/8 30/31/31/31 Gallacther Dr E IO N 1 fy f--34/35/35/35 1 t [> 69/70/86/94— t(1/3/3/3 86/83/83—> rn o o 2/2/5/5—> v or 5/5/5/5--1, to Q o 27/28/34/43�, i-.5 co o rnoo 4"� N O ;EN'," 'MO' N N M NIN ^C. t0 CO LA -CZ m v �—55/56/56/56 10/10/10/10 �"�'- E—40/41/41/41 Parklawn Ave X 42/43/43/43 4-1 4, 52/53/53/53 28/29/26/26 44/45/45/45 91/93/93/93--> 43/44/44/44 4 69/70/70/70---4, --in a 2018 me N 2020 NO-BUILD 2020 BUILD WITH FRANCE AVE.ACCESS co 2020 BUILD WITHOUT FRANCE AVE.ACCESS Lo4 XXDO(DO tXX FIGURE 4 ATRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY W E N C K FOR 7250 FRANCE AVENUE WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK IN EDINA, MN HOUR VOLUMES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. coca •,:r co OZO- C) tr V co co v co 122/124/124/124 V O-- X21/21/21/21 105/107/107/107 Hazelton Rd `✓ 23/23/23/23—2 1 t 1 23/23/23/23--- am.-to 9/9/9/9—1, rnA stn M O_ 7.A in M O'- co V N N o M in M. �� MQ Q V N 0 c MC) 2 72nd St 'f-' 1 LL 69/70/74/74--y I T p N co C �_ co o N co to o- , O_co N°p Ej I8 us W M Access -/-118/-—y, 1”- Ul to N 01 iD 0 PROJECT LI) m LOCATION �O1 C Loop `� Cc?' to o N <.� rn M C t—68/69/69/69 co oo c 4/4/33/62 a)o t` co o N +—123/125/123/123 co I0 r` E-10/10/14/14 4 c_10/10/10/10 Gallagher Dr j 1Y 1 ,v_85/87/87/87 1/1/5/5 1 T I • 115/117/118/127—� 87/89/88/55—3 o o— 6/6/717- 3 o O r 5/5/5/5-4, O o v 54/55/51/60—� v o o.-.- tom o• oh via • V r—o) NDN O O C)- •C) • V toM CDVV V VN ch.- tAM �Op(� pap VN CDC)‘-- Z-.. M US M vN oNM 121/123/123/123 v N ,L .`-mom- X 60/61/61/61 74/75/75/75 J 3� I 186/88/88/88 Parklawn Ave E-102/104/104/104 w ' 50/51/55/55- -t 71/72/72/72 76/78/78/78-- 60/61/61/61 o 75/77/77/77�, (c,9-0(f)-5 a-to o 6 op N 2018 -cote° 2020 NO-BUILD tD 2020 BUILD WITH FRANCE AVE.ACCESS o4 2020 BUILD WITHOUT FRANCE AVE.ACCESS `-v Csl XX/XX/XX/XX O�V FIGURE 5 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY WENCK FOR 7250 FRANCE AVENUE WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK IN EDINA, MN HOUR VOLUMES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. I\ 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. April 2018 5-1 WENCK TAT 1111=121=11 Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. The LOS results for the study intersections are presented in Figures 6 and 7 and discussed below. France Avenue/Hazelton Road (traffic signal control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue/72nd Street (minor street stop sign control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue/Gallagher Drive (traffic signal control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS D for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS D for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue/Parklawn Avenue (traffic signal control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS D for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS E for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. April 2018 5-2 V^V WENCK A Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. Parklawn Avenue/Gallagher Drive (minor street stop sign control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue/proposed access (minor street stop control) - During the a.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. Gallagher Drive/proposed access (minor street stop control) - During the a.m. peak hour under 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. The traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on the intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed project. France Avenue Access As shown in the traffic analysis results, all intersections operate at acceptable levels of service both with and without the proposed access on France Avenue. From a traffic operations perspective, both access options result in minimal impacts to operations on France Avenue. The option with all access on Gallagher Drive results in slightly higher volumes at the Gallagher access location, but these increases are minimal from an operations standpoint. As described earlier, Hennepin County staff expressed concerns about the proposed access on France Avenue. Specifically, Hennepin County staff commented that the proposed access falls short of meeting access spacing guidelines and would introduce a new conflict point on the high-volume corridor with the potential for vehicles to weave across three lanes in the southbound direction to make left or U-turns at Gallagher Drive. April 2018 5-3 V�V WENCK v Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided both sides of France Avenue and the north/west side of Gallagher Drive west of France Avenue. On the south/east side of Gallagher Drive west of France Avenue, a paved trail is provided. Striped crosswalks and pedestrian signal heads are provided at all signalized intersections along France Avenue. The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and bicycle operations. The full sidewalk and bicycle facility plan maps are included in the Appendix. April 2018 5-4 'ItV WENCK v Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. QQm aa m �-D/D/D/D a a m D/D/D/D j j, D/D/D/D Hazelton Rd C/C/C/C D/D/D/D- *1 T 1 A/A/A/A 0 0 w A/A/A/A-, a oo-w as as 8 72nd St LL A/A/A/A B/B/B/B *1 T ma as Access A/A/A/A -1-161--i, T PROJECT m m m LOCATION w o o mmm ¢ woo mmm �A/A/A/A L11,121:0 D/D/D/D l NA/A/A 0 0 E-A/A/A/A 4 A/A/A/A 4 -D/D/D/D A/A/A/AGallagher Dr D/D/D/D A/A/A/A_Jrt f D/D/D/D-� T A/A/A/A--> q Q Q A/A/A/A 0 Cr NNNA a a a D/D/D/D oo mm 00U mm 5,2�U 1 A/A/A/A m o 0 D/D/D/D 4 4-A!A/NA FI ,r -0C/0C Parlclawn Ave NA/NA D/D/D/D A/A/A/A C/C/C/C- I 1 A/A/A/A--> A/A/A/A—> Doo D/D/D/D- , to D o 2018 oD0 N 2020 NO-BUILD I2020 BUILD WITH FRANCE AVE.ACCESS 12020 BUILD WITHOUT FRANCE AVE.ACCESS XX/XX/XX/XX V4PSV FIGURE 6 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY W E N C K FOR 7250 FRANCE AVENUE WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK IN EDINA, MN LEVEL OF SERVICE Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. U a a U t--E/E/E/E E-DID/D/D J 1 4 sv-E/E/E/E Hazelton Rd C/CIC/C E/E/E/E--t n T 1 A/A/A/A-> W 0 0 A/A/A/A-4, w 0 p p 0 Woo QQ > as U C 72nd St LL A/A/A/A CIC/C/C-4, t 0< oa as =a Access A/A/A/A -/-/B/-—1, T C PROJECT CO m m . LOCATION co 0 mm'm ,1 mmv ,t m m m a --TA/A/A/A CO m U D/D/D/D mmcc) E-A/A/A/A m m 0 F-A/A/A/A E) I 4 A/A/A/A 4] 1 4 E/E/E/E A/A/A/A Gallagher Dr D/D/D/D A/A/A/A-T I 1 t [3 E/E/E/E-a A/A/A/A-> <<< A/A/A/A— w w A/A/A/A aaa D/D/D/O-y W W in W aaa WWW m m Ow W mm Uin-W CO Co' O W W 2-E/E/E/E m m °'-'-'W E-E/E/E/E It----A/A/A/A FJ ,j, �—D/D/D/D Parklawn Ave 4—AIAIA/A A/A/A/A D/D/D/D A/A/A/A-a D/D/D/D--f 1 T r A/A/A/A--> A/A/A/A-> U U m E/E/E/E-y, U U CO Uc3m N 2018 U U m r2020 NO-BUILD 12020 BUILD WITH FRANCE AVE.ACCESSt 2020 BUILD WITHOUT FRANCE AVE.ACCESS XX/XX/XX/XX VA7 FIGURE 7 fir, TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY WENCK FOR 7250 FRANCE AVENUE WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK IN EDINA, MN LEVEL OF SERVICE Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes, r 6.0 Parking Analysis As described earlier, the project will include 316 on-site parking spaces. The proposed amount of parking was compared to industry standards to determine adequacy. Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the expected parking demand. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 4th Edition, indicates the various proposed uses peak at different times during the day. The ITE data was adjusted to account for the expected modal split for the site. Based on the ITE data, the peak weekday parking demand for the overall site occurs between 6 pm and 9 pm. The peak parking demand during that time period is 177 spaces. The 316 spaces provided can accommodate the expected peak parking demand. April 2018 6-1 WENCK ^ Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to generate 33 net trips during the weekday a.m. peak hour, 65 net trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour, and 931 net weekday daily trips. • Traffic generated by the proposed development has minimal impact on intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at the intersections analyzed to accommodate the proposed project. • From a traffic operations perspective, both access options result in minimal impacts to operations on France Avenue. The option with all access on Gallagher Drive results in slightly higher volumes at the Gallagher access location, but these increases are minimal from an operations standpoint. • France Avenue is under the jurisdiction of Hennepin County. City staff shared the project sketch plan with Hennepin County staff who responded with concerns about the proposed access on France Avenue. Specifically, Hennepin County staff commented that the proposed access falls short of meeting access spacing guidelines and would introduce a new conflict point on the high-volume corridor with the potential for vehicles to weave across three lanes in the southbound direction to make left or U-turns at Gallagher Drive. From these comments it appears Hennepin County will likely not allow access on France Avenue. • The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and bicycle operations. • The proposed number of parking spaces can accommodate the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. April 2018 7-1 ' Y WENCK v Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 8.0 Appendix • Bicycle and Sidewalk Facilities Maps • Level of Service Worksheets April 2018 8-1 vilikv WENCK TAT mr=no Responsive partner.Exceptional outcomes. 1— 1 , i'LT t 1111®liii MI .... iN+Nat� /���� �k1 aot *� 111 11 IiiIIi ua 4, . elk ,, _ 111 . 1�1�1 r- ilik 1111. r�' ' \ IL 1111 111 AIM dil�• 1111 ��' fit °,` 1 ll•.....169 INJ,101a.bli IPw, , ,qtril1 dr �OPIP1„11� ; gi i A) 4 -, . gv . I :,,,. IN .. prawdan gun iiiiilk it ir r �1�� 111111If( !,--4-0., _ _ip low. ft= :` el ���111[ iirop ate �� • 111111r-ir- ,...,._ , tet}, �� 1., i AIM :;;<, " X62 - ;, 1111 +•I,� 1l:til l j,...w et 111111 i I aido WS110111M111111111_,/ Ii "" rr+-�4=40 14‘ io c k n1iiimillit ..1 A r-, __... =-L_,,mulapt , r —--------N\ IL : ate Ma • us, 1 ,ri , ,,,.,,,,,,,„. , ,,v,..... _._. 1_,,..,.., ,_, a 111111011 I H's Mi�c Imo. :-: ... i,,.. i . . ....— i — 7 1 IP v.," 1 _,,,,., 1 1TLT Legend Existing ---- Future .... Future ..-- Future .... Future Sidewalk State-Aid Sidewalk Active Routes City Sidewalk Nine Mile Creek To School Sidewalk Regional Trail N 49%j-L,, W E °(o.�$' City of Edina VS °•:m— 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Sidewalk Facilities ENovembeg2014 Dep hi t cr ush I Weber Field u Pnkcom Y V ToddPark ... Min M a MII MM 2 yr,_ se*'s %;;,:.r:,— Si„ - _ Uri. , ° Brow nd le Park / Shepard c ° Van Lutheran V Ikenbur g ifiTerf' han Rlvd= v ern m r, r v.m,+� \ o i 1N r m W II 1 k. gj l 50th 8tW f i ii ,eyr Cny llllay remnant k 1 €& tx I rghlands Hsghlanda d II r P I aka Park # I lank y't It �'� Meadow hli Arden e 1 my Park e kl ' o t. °rne � Park (Utah °t p e n 1 1 I ti £ faj (loll IM.MMEMI � ° mm� ds r r m v.° .,',w° a nl dv r com nnn.nms.nnul o pYy ... ,Il,ncy um.Chula 1 York i : ..y: `' 11 I aka Park' 169 y° Perk •oodd.le YN4� lake r'reyod,<.,4, ].h �g ,� - m,r ..rrM�. N hV"pr, s eu,h5oo P kC,� y f tc� Mi tr7,,ah pi4� „I I t _awLt W X gr , P ry ,,�+r��, k '4 Mx..& : ,,.( 3T Benton Ari .,�, < . s ....».»,. H edea n «n k6 Coumr1krd'2 Park 1`o ril Jnhns L1,apa1y a:nool ti.,., Pam 1 _ ft'' y kt Park 4 t= Z a k Park \: ngelrnnal a 44-co .° rnn,Jda y °4 ¢§ .,°� I,u,..un i I e/l. Lake ``";aha .:-Krahl o l` M .V1e Pamela s',..„.,dr° Hall jr Mud LakerAm 4} 62nd StW C t ,dr Strnchaucr d a dg°v L, rkl L. pbara co± 1 r klf,�i Y oI dtit W' Park 1.�” unnaun Creek Valley Parq 2 a &wo4'ancy Arrowhead / N - t, school v�� C i1j V'l,I n C Lake ‘'''''2'" ',;!•�'..r.