Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021-05-26 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Packet
Agenda Planning Com m ission City Of Edina, Minnesota VIRTUAL MEETING Wednesday, May 26, 2021 7:00 PM Watch the m eeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeetings or Facebook.com/EdinaMN. To participate in Public H earings: Call 800-374-0221. Enter Conference ID 1833948. Give the operator your name, street address and telephone number. Press *1 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A City sta: member will introduce you when it is your turn. I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Minutes: Planning Commission April 28, 2021 B.Minutes: Planning Commission May 12, 2021 V.Special Recognitions And Presentations VI.Public Hearings A.B-21-16 5828 Eastv iew Drive Variance request B.B-21-14, 4604 W 56th Street Variance request C.B-21-13, 4236 Scott Terrace Variance request D.Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West. VII.Reports/Recommendations A.Sketch Plan Review – 6500 Barrie Road VIII.Chair And Member Comments IX.Sta : Comments X.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortabl e bei ng part of the publi c proc ess . If you need as s is tanc e i n the way of heari ng am pli <c ation, an interpreter, large-print doc um ents or s om ethi ng els e, pleas e c al l 952-927-8861 72 ho urs in advance of the m eeting. Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Adminis trative S uppo rt S p ecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommission April 28, 2021 Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve the minutes from the April 28, 2021 P lanning C ommission. I N TR O D U C TI O N : AT TAC HME N T S : Description Minutes Planning Commis s ion April 28, 2021 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 1 of 6 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission VIRTUAL MEETING April 28, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Nemerov called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Miranda, Berube, Strauss, Bennett, Agnew, Olsen, Bartling, Alkire and Chair Nemerov. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner Emily Bodeker, Assistant Planner, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Cullen. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Berube moved to approve the April 28, 2021, agenda. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously as presented. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, April 14, 2021 Commissioner Miranda moved to approve the April 14, 2021, meeting minutes. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Commissioner Berube offered up the amendment to change the wording for the motion regarding Public Hearing B, 6222 Braeburn Circle, she indicated using the word “denial” of the request to increase from 6 to 10 residents. She thought the Commission was denying the variance. Chair Nemerov offered up the amendment on page 5 on the 6th bullet point to remove the number 4 from the end. Motion carried unanimously as amended. V. Public Hearings A. B-21-07 – Front Yard Setback Variance – 4248 Alden Drive Assistant Planner Bodeker presented the request of 4248 Alden Drive for a Front Yard Setback Variance. Staff recommends approval of the 6.3-foot front yard setback variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission Questions. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 2 of 6 Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, introduced himself and made a short presentation to the Commission. Public Hearing Mr. Andy Warner, Morningside, addressed the Commission and indicated he did not have any objections to this variance request. Commissioner Berube moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Agnew seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the setback variance and consensus was to approve. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Berube moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the 6.3-foot front yard setback variance at 4248 Alden Drive as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Bartling seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. B-21-20 – An Appeal of an Administrative Decision – 5708 Woodland Lane Assistant City Planner Aaker presented the request of 5708 Woodland Lane for an Appeal of an Administrative Decision. Staff recommends denial of the appeal of administrative decision, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Todd Kerin and Mr. Nick Busalas, appellants, introduced themselves and made a presentation to the Commission. The appellants answered several Commission questions. Assistant City Planner Aaker made the City’s presentation to the Planning Commission. She noted City Attorney Dave Kendall, property owner Mr. Andy Porter, his attorney Mr. David Schooler and the homebuyers, Mr. & Mrs. Pacyna, were also present and may want to comment. Staff and the City Attorney answered Commission questions. Mr. Schooler, representing Refined, addressed the Commission and indicated Refined was at the meeting on three issues. He listed the three issues in the appeal submitted to the City. Mr. Porter, 5905 Fairfax Avenue, representing the Pacyna family and their contractor, addressed the Commission. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 3 of 6 Mr. Mark Pacyna, potential homeowner, addressed the Commission. The Commission asked questions of the presenters and staff. Public Hearing Chair Nemerov indicated one comment from Better Together Edina was received in opposition to whether or not a variance should occur. Ms. Lori Grotz, 5513 Park Place, addressed the Commission on the building plans not being made public at the meeting. Commissioner Alkire moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission started deliberation and discussion. Motion Commissioner Olsen moved that the Planning Commission uphold City staff’s administrative decision approving building permit #ED183412, for a new home plan for the property located at 5708 Woodland Lane as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The Commission continued discussion. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion carried 8 Ayes, 1 Nay (Nemerov). C. B-21-11 – Variance Request for no Basement – 5312 Halifax Ave Assistant City Planner Bodeker presented the request of 5312 Halifax Ave for a Variance Request for no Basement. Staff recommends approval of the variance request for a new house with no basement, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission Questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. David Eggert, Director of Construction for City Homes, introduced himself and made a short presentation to the Commission. Public Hearing None. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 4 of 6 Commissioner Bennett moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the variance request. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Bartling moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request for a new house with no basement at 5312 Halifax Lane as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Agnew seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. D. Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-1, Planned Commercial District 1 and APD, Automobile Parking District to PUD – 4917 Eden Avenue Director Teague presented the request of 4917 Eden Avenue for a Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-1. Staff recommends approval of the project, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Ed Terhaar, Wenk, introduced himself and made a short presentation to the Commission. Director Teague continued with his presentation. Staff answered Commission questions. Mr. Nick Walton, President of Reuter Walton Development and Mr. Chris Palkowitsch of BKV Group and Mr. Kyle Brasser of Reuter Walton Development addressed the Commission. The development team answered Commission questions and discussed the design with proposed changes. Public Hearing Ms. Kim Nelson, North Central States Regional Counsel of Carpenters, addressed the Commission. She indicated her group supports this development request. Ms. Ann Russ, 4929 West Sunny Slope Road, addressed the Commission and indicated she was in opposition to the development. Ms. Julie Risser addressed the Commission. She voiced her opposition to the rezoning. Mr. Steve Lecredice, 4916 West Sunny Slope Road, addressed the Commission and explained he was for development but was in opposition to the rezoning. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Mark Storano, Sunny Side, addressed the Commission and indicated his opposition to this project. Mr. Kirk Odland, 4800 Hilltop Lane, addressed the Commission and voiced his concerns with opposition to the rezoning. Mr. Paul Porter, 4928 Dale Drive, addressed he Commission and discussed several issues he had. He indicated he was opposed to this project. Ms. Lori Grotz, 5513 Park Place, addressed the Commission and indicated her opposition. Mr. Steven Lundberg, Sunny Side, addressed the Commission. He explained he was in opposition to the project. Mr. Dwight Bonniewell, 4920 West Sunny Slope Road, addressed the Commission and stated he was against this rezoning project. Commissioner Berube moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bartling seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. It was noted Commissioner Olsen left the meeting at 11:28 p.m. The Commission continued discussion with staff. Staff added additional condition suggestions to the motion. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Berube moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the project, as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein to rezone to PUD, subject also to Condition 9, conforming the affordable housing to the City Policy within the project, deleting condition 13, condition 14, adding improvements to the pedestrian and bike plan as stated in the transportation study for this project, condition 15, crossing improvement for Wilson and Eden Avenue and the City needs to accelerate the short term improvement goals in the Grandview Transportation study. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried 7 ayes, 1 nays (Bennett). E. Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Off Street Parking Regulations The Commission continued the public hearing to the May 12, 2021 Planning Commission agenda due to the time. Motion Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 6 of 6 Commissioner Bennett moved that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to the May 12, 2021 Planning Commission agenda. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Motion carried Motion carried 7 ayes, 1 nays (Agnew). VII. Reports/Recommendations A. 2021 Planning Commission Attendance Log Director Teague presented the 2021 Planning Commission Attendance Log. VIII. Correspondence and Petitions None. IX. Chair and Member Comments Chair Nemerov thought the public hearing showed the weakness in the City’s sketch plan review process where the Commission is not getting public comments and he hoped the City will look at this process as a part of the 2022 Work Plan. X. Staff Comments None. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Strauss moved to adjourn the April 28, 2021, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 12:45 AM. Commissioner Bartling seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: I V.B. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Adminis trative S uppo rt S p ecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommission May 12, 2021 Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve the minutes from the M ay 12, 2021 P lanning C ommission. I N TR O D U C TI O N : AT TAC HME N T S : Description Minutes Planning Commis s ion May 12, 2021 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 1 of 5 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission VIRTUAL MEETING May 12, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Nemerov called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Miranda, Berube, Strauss, Cullen, Bennett, Olsen, Agnew, Bartling, Alkire and Chair Nemerov. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Emily Bodeker, Assistant Planner, Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: None. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Berube moved to approve the May 12, 2021, agenda. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Public Hearings A. Continued Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Off-Street Parking Regulations Director Teague presented the request for a Zoning Ordinance amendment for Off-Street Parking Regulations. Public Hearing Ms. Roberta Castellano, 4854 France Avenue S, would like the City to provide a full comparison with data together regarding parking at the proposed redevelopment of the Perkins site as well as 7100 France. She indicated she opposed to parking ordinance amendment at this time. Ms. Lori Grotz, 5513 Park Place, suggested leaving the ordinance as is. Commissioner Berube moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission reviewed the Zoning Ordinance Amendment for off-street parking regulations. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 2 of 5 Motion Commissioner Olsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Off Street Parking Regulations as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Motion carried 7 ayes, 2 nays (Agnew, Miranda). Consensus of the Commission was supportive of the Planning Commission continuing discussion on the Zoning Ordinance Amendment while moving it forward to the City Council. B. Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD – 4040 70th Street West Director Teague presented the request of 4040 70th Street West for a Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD at 4040 70th Street West, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Steve Minn, 7 Overhoe Pass with Lupe Development Partners and Ecumen, and Mr. Zac Rosnow, from Pope Architects introduced themselves and made a presentation to the Commission. The applicants answered Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Steve Brown, 5528 Halifax Lane, addressed the Commission and indicated he was supporting this rezoning for a PUD. Ms. Hope Melton, 4825 Valley View Road, addressed the Commission and explained she was in favor of the rezoning to PUD. Ms. Kathy Keun, Valley View Road, addressed the Commission with her concerns about the building. Commissioner Miranda moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bartling seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the rezoning request and consensus was most Commissioners were in favor of the Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Berube moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD at 4040 70th Street West as outlined in Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 3 of 5 the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. Motion carried 8 ayes, 1 nay (Miranda). C. B-21-12 – Sign Variance for Monument Sign Height and Size of Allowable Building Signage – 7101 & 7102 Metro Boulevard Assistant City Planner Bodeker presented the request of 7101 & 7102 Metro Boulevard for a sign variance. Staff recommends approval of the sign variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. David Little, HGR Architects, representing the landlord, introduced himself and addressed the Commission. He answered Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Jim Grotz, 5513 Park Place, addressed the Commission and indicated he was in favor of the proposed signage. Commissioner Bennett moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Agnew seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the variance request. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Alkire moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the variance request for the signs on the building but not the monument sign. The motion failed for lack of second. Motion Commissioner Olsen moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the sign variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion failed 4 ayes, 5 nays (Agnew, Berube, Bennett, Miranda, Nemerov). Motion Commissioner Miranda moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial to the City Council of the sign variance request based on the sign is out of character with too much of an increase over the existing sign and too much of a variance. Commissioner Bennett seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 ayes, 4 nays (Alkire, Olsen, Bartling, Strauss). Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 4 of 5 The Commission recessed at 10:19 p.m. and reconvened at 10:24 p.m. Commissioner Olsen and Student Commissioner Cullen left the meeting. D. Preliminary Plat with Variances – 5209 Minnehaha Boulevard Director Teague presented the request of 5209 Minnehaha Boulevard for a Preliminary Plat with Variances. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Subdivision and variances, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission Questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Scott Busyn, Great Neighbor Homes, introduced himself and addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Bennett moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed the preliminary plat with variances. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Bennett moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the proposed Subdivision and variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried 7 ayes, 1 nay (Agnew). VII. Reports/Recommendations A. Sketch Plan Review – 4911 77th Street West Director Teague presented the request of a sketch plan review at 4911 77th Street West. Staff answered Commission questions. Mr. Jay Scott, and Mr. Christian Lawrence, partners at Solomon Real Estate Group, and Mr. David Stahl, project architect with Cunningham introduced themselves and made a presentation to the Commission. The applicants answered Commission questions about the sketch plan. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 5 of 5 The Commission reviewed the sketch plan and offered the following comments: Make this a true art walk and a true place of engagement Make the pathway to the bike and walking path easier to find Needs to be more of a promenade in front of the retail to allow outdoor engagement and seating Feels too suburban Would like to see more greenspace Would like to be able to see connections from the development to other community places The market rate housing seems to be out of place Feels like the building has its back to the active street Consider changing the look of the apartment building for a more active look Would like to see more affordable units, move up to twenty percent from ten percent Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of all comments. VIII. Correspondence and Petitions None. IX. Chair and Member Comments Commissioner Miranda indicated he was on the Climate Action Plan Workgroup and the meeting was very good with a great diversity of people. Commissioner Bennett updated the Commission on the City’s HRA meeting regarding the Grandview Public Works site redevelopment. X. Staff Comments Director Teague updated the Commission on recent action items brought forward to the City Council. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Berube moved to adjourn the May 12, 2021, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 12:15 AM. Commissioner Agnew seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.A. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Emily Bo d eker, Assistant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-21-16 5828 Eas tview Drive Varianc e req uest Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : D eny the requested variance. I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he applicants, M att and L iz Z ung, are requesting a fence height variance to allow a 6-foot fence within a required front yard (along B enton Avenue) at 5828 E astview D rive. T he subject property, 5828 E astview D rive is located at the northeast corner of B enton Avenue and E astview D rive. T he subject property is a corner lot and has two required front yard setbacks. F ences that exceed four feet in height are not allowed within a required front yard setback. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Staff Report Applicant Submittal Email From Engineering Aerial Map Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 20 May 2021 Public Hearing Comments-5828 Eastview Drive Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Fence Height Variance to allow a 6-foot fence along Benton Avenue at 5828 Eastview Drive VISITORS 7 CONTRIBUTORS 6 RESPONSES 6 1 Registered 0 Unverified 5 Anonymous 1 Registered 0 Unverified 5 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 17, 2021 12:10:50 pm Last Seen:May 17, 2021 12:10:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Robert Spence Q2.Address 5012 Benton Ave Q3.Comment I can't see any reason why they wouldn't be allowed to build a 6ft fence. Maybe they have a dog that could jump a 4ft fence. Respondent No:2 Login:Jay Kosters Email:jkosters@comcast.net Responded At:May 17, 2021 15:45:40 pm Last Seen:May 17, 2021 22:33:03 pm IP Address:75.72.145.133 Q1.First and Last Name Jay Kosters Q2.Address 5813 Tingdale Ave Q3.Comment I can't believe a variance request for a fence height, or a fence of any height is getting any air time. The city of Edina should know how bad that intersection is already as far as getting off Eastview to Eastbound Benton. With that kind of logic you might also think it can be remedied by a traffic control light. Ha! I watch people blow through the stop sign in front of my house daily. When I say blow through it I mean not even slowing down, like they don't see the stop sign. Thanks for the letter informing me of you even listening to the homeowners absurd request. Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 17, 2021 18:25:05 pm Last Seen:May 17, 2021 18:25:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Sanda Q2.Address 5821 Eastview Dr Q3.Comment I certainly welcome the new owners to the neighborhood, but am concerned with having a fence of that size on such a busy corner. Given the geometry of the intersection (Benton Ave jogs to the North just West of the intersection with Eastview Drive), it's already hard to see oncoming traffic from the West. If there's a fence added, especially a tall, solid fence, I would think that the likelihood of accidents at that spot will go up substantially. Add to that the speed of cars on Benton Ave, and I don't see this being a good idea. Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 18, 2021 08:58:14 am Last Seen:May 18, 2021 08:58:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Eleanore Suranne Q2.Address 5024 Benton Avenue Q3.Comment This fence at 6ft tall would have several negative consequences for my property right next door with safety being the chief concern. It is difficult to back out of my driveway as cars tend to rapidly speed around the slight corner as they approach the Tingdale/Benton intersection. I or other cars leaving my driveway have nearly been hit several times with no fence on the subject property in question, I can only imagine how much worse it will be with any fence there, let alone the monstrosity of a 6 ft tall fence. Secondly this will have a negative impact of the east/southeast view I would have as I will be staring at a 6ft tall fence and nothing else. Both of these factors will have real and consequential impacts on current and future property values and as such I very much oppose having this height fence right next to my property. Please continue to enforce the current allowable maximum fence height, as I believe it has served the city well and it is in place for situations exactly like this. At 84 years old I very much value my views out my front door and my safety and that of my visitors along with the protection of my property values, now and for however much more time I have on this earth. Eleanore Suranne 5024 Benton Ave S Edina MN 55436 Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 18, 2021 19:20:43 pm Last Seen:May 18, 2021 19:20:43 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Craig Oldakowski Q2.Address 5821 Tingdale Ave Q3.Comment We believe a 6ft fence would ruin the character and beauty of our community, especially at such a public corner right at the entrance into the neighborhood. We understand the property lacks privacy, but a tall fence isn't the answer or appropriate for Edina. When we moved into our house, we had a similar privacy problem, and we planted trees along our property line. It took some time for growth, but we couldn't be happier with our decision in the long run. Not only does it look great, the trees provide a wonderful noise barrier for us and our surrounding neighbors. We receive unsolicited compliments still to this day about the "fence" of trees. With some planning-and perhaps a nudge in a better direction-the same is easily possible for 5828 Eastview. Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 10:08:14 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 10:08:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kadir Ozakhun Q2.Address 5033 Benton Ave, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment We appreciate the opportunity for submission of our comments regarding variance application to allow a 6-foot fence along Benton Avenue at the subject property, 5828 Eastview Drive. Per City of Edina Residential Fencing Regulations (Sec. 36- 1255), fences cannot exceed four (4) feet in height in the front yard and side street set back areas. We, as the resident at 5033 Benton Ave, object to a variance application submitted by the property owner of 5828 Eastview Drive to allow a 6-foot fence along Benton Avenue at the subject property. The basis for our objection are as follows: (1) Considering 5828 Eastview Drive is a corner lot, a six foot fence could potentially cause blind spot at intersection and may limit drivers visibility. For example, a driver may not be able to see kids bicycling on the road right around the corner. Ultimately, a six foot fence at the subject property could impose a safety risk to our children, families and neighbors. (2) A six foot fence in the front yard and side street set back areas is inconsistent with the aesthetics of the neighborhood. To our knowledge none of the properties located on Benton Ave and Eastview Drive has a six foot fence in the front yard. This would be an eyesore for the residents in the neighborhood. (3) If allowed, a six foot fenced property could adversely affect the re-sale value of the properties in the close proximity to 5828 Eastview Drive, as the view of poor visual aesthetics could be a concern for the potential buyers in the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of our objections. The applicants, Matt and Liz Zung, are requesting a fence height variance to allow a 6-foot fence within a required front yard (along Benton Avenue) at 5828 Eastview Drive. The subject property, 5828 Eastview Drive is located at the northeast corner of Benton Avenue and Eastview Drive. The subject property is a corner lot and has two required front yard setbacks. Fences that exceed four feet in height are not allowed within a required front yard setback. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The subject property, 5828 is .4 acres (17,334 square feet) and is the current site of an existing split entry home that is oriented towards Eastview Drive. May 26, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-21-16, Fence height variance to allow a 6-foot fence along Benton Avenue at 5828 Eastview Drive Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single-Dwelling District Fence Regulations • Fences exceeding four feet in height shall not be erected within a required front yard setback or side street setback.* • No fence shall exceed 6 feet in height. • Fences should be installed with the finished side facing out. • No fence should be installed within a clear view zone. o Clear View Zone: the triangular area formed by connecting the following three points: the point of intersection of the curb lines extended of intersecting streets, and a point on each curb line 30 feet from the point of intersection. If there are no curbs, the edge of the traveled portion of the street shall be used instead of the curb line. *Requires a variance The City’s Traffic Safety Coordinator visited the site and provided information on sight lines and stopping distances at the intersection of Benton Avenue and Eastview Drive. Sight lines at the intersection would be adequate with the proposed fence. There will be approximately 160’ of sight distance and 110’ is required when vehicles are traveling 30 MPH (current speed limit on Benton Avenue). Current sight distance (without a fence) is approximately 220’. PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed variance justified? Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances required that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will: STAFF REPORT Page 3 1) 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. The subject property has two required front yard setbacks. A 4-foot fence would be allowed within the required front yard where the applicant is proposing a 6-foot fence. Staff believes a 4-foot fence is reasonable. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The subject property is a corner lot and has two required front yard setbacks. A 4-foot fence is allowed within the required front yard setback, a 6-foot fence is not. This is a requirement that is consistent throughout residential properties in Edina. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Staff believes the proposed variance will alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Six-foot fences are not permitted in required front yard setbacks. The house adjacent to the subject property is oriented towards Benton Avenue. Staff Recommendation It is difficult for staff to support or recommend approval of a variance from the code to exceed the allowable height for a fence in a required front yard, therefore staff recommends the planning commission deny the variance based on the following findings: 1. A 6-foot fence in the required front yard along Benton Avenue would alter the character of the neighborhood. 2. The circumstances are not unique to the subject property. 3. The criteria for granting a variance is not met. If the Planning Commission believes that the proposal is reasonable and that the application meets the conditions to grant a variance, the Commission could approve the variance based on the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 4 1. The practical difficulty is caused by unique shaped lot. A 6-foot fence would only be permitted in a limited location due to the front yard setback requirements along Benton Avenue and Eastview Drive. 2. The proposed 6-foot fence would not alter the character of the neighborhood. 3. Sight lines remain adequate at the intersection of Benton Avenue and Eastview Drive with the addition of a 6-foot fence. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The fence must be installed per the site plan submitted with the variance application. 5828 Eastview Drive Variance request: This req~t is seeking approval to install a 6 foot fence on the Benton Ave side of the property and the Corner of Benton and Eastview Drive. The six-foot fence is needed for the safety of passing cars as it will help reduce the amount of sporting equipment going across the road and potentially causing an accident. The new owner has 2 active children both involved in various sports. It will also help cut out more of the noise add privacy from the busy Benton side of the property. The Eastview drive side of the fence will be the standard 4 foot fence as to not block out the neighbors and the quit Eastview side of the challenging corner lot. Per the application a survey was done on the property to ensure the fence will conform with the existing lot lines. The property has been surveyed/staked to mark where the magnets are located and the proposed fence will be within that boundary as marked on the attached image ensuring to leave a dear line of site for the stop sign on Eastview. It is going to be a Cedar fence and will not only increase safety for passing cars/pedestrians as well as the property owners but will also add to the visual aesthetics of the neighborhood/ property as you can see by the attached image. From:Nick Bauler To:Emily Bodeker Cc:Chad Millner; Andrew Scipioni; Cary Teague Subject:RE: Variance Request: 5828 Eastview Drive 6 foot fence Date:Wednesday, May 19, 2021 1:03:20 PM Emily, Sight lines with the proposed fence appear to be adequate. Approximately 160’ will be available, when 110’ is required if a vehicle is traveling 30 MPH (current speed limit on Benton Ave). Without a fence, sight distance is approximately 220’. Sight distance will be impacted slightly. Plenty of distance will remain with a fence installed according to the plans. Let me know if you have questions. Nick Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator 952-826-0349 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 NBauler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Stay informed about the City’s response to COVID-19 at EdinaMN.gov/Coronavirus. Need a hand or want to help? Visit BetterTogetherEdina.org/COVID-19. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Emily Bodeker <EBodeker@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 12:14 PM To: Nick Bauler <NBauler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: RE: Variance Request: 5828 Eastview Drive 6 foot fence Thank you! Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-0462 | Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W. 50th St. | Edina, MN 55424 EBodeker@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Stay informed about the City’s response to COVID-19 at EdinaMN.gov/Coronavirus. Need a hand or want to help? Visit BetterTogetherEdina.org/COVID-19. From: Nick Bauler <NBauler@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 12:04 PM To: Emily Bodeker <EBodeker@EdinaMN.gov>; Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov>; Andrew Scipioni <ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Cary Teague <cteague@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: RE: Variance Request: 5828 Eastview Drive 6 foot fence Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, Henn epin County, Edin a, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 5828 Eastview Dri ve May 13, 2 021 1 in = 50 f t / Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.B. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Kris Aaker, As s is tant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-21-14, 4604 W 56th S treet Varianc e req uest Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve the variance as submitted I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he subject property is located on the north side of West 56th S treet currently consisting of a rambler with an attached garage that are proposed to be removed. T he applicant is requesting a variance for a tear-down re- build/new home. T he property is near a pond with a high-water table. T he variance request is to allow a 3.2-foot 1st floor height increase from the 1 foot maximum allowed for a new home. D ue to proximity to a pond and corresponding high-water table the basement is proposed to be elevated requiring a higher than 1 foot first floor increase. T he project complies with all other zoning ordinance requirements. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Staff Report Engineering Memo Site location Applicant Narrative Propos ed Survey Exis ting Survey Plans Elevation Drawing Eros ion plan SWMP Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 20 May 2021 Public Hearing Comments-4604 W 56th St Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: 3.2 foot first floor height variance for a new home at 4604 W 56th Street VISITORS 3 CONTRIBUTORS 1 RESPONSES 1 0 Registered 0 Unverified 1 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 1 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 12:32:49 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 12:32:49 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Linda Pavic Q2.Address 4616 56th Street W. Q3.Comment This is really unacceptable to me. This neighborhood is being inundated with very large homes on very small lots. They’re saying the reason for this is because it’s on the pond, but we’ve had new homes built on the pond and there has never been this type of request before. The pond is a little pond. It used to look like a pond, but now it looks like a puddle because of the looming homes being built around it. I am against allowing this variance. There is a small 1-story rambler home right next to it that will look so out of place. There are still some small homes on this block that are being aesthetically overwhelmed by the black and white homes mostly built around. I just think it is not okay for the neighborhood. We keep pushing the boundaries. I say no to this variance if my vote matters. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/17/21 at 7:30 PM PM) The request is for a variance to allow the first-floor elevation of a new home to exceed the first-floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. The subject property is 8,093 square feet in area and is located on the north side of West 56th Street, just west of St. Johns Ave., currently consisting of a rambler with an attached garage. The applicant is requesting a variance for a tear-down re-build/new home. The property is near a pond with a high-water table and flood zone. The variance request is to allow a 3.2-foot 1st floor height increase from the 1 foot maximum allowed for a new home. The variance requested is for a 2.2 ft increase. Due to proximity to a pond, flood zone and corresponding high-water table the basement is proposed to be elevated above the flood elevation therefore requiring a higher first floor increase. The project complies with all other zoning ordinance requirements. The City of Edina’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan indicates the lowest floor elevation shall be 2’ above the outlet elevation of the nearby water bodies. For the proposed new home, the required lowest floor is 886.54 (outlet elevation + 2’ of freeboard). The applicant has requested a site-specific standard for low floor elevation, to limit the amount the structure needs to be raised. According to the Engineering Department, the flood risk is a function of exposure and vulnerability. The applicant is reducing the 2’ of freeboard above the flood elevation to .5’ above the outlet elevation. Freeboard is a cushion from the flood elevation and allows for events that exceed the established flood elevation. To accommodate the request for less freeboard and thus less 1st floor height variance, the Engineering Dept. is requesting conditions be met for the construction of the new house as follows: Conditions for 2.0-1.5=0.5’ freeboard, lowest floor elevation 885.04’ • The basement should be engineered to resist prolonged hydrostatic forces • The plan should include all planned flood precautions designed by their engineer • The builder should engage their engineer for construction oversight • The engineer should sign and certify that the foundation is reasonably safe from flooding after construction May 26, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-21-14, A 2.2-foot first floor height variance for a new home at 4604 West 56th Street. Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 • The basement should include a sanitary backflow device, or overhead sanitary sewer connection (a pumped basement for any lower level plumbing) The proposed first floor elevation of the house will be at 895’, which will be 2.2 ft higher than the 1-foot increase allowed by ordinance, (a 3.2’ total increase). The new 1st floor would need to be higher if the maximum 2’ freeboard would be implemented. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Site Features The existing 8,092 square foot lot is located on north of 56th Street backing up to a pond. The property falls within a localized flood hazard area. The existing rambler is to be removed and replaced with a two-story home, which will be elevated given the water table and localized flood standards. The new first floor height will be increased a total of 3.2’, however, the maximum allowable over-all height measured from average existing grade will comply with the maximum 30 ft height restriction. The maximum ridge height from grade allowed is 30 feet, with the new home ridge height from existing grade proposed at 29.85 feet, lower than the maximum allowed. The maximum height is at a fixed elevation given existing grade and would not be allowed to increase without the benefit of a variance even with a first-floor height increase to accommodate the full 2’ increase typically required for freeboard. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Applicant proposes a swale to carry drainage along the west property line to the public curb and gutter on 56th Street. Stormwater was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP-003 standards. A final grade as-built survey and inspection will be required to verify compliance with the approved stormwater plan. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Rear– South Front - East Side – West Side– 25 feet 33.9 feet 5 feet/12 total 5 feet/12 total 48 feet 35 feet 5.25 feet 6.95 feet Building Coverage 2,250 sq ft 2,087 sq ft Basement Elevation First Floor Elevation Building Height 885 Min 892.8 **891.8 Existing 30 feet 885 *895 29.58 feet *Requires a variance ***Existing condition PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues Does the proposed new home meet the criteria for approval of variances with a with a first-floor elevation higher than the existing home? Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first-floor elevation 3.2 feet higher than the existing home with a variance of 2.2 feet as requested for the following four reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the new 1st floor elevation height. The proposed home design elevates the lowest level of the dwelling above the required localized Engineering standards. It is a goal of the city to address flood prone properties when given the opportunity by requiring elevation of low floors and openings. Many homes in Edina were built prior to the first flood plain study and recent localized studies so may be nonconforming with basements lower than currently required. STAFF REPORT Page 4 2. The variance allows the new home to be elevated and maintain the required distances from the neighbors to the east and west. It provides the required elevated basement while still complying with the maximum allowable height as measured from existing grade. The home will comply in all respects with exception of the 1st floor height. The applicant is reducing the amount required basement elevation by limiting freeboard, (flood cushion), by implementing flood proofing techniques to keep the over-all building height within required maximums. 3. The proposed home design reflects the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass. The maximum height from existing grade will conform even given the increase in 1st floor elevation. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and similar to a newer home directly west. The proposed home will be an improvement to the existing flood zone conditions, complies with the over-all height maximum requirement and will enhance the property. The applicant has chosen to reduce the amount of freeboard and implement flood proofing measures to keep the home as low as possible and not increase height an additional1.5 ft for 2 ft of freeboard. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance, subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: Survey April 20, 2021. Building plans and elevations date stamped, 2021. 