•-e"ti * '...: - �4�r ' ' N nnunddle w �' H,sl:,n,l�, 0 ” �Y� Park 6611,JI W fake irk cul SI R b sl ,,4 CnCamel. $1 u I-Ipi.. •I ll h t .0 eg� a m In.l' I I I v,lle;Vir Kd Park . ; 4.; Lk t mds �' M{iwm '.4a r i Oth St W ., c 1 rh # }n 6 i' 2 70th SI R +I4wM1,/a, -ffi%0 t' I■ 70lh sl W Ameh :.a,:nenonp SIM, A Acres C��Ilia lira..1 H7a Yln = ��,I� fork Pa 04 I cop ' < I F - s fl 1 y.,.rke n I "y. Braemar Perk and Golf Course D.ss 1 Ball 169 (CouMay Ftelds) �` _ mu _ _ I,kc N 'Jtl St\tl _ F:lim, I:akla A\J 1 4 I4,1 +,xmty c F d Bae ardslark 75th Sr W G .. ' %f"®9 nia„(sole Cour NetehGte etch t. # �: I T]tl,SIw / Fdobordi r 7rith St W, Park I Minnesota DI 6 .a.,,,,,, 'W,,,, -..,..*.awt Bicycle Facilities Bike Routes(signed and/or marked as) iimAdvisory Bike Lanes Bike or Shared Use Paths 9,ra. Bike Boulevards Green Shared Bike Lanes N w o�t Bike Lanes MMS'Shared Lane Markings W+E .\® a'CP Signed Bike Routes Approved Primary Route s Approved Secondary Route .e,�• Engineering Dept January 2016 O:\Users\eng i neeri ng\Projects\Bicycle_F acilities_Comprehensive.mxd 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 ., , ,,: ! ' Or' Etitti wit. WBT WBR NBt. NBT NBR sat, `KV `?" Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 78 14 75 7 573 67 129 793 7 Future Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 78 14 75 7 573 67 129 793 7 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 14 17 2 81 15 78 7 597 70 134 826 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 121 132 13 261 255 216 47 855 99 919 3520 30 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.52 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow,veh/h 545 972 98 1393 1870 1585 1781 4640 538 1781 5222 44 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 33 0 0 81 15 78 7 436 231 134 538 295 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1615 0 0 1393 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1862 Q Serve(g_s),s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.8 4.9 0.4 13.8 14.0 4.3 6.7 6.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 1.7 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.8 4.9 0.4 13.8 14.0 4.3 6.7 6.7 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 266 0 0 261 255 216 47 628 327 919 2294 1255 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.06 0.36 0.15 0.70 0.71 0.15 0.23 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 423 0 0 401 442 375 275 1176 613 919 2294 1255 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 41.8 0.0 0.0 43.2 41.4 43.2 53.3 48.6 48.7 13.9 6.9 6.9 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 1.0 1.5 6.3 12.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 2.0 0.2 6.9 7.8 1.7 2.3 2.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.0 0.0 0.0 43.9 41.5 44.2 54.8 54.9 60.8 14.0 7.2 7.4 LnGrp LOS D A A D D D D D E B A A Approach Vol,veh/h 33 174 674 967 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.0 43.8 56.9 8.2 Approach LOS D D E A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 62.7 26.3 21.0 8.9 80.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 28.0 38.0 26.0 17.0 49.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 6.3 16.0 3.7 2.4 8.7 7.4 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.3 4.2 0.1 0.0 6.1 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 29.9 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NOT NOR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 69 2 27 34 8 5 43 617 27 21 849 67 Future Volume(veh/h) 69 2 27 34 8 5 43 617 27 21 849 67 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 70 2 28 35 8 5 44 630 28 21 866 68 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 245 14 202 229 145 91 799 3193 141 115 1222 96 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.08 Sat Flow,veh/h 1401 107 1495 1380 1076 673 1781 5013 222 1781 4829 378 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 70 0 30 35 0 13 44 427 231 21 610 324 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1401 0 1601 1380 0 1749 1781 1702 1830 1781 1702 1802 Q Serve(g_s),s 5.0 0.0 1.8 2.5 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.4 11.4 1.3 19.2 19.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 5.8 0.0 1.8 4.3 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.4 11.4 1.3 19.2 19.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.21 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 245 0 216 229 0 236 799 2168 1166 115 861 456 V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.00 0.14 0.15 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 375 0 364 356 0 398 799 2168 1166 308 1454 770 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 44.0 0.0 41.9 43.9 0.0 41.5 26.8 20.3 20.3 51.0 46.4 46.5 lncr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 4.9 9.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.8 0.0 0.7 0.9 0.0 0.3 1.0 5.2 5.7 0.6 9.3 10.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.6 0.0 42.2 44.2 0.0 41.6 26.9 20.5 20.7 51.7 51.3 55.6 LnGrp LOS D A DD A DCCCD D E Approach Vol,veh/h 100 48 702 955 Approach Delay,s/veh 43.9 43.5 20.9 52.8 Approach LOS D D C D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 13.1 76.1 20.8 55.3 33.8 20.8 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 48.0 25.0 20.0 47.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 3.3 13.4 7.8 4.3 21.3 6.3 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.0 4.5 0.3 0.1 6.6 0.1 intersection summery HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.6 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1> 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 44 43 69 52 40 55 89 588 73 111 746 46 Future Volume(veh/h) 44 43 69 52 40 55 89 588 73 111 746 46 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 46 45 72 54 42 57 93 612 76 116 777 48 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 366 88 141 353 103 140 582 859 267 654 1064 330 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.33 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.07 0.07 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 648 1036 1781 719 976 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 46 0 117 54 0 99 93 612 76 116 777 48 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1684 1781 0 1695 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 2.2 0.0 7.1 2.6 0.0 5.8 4.1 12.5 3.4 6.4 16.4 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.2 0.0 7.1 2.6 0.0 5.8 4.1 12.5 3.4 6.4 16.4 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 366 0 230 353 0 243 582 859 267 654 1064 330 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.00 0.51 0.15 0.00 0.41 0.16 0.71 0.29 0.18 0.73 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 458 0 276 432 0 277 582 1485 461 654 1485 461 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 32.8 0.0 44.1 32.4 0.0 42.8 26.3 43.2 21.7 33.4 48.2 22.5 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 1.7 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.1 5.0 2.7 0.1 4.3 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.0 0.0 3.1 1.1 0.0 2.5 1.7 5.6 2.0 2.9 7.9 1.3 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.9 0.0 45.8 32.6 0.0 43.9 26.4 48.2 24.3 33.5 52.5 23.4 LnGrp LOS C A D C A D C D C C D C Approach Vol,veh/h 163 153 781 941 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.2 39.9 43.3 48.7 Approach LOS D D D D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 46.4 24.5 18.1 21.0 42.0 28.9 17.3 21.8 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 8.4 14.5 4.6 9.1 6.1 18.4 4.2 7.8 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 4.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 4.5 0.1 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 45.4 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 75 44 647 862 11 Future Vol,veh/h 0 75 44 647 862 11 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 79 46 681 907 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 460 919 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 469 428 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 469 428 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 14.2 0.9 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 428 - 469 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.108 - 0.168 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 14.4 - 14.2 - - HCM Lane LOS B - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 - 0.6 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 28 91 42 10 54 18 Future Vol,veh/h 28 91 42 10 54 18 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 31 100 46 11 59 20 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 57 0 - 0 214 52 Stage 1 - - - - 52 - Stage 2 - - - - 162 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1547 - - - 774 1016 Stage 1 - - - - 970 - Stage 2 - - - - 867 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1547 - - - 758 1016 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 758 - Stage 1 - - - - 950 - Stage 2 - - - - 867 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 1.7 0 9.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1547 - - - 809 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 - - - 0.098 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.4 0 - - 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 84 5 30 62 24 5 1 10 4 1 1 Future Vol,veh/h 3 84 5 30 62 24 5 1 10 4 1 1 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 3 88 5 32 65 25 5 1 11 4 1 1 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Marl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 90 0 0 93 0 0 240 251 91 245 241 78 Stage 1 - - - - - - 97 97 - 142 142 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 143 154 - 103 99 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.5184.0183.3183.5184.0183.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1505 - - 1501 - - 714 652 967 709 660 983 Stage 1 - - - - - - 910 815 - 861 779 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 860 770 - 903 813 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1505 - - 1501 - - 699 636 967 687 644 983 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 699 636 - 687 644 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 908 813 - 859 761 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 838 752 - 890 811 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.2 1.9 9.4 10.1 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 839 1505 - - 1501 - - 715 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 0.002 - - 0.021 - - 0.009 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.4 0 - 7.5 0 - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0.1 - - 0 T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 AM.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 585 68 132 809 7 Future Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 585 68 132 809 7 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 14 17 2 83 15 80 7 609 71 138 843 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 121 132 13 261 255 216 47 870 100 913 3520 29 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.51 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow,veh/h 545 972 98 1393 1870 1585 1781 4643 535 1781 5223 43 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 33 0 0 83 15 80 7 445 235 138 549 301 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1614 0 0 1393 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1863 Q Serve(g_s),s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.1 14.3 4.5 6.9 6.