2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer’s memo dated: May 20, 2021. DATE: 5/20/2021 TO: Cary Teagu e – Plan ning Director FROM: Ross Bintner, PE – Engineering Services Manager RE: 4604 56th Street - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the req uest of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed included Geotechnical Report (9/9/20), Survey (2/10/21), Site Plan (2/10/21), Stormwater Management Plan (4/27/21), Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (4/27/21) Summary of Work The applicant proposes a new single family home at the subject address. The request is for a variance to first floor height. Easements A 9” PVC pipe runs along the western boundary and is not in easement. Without public easement on this property and the neighboring 4608 property, this facility would be considered privately owned. Considerer dedicating easement for public drainage and utility along this property line. Grading and Drainage Site drains to MHS_19 subwatershed in the rear, which includes a pond, and MHS_47 and 84 subwatersheds in the front. Applicant proposes a swale to carry drainage along the west property line to the public curb and gutter on 56th Street. Stormwater Mitigation Stormwater was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP -003 standards. A final grade as -built survey and inspection will be required to verify compliance with the approved stormwater plan. Floodplain Development Per the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan Section 3.1.2.1.3, new principle structures, additions , and other permanent fixtures must have a lowest entry elevation at least two feet above the applicable 1-percent-annual-chance flood elevation when the structure is within or adjacent to a local flood area. For the proposed new homes on the subject properties, the required lowest entry elevation is thus; [889.4] (flood elevation + 2’). Per the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan Section 3.1.2.1(2) the lowest floor elevation shall be 2’ above the outlet elevation of nearby water bodies. For the proposed new homes on the subject properties, the required lowest floor is thus; [886.54] (outlet elevation + 2’). The applicant has requested a site specific standard for low floor elevation, to limit the amount the structure needs to be raised. Flood risk is a function of exposure and vulnerability. Exposure in the extent to which an asset comes into contact with flood water and vulnerability is an exposed asset ability to resist flood -related damage. The standard requirement described below aims to reduce vulnerability commensurate with a 1.5’ reduction in freeboard. Conditions for 2.0 -1.5=0.5 ’ freeboard, lowest floor elevation 88 5.0 4’ • The basement should be engineered to resist prolonged hydrostatic forces • The plan should include all planned flood precautions designed by their engineer • The builder should engage their engineer for construction oversight • The engineer should sign and certify that the foundation is reasonably safe from flooding after construction • The basement should include a sanitary backflow device, or overhead sanitary sewer connection (a pumped basement for any lower level plumbing) Note; Reduction in the freeboard, a deeper basement, may have the effect to increase the exposure to flood risk through groundwater. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP -002. Street and Driveway Entrance The applicant proposes to relocate/replace the existing curb cut. A driveway entrance permit will be required . The street was reconstructed in 2016. Refer to standard plate 542 for patching requirements. Public Utilities Water and sanitary is served from 56th Street. A one-inch water service line from the curb stop to the dwelling is required per the City’s policy SP -024. Sump line available for connection. If connecting to the City sump line, a permit and compliance with City of Edina Building Policy SP -006 will be required. Miscellaneous A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit may be required, applicant will need to verify with the district. Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 460 4 5 6th S t Lege nd Addresses May 11, 2021 1 in = 94 f t / wood fenceoverhead wireso v e r h e a d w i r e s ov e r h e a d w i r e s chain link fenceC u r b wood fence overhead wires 33.1(lies east of line)S 89°44'15" E 59.56 N 00°24'11" E 135.20S 00°09'08" W 135.2360.00 plat meas.34.79.7measuremeasure 56TH STREET W.135.03 plat135.03 platP a t i o Porch 2'0"9'0"1'0"7'0"1'0"5'6"22'0"6'6"8'0"7'0"10'6"2'6"2'0"24'0"3'2"20'0"30'2"2'0"5'0"2'6"11'6"8'6"1'0"20'6"8'0"18'0"D r i v e w a yWalk33.95.25 7.2±%step50.0 891.5 893.5 894.5 1-Story Frame No.55441-Story Frame No.4608 catch basin rim=888.42 inv=883.09 tcc 888.84 tcc 888.65 tcc 888.19 Power Pole Wood Fence 0.6' North of Line 3.9 corner of fence on line 18"pine 891.7 888 890 8908 8 8 890 890 890.1 890.2 890.7 890.9 889.9 888.9 890.5 886.2 889.6 890.6 890.2 peak 906.1 1st floor 891.4 inv10"plastic pipe 884.54 889.6 888.9 1st floor 893.8 garage floor 891.8 peak 915.7 889.5 889.4 Proposed Residence Egress well Egress well888 890 892 893 892 890 N 89°41'12" W 60.15 meas. 60.00 plat 886 Proposed Hardcover Lot Area 8,093 sq ft Building 2,087 sq ft Patio 134 sq ft Patio Allowance -134 sq ft Porch 36 sq ft Entry Allowance -36 sq ft Total 2,087 sq ft Percentage 25.79% F:\survey\subdivision of littel park - hennepin\19-2\01 Surveying - 81681\01 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwg Basis for bearings is assumed Surveyors Certificate 000.0 x000.0 Denotes Wood Hub Set for excavation only Denotes Existing Elevation Denotes Proposed Elevation Denotes Surface Drainage Denotes Iron Monument Denotes Found Iron Monument Denotes Proposed Contours Denotes Existing Contours NOTE: Proposed grades are subject to results of soil tests. Proposed building information must be checked with approved building plan and development or grading plan before excavation and construction. Proposed grades shown on this survey are interpolations of proposed contours from the drainage, grading and/or development plans. NOTE: The relationship between proposed floor elevations to be verified by builder. NOTE: The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. Drawn By Signed Gregory R. Prasch, Minn. Reg. No. 24992 Scale: 1" = 20' F.B.No. Project No.I certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota rev Address: Legal Description 7601 73rd Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 (763) 560-3093 DemarcInc.com 81681A 1070-22 Site Plan Survey For: 4604 West 56th Street Edina, MN Prepared this 10th day of February 2021. REFINED, LLC Lot 19, Block 2, SUBDIVISION OF LITTEL PARK Hennepin County, Minnesota Property located in Section 19, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota Existing FFE = 891.8 Proposed Top of Foundation Proposed Garage Floor Proposed Basement Floor Type of Building Proposed First Floor Elevation895.0 891.5 885.0 Full Basement Property Zoning : R-1 Setbacks: Front Street = 30 feet Interior Side Yard = 12 feet total with no less than 5 feet on one side Rear Yard = 25 feet Existing Average Front Ground Elevation = 890.42 Proposed Average Front Ground Elevation = 892.14 4-27-21 house dimensions 893.7 890.3 4-29-21 pond 5-21-21 moved house forward FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" FIRST FLOOR CEILING 9' -1 1/8" SECOND FLOOR 10' -11 7/8" SECOND FLOOR CEILING 19' -1" BASEMENT CEILNG -1' -6 3/4" BASEMENT FLOOR -9' -10 1/4"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 10 3/4"9' - 1 1/8"1' - 6 3/4"8' - 3 1/2"895.0 F.F. 892 FRONT GAR. FL. 890.0 AVG. EXIST. GRADE30' - 0"12" 12" 12" 12" 1' - 0" 12" & 2" TRIM BD. 6"6" 12" & 2" 12" & 2" 12/12 9.5/12 3.5/12 18" O.H. 12" 12" 6" 12" 12" 12" 1' - 6" 1' - 6" 1' - 0" 1' - 6" 1' - 6"1' - 6" 1' - 6" 3 1/2" 12" 6" SIDING 885.1 L.L. CALCULATION NOTES EXTERIOR NOTES FLASHING N0TES WINDOW N0TES EXT. FINISHING N0TES FLOOR AREAS ARE CALCULATED FROM THE INSIDE OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT BASEMENT AND INSIDE OF FRAMED WALLS AT FIRST & SECOND LEVELS. STAIRS ARE INCLUDED IN CALCULATIONS AT ALL LEVELS. * KICKOUT FLASHING TO BE INSTALLED AS NEEDED INSTALLED PRIOR TO FINISHING * CARPENTER TO FLASH ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWS AND DOORS PER MN & IRC * EXTERIOR WALL FINISHER TO VERIFY KICKOUT FLASHING IS CODE REQUIREMENTS * XXXX WINDOWS * BLDR. TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR, & OPENING HDR. HTS. * XX SIDING/SHAKES * XX 8"&3" FASCIA UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE * XX SOFFIT W/ VENTS * XX TRIM * XX SHINGLES FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" FIRST FLOOR CEILING 9' -1 1/8" SECOND FLOOR 10' -11 7/8" SECOND FLOOR CEILING 19' -1" BASEMENT CEILNG -1' -6 3/4" BASEMENT FLOOR -9' -10 1/4"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 10 3/4"9' - 1 1/8"1' - 6 3/4"8' - 3 1/2"1' - 6" 3 1/2" 12" 3 1/2" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 0' - 10"Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.1 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MNRCHD XXXX FCHD XXXX 1/4" = 1'-0"1 FRONT ELEVATION AREA CALCULATIONS SCREEN PORCH Not Placed Building Common Area BONUS ROOM Not Placed Building Common Area SPORT COURT Not Placed Building Common Area BASEMENT FINISHED 1429 SF Building Common Area UNFINISHED 179 SF Building Common Area FIRST FLOOR FINISHED 1609 SF Building Common Area GARAGE 472 SF Building Common Area SECOND FLOOR FINISHED 1795 SF Building Common Area Building Common Area 5484 SF Grand total 5484 SF 1/4" = 1'-0"3 Left Elevation 4 3D View FRONT/LEFT 5 3D View FRONT/RIGHT REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:27 PM FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" FIRST FLOOR CEILING 9' -1 1/8" SECOND FLOOR 10' -11 7/8" SECOND FLOOR CEILING 19' -1" BASEMENT CEILNG -1' -6 3/4" BASEMENT FLOOR -9' -10 1/4"8' - 3 1/2"1' - 6 3/4"9' - 1 1/8"1' - 10 3/4"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 6"1' - 6" 1' - 0"1' - 0" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" FIRST FLOOR CEILING 9' -1 1/8" SECOND FLOOR 10' -11 7/8" SECOND FLOOR CEILING 19' -1" BASEMENT CEILNG -1' -6 3/4" BASEMENT FLOOR -9' -10 1/4"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 10 3/4"9' - 1 1/8"1' - 6 3/4"8' - 3 1/2"9 1/2" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 1' - 6" 1' - 6" 1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 6" 1' - 0"Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.2 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MN1/4" = 1'-0"1 Rear Elevation 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Right Elevation 3 3D View LEFT/REAR 4 3D View RIGHT/REAR REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:31 PM NO CEILING GYP. BD. REQ'D BY CODE (80 SQ FT. MAX) 1/2" GYP. BD. @ WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS VANITYEGRESS WINDOW WELL WINDOW WELL 29' - 10"5' - 0"11' - 6"1' - 0"2' - 4"2' - 4"19' - 8"24' - 0"2' - 6"3' - 2"2' - 0"10' - 2"8' - 2"22' - 0"1' - 10"21' - 8"20' - 2"8' - 8"0' - 2"0' - 2" FOUND.FOUND.6' - 6"11' - 2"2' - 6"UNEX. F REC. RM. CARPET BEDROOM #5 CARPET W.I.C. CARPET BATH C.TILE PLAY ROOM BURNISHED CONC. EXERCISE RUBBER MECH./ STOR. UNFIN. BAR UNEX. 6'-0"X6'-8" 2'-8"X6'-8"3'-0"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-6"x6'-8" 2'-4"X6'-8" 2'-4"GLS DROP TOP OF GAR. FOUND. 1'-0" DROP TOP OF GAR. FOUND. 1'-0"UP 16R11" TREADSART RECESS 2 7 TV UNEX.1' - 6"4' - 10"1' - 10"4' - 10"UCA3254 (TYP.)UAWN4828 (TYP.)CARPET U.C. REF.SOUND DAMPEN INSUL. (TYP.) HI-EFF W.H. SEALED SUMP HI-EFF FURN FD H.R. ABOVE SEE SURVEY FOR SUMP DISCHARGE LOCATION F3 IN 2" FOUNDATION IS HELD IN FOR INSULATION AS NOTED DASHED LINE @ FULL BASEMENT SHOWS SHEATHING LINE ABOVE DASHED LINE @ STUD WALL SHOWS FOUNDATION LINE BELOW FOUND. SHEATH. 2 6 1 7 1 6 3 7 4 6 2" FURRING TRUSSES18" FLOOR19.2" O.C.2X6TRUSSES18" FLOOR19.2" O.C.TRUSSES18" FLOOR19.2" O.C.TRUSSES18" FLOOR19.2" O.C.WALL BELOW LANDING 2'-8"X6'-8" FL. HDR.FL. HDR.FL. HDR. 9' - 5 1/2"11' - 7"9' - 5 3/4"5' - 2 3/4"5' - 2 3/4"1' - 4"18' - 6 3/4"21' - 0 1/4"5' - 3 1/2"3' - 4 1/2" 1' - 0" 3' - 10 1/2"12' - 9 1/4"15' - 5 3/4"4' - 3"7' - 1 1/4"2X6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. 4" OF 6" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 20" OF 6" POURED 82" OF 10" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 20" OF 8" POURED 82" OF 12" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG.STEP FTG.STEP FTG. 8" OF 6" POURED 40" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 8" OF 8" POURED 94" OF 12" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 8" OF 6" POURED 94" OF 10" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 8" OF 8" POURED 94" OF 12" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 8" OF 6" POURED 94" OF 10" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 94" OF 8" POURED 16"X8" CONC. FTG. 94" OF 8" POURED 16"X8" CONC. FTG. 2X8 STUDS @ 16" O.C. 42" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. (@ EGRESS WINDOWS) 2X8 STUDS @ 16" O.C. 42" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 5' - 11"5' - 7" FL4 IN 2" FL4 IN 2"5' - 7"5' - 7"17' - 0"12' - 10"8' - 4"1' - 0"0' - 4"0' - 4"0' - 2" *DROP MECH. FLOOR 1/12"1' - 0"BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN WINDOW N0TES GUARDRAIL NOTES FLOOR SYSTEM NOTES FRAMING NOTES SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" • 8'-9 1/2" PLATE HEIGHT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • 2X6 STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/LSL SOLID BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOADS, SUPPORT BEAMS, MICROLAMS, & GIRDER TRUSSES TO FOUNDATION • PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILINGS & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONCEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED CEILINGS, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES) • PROVIDE DRAFT STOPPING BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SQ.FT. • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS & FREESTANDING TUB ABOVE • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN SIDE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS SHEETROCK & INSULATION NOTES • GYP. BD. REQUIRED AT ENTIRE CEILING (EXCEPT 80 SQ.FT. MAXIMUM AT MECHANICAL) • 1/2" GYP. BD. AT WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN. 1/2" GYP. BD. AT HABITABLE AREAS EXTERIOR DIMENSION ARE FROM EXTERIOR OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMENT AREAS AND AS NOTED AT FRAMED WALLS AT LOOKOUT AND WALKOUT AREAS SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARMS IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN AY ROOM THAT HAS A CEILING HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" HIGHER THAN A CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOMS • MARVIN ULTIMATE WINDOWS 1. CODE MAX U VALUE = 0.32 MAX SHGC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS FRAMED ON SILL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER LIST WITH U FACTOR, SHGC, & STC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HTS. • WINDOW WELLS WITH A VERTICAL DEPTH OF MORE THAN 44" MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH AN APPROVED LADDER Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.3 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MNBASEMENT FINISHED 1429 SF UNFINISHED 179 SF REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:32 PM 36" REF. SIMPSON STHD14 ANCHOR STRAPS AT THIS WALL GARAGE DOOR W/ GLASS GARAGE 4" CONC. FLOOR W/ FIBERMESH 2X6 GARAGE WALLS 1/2" GYP. BD. ON ALL WALLS 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. ON CEILING WD. STEPS W/ RAILING20 MIN. DR.F 3' - 2"2' - 0"10' - 6"8' - 0"22' - 0"2' - 0"6' - 6"7' - 0"2' - 6"24' - 0"20' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 6"30' - 2"5' - 0"11' - 6"1' - 0"8' - 6"20' - 6"21' - 6"5' - 6"7' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"48" RANGEW/ HOODVANITYDW12" SNACK BARBENCH W/HOOKS ABOVE2X6 GREAT ROOM WOOD DINING WOOD KITCHEN WOOD W.I.P. WOOD SITTING AREA WOOD MUD RM. C.TILE W.I.C. C.TILE PDW. RM. WOOD OFFICE WOOD FOYER WOOD 1' - 6 1/2"4' - 3"7' - 4"7' - 6 3/4"3' - 8"5' - 4 1/2"6' - 6 1/2"8' - 2 3/4" 2'-6"x6'-8"3'-6"x8'-0"2'-4"X8'-0"2'-4"X8'-0" 2'-4"X8'-0"2'-8"X6'-8"2'-8"X8'-0"2'-4"X8'-0"GAR. FLOOR DROPPED 1'-0" DROP GAR. PLATE HT. 2" DROP GAR. PLATE HT. 1'-6"D.V. GASFIREPLACEFLUSH HEARTH11" TREADSDN 16RUP 18RCOVERED PATIO 2 7 SHELVING FRONT STOOP 12'-0"X8'-0" PD BOX OUT LEDGE 4' - 0"4' - 6"3' - 8"8' - 0"4' - 2 1/2"FLOOR LINE ABOVE FD CONC.9'-7 1/8"9'-1 1/8"STEP CEIL. 9'-7 1/8" CEIL. HT. FULL VIEW 29" S.L.SOUND DAMPEN INSUL. (TYP.)DWCONC. UCA3248 UCA3272 (TYP.)UCA3272 (TYP.)UCA3260UAWN3624-2WUCA2854 (TYP.)UCA3284 (TYP.)UCA3284 (TYP.)UCA3284UCA3260UCA3260UCA3260 (TYP.)RAILINGTRUSSES22" FLOOR19.2" O.C.FL. HDR.TRUSSES22" FLOOR19.2" O.C.TRUSSES22" FLOOR19.2" O.C.TRUSSES24" FLOOR19.2" O.C.TRUSSES22" FLOOR19.2" O.C.H.R. 2X6 OPEN TO ABOVE FLOOR LINE ABOVE2X10 JSTS.