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 1.7 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.1 14.3 4.5 6.9 6.9 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 266 0 0 261 255 216 47 638 333 913 2294 1255 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.06 0.37 0.15 0.70 0.71 0.15 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 423 0 0 401 442 375 275 1176 613 913 2294 1255 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 41.8 0.0 0.0 43.3 41.4 43.2 53.3 48.5 48.6 14.2 7.0 7.0 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 1.1 1.5 6.2 12.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 2.0 0.2 7.0 7.9 1.8 2.3 2.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.0 0.0 0.0 44.0 41.5 44.3 54.8 54.7 60.6 14.2 7.2 7.4 LnGrp LOS D A A D D D D D E B A A Approach Vol,veh/h 33 178 687 988 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.0 43.9 56.8 8.3 Approach LOS D D E A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 62.4 26.6 21.0 8.9 80.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 28.0 38.0 26.0 17.0 49.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 6.5 16.3 3.7 2.4 8.9 7.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.3 4.3 0.1 0.0 6.3 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 29.9 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 70 2 28 35 8 5 44 629 28 21 866 68 Future Volume(veh/h) 70 2 28 35 8 5 44 629 28 21 866 68 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 71 2 29 36 8 5 45 642 29 21 884 69 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 246 14 202 228 145 91 790 3189 143 115 1245 97 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow,veh/h 1401 103 1498 1378 1076 673 1781 5009 225 1781 4831 376 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 71 0 31 36 0 13 45 435 236 21 622 331 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1401 0 1601 1378 0 1749 1781 1702 1830 1781 1702 1803 Q Serve(g_s),s 5.1 0.0 1.9 2.6 0.0 0.7 2.4 11.6 11.7 1.3 19.6 19.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 5.8 0.0 1.9 4.5 0.0 0.7 2.4 11.6 11.7 1.3 19.6 19.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.21 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 246 0 216 228 0 236 790 2168 1165 115 877 465 V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.00 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 375 0 364 355 0 398 790 2168 1165 308 1454 770 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 44.0 0.0 42.0 43.9 0.0 41.5 27.1 20.4 20.4 51.0 46.3 46.3 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 4.8 9.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.8 0.0 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.3 1.0 5.3 5.8 0.6 9.5 10.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.6 0.0 42.3 44.3 0.0 41.6 27.2 20.6 20.8 51.7 51.1 55.3 LnGrp LOS D A DD A DCCCDD E Approach Vol,veh/h 102 49 716 974 Approach Delay,s/veh 43.9 43.5 21.0 52.6 Approach LOS D D C D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 13.1 76.0 20.9 54.8 34.3 20.9 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 48.0 25.0 20.0 47.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 3.3 13.7 7.8 4.4 21.7 6.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.0 4.6 0.3 0.1 6.7 0.1 intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.6 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 dement .: taT EBR, . & ,"T. . t y .*f .._,'. . Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1> 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 600 74 113 761 47 Future Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 600 74 113 761 47 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 47 46 73 55 43 58 95 625 77 118 793 49 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 366 89 141 353 103 140 575 874 271 647 1081 336 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.07 0.07 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 651 1033 1781 722 973 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 47 0 119 55 0 101 95 625 77 118 793 49 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1684 1781 0 1695 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.7 3.4 6.6 16.7 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.7 3.4 6.6 16.7 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.61 1.00 0.57 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 366 0 230 353 0 243 575 874 271 647 1081 336 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.00 0.52 0.16 0.00 0.42 0.17 0.72 0.28 0.18 0.73 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 456 0 276 431 0 277 575 1485 461 647 1485 461 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 0.0 44.1 32.4 0.0 42.9 26.6 43.1 21.4 33.7 48.1 22.3 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 1.8 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.1 5.0 2.6 0.1 4.3 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.0 0.0 3.1 1.2 0.0 2.6 1.8 5.7 2.0 3.0 8.1 1.3 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.9 0.0 46.0 32.6 0.0 44.1 26.8 48.0 24.0 33.8 52.4 23.2 LnGrp LOS C A DC A DCDCCDC Approach Vol,veh/h 166 156 797 960 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.3 40.0 43.2 48.6 Approach LOS D D D D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 46.0 24.8 18.2 21.0 41.5 29.3 17.4 21.8 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 8.6 14.7 4.6 9.2 6.2 18.7 4.3 8.0 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 4.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 4.5 0.1 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 45.4 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 77 45 660 879 11 Future Vol,veh/h 0 77 45 660 879 11 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 81 47 695 925 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 469 937 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 463 420 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 463 420 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 14.4 0.9 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 420 - 463 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.113 - 0.175 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 14.7 - 14.4 - - HCM Lane LOS B - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 - 0.6 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 29 93 43 10 55 18 Future Vol,veh/h 29 93 43 10 55 18 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 32 102 47 11 60 20 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 58 0 - 0 219 53 Stage 1 - - - - 53 - Stage 2 - - - - 166 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 769 1014 Stage 1 - - - - 970 - Stage 2 - - - - 863 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 752 1014 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 752 - Stage 1 - - - - 949 - Stage 2 - - - - 863 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 1.8 0 10 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1546 - - - 803 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 - - - 0.1 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.4 0 - - 10 HCM Lane LOS A A - - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 86 5 31 63 24 5 1 10 4 1 1 Future Vol,veh/h 3 86 5 31 63 24 5 1 10 4 1 1 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 3 91 5 33 66 25 5 1 11 4 1 1 Major/Minor Majora Major2 Minarl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 91 0 0 96 0 0 246 257 94 251 247 79 Stage 1 - - - - - - 100 100 - 145 145 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 146 157 - 106 102 - Critical Hdwy 4,12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1504 - - 1498 - - 708 647 963 702 655 981 Stage 1 - - - - - - 906 812 - 858 777 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 857 768 - 900 811 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1504 - - 1498 - - 693 631 963 680 639 981 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 693 631 - 680 639 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 904 810 - 856 759 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 835 750 - 887 809 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.2 2 9.4 10.1 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 834 1504 - - 1498 - - 709 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 0.002 - - 0.022 - - 0.009 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.4 0 - 7.5 0 - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0.1 - - 0 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM nb.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 _° ,nt at W d:T 4 t F t.. :," ,,,,:,°,14;;'`-:':L: Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 600 68 132 799 7 Future Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 600 68 132 799 7 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 14 17 2 83 15 80 7 625 71 138 832 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 121 132 13 261 255 216 47 890 100 907 3520 30 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.51 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow,veh/h 545 972 98 1393 1870 1585 1781 4657 524 1781 5223 44 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 33 0 0 83 15 80 7 455 241 138 542 297 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1614 0 0 1393 1870 1585 1781 1702 1776 1781 1702 1862 Q Serve(g_s),s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.4 14.6 4.5 6.8 6.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 1.7 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.4 14.6 4.5 6.8 6.8 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 266 0 0 261 255 216 47 651 340 907 2294 1255 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.06 0.37 0.15 0.70 0.71 0.15 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 423 0 0 401 442 375 275 1176 614 907 2294 1255 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 41.8 0.0 0.0 43.3 41.4 43.2 53.3 48.4 48.5 14.4 7.0 7.0 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 1.1 1.5 6.1 11.8 0.1 0.2 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 2.0 0.2 7.1 8.1 1.8 2.3 2.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.0 0.0 0.0 44.0 41.5 44.3 54.8 54.6 60.4 14.5 7.2 7.4 LnGrp LOS D A A D D D D D E B A A Approach Vol,veh/h 33 178 703 977 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.0 43.9 56.6 8.3 Approach LOS D D E A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 62.0 27.0 21.0 8.9 80.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 28.0 38.0 26.0 17.0 49.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 6.5 16.6 3.7 2.4 8.8 7.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.3 4.4 0.1 0.0 6.2 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.2 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 86 5 34 35 8 5 43 624 28 29 868 42 Future Volume(veh/h) 86 5 34 35 8 5 43 624 28 29 868 42 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 88 5 35 36 8 5 44 637 29 30 886 43 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 247 27 192 221 146 91 801 3098 140 146 1251 61 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.08 0.08 Sat Flow,veh/h 1401 202 1414 1367 1076 673 1781 5007 227 1781 4989 242 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 88 0 40 36 0 13 44 432 234 30 604 325 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1401 0 1616 1367 0 1749 1781 1702 1830 1781 1702 1827 Q Serve(g_s),s 6.4 0.0 2.4 2.6 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.6 11.7 1.8 19.0 19.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 7.1 0.0 2.4 5.0 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.6 11.7 1.8 19.0 19.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.13 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 247 0 219 221 0 237 801 2106 1132 146 853 458 V/C Ratio(X) 0.36 0.00 0.18 0.16 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 375 0 367 346 0 398 801 2106 1132 308 1454 781 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 44.5 0.0 42.1 44.4 0.0 41.4 26.8 21.3 21.3 50.0 46.5 46.6 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.9 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.7 4.9 9.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.3 0.0 1.0 0.9 0.0 0.3 1.0 5.3 5.8 0.8 9.3 10.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.4 0.0 42.5 44.7 0.0 41.5 26.8 21.5 21.7 50.7 51.4 55.5 LnGrp LOS D A DD A DCCCDD E Approach Vol,veh/h 128 49 710 959 Approach Delay,s/veh 44.5 43.8 21.9 52.8 Approach LOS D D C D Timer•Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 , .t.. Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 15.0 74.1 20.9 55.5 33.6 20.9 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 48.0 25.0 20.0 47.0 25.0 .. �� M*"0 ;Y, Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 3.8 13.7 9.1 4.3 21.1 7.0 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.0 4.6 0.3 0.1 6.5 0.1 „ ' u `fits wt HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 40.1 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Vioginent . �.. , Or �,' WM WU WBR NBA. tar NBR SOL t ... Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1> 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 594 74 113 770 47 Future Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 594 74 113 770 47 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 47 46 73 55 43 58 95 619 77 118 802 49 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 366 89 141 353 103 140 572 867 269 650 1091 339 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.07 0.07 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 651 1033 1781 722 973 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 47 0 119 55 0 101 95 619 77 118 802 49 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1684 1781 0 1695 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.6 3.4 6.6 16.9 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.6 3.4 6.6 16.9 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.61 1.00 0.57 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 366 0 230 353 0 243 572 867 269 650 1091 339 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.00 0.52 0.16 0.00 0.42 0.17 0.71 0.29 0.18 0.74 0.14 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 456 0 276 431 0 277 572 1485 461 650 1485 461 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 0.0 44.1 32.4 0.0 42.9 26.8 43.1 21.5 33.6 48.1 22.2 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 1.8 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.1 5.0 2.7 0.1 4.3 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.0 0.0 3.1 1.2 0.0 2.6 1.8 5.6 2.0 3.0 8.2 1.3 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.9 0.0 46.0 32.6 0.0 44.1 26.9 48.1 24.2 33.7 52.4 23.0 LnGrp LOS C A DC A DCDCCDC Approach Vol,veh/h 166 156 791 969 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.3 40.0 43.2 48.6 Approach LOS D D D D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 46.1 24.7 18.2 21.0 41.3 29.5 17.4 21,8 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 8.6 14.6 4.6 9.2 6.2 18.9 4.3 8.0 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 4.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 4.6 0.1 0.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 45.4 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 74 49 675 869 11 Future Vol,veh/h 0 74 49 675 869 11 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 78 52 711 915 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 464 927 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 466 424 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 466 424 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 14.3 1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(vehlh) 424 - 466 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.122 - 0.167 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 14.7 - 14.3 - - HCM Lane LOS B - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 - 0.6 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 26 93 43 10 55 21 Future Vol,veh/h 26 93 43 10 55 21 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 29 102 47 11 60 23 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 58 0 - 0 213 53 Stage 1 - - - - 53 - Stage 2 - - - - 160 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 775 1014 Stage 1 - - - - 970 - Stage 2 - - - - 869 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 760 1014 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 760 - Stage 1 - - - - 951 - Stage 2 - - - - 869 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 1.6 0 9.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1546 - - - 817 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.102 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.4 0 - - 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 83 5 31 63 24 5 1 10 35 1 4 Future Vol,veh/h 3 83 5 31 63 24 5 1 10 35 1 4 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 3 87 5 33 66 25 5 1 11 37 1 4 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minorl M1nor2, Conflicting Flow All 91 0 0 92 0 0 243 253 90 247 243 79 Stage 1 - - - - - - 96 96 - 145 145 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 147 157 - 102 98 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1504 - - 1503 - - 711 650 968 707 659 981 Stage 1 - - - - - - 911 815 - 858 777 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 856 768 - 904 814 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1504 - - 1503 - - 694 634 968 685 643 981 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 694 634 - 685 643 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 909 813 - 856 759 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 832 750 - 891 812 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.2 2 9.4 10.4 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 837 1504 - - 1503 - - 705 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 0.002 - - 0.022 - - 0.06 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.4 0 - 7.4 0 - 10.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.2 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 11: CSAH 17/France Ave & access 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 0 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 17 0 724 924 19 Future Vol,veh/h 0 17 0 724 924 19 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 18 0 762 973 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 497 - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 444 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - 0 - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 444 - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 13.4 0 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) - 444 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.04 - - HCM Control Delay(s) - 13.4 - - HCM Lane LOS - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) - 0.1 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 600 68 132 799 7 Future Volume(veh/h) 13 16 2 80 14 77 7 600 68 132 799 7 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 14 17 2 83 15 80 7 625 71 138 832 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 121 132 13 261 255 216 47 890 100 907 3520 30 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.51 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow,veh/h 545 972 98 1393 1870 1585 1781 4657 524 1781 5223 44 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 33 0 0 83 15 80 7 455 241 138 542 297 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1614 0 0 1393 1870 1585 1781 1702 1776 1781 1702 1862 Q Serve(g_s),s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.4 14.6 4.5 6.8 6.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 1.7 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.8 5.1 0.4 14.4 14.6 4.5 6.8 6.8 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 266 0 0 261 255 216 47 651 340 907 2294 1255 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.06 0.37 0.15 0.70 0.71 0.15 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 423 0 0 401 442 375 275 1176 614 907 2294 1255 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 41.8 0.0 0.0 43.3 41.4 43.2 53.3 48.4 48.5 14.4 7.0 7.0 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 1.1 1.5 6.1 11.8 0.1 0.2 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 2.0 0.2 7.1 8.1 1.8 2.3 2.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.0 0.0 0.0 44.0 41.5 44.3 54.8 54.6 60.4 14.5 7.2 7.4 LnGrp LOS D A A DDDDD EB A A Approach Vol,veh/h 33 178 703 977 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.0 43.9 56.6 8.3 Approach LOS D D E A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 62.0 27.0 21.0 8.9 80.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 28.0 38.0 26.0 17.0 49.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 6.5 16.6 3.7 2.4 8.8 7.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.3 4.4 0.1 0.0 6.2 0.5 Intersection Summary ,. a,a.. ... HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.2 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 94 5 43 35 8 5 43 624 28 21 860 61 Future Volume(veh/h) 94 5 43 35 8 5 43 624 28 21 860 61 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 96 5 44 36 8 5 44 637 29 21 878 62 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 247 22 197 213 146 91 795 3183 144 115 1238 87 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.08 Sat Flow,veh/h 1401 164 1446 1356 1076 673 1781 5007 227 1781 4870 343 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 96 0 49 36 0 13 44 432 234 21 613 327 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 1401 0 1610 1356 0 1749 1781 1702 1830 1781 1702 1809 Q Serve(g_s),s 7.0 0.0 3.0 2.7 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.5 11.6 1.3 19.3 19.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 7.8 0.0 3.0 5.7 0.0 0.7 2.3 11.5 11.6 1.3 19.3 19.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.19 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 247 0 219 213 0 238 795 2164 1163 115 865 460 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.00 0.22 0.17 0.00 0.05 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 375 0 366 337 0 398 795 2164 1163 308 1454 773 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 44.7 0.0 42.3 44.9 0.0 41.4 27.0 20.4 20.4 51.0 46.4 46.5 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 4.9 9.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.5 0.0 1.2 0.9 0.0 0.3 1.0 5.2 5.7 0.6 9.4 10.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.7 0.0 42.9 45.2 0.0 41.5 27.0 20.6 20.8 51.7 51.3 55.5 LnGrp LOS D A D D A D C C C D D E Approach Vol,veh/h 145 49 710 961 Approach Delay,s/veh 44.8 44.2 21.0 52.7 Approach LOS D D C D Timer Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 13.1 75.9 21.0 55.1 34.0 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 48.0 25.0 20.0 47.