@ 16" O.C.2 6 1 7 1 6 3 7 4 6 2' - 0" 9' - 9 1/2"13' - 10 1/4"6' - 6 1/4"2' - 9 1/4"2' - 2 3/4"5' - 9"5' - 9"4' - 6 1/4"3' - 11 3/4"10' - 3"6' - 0 1/2"4' - 2 1/2"3' - 6"3' - 6"5' - 3"5' - 3"2' - 6 1/4"3' - 2 1/2"2' - 3 1/4"11' - 0"11' - 0"2' - 9 1/4"16' - 3 1/4"4' - 11 1/2"3' - 7"12' - 10"3' - 7"24" S.L.FULL VIEW8' - 10"5' - 0"7' - 8"12' - 0 1/2" 1' - 5" 8' - 0" DR. STEEL BM.DR. HDR.FLOOR LINE ABOVE RAILING RAILING2X6 2' - 4"8' - 10 1/4"7' - 10 1/2"4' - 1 1/2"2' - 5"5' - 8 3/4"4' - 2 3/4"2' - 4 1/2"4' - 7 3/4"2' - 7 1/4"8' - 5"2' - 3"7' - 9 1/4"20' - 0"4' - 11 1/2"5' - 2 3/4"1' - 11"7' - 4 3/4"3' - 9 1/4"3' - 2 3/4"9'-7 1/8" 9'-1 1/8" 2' - 5 3/4"6' - 6 1/2"6' - 4 1/2"6' - 9 3/4"2X6 1' - 11"BUILT-IN 892 FRONT OF GAR. FL. 892.416 REAR OF GAR. FL. *SLOPE GARAGE FLOOR AS NEEDED TO REDUCE NUMBER OF RISERS TO HOUSETRUSSES24" FLOOR19.2" O.C.DROP GAR. PLATE HT. 1'-4"ENERGY LEG@ 24" O.C.TRUSSESMULTI-PITCHBOBBEDFRAME WALL ON ROOF (TYP.) 2' - 0" FD 16'-0"X8'-0"FL. HDR.FL. HDR. TRUSSES 16" FLOOR 19.2" O.C.TRUSSES16" FLOOR19.2" O.C.2X10 JSTS.@ 16" O.C.TRUSSES16" FLOOR19.2" O.C.FL. HDR. FL. HDR.1' - 6"FIRST FLOOR PLAN WINDOW N0TES GUARDRAIL NOTES FLOOR SYSTEM NOTES FRAMING NOTES EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS ARE SHEATHING TO SHEATHING SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" • 9'-1 1/8" PLATE HEIGHT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • 2X6 STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/LSL SOLID BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOADS, SUPPORT BEAMS, MICROLAMS, AND GIRDER TRUSSES TO FOUNDATION • PROVIDE FIREBLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILINGS & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONCEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED CEILINGS, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES • PROVIDE DRAFT STOPPING BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SQ.FT. • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN. 1/2" GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS & FREESTANDING TUB ABOVE • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS • MARVIN ULTIMATE WINDOWS 1. CODE MAX U VALUE = 0.32 MAX SHGC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET 8'-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER LIST WITH U FACTOR, SHGC, & STC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HTS. • FP = PROVIDE FALL PROTECTION @ OPERATING WINDOWS • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN SIDE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARMS IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN AY ROOM THAT HAS A CEILING HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" HIGHER THAN A CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOMS Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.4 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MNFIRST FLOOR FINISHED 1609 SF GARAGE 472 SF REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:32 PM LINENCABNT36"X60" FREE STANDING VER. SIZE VANITYVANITY VANITYF F F 11" TREADSDN 18R2X6 BEDROOM #4 CARPET LAUNDRY C.TILE W.I.C. CARPET MASTER BEDROOM CARPET MASTER BATH C.TILE W.I.C. CARPET BATH C.TILE W.I.C. CARPET BATH C.TILE W.I.C. CARPET BEDROOM #2 CARPET BEDROOM #3 CARPET4'-0"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-6"x6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8" 2'-6"x6'-8"2'-8"X6'-8"3'-0"X6'-8"5'-0"X6'-8"2'-4"X6'-8" 2'-4"X6'-8" 2'-4"GLS 2'-4"X6'-8"2'-8"X6'-8" 2' - 11 1/2"6' - 8"2' - 11 1/2" 4'-11 1/8" WALL HT. 2 7 34" 64" C.T. 5-0 TUB W/ SHOWER CT WALLS 5'-4 5/8" WALL HT. ENERGY LEG @ 24" O.C. TRUSSES VAULTED ENERGY LEG @ 24" O.C. TRUSSES VAULTED 6'-4 1/8" WALL HT.ENERGY LEG@ 24" O.C.TRUSSESVAULTED48" 60" C.T. GLS. WALL 2X620' - 0"24' - 0"12' - 6"8' - 0"12' - 7"11' - 5"13' - 10"7' - 8"20' - 6"4' - 0"46' - 8"1' - 0"ENERGY LEG@ 24" O.C.TRUSSESMONOENERGY LEG @ 24" O.C. TRUSSES BOBBED ENERGY LEG@ 24" O.C.TRUSSESSLOPED CEIL. ENERGY LEG @ 24" O.C. TRUSSES OFFSETENERGY LEG@ 24" O.C.TRUSSESMONOENERGY LEG @ 24" O.C. TRUSSES OFFSET VAULTED 6'-5" WALL HT. 7'-4 5/8" WALL HT. CARPET S.R.O. SHAVING LEDGE SINK SOUND DAMPEN INSUL. (TYP.) SOUND DAMPEN INSUL. (TYP.)UCA2460 (TYP.)UCA2864-3W UCA2048 UCA2864 (TYP.)UCA2036UCA2036UCA2036UCA3260 (TYP.)UCA2036UCA3660 (TYP.)UCAP4856 UCA2036RAILING1' - 6 1/4"4' - 3"7' - 4"6' - 4 3/4"5' - 9 1/2"3' - 11 1/2"9' - 6"5' - 8 3/4" FRAME WALL ON ROOF (TYP.) 7' - 5"2' - 0"2' - 0" SLOPED CEIL. (TYP.)2X6SOUND DAMPEN INSUL. (TYP.) 2X6 2X62X6MONO GIRDER TRUSS VAULTED GIRDER TRUSS VAULTED GIRDER TRUSS P.D.P.D.5' - 8 3/4"3' - 8"2' - 4 1/2"2' - 9 1/4"5' - 1 3/4"19' - 9 3/4"4' - 6"6' - 6"7' - 3"5' - 3"2' - 6 1/4"5' - 5 3/4"3' - 4"3' - 4"19' - 0 1/2"4' - 11 1/2"18' - 1 1/2"1' - 10 1/2"10' - 5"9' - 11 1/2"9' - 7"10' - 8"6' - 0 1/2"1' - 10 1/2"7' - 8 1/4"6' - 10 3/4"4' - 0 1/2"VAULTED GIRDER TRUSS BOBBED GIRDER TRUSS BOBBED GIRDER TRUSS BOBBED GIRDER TRUSS 6' - 6 1/2"1' - 5 1/2"4' - 6"7' - 2 3/4"4' - 0"4' - 10 1/2"9' - 6"5' - 8 3/4"5' - 8 3/4"9' - 2"3' - 10 1/2"5' - 11"7' - 1 1/2"14' - 8 1/4"5' - 8 1/2"4' - 0 1/4"3' - 11 1/2"13' - 10 1/2"7' - 3 1/2"12' - 9 3/4"2' - 2"CURB0' - 1 3/4" F.P. EGRESS F.P. EGRESS EGRESS F.P. EGRESS F.P. TEMP.F.P.RAILINGOPEN TO BELOW 2 6 1 7 1 6 3 7 4 6 2X62'-4"GLSGLS. WALL 5' - 0"6'-4 1/8" WALL HT.SECOND FLOOR PLAN WINDOW N0TES GUARDRAIL NOTES FRAMING NOTES EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS ARE SHEATHING TO SHEATHING SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" • 8'-1 1/8" PLATE HEIGHT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • 2X6 STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/LSL SOLID BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOADS, SUPPORT BEAMS, MICROLAMS, AND GIRDER TRUSSES TO FOUNDATION • PROVIDE FIREBLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILINGS & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONCEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED CEILINGS, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES • PROVIDE DRAFT STOPPING BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SQ.FT. • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN. 1/2" GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • MARVIN ULTIMATE WINDOWS 1. CODE MAX U VALUE = 0.32 MAX SHGC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET 6'-10" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER LIST WITH U FACTOR, SHGC, & STC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HTS. • FP = PROVIDE FALL PROTECTION @ OPERATING WINDOWS • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN SIDE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARMS IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN AY ROOM THAT HAS A CEILING HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" HIGHER THAN A CORRIDOR GIVING ACCESS TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOMS Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.5 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MNSECOND FLOOR FINISHED 1795 SF REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:32 PM 892 FRONT OF GAR. FL. 892.416 REAR OF GAR. FL. GARAGE BEDROOM #4BATH KITCHEN SITTING AREAMUD RM. REC. RM.BEDROOM #5 1' - 6"1' - 5 5/8"1' - 8"6' - 10"3' - 6"0' - 2" 12" 12" 12" 12" 9 1/2" 12" 2X6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. 4" OF 6" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG.8' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"8' - 3 1/2"1/2" GYP. BD. GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 1/2" GYP. BD. 3 1/2" CONC. FLOOR W/ POLY BELOW 5/8" GYP. BD. W/ VAPOR BARRIER GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 22" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C. 18" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C.6' - 7 7/8"7' - 10 7/8" 1' - 6"1' - 6"FL. HDR. 1/2" GYP. BD. ON ALL WALLS 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. ON CEILING 4" CONC. FLOOR W/ FIBERMESH 40" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. @ GAR. DOOR3' - 4"20" OF 8" POURED 82" OF 12" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 2X8 STUDS @ 16" O.C. 42" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. (@ EGRESS WINDOWS) R-10 INSUL R-5 INSUL. 2X8 TRTD. PLATE 1/2"X12" A.B. @ 32" O.C. W/ SILL SEALER RUBBER MEMBRANE SLOPED INSUL. TRTD. 3/4" PLY. WD. SLOPE TO SCUPPER THRU TRIM VERIFY LOCATION 1' - 6"0' - 6 1/8"1' - 2"6' - 5"1' - 6"1' - 1"3 1/2" 12" 3 1/2" 12" MASTER BEDROOMW.I.C.BEDROOM #2 DININGFOYER BATHEXERCISEBAR 2X10 JSTS. @16" O.C. MASTER BATHW.I.C.BEDROOM #2 GREAT ROOMOFFICE PLAY ROOM MECH./ STOR. *DROP MECH. FLOOR 1/12"Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.6 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MN1/8" = 1'-0"3 ROOF PLAN * MANUF. DESIGNED ROOF TRUSSES * ROOF TRUSS MANUF. TO VERIFY ALL PITCHES, OVERHANGS, HEEL HEIGHTS, EXTENDED CHORDS, AND KNEE WALL HEIGHTS * BUILDER TO REVIEW TRUSS DESIGN & LAYOUT PRIOR TO ORDERING TRUSSES * VENT ROOF 1 SQ. FT. PER 200 SQ. FT. 50% ROOF 50% SOFFIT * FULL ICE & WATER SHIELD AT ROOF PITCHES LESS THAN 4/12 * KICKOUT FLASHING TO BE INSTALLED AS NEEDED BY ROOFING CONTRACTOR, EXTERIOR WALL FINISHER TO VERIFY THAT KICKOUT FLASHING IS INSTALLED PRIOR TO FINISHING 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Section "A" 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Section "B" 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Section "C" REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:32 PM RUBBER MEMBRANE SLOPED INSUL. TRTD. 3/4" PLY. WD.SLOPE TO SCUPPER THRU TRIM VERIFY LOCATION 1' - 6"1' - 6"6' - 4 1/8"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 2"1' - 2 1/4"GARAGE BEDROOM #2 BEDROOM #3 OFFICE MECH./ STOR.5' - 4 5/8"7' - 4 5/8"8' - 1 1/8"1' - 6" 1' - 6"1' - 2"1' - 2 1/4"1' - 2 1/4"1' - 2"9' - 1 1/8"8' - 5"8' - 6"0' - 8"7' - 10"*DROP MECH. FLOOR 1/12" 1/2" GYP. BD. GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 1/2" GYP. BD. 3 1/2" CONC. FLOOR W/ POLY BELOW 5/8" GYP. BD. W/ VAPOR BARRIER GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 22" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C. 18" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C. 24" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C.6' - 4 1/8"1' - 2"1' - 4"8' - 11 1/8"FIRST FLOOR BEYOND 16" FLOOR TRUSSES 19.2" O.C.0' - 8"3' - 4"1' - 8"6' - 10"1' - 0"3' - 0" SISTER 2X8 STUDS @ 1'-0" O.H. RUBBER MEMBRANE SLOPED INSUL. TRTD. 3/4" PLY. WD. 2X10 JSTS. @16" O.C. 8" OF 6" POURED 40" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. 1/2" GYP. BD. ON ALL WALLS 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. ON CEILING 4" CONC. FLOOR W/ FIBERMESH R-38 INSUL. GARAGE W.I.C.BEDROOM #3 8' - 6"1' - 0" 1' - 0"1' - 2 1/4"1' - 2"8' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"STAIRWAY NOTES: STAIRWAY HEADROOM TO BE 7'-0" MIN. HANDRAIL HEIGHT TO BE CONT. 34" TO 38" ABOVE NOSING, OPNG'S TO BE LESS THAN 4" 3-2X12 STRINGERS & 10" TREADS RAILING RAILING 895 F.F. 885.1 L.L.8' - 3 1/2"892 FRONT OF GAR. FL. 892.416 REAR OF GAR. FL.1' - 8"6' - 10"0' - 2" 2" FURRING @ ART RECESS 0' - 2" 1/2" GYP. BD. GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 1/2" GYP. BD. 3 1/2" CONC. FLOOR W/ POLY BELOW 5/8" GYP. BD. W/ VAPOR BARRIER GLUE & SCREW 3/4' T&G PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR 2X8 TRTD. PLATE 1/2"X12" A.B. @ 32" O.C. W/ SILL SEALER VENT ROOF 1-200 50% SOFFIT 50% ROOF R-49 INSULATIONHARDIE FASCIA HARDIE SOFFIT W/VENTS EXTERIOR WALL SIDING (SEE ELEVATION) HOUSE WRAP 7/16" O.S.B. SHEATHING 2X6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. FLASH & BATT (R-21) INSUL. VAPOR BARRIER 1/2" GYP. BD. ICE SHIELD OR EQUAL TO 24" INSIDE WALL TYPICAL TO ABOVE ROOF 30 YEAR ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES 15# FELT 5/8" O.S.B. SHEATHING MANUFACTURE DESIGNED TRUSSES 24" O.C. SEE RIM DETAIL 12" 12"0' - 8"3' - 4"2X10 JOISTS @ 16" O.C. R-10 INSUL R-5 INSUL. 102" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. WATERPROOFING 2X10 JOISTS @ 16" O.C. 22" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C. 18" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C. DRAIN TILE AS REQD. ON 2" MIN. OF WASHED GRAVEL OR CRUSHED ROCK. AND COVERED WITH 6" MINUM OF SAME MATERIAL. 20" OF 6" POURED 82" OF 10" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. R-10 INSUL R-5 INSUL.6' - 8"VAULTED GIRDER TRUSS VAULTED GIRDER TRUSS 4' - 11 1/8"24" FLOOR TRUSSES @ 19.2" O.C.0' - 2"1' - 4"8" OF 6" POURED 40" OF 8" POURED 20"X8" CONC. FTG. FL. HDR. 1/2" GYP. BD. ON ALL WALLS 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. ON CEILING 4" CONC. FLOOR W/ FIBERMESH R-38 INSUL. 