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 3.3 13.6 9.8 4.3 21.4 7.7 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.0 4.6 0.4 0.1 6.6 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.8 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1> 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 594 74 113 770 47 Future Volume(veh/h) 45 44 70 53 41 56 91 594 74 113 770 47 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 47 46 73 55 43 58 95 619 77 118 802 49 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 366 89 141 353 103 140 572 867 269 650 1091 339 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.07 0.07 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 651 1033 1781 722 973 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 47 0 119 55 0 101 95 619 77 118 802 49 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1684 1781 0 1695 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.6 3.4 6.6 16.9 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.3 0.0 7.2 2.6 0.0 6.0 4.2 12.6 3.4 6.6 16.9 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.61 1.00 0.57 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 366 0 230 353 0 243 572 867 269 650 1091 339 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.00 0.52 0.16 0.00 0.42 0.17 0.71 0.29 0.18 0.74 0.14 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 456 0 276 431 0 277 572 1485 461 650 1485 461 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 0.0 44.1 32.4 0.0 42.9 26.8 43.1 21.5 33.6 48.1 22.2 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.2 0.0 1.8 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.1 5.0 2.7 0.1 4.3 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.0 0.0 3.1 1.2 0.0 2.6 1.8 5.6 2.0 3.0 8.2 1,3 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.9 0.0 46.0 32.6 0.0 44.1 26.9 48.1 24.2 33.7 52.4 23.0 LnGrp LOS C A DC A DCDCCDC Approach Vol,veh/h 166 156 791 969 Approach Delay,s/veh 42.3 40.0 43.2 48.6 Approach LOS D D D D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 46.1 24.7 18.2 21.0 41.3 29.5 17.4 21.8 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 32.0 17.0 18.0 ;:gfOi(50',0*,414 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 8.6 14.6 4.6 9.2 6.2 18.9 4.3 8.0 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 4.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 4.6 0.1 0.3 gvan HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 45.4 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 74 49 675 869 11 Future Vol,veh/h 0 74 49 675 869 11 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 78 52 711 915 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 464 927 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 466 424 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 466 424 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 14.3 1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 424 - 466 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.122 - 0.167 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 14.7 - 14.3 - - HCM Lane LOS B - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 - 0.6 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 26 93 43 10 55 21 Future Vol,veh/h 26 93 43 10 55 21 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 29 102 47 11 60 23 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 58 0 - 0 213 53 Stage 1 - - - - 53 - Stage 2 - - - - 160 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 775 1014 Stage 1 - - - - 970 - Stage 2 - - - - 869 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1546 - - - 760 1014 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 760 - Stage 1 - - - - 951 - Stage 2 - - - - 869 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 1.6 0 9.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1546 - - - 817 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.102 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.4 0 - - 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A A - - A HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 3 83 5 31 63 43 5 1 10 52 1 4 Future Vol,veh/h 3 83 5 31 63 43 5 1 10 52 1 4 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 3 87 5 33 66 45 5 1 11 55 1 4 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 111 0 0 92 0 0 253 273 90 257 253 89 Stage 1 - - - - - - 96 96 - 155 155 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 157 177 - 102 98 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1479 - - 1503 - - 700 634 968 696 650 969 Stage 1 - - - - - - 911 815 - 847 769 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 845 753 - 904 814 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1479 - - 1503 - - 683 618 968 674 633 969 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 683 618 - 674 633 - Stage l - - - - - - 909 813 - 845 751 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 820 735 - 891 812 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.2 1.7 9.4 10.7 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 830 1479 - - 1503 - - 688 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 0.002 - - 0.022 - - 0.087 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.4 0 - 7.4 0 - 10.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 AM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Movement EBL EBT ERR MIL MIT WEIR RIB(,. NRT ''„, Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 105 21 122 19 1314 152 182 915 4 Future Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 105 21 122 19 1314 152 182 915 4 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 24 24 9 111 22 128 20 1383 160 192 963 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 96 88 27 216 208 176 104 1689 195 697 3658 15 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.48 0.48 0.39 0.70 0.70 Sat Flow,veh/h 519 795 246 1376 1870 1585 1781 4641 537 1781 5249 22 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 57 0 0 111 22 128 20 1014 529 192 625 342 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1561 0 0 1376 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1866 Q Serve(g_s),s 1.4 0.0 0.0 5.4 1.4 10.5 1.4 34.4 34.4 9.9 9.2 9.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.1 0.0 0.0 9.5 1.4 10.5 1.4 34.4 34.4 9.9 9.2 9.2 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 211 0 0 216 208 176 104 1239 646 697 2372 1301 V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.11 0.73 0.19 0.82 0.82 0.28 0.26 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 300 0 0 297 319 270 198 1614 841 697 2372 1301 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 55.1 0.0 0.0 57.3 54.0 58.0 59.2 31.0 31.0 28.0 7.6 7.6 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.2 5.6 0.9 6.1 11.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.7 4.5 0.7 13.8 15.3 4.3 3.2 3.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.8 0.0 0.0 59.2 54.2 63.6 60.1 37.1 42.1 28.2 7.9 8.1 LnGrp LOS E A A ED E EDDC A A Approach Vol,veh/h 57 261 1563 1159 Approach Delay,s/veh 55.8 61.0 39.1 11.3 Approach LOS E E D B Timet-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 58.9 55.1 21.0 13.9 100.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 30.0 64.0 23.0 15.0 79.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 11.9 36.4 6.1 3.4 11.2 12.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.5 12.8 0.2 0.0 7.7 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.7 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Movement ESL EBT EBR WSL WBT WEIR, NBL NBT ' NBR SBL SO OR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 115 6 54 85 10 68 42 1382 92 77 903 88 Future Volume(veh/h) 115 6 54 85 10 68 42 1382 92 77 903 88 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 119 6 56 88 10 70 43 1425 95 79 931 91 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 194 24 219 210 31 214 158 1901 127 582 2965 289 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.33 0.63 0.63 Sat Flow,veh/h 1319 156 1453 1340 202 1414 1781 4890 326 1781 4730 461 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 119 0 62 88 0 80 43 992 528 79 669 353 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1319 0 1609 1340 0 1616 1781 1702 1812 1781 1702 1787 Q Serve(g_s),s 12.0 0.0 4.6 8.4 0.0 6.0 3.2 37.9 37.9 4.2 12.3 12.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 17.9 0.0 4.6 13.0 0.0 6.0 3.2 37.9 37.9 4.2 12.3 12.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 194 0 243 210 0 244 158 1323 704 582 2133 1120 V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 0.00 0.26 0.42 0.00 0.33 0.27 0.75 0.75 0.14 0.31 0.31 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 288 0 358 306 0 359 238 1715 913 582 2133 1120 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.82 0.82 0.82 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 59.2 0.0 50.6 56.3 0.0 51.2 61.2 52.5 52.5 32.0 11.7 11.7 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 3.1 0.0 0.5 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.7 3.2 6.0 0.1 0.4 0.7 Initial 0 Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.2 0.0 1.9 2.9 0.0 2.5 1.5 18,0 19.7 1.8 4.6 5.0 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.3 0.0 51.2 57.7 0.0 52.0 62.0 55.8 58.5 32.1 12.1 12.5 LnGrp LOS E A D E A D E E E C B B Approach Vol,veh/h 181 168 1563 1101 Approach Delay,s/veh 58.5 54.9 56.8 13.6 Approach LOS E D E B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 50.1 58.5 26.4 18.0 90.6 26.4 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 68.0 30.0 18.0 69.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 6.2 39.9 19.9 5.2 14.4 15.0 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.1 12.5 0.5 0.0 8.4 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 41.0 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBt_ WBT WBR N8L NBT N1 ``SBL SBA Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 71 60 75 86 60 121 100 1324 67 139 929 16 Future Volume(veh/h) 71 60 75 86 60 121 100 1324 67 139 929 16 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/hM 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 74 62 78 90 62 126 104 1379 70 145 968 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 339 84 105 284 214 181 616 2518 782 197 1318 409 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.35 0.49 0.49 0.04 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 753 947 1781 1870 1585 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 74 0 140 90 62 126 104 1379 70 145 968 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1700 1781 1870 1585 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 4.6 0.0 10.8 5.6 4.1 10.3 5.5 25.3 3.2 10.9 25.0 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.6 0.0 10.8 5.6 4.1 10.3 5.5 25.3 3.2 10.9 25.0 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 339 0 189 284 214 181 616 2518 782 197 1318 409 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.74 0.32 0.29 0.70 0.17 0.55 0.09 0.74 0.73 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 352 0 227 304 263 223 616 2518 782 290 2269 704 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 43.4 0.0 58.1 43.9 54.8 57.5 30.7 23.8 18.1 63.1 57.2 25.4 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.3 0.0 10.1 0.6 0.7 6.9 0.1 0.9 0.2 5.0 3.5 0.2 Initial 0 Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.1 0.0 5.2 2.6 2.0 4.5 2.4 10.2 1.2 5.5 11.9 0.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 0.0 68.2 44.5 55.5 64.4 30.8 24.6 18.4 68.1 60.7 25.6 LnGrp LOS D A ED E ECCBE EC Approach Vol,veh/h 214 278 1553 1130 Approach Delay,s/veh 59.7 56.0 24.8 61.1 Approach LOS E E C E Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 20.9 72.6 20.5 21.0 52.7 40.9 20.1 21.4 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 22.0 55.0 16.0 18.0 17.0 60.0 15.0 19.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 12.9 27.3 7.6 12.8 7.5 27.0 6.6 12.3 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 11.9 0.1 0.3 0.1 7.9 0.1 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 42.8 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 69 80 1485 998 31 Future Vol,veh/h 0 69 80 1485 998 31 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 73 84 1563 1051 33 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 542 1084 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 415 356 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 415 356 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 15.5 0.9 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 356 - 415 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.237 - 0.175 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 18.2 - 15.5 - - HCM Lane LOS C - C - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.9 - 0.6 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Int Delay,s/veh 2.9 Movement ERL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 50 76 102 74 23 44 Future Vol,veh/h 50 76 102 74 23 44 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 53 80 107 78 24 46 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 185 0 - 0 332 146 Stage 1 - - - - 146 - Stage 2 - - - - 186 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1390 - - - 663 901 Stage 1 - - - - 881 - Stage 2 - - - - 846 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1390 - - - 636 901 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 636 - Stage 1 - - - - 846 - Stage 2 - - - - 846 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 3.1 0 10 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1390 - - - 788 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - - 0.09 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.7 0 - - 10 HCM Lane LOS A A - - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 1 87 5 10 123 4 10 1 40 24 1 3 Future Vol,veh/h 1 87 5 10 123 4 10 1 40 24 1 3 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 1 92 5 11 129 4 11 1 42 25 1 3 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 133 0 0 97 0 0 252 252 95 271 252 131 Stage 1 - - - - - - 97 97 - 153 153 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 155 155 - 118 99 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1452 - - 1496 - - 701 651 962 682 651 919 Stage 1 - - - - - - 910 815 - 849 771 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 847 769 - 887 813 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1452 - - 1496 - - 693 645 962 647 645 919 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 693 645 - 647 645 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 909 814 - 848 765 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 836 763 - 846 812 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.1 0.5 9.3 10.6 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 886 1452 - - 1496 - - 668 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.001 - - 0.007 - - 0.044 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.3 7.5 0 - 7.4 0 - 10.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.1 T:\3022\09\synchro\2018 PM.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1340 155 186 933 4 Future Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1340 155 186 933 4 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 24 24 9 113 22 131 20 1411 163 196 982 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 95 88 27 216 208 176 104 1717 198 687 3658 15 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.49 0.49 0.39 0.70 0.70 Sat Flow,veh/h 518 794 246 1376 1870 1585 1781 4642 536 1781 5249 21 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 57 0 0 113 22 131 20 1035 539 196 637 349 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1559 0 0 1376 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1867 Q Serve(g_s),s 1.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.4 9.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4,1 0.0 0.0 9.7 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.4 9.4 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 211 0 0 216 208 176 104 1259 656 687 2372 1301 V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.11 0.74 0.19 0.82 0.82 0.29 0.27 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 300 0 0 297 319 270 198 1614 841 687 2372 1301 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 55.1 0.0 0.0 57.4 54.0 58.1 59.2 30.5 30.5 28.6 7.6 7.6 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.1 0.9 6.1 11.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.7 4.6 0.7 14.0 15.5 4.4 3.3 3.7 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.8 0.0 0.0 59.4 54.2 64.2 60.1 36.6 41.6 28.9 7.9 8.1 LnGrp LOS E A A ED E EDDC A A Approach Vol,veh/h 57 266 1594 1182 Approach Delay,s/veh 55.8 61.3 38.6 11.4 Approach LOS E E D B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 58.1 55.9 21.0 13.9 100.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 30.0 64.0 23.0 15.0 79.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 12.3 37.0 6.1 3.4 11.4 12.8 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.5 12.9 0.2 0.0 7.9 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.5 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 !Movement EBL EBT ERR WBL WBT WEIR NBL NBT : NBR SRL SBI Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 117 6 55 87 10 69 43 1410 94 79 921 90 Future Volume(veh/h) 117 6 55 87 10 69 43 1410 94 79 921 90 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 121 6 57 90 10 71 44 1454 97 81 949 93 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 196 23 223 212 31 217 160 1934 129 566 2950 288 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.32 0.62 0.62 Sat Flow,veh/h 1317 153 1455 1339 199 1416 1781 4890 326 1781 4729 462 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 121 0 63 90 0 81 44 1012 539 81 682 360 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1317 0 1608 1339 0 1615 1781 1702 1812 1781 1702 1787 Q Serve(g_s),s 12.2 0.0 4.7 8.6 0.0 6.0 3.3 38.7 38.7 4.4 12.7 12.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 18.2 0.0 4.7 13.2 0.0 6.0 3.3 38.7 38.7 4.4 12.7 12.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.26 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 196 0 246 212 0 247 160 1347 717 566 2123 1115 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.26 0.42 0.00 0.33 0.28 0.75 0.75 0.14 0.32 0.32 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 287 0 357 305 0 359 238 1715 913 566 2123 1115 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.81 0.81 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 59.1 0.0 50.4 56.2 0.0 51.0 61.2 52.3 52.3 32.9 11.9 12.0 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 3.1 0.0 0.5 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.7 3.2 5.9 0.1 0.4 0.8 Initial 0 Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.2 0.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 2.5 1.5 18.3 20.0 1.9 4.8 5.2 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.2 0.0 50.9 57.6 0.0 51.7 61.9 55.5 58.1 33.0 12.3 12.7 LnGrp LOS E A D E A D E E E C B B Approach Vol,veh/h 184 171 1595 1123 Approach Delay,s/veh 58.4 54.8 56.6 14.0 Approach LOS E D E B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 48.9 59.4 26.7 18.1 90.2 2.6.7 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 68.0 30.0 18.0 69.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 6.4 40.7 20.2 5.3 14.8 15.2 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.1 12.7 0.5 0.0 8.6 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 41.0 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1351 68 142 948 16 Future Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1351 68 142 948 16 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 75 64 80 92 64 128 106 1407 71 148 988 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 338 84 105 281 214 181 606 2517 781 197 1344 417 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.49 0.49 0.04 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 756 945 1781 1870 1585 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 75 0 144 92 64 128 106 1407 71 148 988 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 0 1700 1781 1870 1585 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.0 3.2 11.1 25.5 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.0 3.2 11.1 25.5 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 338 0 189 281 214 181 606 2517 781 197 1344 417 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.76 0.33 0.30 0.71 0.17 0.56 0.09 0.75 0.73 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 350 0 227 300 263 223 606 2517 781 290 2269 704 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 43.4 0.0 58.3 43.9 54.8 57.6 31.2 24.0 18.2 63.2 57.0 25.0 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.3 0.0 11.8 0.7 0.8 7.5 0.1 0.9 0.2 5.8 3.4 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.1 0.0 5.4 2.6 2.1 4.6 2.5 10.5 1.2 5.6 12.1 0.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 0.0 70.0 44.6 55.6 65.1 31.4 24.9 18.4 68.9 60.5 25.2 LnGrp LOS D A E D E E C C B E E C Approach Vol,veh/h 219 284 1584 1153 Approach Delay,s/veh 61.0 56.3 25.0 61.0 Approach LOS E E C E Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 20.9 72.5 20.5 21.0 51.9 41.5 20.1 21.4 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 22.0 55.0 16.0 18.0 17.0 60.0 15.0 19.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 13.1 28.0 7.7 13.1 7.6 27.5 6.7 12.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 12.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 8.1 0.1 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 43.0 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 70 82 1515 1018 32 Future Vol,veh/h 0 70 82 1515 1018 32 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 74 86 1595 1072 34 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 553 1106 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 408 348 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 408 348 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 15.8 1 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 348 - 408 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.248 - 0.181 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 18.7 - 15.8 - - HCM Lane LOS C - C - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1 - 0.7 - - T:\3022109\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 51 78 104 75 23 45 Future Vol,veh/h 51 78 104 75 23 45 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 54 82 109 79 24 47 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 188 0 - 0 339 149 Stage 1 - - - - 149 - Stage 2 - - - - 190 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 657 898 Stage 1 - - - - 879 - Stage 2 - - - - 842 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 630 898 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 630 - Stage 1 - - - - 843 - Stage 2 - - - - 842 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 3 0 10 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLnI Capacity(veh/h) 1386 - - - 785 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.039 - - - 0.091 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.7 0 - - 10 HCM Lane LOS A A - - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 Synchro 10 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 1 89 5 10 125 4 10 1 40 24 1 3 Future Vol,veh/h 1 89 5 10 125 4 10 1 40 24 1 3 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mk/tint Flow 1 94 5 11 132 4 11 1 42 25 1 3 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 136 0 0 99 0 0 257 257 97 276 257 134 Stage 1 - - - - - - 99 99 - 156 156 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 158 158 - 120 101 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1448 - - 1494 - - 696 647 959 676 647 915 Stage 1 - - - - - - 907 813 - 846 769 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 844 767 - 884 811 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1448 - - 1494 - - 688 641 959 641 641 915 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 688 641 - 641 641 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 906 812 - 845 763 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 833 761 - 843 810 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.1 0.5 9.3 10.7 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvrnt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 882 1448 - - 1494 - - 662 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.001 - - 0.007 - - 0.045 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.3 7.5 0 - 7.4 0 - 10.