2X8 TRTD. PLATE 1/2"X12" A.B. @ 32" O.C. W/ SILL SEALER FL. HDR. BEYOND BEDROOM #4LAUNDRY MASTER BEDROOMW.I.C. GREAT ROOM DINING KITCHEN REC. RM.PLAY ROOM BAR Fax: 763-780-8015BLAINE, MN. 55449SUITE 1069100 BALTIMORE ST NEPhone: 763-780-8004CD.F.P.PLANNING & DESIGNSHEET NO. COMM. NO. DRAWN BY: REVISIONS: DATE: 2019 DFP PLANNING & DESIGNUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT ACT.7 220337 3-4-21 KH 3-9-21 KH 2-25-21 3-16-21 KH KH 3-29-21 KH 5-10-21 KH 5-14-21 KHROSE RESIDENCE4604 WEST 56TH ST.EDINA, MN1/4" = 1'-0"1 Section "D" 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Section "E" 1/4" = 1'-0"3 Section "F" REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 05/14/2021 5:52:32 PM wood fenceoverhead wiresoverhead wiresoverhead wireschain link fenceC u r bwood fenceoverhead wires33.1 (lies east of line)S 89°44'15" E 59.56N 00°24'11" E 135.20S 00°09'08" W 135.23 60.00 platmeas.34.7 9.7measuremeasure56TH STREET W.135.03 plat135.03 platP a t i oPorch2'0"9'0"1'0"7'0"1'0"5'6"22'0"6'6"8'0"7'0"10'6"2'6"2'0"24'0"3'2"20'0"30'2"2'0"5'0"2'6"11'6"8'6"1'0"20'6"8'0"18'0"D r i v e w a yWalk35.0 6.85.47.2±%step48.6891.5893.5894.51-Story Frame No.55441-Story Frame No.4608catch basinrim=888.42inv=883.09tcc888.84tcc888.65tcc888.19Power PoleWoodFence 0.6'North ofLine3.9corner of fence on line18"pine891.7888890890888890890890.1890.2890.7890.9889.9888.9890.5886.2889.6890.6890.2peak906.11st floor891.4inv10"plastic pipe884.54889.6888.91st floor893.8garage floorpeak915.7889.5889.4Proposed ResidenceEgress wellEgress well 888890892893892890N 89°41'12" W 60.15meas.60.00 plat886F:\survey\countryside - hennepin\3-8\01 Surveying - 88755\01 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwg C1 OF C1DATE:LIC. NO.:SHEET NO.PROJECT: 89426AREVISIONSDESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:EROSION AND SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATEOF MINNESOTA.JEFFREY A. PRASCH, P.E.04.27.2152706JWLJAPGRP7601 73RD AVENUE N, BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55428PHONE: 763.560.3093 FAX: 763.560.3522www.DemarcInc.comFLOWSTRAW SEDIMENTCONTROL LOG1 IN X 2 IN X 24 IN LONG WOODEN STAKES.STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN THROUGH THEBACK HALF OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGAT AN ANGLE OF 45 DEGREES WITH THETOP OF THE STAKE POINTING UPSTREAM.BACKFILL AND COMPACT SOILFROM TRENCH ON UPGRADIENTSIDE OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGPLACE SEDIMENT CONTROLLOG IN SHALLOW TRENCH(1 IN - 2 IN DEPTH)8 IN - 10 IN EMBEDMENT DEPTHSPACE BETWEEN STAKES SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 1 FT FOR DITCH CHECKSOR 2 FT FOR OTHER APPLICATIONS.BIOROLLSNOT TO SCALE3C1EXISTING GROUNDEROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (I.E. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS, ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT, INLET PROTECTION, ETC.) SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TOTHE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.2. INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ANY INLET THAT MAY RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE DISTURBED AREAS OF THE PROJECT. INLET PROTECTION MAY BEREMOVED FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (FLOODING / FREEZING) HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED. THE PERMITTED MUST RECEIVE WRITTENCORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CITY ENGINEER VERIFYING THE NEED FOR REMOVAL.3. INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S, SUCH AS SILT FENCE, AROUND ALL STOCKPILES.4. RETAIN AND PROTECT AS MUCH NATURAL VEGETATION AS FEASIBLE. WHEN VEGETATION IS REMOVED DURING DEVELOPMENT, THE EXPOSED CONDITION OF LANDSHALL BE KEPT TO THE SHORTEST PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME, BUT NOT LONGER THAN 60 DAYS. ANY EXPOSED AREAS EXCEEDING THIS TIME-FRAME SHALL BETEMPORARILY STABILIZED (STRAW MULCH, WOODCHIPS, ROCK). AREAS BEING USED FOR MATERIAL STORAGE AND AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ARE EXEMPTFROM TEMPORARY STABILIZATION.5. ANY STEEP SLOPES (3H : 1V OR STEEPER) EXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY VEGETATION, MULCHING OR BY OTHERMEANS ACCEPTABLE TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITHIN 14 DAYS OF CEASING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ON THE STEEP SLOPES. STOCKPILES MAY BEPROTECTED BY AN ANCHORED TARP OR PLASTIC SHEET.6. PROVIDE DUST CONTROL AS NECESSARY. DUST CONTROL CAN INCLUDE WATER.7. REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENTS TRACKED OR OTHERWISE DEPOSITED ONTO PUBLIC PAVEMENT AREAS ON A DAILY BASIS OR AS NEEDED.8. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S SHALL BE INSPECTED EVERY 7 DAYS, OR WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ALL RAIN EVENTS GREATER THAN 1.0" IN 24 HOURS.CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED SHALL BE INITIATED WITHIN 24 HOURS.9. SILT FENCE, BIO-ROLLS AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THESEDIMENT REACHES 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE. THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW.10. AFTER FINAL GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED, EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. PERMANENT STABILIZATION SHALLCONSIST OF 4 INCHES TOPSOIL, AND SEED, MULCH AND FERTILIZER APPLIED BY METHODS AND RATES RECOMMENDED IN MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 2575 ANDMN/DOT SEEDING MANUAL, OR SOD. THE SEED MIX SHALL BE MN/DOT 25-151.11. NO CONCRETE WASHOUT ALLOWED ON SITE, TRUCK BASED SELF CONTAINMENT WASHOUT DEVICES REQUIRED.12. OIL STAINS ON CITY STREETS SHALL BE CLEANED UP WITH FLOOR DRY, AND DISPOSED OF AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIAL.13. ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE SHALL BE STORED CLEANED UP AND DISPOSED OF PER EPA STANDARDS.14. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED.15. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AFTER PERMANENT STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.16. TEMPORARY PUMPED DISCHARGE POLLUTION PREVENTION TECHNIQUES: "DANDY DEWATERING BAG" BROCK WHITE CO. USA.18. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: (952) 471-0590.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CITY OF EDINA SHALL APPLY EXCEPT WHERE MODIFIED BY THESE DOCUMENTS.2."GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (1-800-252-1166) SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION.3.PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION, THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH UTILITYCOMPANIES. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY WITH ANY CONFLICTS.4.THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES.5.EXISTING TOPSOIL SHALL BE SALVAGED TO PROVIDE 4" TOPSOIL COVERAGE OVER ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE REVEGETATED.6.THE BUILDING PAD MUST BE PROVIDED WITH POSITIVE DRAINAGE. THIS WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT.7.AFTER THE SILT FENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED REMAINING SEDIMENT SHALL BE SMOOTHED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED AND SEEDED ORSODDED AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.8.NO FINISHED SLOPE SHALL EXCEED 4H : 1V UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9.PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. METHODS OF MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT.SCALE IN FEET200405 FT MINIMUM LENGTH POSTAT 6 FT MAXIMUM SPACINGPLASTIC ZIP TIES (50 LBSTENSILE) LOCATED IN TOP 8 INGEOTEXTILE FABRIC,36 IN WIDETIRE COMPACTION ZONEMACHINE SLICE8 IN - 12 IN DEPTHFLOWFLOWSILT FENCE (MACHINE SLICED)NOT TO SCALE1C12 FT MINIMUMPOST EMBEDMENTEXISTING GROUNDINLET PROTECTIONNOT TO SCALE2C1MINIMUM DOUBLE STITCHEDSEAMS ALL AROUND SIDEPIECES AND ON FLAP POCKETSFRONT, BACK, ANDBOTTOM TO BEMADE FROM SINGLEPIECE OF FABRICOVERFLOW HOLES (2 IN X 4IN HOLE SHALL BE HEAT CUTINTO ALL FOUR SIDE PANELS)USE REBAR OR STEEL RODFOR REMOVAL (FOR INLETSWITH CAST CURB BOXREPLACE ROD WITH WOOD 2IN X 4 IN). EXTEND 10 INBEYOND GRATE WIDTH ONBOTH SIDES, LENGTHVARIES. SECURE TO GRATEWITH WIRE OR PLASTIC TIES.LW12 W12 IN8 ININLET SPECIFICATIONS AS PERTHE PLAN DIMENSION LENGTH ANDWIDTH TO MATCH FLAP POCKET12 LROCKSTABILIZING EXITSILT FENCE ORBIOROLLS (TYP.)17. CONTACT PERSON FOR SITE CLEANLINESS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS: ANDY PORTER (612) 961-9101.LOT 19, BLOCK 2, SUBDIVISIONOF LITTEL PARK4604 56th STREET WEDINA, MNREFINED, LLC5905 FAIRFAX AVENUEEDINA, MINNESOTA 5542420' MINIMUM LENGTH 6 IN MINIMUM EXIT WIDTH ASREQUIREDROCK STABILIZING EXITNOT TO SCALE4C1PUBLIC ROADSURFACE FLOWCRUSHED ROCKPER SPECIFICATIONEXISTING GROUNDGEOTEXTILEFABRICTAPER EDGESAT 1:11 IN - 2 IN CRUSHED ROCKRADIUS ASREQUIREDExisting HardcoverLot Area8,093 sq ftBuilding1,793 sq ftDriveway360 sq ftSidewalk272 sq ftDeck166 sq ftTotal2,591 sq ftPercentage32.02%Proposed HardcoverLot Area8,093 sq ftBuilding2,087 sq ftPatio152 sq ftDriveway694 sq ftSidewalk108 sq ftTotal3,041 sq ftPercentage37.58%Grade Swale890.3INLET CONTROL(TYP.) STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Lot 19, Block 2, Subdivision of Littel Park 4604 56th Street W Edina, Minnesota April 27, 2021 Prepared By: Demarc Land Surveying & Engineering 7601 73rd Avenue North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55428 763.560.3093 I hereby certify that this Plan, Specification or Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Prepared For: Refined LLC 5905 Fairfax Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Jeffrey A Prasch, PE Project Engineer 04.27.21 Date 52706 License Number Stormwater Management Plan 4604 56th Street W – Edina, MN April 27, 2021 i 1.0 Project Overview .......................................................................................................................... ii 2.0 Design Considerations ................................................................................................................ ii 3.0 Subcatchment Analysis ............................................................................................................... ii Table 3.1 – Impervious Area Summary ............................................................................. ii Appendix A – Figures Figure 1 – Drainage Areas Existing Conditions Figure 2 – Drainage Areas Proposed Conditions Stormwater Management Plan 4604 56th Street W – Edina, MN April 27, 2021 ii 1.0 Project Overview A redevelopment of a single-family home is being proposed at 4604 56th Street W in the City of Edina, Minnesota within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The current site is 0.19 acres with a residence, attached garage, driveway, deck, and concrete sidewalk on the property. There are existing residences to the north, east, and west of the property. Currently, half of the site drains south, while half drains north to a pond. According to the City of Edina water resources map, there are structural flooding issues immediately downstream of the property. The existing drainage conditions are shown in Figure 1. The proposed improvements include a redevelopment of a single-family home. We propose the use of a swale in the side yard west of the residence. This swale will collect rain water from the side yard and roof and direct it to the street rather than to the pond. Figure 2 shows the proposed drainage conditions. The proposed stormwater improvements will include: Swale 2.0 Design Considerations The City of Edina (City) dictates the rate and volume requirements for this site. Since the project is the construction of a new dwelling unit, this site falls under Category 2 requirements of the Edina Building Safety Policy. For MCWD, because this is a reconstruction of a single-family home, it is exempt from their rule. 3.0 Subcatchment Analysis The City regulates the rate of water discharged from the site. The requirement is that there be no increase in peak rate to private properties for 10% annual probability event (NOAA Atlas 14, 10-year). Additionally, for sites that increase impervious area draining to structural flooding by 600 square feet, volume control will be required. Table 3.1 shows the existing and proposed impervious surface. Table 3.1 – Impervious Area Summary Subcatchment Impervious Area [sf] Subcatchment Area [sf] Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Private Property (2S) 1,271 1,163 4,930 4,393 Street (1S) 1,321 1,878 3,162 3,699 Total 2,592 3,041 8,092 8,092 As shown in the table above, the discharge rate for the proposed conditions shall meet the rate requirements because the total area of the subcatchment (2S) and the impervious surface within the subcatchment (2S) draining to the pond have both decreased. Also to be noted is that the total increase in impervious surface is less than 600 square feet draining to structural flooding; therefore, no volume control is required. Appendix A Figures 42.019.57.421.1 11.92.3 12.51.0 18.01.0 7.038.3 wood fenceover h e a d w i r e s overhead wiresoverhead wireschain link fenceD e c kC u r bC o n c r e t eb i t u m i n o u s wood fenceoverhead wires33.1 (lies east of line)S 89°44'15" E 59.56N 00°24'11" E 135.20 S 00°09'08" W 135.23 60.00 platmeas.35.8 34.7 9.75.44.9stoopmeasure measure56TH STREET W.135.03 plat 135.03 plat1-Story Frame No.46041-Story Frame No.55441-Story Frame No.4608A/Ccantcatch basinrim=888.42inv=883.09tcc888.84tcc888.65tcc888.19Power PoleWoodFence 0.6'North ofLineelec meter3.9corner of fence on line18"pine891.7888890890888890890890.1890.2890.7890.9889.9888.9890.5886.2889.6890.6890.2peak906.11st floor891.4peak906.3inv10"plastic pipe884.54889.6888.91st floor891.81st floor893.8garage floor891.8peak915.7window well889.5889.4N 89°41'12" W 60.15meas.60.00 plat886 DRAINAGE AREAS EXISTING CONDITIONS FIGURE 104.27.2021LEGENDSUBCATCHMENT NUMBERPOND/CATCH BASIN NUMBERLINK NUMBERREACH NUMBERDRAINAGE ARROW1S1P1L1RSCALE IN FEET20040LOT 19, BLOCK 2, SUBDIVISION OF LITTEL PARK 4604 56th STREET W EDINA, MN 2S1S wood fenceoverhead wires overhead wiresoverhead wireschain link fenceC u r bwood fenceoverhead wires33.1 (lies east of line)S 89°44'15" E 59.56N 00°24'11" E 135.20 S 00°09'08" W 135.23 60.00 platmeas.34.7 9.7measure measure56TH STREET W.135.03 plat 135.03 platP a t i oPorch2'0"9'0"1'0"7'0"1'0"5'6"22'0"6'6"8'0"7'0"10'6"2'6"2'0"24'0"3'2"20'0"30'2"2'0"5'0"2'6"11'6"8'6"1'0"20'6" 8'0"18'0"Walk 35.0 6.85.4step48.6891.5893.5894.51-Story Frame No.55441-Story Frame No.4608catch basinrim=888.42inv=883.09tcc888.84tcc888.65tcc888.19Power PoleWoodFence 0.6'North ofLine3.9corner of fence on line18"pine891.7888890890888890890890.1890.2890.7890.9889.9888.9890.5886.2889.6890.6890.2peak906.11st floor891.4inv10"plastic pipe884.54889.6888.91st floor893.8garage floor891.8peak915.7889.5889.4Proposed ResidenceEgress wellEgress well 888890892893892890N 89°41'12" W 60.15meas.60.00 plat886 DRAINAGE AREAS PROPOSED CONDITIONS FIGURE 204.27.2021LEGENDSUBCATCHMENT NUMBERPOND/CATCH BASIN NUMBERLINK NUMBERREACH NUMBERDRAINAGE ARROW1S1P1L1RSCALE IN FEET20040LOT 19, BLOCK 2, SUBDIVISION OF LITTEL PARK 4604 56th STREET W EDINA, MN 2S1S890.3 Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.C . To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:Kris Aaker, As s is tant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-21-13, 4236 S c o tt Terrace Varianc e req uest Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : Approve the variance request as submitted I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he subject property is located on the west side of S cott Terrace consisting of a one-story rambler with a tuck- under two car garage. T he homeowners are requesting a 1.37-foot south side yard setback and a 4.12-foot front yard setback variance to add a second floor to the nonconforming first floor. T he existing home is nonconforming regarding both south side and east front yard setback. T he owner ’s intent is to extend up above the nonconforming first floor to provide addition living space. T he project complies with all other zoning ordinance requirements. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Staff Report Engineering Memo Site Location Survey Survey/Plans Applicant Narrative Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 20 May 2021 Public Hearing Comments-4236 Scott Terrace Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: 1.37 foot south side yard setback and 4.12 front yard setback variances at 4236 Scott Terrace No Responses VISITORS 0 CONTRIBUTORS 0 RESPONSES 0 0 Registered 0 Unverified 0 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 0 Anonymous The subject property, 4236 Scott Terrace is located on the west side of Scott Terrace, south of 42nd Street West and north of Morningside Road. The existing home, built in 1963, is a one-story rambler with a tuck-under two car garage. The existing one-story rambler has a non-conforming south side yard and front yard setback. The applicant has submitted a request for a 1.37-foot side yard setback variance and a 4.12 -foot front yard setback variance to construct a second-floor addition that primarily aligns with the current non-conforming setbacks of the south and east sides of the existing first floor. A variance is needed given that the alternate setback standard cannot be used if there currently is no second floor. The average front yard setback is 42.56 ft for the property. The existing structure is non-conforming and measures 39.1ft. The proposed second floor will match the existing side and front setbacks with a small non-livable architectural projection that measures 8 additional inches. The applicant has indicated the 8” projections have been added to create visual interest to the front and side elevation where the exterior finish changes and is critical to the architectural design. With exception of the side and front yard setback, the proposed project meets all other zoning requirements. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features May 26, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-21-13, A 1.37-foot south side yard setback and a 4.12-foot front yard setback variance to add a second floor to the nonconforming first floor at 4236 Scott Terrace. Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 4236 Scott Terrace is a one-story rambler built in 1963. The current home does not meet the setbacks required in today’s code from the east or south lot lines. The existing setback to the south property line is 4.3 feet instead of today’s required setback of 5 feet. The average front yard setback is 42.56 ft for the property. The existing structure is non-conforming and measures 39.1ft. The proposed addition will maintain the existing setback on the north side of the house. The proposed addition is a second-floor addition, which does not fall within the allowable non-conforming alternate setback standard. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single-Dwelling District Grading & Drainage The Engineering Department has reviewed the application and submitted with comments as attached in their, 2021, memorandum. The subject property currently Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side – Side yard East Side – Front Yard South – Side yard West Rear – Yard 5 feet 42.56 feet 5 feet 25 feet 14.6 feet 39.1 feet existing/38.44 (+proposed 8”) 4.3/ feet existing/3.64 (+proposed 8”) 109 feet Building Coverage 25% 24.5% *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposed variance justified? STAFF REPORT Page 3 Minnesota Statues and Section 36-98 of the Edina Zoning Ordinance require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The proposed variance will: 1. 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 how the existing house is situated on the lot. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and the proposed addition complies with zoning standards with the exception of the south side yard and east front yard setback requirements. The practical difficulty is caused by the existing location of the home and the required setbacks. Due to the addition being on a different floor, the non- conforming setback standard does not apply. The home will be refurbished and modified within the existing setbacks, (or slightly closer setback given finish material). The original home was constructed without variances. 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 non-conforming setbacks and was built prior to the current ordinance requirements. There were no variances grated for the original construction of the home in 1963. The proposed addition will continue the non-conforming setback on the second floor that was allowed in 1963 when the original home was built. Setback requirements have changed over time creating non-conformities. This was not self-created by the applicant. The proposed addition conforms to all other zoning standards. 3. Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The addition will match the existing homes side yard setback on the first floor. All other aspects of the addition will conform to the ordinance requirements. Recommended Action: Approve a 1.37-foot side yard and a 4.12-foot front yard setback variance for an existing non- conforming home at 4236 Scott Terrace Approval is subject to the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 4 1. The proposal meets the variance criteria. The practical difficulty is caused by the existing location of the home and existing non-conforming side and front yard setbacks. 2. The proposed addition is reasonable and was not self-created. The current house has non- conforming side and front yard setbacks and was built prior to the current setback requirements. 3. Granting the variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Survey and plans date stamped, April 12, 2021. 2. Comments and conditions listed in the May 20 , 2021 Engineering Memo. DATE: 5/20/2021 TO: Cary Teagu e – Plan ning Director FROM: Zuleyka Marquez, PE – Graduate Engineer RE: 4236 Scott Terrace - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and u tility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the req uest of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed included an existing and proposed survey dated April 12, 2021. Summary of Work The applicant proposes a second story addition over the existing footprint. The request is for a variance to the setbacks. Easements No comments . Grading and Drainage The front yard drains to the Scott Terrace and eventually Weber Park. The backyard drains to a landlocked basin. Stormwater Mitigation The proposed survey was reviewed against the City of Edina Building Policy SP -003. No mitigation required. Floodplain Development The lowest floor elevation for any new development (new home or new lowest floor) would be required at no less than 905.1’. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan was reviewed and is consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP -002. Street and Driveway Entrance The applicant proposes to replace the driveway . A driveway entrance permit will be required if the driveway apron is replaced or damaged during construction. The street was reconstructed in 2014. Refer to standard plates 525, 540, and 542 for patching requirements. Public Utilities Water and sanitary is served from Scott Terrace. A one-inch water service line from the curb stop to the dwelling is required per the City’s policy SP -024. Sump line available for connection. If connecting to the City sump line, a permit and compliance with City of Edina Building Policy SP -006 will be required. Miscellaneous A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit may be required; applicant will need to verify with the district. Original structure built in 1963 and the watermain was installed in 1961. Thus, a well is likely not located onsite. Coordination with Minnesota Department of Health will not be required . Retaining wall work is proposed . The applicant will be required to submit drawings, cross-section, and calculations prepared and signed by a Minnesota licensed professional engineer. Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 4236 Scott Terrace May 11, 2021 1 in = 94 f t / CITY OF EDINA APR 1 2 2021 .PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKER RESIDENCE 4 2 3 6 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 nb1 i1studio 07april 2 0 2 1 tzozi!Jdeto pnis Ptin a. 0 0 9Lif7 g5 uw 'eu!pa ape.i.le 4 4 4o3s 9szt7 301\1301S3d d9N3VEI IND- IALLUVd30 DNININIVIA IZOZ g i &IV VNI03 JO All (t) tamomiremminomeurawata- 1 I r 1 i 1 1 BACKER RESIDENCE 4 236 scot t terrace edina, ni n 55 416 0 7 a pr i I 2 0 2 1 I I 111 CITY OF EDINA APR 1 2 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT n uild studio CITY OF EDINA APR 12 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKER RESIDENCE 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 0 7 a pr i I 2 0 2 1 C CITY OF EDINA APR 12 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKER RESIDENCE 4 2 3 6 scott terrace mn 5 5 4 1 6 0 /apr i I C) 2 I -e uiid studio REVISION CLOUD BACKER residence a remodel and addition 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 0.) 0 •-ks -o A 2 • o;;;; 0- - 00 of no nu • • • X :2 o3 GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL UNDERGROUND ITEMS WITH THE PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS. CODE REFERENCE SCALE: ni° AREA CALCULATIONS SCALE: nts 2020 MINNESOTA RESIDENTIAL CODE 2015 MINNESOTA RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CODE 2020 MINNESOTA MECHANICAL & FUEL GAS CODE 2015 MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE MINNESOTA ELECTRIC CODE BASEMENT: EXISTING: ADDITION: TOTAL FIRST FLOOR: FIRST FLOOR: EXISTING: ADDITION: TOTAL FIRST FLOOR: 829 sf 147 sf 976 SF 1,461 St 140 sf 1,601 SF I TOTAL LIVABLE: 4,141 st I NON-LIVABLE EXISTING GARAGE: 403 sf Cabinet Casement Ceiling Closet Clear Concrete Masonry Unit Counter Column Concrete Connection Continuous Corridor Ceramic Tie Center Cold Water Double Petal Drinking Fountain Double Hung Diameter Dimension Dispenser Down Door Opening Downspout Drawing Drawer ROOM LABEL ROOM 101 INTERIOR ELEVATION A KEYNOTE SYMBOL IXI DOOR SYMBOL WINDOW SYMBOL O WALL TYPE SYMBOL WORK POINT OR CONTROL POINT (E) EA EJ ELEC ELEV SNCL E.O.S. EQ EQUIP E.W. EXTG EXT F.A. F.D. FDN F.E.C. F.G. FIN FLR FLUOR F.O.F. F.O.S. FT FTG FURR AREA REFERENCE ETAIL NO. HEET NO. REVISION NO. EXISTING East Each Expansion Joint Electrical Elevation Enclosure Edge of Slab Equal Equipment Each Way Existing Exterior Fixed Fire Alarm Floor Drain Foundation Fire Extinguisher Cob Finish Grade Finish Floor Fluorescent Face of ITnish Face of Stud/Structure Fool, Feet Footing Furring, Furred GA Gouge LAM Laminate GAIN Galvanized LAV Lavatory G.I. Galvanized Iron L.F. Uneol Foot GL Glass, Glazing L.R. Living Room GYP Gypsum MATE Material N.B. Hose Bib MAX Maximum H.C. Holow Core MECH Mechanical HCP Handicapped MEMB Membrane HDWR Hardware MET Metal HDWD Hardwood MFR Manufacture H.M. Hollow Metol MIN Minimum HORIZ Horizontal MIR Manor HS Horizontal Slider MISC Miscelaneous HT Height M.O. Masonry Opening HVAC Heating, Ventilation M.R. Moisture Resistant and Air Conditioning MTD Mounted H.W. Hot Water MUL Mullion I.D. Inside Diameter N North INCL Including N/A Not Applicable INSUL insulation Not In Contract INT Interior NO. Number NOM Nominal JAN Janitor N.T.S. Not to Scale JST JT Joist Joint 0/ Over OA Overall KIT Kitchen O.C. On Center SECOND FLOOR: EXISTING: ADDITION: TOTAL SECOND FLOOR: IECC REQUIREMENTS SCALE: Va CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION: AN ENERGY CODE COMPLIANCE REPORT MUST ACCOMPANY PLANS FOR REVIEW. THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE ACCURATELY REFLECTED ON THE BUILDING PLANS. ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BE FIELD VERIFIED BY THE INSPECTOR. INSULATION: ALL INSULATION SHALL BE LABELED. FOR BLOW-IN PRODUCTS, ONE PACKAGE MUST BE SAVED FOR FIELD VERIFICATION. BLOW-IN INSULATION CERTIFICATION MUST BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO BUILDING FINAL INSPECTION. BATTS SHALL NOT BE COMPRESSED, AND SHALL BE SPLIT AT ELECTRICAL WIRING AND PIPING INTERRUPTIONS. INSULATION SHALL BE INSTALLED IN SUBSTANTIAL CONTACT WITH THE AIR BARRIER. BATTS INSTALLED IN WALLS WITH ONE SIDE OPEN SHALL BE PERMANENTLY HELD IN PLACE BY WIRES, STRAPPING OR STAPLES. WINDOWS: ALL NEW WINDOWS AND DOORS MUST DISPLAY NFRC LABELS, CLEARLY DISPLAYING U-VALUES AND SHGC COEFFICIENTS (FOR GLAZED AREA) FOR FIELD VERIFICATION. RE-USED/UNLABELED WINDOWS OR DOORS MUST MEET MINIMUM DEFAULT VALUES LISTED IN CODE. SKYLIGHTS: NFRC LABELS SHALL BE CLEARLY DISPLAYED, LISTING U AND SHGC VALUES. SKYLIGHT SHAFTS SHALL BE INSULATED WITH R-13 INSULATION, SECURED IN PLACE. CAULKING AND SEALANTS: EXTERIOR JOINTS, SEAMS OR PENETRATIONS IN THE AIR BARRIER THAT ARE SOURCES OF AIR LEAKAGE, SHALL BE SEALED WITH DURABLE CAULKING MATERIALS, CLOSED WITH GASKETING SYSTEMS, TAPED OR COVERED WITH MOISTURE VAPOR-PERMEABLE HOUSEWRAP. PROVIDE CAULKING OR SILL SEAL AT JOINT BETWEEN SILL PLATES OF FRAMED EXTERIOR WALLS AND FOUNDATION. THE SPACE BETWEEN FRAMED ROUGH OPENINGS AND DOOR OR WINDOW FRAMES MUST BE FOAM INSULATED OR CAULKED. SEAL RECESSED LIGHTING. PUMBING, ELECTRICAL BOX AND WIRING PENETRATIONS IN THE AIR BARRIER AGAINST AIR INFILTRATION. EXTERIOR DOORS MUST BE WEATHER-STRIPPED. ATTIC ACCESS OPENING COVERS MUST BE GASKETED TO PREVENT AIR LEAKAGE. HVAC SYSTEM: MECHANICAL EFFICIENCY AND CAPACITY OF NEW UNITS MUST APPEAR ON EQUIPMENT. THERMOSTATS: DEVICES SHALL HAVE A DEADBAND RANGE OF F WITHIN WHICH THE SUPPLY OF HEATING AND COOLING ENERGY IS SHUT OFF OR REDUCED TO A MINIMUM. HEAT PUMPS: SYSTEMS HAVING SUPPLEMENTARY ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE HEATERS SHALL HAVE CONTROLS THAT PREVENT THE HEATER OPERATION WHEN THE HEATING LOAD IS CAPABLE OF BEING MET BY THE PUMP. DUCTS AND PLENUMS: ALL SUPPLY AND RETURN-AIR PLENUMS SHALL HAVE ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS SECURELY FASTENED AND SEALED WITH WELDS, GASKETS, MASTICS, MASTIC-PLUS-EMBEDDED-FABRIC SYSTEMS OR APPROVED TAPES. DUCT AND PLENUM INSULATION: UNLESS LOCATED IN CONDITIONED