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.1 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM nb.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Sffr ;OR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1341 155 186 948 4 Future Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1341 155 186 948 4 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 24 24 9 113 22 131 20 1412 163 196 998 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 95 88 27 216 208 176 104 1718 198 687 3659 15 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.49 0.49 0.39 0.70 0.70 Sat Flow,veh/h 518 794 246 1376 1870 1585 1781 4642 536 1781 5250 21 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 57 0 0 113 22 131 20 1035 540 196 647 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1559 0 0 1376 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1867 Q Serve(g_s),s 1.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.6 9.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.1 0,0 0.0 9.7 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.6 9.6 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 211 0 0 216 208 176 104 1260 657 687 2372 1301 V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.11 0.74 0.19 0.82 0.82 0.29 0.27 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 300 0 0 297 319 270 198 1614 841 687 2372 1301 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 55.1 0.0 0.0 57.4 54.0 58.1 59.2 30.5 30.5 28.6 7.7 7.7 !nor Delay(d2),s/veh 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.1 0.9 6.1 11.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.7 4.6 0.7 14.0 15.5 4.4 3.4 3.8 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.8 0.0 0.0 59.4 54.2 64.2 60.1 36.6 41.6 28.9 7.9 8.2 LnGrp LOS E A A E D E E D D C A A Approach Vol,veh/h 57 266 1595 1198 Approach Delay,s/veh 55.8 61.3 38.6 11.4 Approach LOS E E D B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 6 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 58.0 56.0 21.0 13.9 100.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 30.0 64.0 23.0 15.0 79.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 12.3 37.0 6.1 3.4 11.6 12.8 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.5 12.9 0.2 0.0 8.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.4 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 118 7 51 87 14 69 61 1401 94 88 924 86 Future Volume(veh/h) 118 7 51 87 14 69 61 1401 94 88 924 86 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 122 7 53 90 14 71 63 1444 97 91 953 89 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 197 29 222 219 42 212 179 1923 129 565 2899 270 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.32 0.61 0.61 Sat Flow,veh/h 1313 188 1425 1343 268 1358 1781 4887 328 1781 4752 443 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 122 0 60 90 0 85 63 1006 535 91 682 360 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1313 0 1614 1343 0 1626 1781 1702 1811 1781 1702 1791 Q Serve(g_s),s 12.3 0.0 4.4 8.5 0.0 6.3 4.7 38.5 38.5 5.0 13.2 13.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 18.6 0.0 4.4 12.9 0.0 6.3 4.7 38.5 38.5 5.0 13.2 13.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.25 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 197 0 252 219 0 253 179 1339 713 565 2077 1093 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.24 0.41 0.00 0.34 0.35 0.75 0.75 0.16 0.33 0.33 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 284 0 359 308 0 361 238 1715 912 565 2077 1093 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.81 0.81 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 59.0 0.0 50.0 55.6 0.0 50.8 60.9 52.4 52.4 33.1 12.8 12.8 lncr Delay(d2),s/veh 3.2 0.0 0.5 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.9 3.2 5.9 0.1 0.4 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.3 0.0 1.8 3.0 0.0 2.6 2.2 18.2 19.9 2.2 5.0 5.4 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.2 0.0 50.4 56.8 0.0 51.5 61.9 55.6 58.2 33.3 13.3 13.6 LnGrp LOS E A D E A D E E E C B B Approach Vol,veh/h 182 175 1604 1133 Approach Delay,s/veh 58.3 54.3 56.7 15.0 Approach LOS E D E B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 48.8 59.1 27.0 19.6 88.4 27.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 68.0 30.0 18.0 69.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 7.0 40.5 20.6 6.7 15.2 14.9 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.1 12.7 0.4 0.1 8.6 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 41.4 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL MT WEIR NBL NBT Nacz sat, . ..,tOT. . ., Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1360 68 142 947 16 Future Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1360 68 142 947 16 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 75 64 80 92 64 128 106 1417 71 148 986 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 338 84 105 281 214 181 607 2517 781 197 1342 416 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.49 0.49 0.04 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 756 945 1781 1870 1585 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 75 0 144 92 64 128 106 1417 71 148 986 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1700 1781 1870 1585 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.3 3.2 11.1 25.4 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.3 3.2 11.1 25.4 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 338 0 189 281 214 181 607 2517 781 197 1342 416 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.76 0.33 0.30 0.71 0.17 0.56 0.09 0.75 0.73 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 350 0 227 300 263 223 607 2517 781 290 2269 704 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 43.4 0.0 58.3 43.9 54.8 57.6 31.2 24.0 18.2 63.2 57.1 25.1 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.3 0.0 11.8 0.7 0.8 7.5 0.1 0.9 0.2 5.8 3.4 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.1 0.0 5.4 2.6 2.1 4.6 2.5 10.6 1.2 5.6 12.1 0.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 0.0 70.0 44.6 55.6 65.1 31.3 24.9 18.4 68.9 60.5 25.2 LnGrp LOS D A EDE ECC BE EC Approach Vol,veh/h 219 284 1594 1151 Approach Delay,s/veh 61.0 56.3 25.1 61.1 Approach LOS E E C E Timer Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 20.9 72.5 20.5 21.0 52.0 41.5 20.1 21.4 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 22.0 55.0 16.0 18.0 17.0 60.0 15.0 19.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 13.1 28.3 7.7 13.1 7.6 27.4 6.7 12.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 12.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 8.0 0.1 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 43.0 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 74 82 1516 1033 32 Future Vol,veh/h 0 74 82 1516 1033 32 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 78 86 1596 1087 34 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 561 1121 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 403 342 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 403 342 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 16.1 1 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 342 - 403 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.252 - 0.193 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 19 - 16.1 - - HCM Lane LOS C - C - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1 - 0.7 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 55 78 104 75 23 45 Future Vol,veh/h 55 78 104 75 23 45 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 58 82 109 79 24 47 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 188 0 - 0 347 149 Stage 1 - - - - 149 - Stage 2 - - - - 198 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 650 898 Stage 1 - - - - 879 - Stage 2 - - - - 835 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 621 898 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 621 - Stage 1 - - - - 840 - Stage 2 - - - - 835 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 3.2 0 10.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1386 - - - 780 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - - 0.092 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.7 0 - - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A - - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 5 88 5 10 125 33 10 1 40 42 1 5 Future Vol,veh/h 5 88 5 10 125 33 10 1 40 42 1 5 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 93 5 11 132 35 11 1 42 44 1 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 167 0 0 98 0 0 281 295 96 299 280 150 Stage 1 - - - - - - 106 106 - 172 172 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 175 189 - 127 108 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1411 - - 1495 - - 671 616 960 653 628 896 Stage 1 - - - - - - 900 807 - 830 756 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 827 744 - 877 806 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1411 - - 1495 - - 660 609 960 618 620 896 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 660 609 - 618 620 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 896 804 - 827 750 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 814 738 - 834 803 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.4 0.4 9.4 11.1 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt HBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WEL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 872 1411 - - 1495 - - 639 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 0.004 - - 0.007 - - 0.079 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.6 0 - 7.4 0 - 11.1 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 11: CSAH 17/France Ave & access 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 0 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 18 0 1597 1079 29 Future Vol,veh/h 0 18 0 1597 1079 29 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 19 0 1681 1136 31 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 584 - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 390 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - 0 - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 390 - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 14.7 0 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) - 390 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.049 - - HCM Control Delay(s) - 14.7 - - HCM Lane LOS - B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) - 0.2 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b with France access.syn Synchro 10 21: CSAH 17/France Ave & Hazelton Rd 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT S Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 1 1 1 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1341 155 186 948 4 Future Volume(veh/h) 23 23 9 107 21 124 19 1341 155 186 948 4 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 24 24 9 113 22 131 20 1412 163 196 998 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 95 88 27 216 208 176 104 1718 198 687 3659 15 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.49 0.49 0.39 0.70 0.70 Sat Flow,veh/h 518 794 246 1376 1870 1585 1781 4642 536 1781 5250 21 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 57 0 0 113 22 131 20 1035 540 196 647 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1559 0 0 1376 1870 1585 1781 1702 1774 1781 1702 1867 Q Serve(g_s),s 1.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.6 9.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.1 0.0 0.0 9.7 1.4 10.8 1.4 35.0 35.0 10.3 9.6 9.6 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.01 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 211 0 0 216 208 176 104 1260 657 687 2372 1301 V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.11 0.74 0.19 0.82 0.82 0.29 0.27 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 300 0 0 297 319 270 198 1614 841 687 2372 1301 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 55.1 0.0 0.0 57.4 54.0 58.1 59.2 30.5 30.5 28.6 7.7 7.7 !nor Delay(d2),s/veh 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.1 0.9 6.1 11.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.7 4.6 0.7 14.0 15.5 4.4 3.4 3.8 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.8 0.0 0.0 59.4 54.2 64.2 60.1 36.6 41.6 28.9 7.9 8.2 LnGrp LOS E A A E D E E D D C A A Approach Vol,veh/h 57 266 1595 1198 Approach Delay,s/veh 55.8 61.3 38.6 11.4 Approach LOS E E D B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 58.0 56.0 21.0 13.9 100.1 21.0 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 30.0 64.0 23.0 15.0 79.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 12.3 37.0 6.1 3.4 11.6 12.8 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.5 12.9 0.2 0.0 8.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.4 HCM 6th LOS C T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 26: CSAH 17/France Ave & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Movement EBL EBT ERR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SRL SBT LL.r. Lane Configurations 1 1> 0 1 1> 0 1 3> 0 1 3> 0 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 127 7 60 87 14 69 61 1401 94 79 915 115 Future Volume(veh/h) 127 7 60 87 14 69 61 1401 94 79 915 115 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 131 7 62 90 14 71 63 1444 97 81 943 119 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 206 27 235 220 44 221 179 1923 129 554 2772 349 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.31 0.60 0.60 Sat Flow,veh/h 1313 163 1447 1332 268 1358 1781 4887 328 1781 4593 578 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 131 0 69 90 0 85 63 1006 535 81 698 364 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1313 0 1610 1332 0 1626 1781 1702 1811 1781 1702 1766 Q Serve(g_s),s 13.2 0.0 5.1 8.6 0.0 6.2 4.7 38.5 38.5 4.4 13.8 13.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 19.5 0.0 5.1 13.6 0.0 6.2 4.7 38.5 38.5 4.4 13.8 13.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.33 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 206 0 262 220 0 264 179 1339 713 554 2055 1066 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.00 0.26 0.41 0.00 0.32 0.35 0.75 0.75 0.15 0.34 0.34 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 284 0 358 299 0 361 238 1715 912 554 2055 1066 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.81 0.81 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 58.6 0.0 49.5 55.4 0.0 50.0 60.9 52.4 52.4 33.6 13.3 13.4 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 3.2 0.0 0.5 1.2 0.0 0.7 0.9 3.2 5.9 0.1 0.5 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 4.6 0.0 2.1 3.0 0.0 2.6 2.2 18.2 19.9 1.9 5.3 5.6 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 61.8 0.0 50.0 56.7 0.0 50.7 61.9 55.6 58.2 33.7 13.8 14.2 LnGrp LOS E A D E A D E E E C B B Approach Vol,veh/h 200 175 1604 1143 Approach Delay,s/veh 57.7 53.7 56.7 15.3 Approach LOS E D E B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 48.0 59.1 27.9 19.6 87.5 27.9 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 19.0 68.0 30.0 18.0 69.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11),s 6.4 40.5 21.5 6.7 15.9 15.6 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.1 12.7 0.5 0.1 8.8 0.6 intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 41.5 HCM 6th LOS D T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 1: CSAH 17/France Ave & Parklawn Ave 03/29/2018 Movement EBI. EBT ERR WBL WBT WBR WI. NBT NBR SBL SBT SL,' Lane Configurations 1 <1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 Traffic Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1360 68 142 947 16 Future Volume(veh/h) 72 61 77 88 61 123 102 1360 68 142 947 16 Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 75 64 80 92 64 128 106 1417 71 148 986 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 338 84 105 281 214 181 607 2517 781 197 1342 416 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.49 0.49 0.04 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow,veh/h 1781 756 945 1781 1870 1585 1781 5106 1585 1781 5106 1585 Grp Volume(v),veh/h 75 0 144 92 64 128 106 1417 71 148 986 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1700 1781 1870 1585 1781 1702 1585 1781 1702 1585 Q Serve(g_s),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.3 3.2 11.1 25.4 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 4.7 0.0 11.1 5.7 4.2 10.5 5.6 26.3 3.2 11.1 25.4 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 338 0 189 281 214 181 607 2517 781 197 1342 416 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.76 0.33 0.30 0.71 0.17 0.56 0.09 0.75 0.73 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 350 0 227 300 263 223 607 2517 781 290 2269 704 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 43.4 0.0 58.3 43.9 54.8 57.6 31.2 24.0 18.2 63.2 57.1 25.1 Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.3 0.0 11.8 0.7 0.8 7.5 0.1 0.9 0.2 5.8 3.4 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 5.4 2.6 2.1 4.6 2.5 10.6 1.2 5.6 12.1 0.5 Unsig.Movement Delay,s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 0.0 70.0 44.6 55.6 65.1 31.3 24.9 18.4 68.9 60.5 25.2 LnGrp LOS D A E D E E C C B E E C Approach Vol,veh/h 219 284 1594 1151 Approach Delay,s/veh 61.0 56.3 25.1 61.1 Approach LOS E E C E Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 20.9 72.5 20.5 21.0 52.0 41.5 20.1 21.4 Change Period(Y+Rc),s 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Max Green Setting(Gmax),s 22.0 55.0 16.0 18.0 17.0 60.0 15.0 19.0 Max 0 Clear Time(g_c+11),s 13.1 28.3 7.7 13.1 7.6 27.4 6.7 12.5 Green Ext Time(p_c),s 0.2 12.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 8.0 0.1 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 43.0 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 24: CSAH 17/France Ave & 72nd St 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SRI SBR Lane Configurations 0 1 1 3 3> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 74 82 1516 1033 32 Future Vol,veh/h 0 74 82 1516 1033 32 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - 0 175 - - - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 78 86 1596 1087 34 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All - 561 1121 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - 7.14 5.34 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 3.12 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 403 342 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 403 342 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 16.1 1 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 342 - 403 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.252 - 0.193 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 19 - 16.1 - - HCM Lane LOS C - C - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1 - 0.7 - - T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 5: Parklawn Ave & Gallagher Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1 1> 0 1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 55 78 104 75 23 45 Future Vol,veh/h 55 78 104 75 23 45 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 58 82 109 79 24 47 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 188 0 - 0 347 149 Stage 1 - - - - 149 - Stage 2 - - - - 198 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 650 898 Stage 1 - - - - 879 - Stage 2 - - - - 835 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1386 - - - 621 898 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 621 - Stage 1 - - - - 840 - Stage 2 - - - - 835 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay,s 3.2 0 10.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 1386 - - - 780 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - - 0.092 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.7 0 - - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A - - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 2: access & Gallager Dr 03/29/2018 Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR; WBL WBT WBR NB.L NBTNBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 5 88 5 10 123 62 10 1 40 60 1 5 Future Vol,veh/h 5 88 5 10 123 62 10 1 40 60 1 5 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 93 5 11 129 65 11 1 42 63 1 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 194 0 0 98 0 0 293 322 96 311 292 162 Stage 1 - - - - - - 106 106 - 184 184 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 187 216 - 127 108 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.5184.0183.3183.5184.0183.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1379 - - 1495 - - 659 595 960 642 619 883 Stage 1 - - - - - - 900 807 - 818 747 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 815 724 - 877 806 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1379 - 1495 - - 648 588 960 607 612 883 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 648 588 - 607 612 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 896 804 - 815 741 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 803 718 - 834 803 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.4 0.4 9.4 11.5 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 867 1379 - - 1495 - - 622 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 0.004 - - 0.007 - - 0.112 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4 7.6 0 - 7.4 0 - 11.5 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.4 T:\3022\09\synchro\2020 PM b without France access.syn Synchro 10 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Paul, Sr. Hughes <paul.sr@peoplehelpinc.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:07 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: case file 2017.005 Sir: Anytime I learn of`something' the Edina Planning Commission has on `their' agenda, my suspicions go sky high! My first question regarding this proposition is, Why is this necessary? Secondly, will the Planning Commission 'once again' attempt to modify the existing code for building standards to help the developer finance the project with Federal/State funding? (I am under the premise that on the West side of France Ave no building should exceed 4 stories in height) (How much does this require of changing the standards of x number of people per square foot standards?) Third, is the motivation behind the Planning Commission driven by the economics (tax base from the proposed building) or an upgrade of property utilization THAT STAYS WITHIN THE PRESENT CITY BUILDING CODE FOR THE WEST SIDE OF FRANCE AVE. As one can surmise with my thoughts, far too often this Panning Commission attempts to fill the coffers of the city at the expense of`always changing the rules to couch the underlying intentions' and classically speaking the government element serves its purpose almost always and not the residences who live in the area. I do not support building any building on the West side of France Ave taller than 4 stories, period! Is it possible that this commission will ever get that message into their thought process - I wonder how each member would feel about approving the construction of a 6 story building within 1000 feet of their residence? Their answer to that question would call for"Radical Candor' - I doubt that exists within their political venue! Paul Hughes PEOPLE ► HELP HELPNU PEOPLE GROW PROFESSIONALLY" Paul Hughes.SR. (l2 760 5461 Talent Development Advisor na.0 .5r:ii peoplehe:p+ncvcom 1