SPACE, ALL SUPPLY DUCTS AND PLENUMS SHALL HAVE MINIMUM R-6 INSULATION. RETURN AIR DUCTS AND PLENUMS SHALL BE INSULATED WITH MINIMUM R-6 INSULATION. HOT WATER HEATERS: UNITS SHALL BE LABELED AS TO THEIR INPUT RATING EFFIICENCY. FOR NON-CIRCULATING HOT WATER SYSTEMS, ALL HOT WATER PIPING INSTALLED IN UNCONDITIONED SPACES, INCLUDING UNDER SLABS, SHALL BE INSULATED WITH R-2 (MIN.) CIRCULATING HOT WATER HEATING HOT WATER LINES SHALL BE INSULATED WITH R-2 PIPE INSULATION (MIN.) ABBREVIATIONS LIST And At Centerline Diameter or Round Number Anchor Bolt Air Conditioning Asphaltic Concrete Acoustical Tie Area Drain Adjustable Above Finish Floor Above Finish Grade Aluminum Access Panel Approximate Architectural Board Bituminous Building Block Blocking Beam Bottom Bedroom Built Up Rooting SCALE: n/o • ARCHITECT jasonstrodl [a d a p tura) 4201 GRIMES AVE SOUTH EDINA, MN 55416 (702) 629-7222 SURVEYOR ADVANCE SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING, CO. 17917 HIGHWAY NO. 7 MINNETONKA, MN 55345 (952) 474-7964 0 sf 1,564 sf 1,564 SF BUILDING HEIGHT: 6.27-9" (30'-Cr ALLOWABLE) LOT SIZE: 9,800 SF ALLOWABLE LOT 2,450 SF (25%MAX) COVERAGE: VICINITY MAP O.D. Outside Diameter South TEL Telephone SCALE: 015 OFF Office S.C. Solid Core TEMP Tempered, Temperature O.H. Overhang SCHED Schedule THK Thick, Thickness OVHD Overhead SECT Section THR Threshold OPNG Opening SEP Separotion, Separate TOIL Toilet OPP Opposite SH Shelf T.O.P. Top of Pavement PL P.L. Plate Property line SH SH &P Single Hung Shelf and Pole T.O.S. T.P.D. Top of Slab Toilet Paper Dispenser EXCELSIOR PLMG Plumbing SIM Simlar T.W. Top of Wall PIAM Plastic Laminate SLDG Siding T.S. Top of Steel 42ND PLAS Plaster SPEC Specification TV Television 44TH PLYWD Plywood SQ Square T.O. Top of PR Pair SS. Stainless Steel TYP Typical PT Paint S.SK. Service Sink PTN PTRY Partition Poetry STD STL Standard Steel UNF U.N.O. Unfinished Unless Noted Otherwise 50TH 54TH RAD R.D. Riser Radius Roof Drain STOR STRUCT SUSP SW Storage Structural Suspended Switch VERT VEST V.I.F. Vertical Vestibule Verily In Field REF Reference Symmetrical VOL Volume REFR REINF Refrigerator Reinforced, Reinforcing SYM SYS System W West O O REQ'D Required Tread W.H. Water Heater 1-62 RESIL Resilient T.B. Towel Bar W.C. Water Closet REV Revised / Reversed T&G Tongue & Groove WD Wood RM Room T.O.C. Top of Curb WP Waterproof R.O. Rough Opening T.O.D. Top of Drain WSCT Wainscot SYMBOLS LIST SCALE: T74.-T.---Cr MATERIALS LIST SCALE: nie BUILDING GRID LINES O O EXTERIOR ELEVATION NORTH SECTION CEILING HEIGHT OR EQUIPMENT NUMBER DETAIL GRID REFERENCE ELEVATION REFERENCE SECTION NO. SHEET NO. ROOM NAME ROOM NO. ELEVATION NO. (TYPICAL) SHEET NO. KEYNOTE NO. ROOM NO. REFERENCE NO. WINDOW TYPE WALL TYPE REFERENCE CEILING HEIGHT OR ITEM NUMBER CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT STONE 2X4 WOOD FRAMING 2X6 WOOD FRAMING CONCRETE (SECTION VIEW) 1,11. /11,1,411k. EARTH TURF WATER INSULATION GENERAL NOTES SCALE: DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS ALL WORK, MATERIAL, METHODS, ETC. SHALL CONFORM TO ALL GOVERNING BUILDING CODES, REGULATIONS AND AGENCIES THE CONTRACTOR AND SUB-CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH CONDITIONS PRIOR TO BID. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL ALL THE TEMPORARY SHORING AND BRACING TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE WORK UNTIL IT IS IN ITS COMPLETE FORM. IN THE EVENT OF DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN ANY DRAWINGS AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ARCHTIECT IMMEDIATELY. ALL DIMENSIONS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION ARE TO FACE OF STUD (F.OS.), U.N.O. ALL DIMENSIONS OF CASEWORK ARE TO FACE OF FINISH (F.O.F.) SCALE: nia 0 AB A/C A.C. ACT AD ADJ A.F.F. A.F.G. ALUM A.P. APPROX ARCH BD BITUM BLDG BLK BLKG BM BOT BED B.U.R. CAB CASE CLG CLO CLR C.M.U. CNTR COL CONC CONN CONT CORR C.T. CTR C.W. DBL DET D.F. DH DIA DIM DISP DN D.O. DS DWG DWR CONSULTANT LIST PROJECT INFORMATION SCALE: SHEET INDEX SCALE: ni° ARCHITECTURAL A0.0 PROJECT INFO, SHEET INDEX A0.2 DEMOLITION PLANS A1.0 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A2.1 BASEMENT PLAN & FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2.2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN & ROOF PLAN A3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A4.1 BUILDING SECTIONS CITY OF EDINA APR 12 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRO IFC:T• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scan terrace edlna, mn 55416 HARRIET LAKE PROJECT SITE REVISION • SHEET TITI F• COVER SHEET GENERAL NOTES SHEET INDEX SHFFT• a0.0 S II RmITTAI • VARIANCE REQUEST DATE 4/7/21 PROPERTY OWNER: JOSEPH & TISHA BACKER PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4236 SCOTT TERRACE EDINA, MN 55416 PROPERTY APN: 07-028-24-41-0055 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: REMODEL AND ADDITION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 OCCUPANCY: R-3, U CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE 5-B # STORIES: 2.5 STORIES 1 (BELOW GRADE) DEMOLITION NOTES DEMOLITION LEGEND wi EPARTMENT PRCHFC.T• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scoff terrace edina, mn 55416 HFFT TITI F DEMOLITION PLANS SI-IFFT• A0.2 SURIAITTAI • VARIANCE REQUEST DATF• 0 4/7/21 EXISTING FIREPLACE AND HEARTH TO REMAIN AS-IS. REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW DEMOLISH EXISTING KITCHEN COMPLETE: CABINETS, FIXTURES, APPLIANCES, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW DEMOLISH EXISTING 3-SEASON PORCH COMPLETE REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW, SLIDING GLASS DOOR AND WALL FRAMING REMOVE EXISTING STAIR AND WALL FRAMING r, EXISTING FLOORING TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FLOORING TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT IN PLACE 7 n__ _J L___J L--_J L___J I L _ L I I L „ I L _ J _ r -- I I L _ I I I —I I I :14 I IA NOT IN SCOPE L LI EXISTING FLOORING TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FLOORING TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT IN PLACE /, I I LC A i; t(----- REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW 4 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW 4- REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND WALL FRAMING THIS AREA REMOVE EXISTING CLOSET DOOR AND FRAMING REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW AND PORTION OF WALL FRAMING FOR NEW OPENING REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND TRIM, TYPICAL THIS FLOOR REMOVE EXISTING WALL FRAMING, DOORS, CLOSET FIXTURES THIS AREA DEMOLISH EXISTING BATHROOM COMPLETE. FLOORING, FIXTURES, CABINETS, ETC. DEMOLISH EXISTING DOOR AND CLOSET FRAMING REMOVE EXISTING FLOOR JOISTS THIS AREA FOR NEW STAIR REMOVE EXISTING WALL FRAMING, DOORS. CLOSET FIXTURES THIS AREA REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW AND PORTION OF WALL FRAMING FOR NEW DOOR OPENING REMOVE EXISTING ROOF COMPLETE SCALE: ye= r-cr FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAN (-Th „,4 SCALE: 1/4* = 1.-0 BASEMENT DEMOLITION PLAN " 1 01 0 U ni tx o < LL 03 —1—/ SFAI 2 2021 EXISTING BRICK VENEER TO REMAIN REMOVE EXISTING GARAGE DOOR AND MOTOR r REMOVE EXISTING FLOORING AND BASE AT HALLWAY, EXISTING CABINET TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACEj7- EXISTING FIREPLACE AND HEARTH TO REMAIN AS-IS — — I ---II ///////////////7 NOT IN SCOPE REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING WALL REMOVE EXISTING STAIR EXISTING WATER HEATER. REPLACE AS NEEDED REMOVE EXISTING BOILER. HVAC CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE SPACE FOR NEW FURNACE REMOVE EXISTING CABINET AND STORE ON-SITE FOR OWNERS REUSE REMOVE EXISTING WALL FRAMING AND DOOR AREA TO BE CLEARED FOR NEW STAIR. EXISTING MASONRY FOUNDATION WALL TO REMAIN F -71 I X I SCALE: n/a 1. DEMOLITION DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED FOR CONVENIENCE AND INFORMATION ONLY. CONTRACTOR IS TO COORDINATE EXTENT OF DEMOLION WITH ALL ALTERATION PLANS ANC ELEVATIONS. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT ALL SHORING, BRACING, TEMPORARY SUPPORT, AND BARRIERS AS REQUIRED BY CITY AND STATE REGULATIONS PRIOR TO DEMOLTION AND UNTIL COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AS REQUIRED BY PROJECT SCOPE. a CONTRACTOR IS TO REMOVE ALL DEMOLISHED MATERIALS FROM THE SITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE AGENCY CODES AND REGULATIONS. 4, CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING MECHANICAL, PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AND SHALL PROTECT THOSE SYSTEMS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE WORK. 5. REMOVE EXISTING BASEBOARDS AND DOOR TRIM AT FIRST FLOOR. 6. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PRICING OPTION, TO REMOVE AND REPLACE ALL INTERIOR DOORS AND JAMBS IN BASEMENT. CITY 01 APR 1 PLANNING C) SCALE: ix =1.-o- I I EXISTING ITEM TO REMAIN 1- EXISTING ITEM TO BE REMOVED EXISTING AREA NOT IN SCOPE. TO REMAIN AS-IS 0 -U 2,; o 0 C ON F- >0 — 0. e'0 nF • 0 0 w 0 OS C EXISTING GARAGE 48.47' LAWN FAI EXISTING GARAGE EXISTING DECK (761 SP) 1V-0* mom • NEW WOOD STEPS AND LANDING TO MATCH EXISTING DECK INA CITY OF E 021 APR 1 2 EXISTING FOOTPRINT (1,567 SF) PO 07-02844-41-0055 - i i PRO CT• PLANNING DEPA &VA SIS A I D D D EN ITI C O E N 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 g:. EXISTING HOME 7,-0° EXISTING HOME UP to SFT'-4 PORCH (120 SF) FVIsIoNS• SHEET TITI F ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN PORCH FRAMING SH F F T • al.0 SlIBMITTAI • VARIANCE REQUEST 1lATF• 4/7/21 CONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALL AND CONCRETE STEPS CO CRETE. DRIV WAY 1/2. ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN SCALE: I. = UP UP IF 0 I LAWN NOT IN SCOPE PLAN NOTES SCALE: N/A 1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS 2. ALL WORK, MATERIAL, METHODS, ETC. SHALL CONFORM TO ALL GOVERNING BUILDING CODES, REGULATIONS AND AGENCIES 3. CONTRACTOR/OWNER-BUILDER TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ALL DIMENSIONS AFTER DEMOLITION AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES OR UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION 4. ALL DIMENSIONS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION ARE TO FACE OF STRUCTURE (F.0.5.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 5. ALL DIMENSIONS OF CASEWORK ARE TO FACE OF FINISH (F.aF.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 6. ALL DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION ARE TO FACE OF FINISH (F.O.F.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 7. ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS DIMENSIONED TO CENTER OF CLEAR OPENING 8. NEW EXTERIOR WALLS TO BE PROVIDED WITH MINIMUM R-20 INSULATION 9. NEW FRAMING IN BASEMENT AT EXTERIOR WALLS TO BE PROVIDED WITH R-I3 BATT INSULATION 10. NEW INTERIOR WALLS AT BATHROOMS AND LAUNDRY ROOM TO BE PROVIDED WITH MINIMUM R-13 INSULATION II. NEW INTERIOR GYPSUM BOARD SHEATHING TO BE 1/7' SMOOTH WITH LEVEL 5 FINISH AND SQUARE CORNER BEAD. 12. CEILINGS TO BE PROVIDED WITH 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD SHEATHING. 13. WOOD FLOORING AT FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR TO MATCH EXISTING. ALL WOOD FLOORS TO BE REFINISHED PER ARCHITECTS SAMPLE. 14. BASEBOARD TO BE 5-1/2" X 1/2" MDF. 15. DOOR CASING TO BE 7' X 1/2" MDF. 16. INTERIOR DOORS TO BE FLUSH WOOD VENEER PER ARCHITECTS SAMPLE. 17. ALL WINDOW AND DOOR SIZES SHOWN ARE WxH AND MEASURED IN FEET-INCHES Q.E. 2668 ISA 7-6" x 6.-8" DOOR) 18. ATTIC TO BE PROVIDED WITH MIN R-49 INSULATION 19. NEW PAINT THROUGHOUT. KEYNOTES 0 SCALE: N/A 1. 36" HIGH WALL-MOUNTED HANDRAIL. 2. WOOD STAIR TREADS AND LANDING 3. SHELF AND POLE 4. BARN DOOR TRACK AND DOOR. PROVIDE BACKING. 5. NEW GARAGE DOOR AND MOTOR 6. LINE OF FLOOR ABOVE 7. TILE OR VINYL PLANK FLOORING 8. 20-MIN FIRE RATED SELF-CLOSING DOOR CITY OF EDINi APR 1 2 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALL LEGEND KEYNOTES 0 HVAC CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE LAYOUT OF MECHANICAL ROOM FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: I/4 = 1-0 CONTRACTOR TO RAISE CEILING HEIGHT TO 5,-1" ABOVE FINISH FLOOR ENGINEERING FOR ALL STEEL AND LUMBER SIZES, BEAMS, HEADERS, TRUSSES, POSTS, ETC TO BE PROVIDED ON-SITE BY CONTRACTOR BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = SCALE: 1/4' = 11-0* 1164MBLI 2X4 WOOD STUDS 8 16" O.C. =EC= 2X6 WOOD STUDS 0 16" O.C. =ow BRICK VENEER. MATCH EXISTING I I EXISTING ITEM _7:31 SOFFN I S H F FT• A2.1 SIIRMITTAI VARIANCE REQUEST TF• 4/7/21 r F >0 . aw NF 4.0 • • o .0 < •• • 3 03 12. 34' HIGH 2X4 PONY WALL BELOW 13. LOW CABINET 14. LINE OF WALL BELOW SCALE: N/A 1. 36" HIGH HANDRAIL 2. FLOATING WOOD TREADS AND LANDING 3. SHELF AND POLE 4. LINE OF FLOOR/ROOF ABOVE 5. 3" DIAMETER STEEL POST, TYPICAL OF (4) DINING 9'-1" 1/3.2 V-0" 6'-6" 2'-10" ESINK/WDW ALI OVEN REF NOT IN SCOPE PDR. T _ COAT 7-11" tSINK 0 6' -I I" 1 4 V -4 UP 14 STAIR -I- T 9'-1" 7.-0- 9. DOUBLE CORNER FRAMELESS GAS FIREPLACE UNIT. MFR: FLARE MODEL: FLARE-DC-45-H 10. LINE OF UPPER CABINET AND/OR FLOATING SHELF I I. WOOD CAP AT TOP OF THICKENED BASEMENT WALL 6. 2X4 WOOD SLATS 7. EXISTING FIREPLACE AND HEARTH TO REMAIN AS-IS. CONTRACTOR TO MATCH BRICK VENEER WHERE CEILING IS RAISED. PROVIDE MASONRY FLUE ADAPTER AND TYPE 'A' METAL FLUE THROUGH ROOF. 8. TV NICHE S 2-2 FLOOR TRUSS DIRECTION LIVING V-1" 1/3.1 FAMILY 9'-1" FLOOR TRUSS DIRECTION INFILL EXISTING WINDOW OPENING INFILL EXISTING WINDOW OPENING -.4411111111.... I/3.1 SF AI • PRO IFCT• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scott terrace edIna, mn 55416 REVISIONS_: S HFFT TITI F• BASEMENT PLAN 1/3.2 1".111111/ HALL ENGINEERING FOR ALL STEEL AND LUMBER SIZES, BEAMS, HEADERS, TRUSSES, POSTS, ETC TO BE PROVIDED ON-SITE BY CONTRACTOR / WH CH, 0 SFAI • CRICKET, TYPICAL LOW-SLOPE ROOF WITH SINGLE-PLY ROOFING MEMBRANE V.I.F. 1W-I 1/2* 4,-3' tr-8" 1/3.2 '-'111111111118.- 0 LilL I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I t34 - - '-I1 2'-5' SINK SINK e-6* 0.4 D 1 I J _L CO +17 2-8" LOFT 9.-1" 3V-2 1/2' 5'-1 1/3.2 LINE OF WALL BELOW \-• PARAPET WALL WITH SHEET METAL PARAPET CAP C SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT, TYPICAL LDRY in M. BED 9'-1" RD1 )OF 1CTT(if > 1.4 IIIIIIIIIII ESIII 111111111 SINK 0" 4.-8" 12'-3 /2 C-I0" N r-6. 2868 CPT ID OPEN TO BELOW E.- BED 2 W I" 2869 H CO EQUAL EQUAL L 2868 1 111111111 11 • 1/3.1 LOW ROOF WITH SINGLE-PLY ROOFING MEMBRANE 1/3.1 CO CITY OF EDINA V.I.F. V.I.F. 2868 < R°,`,'EFcTg,S, > ATH 2L 7c, U 9'-1 DN 3' -10' 7'-10" 10 -0' V-te 1.-7 3/4/-2 3/4', 20.-2 1/2 APR 1 2 2021 PLAN NOTES SCALE: N/A I. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS 2. ALL WORK, MATERIAL METHODS, ETC. SHALL CONFORM TO ALL GOVERNING BUILDING CODES, REGULATIONS AND AGENCIES 3. CONTRACTOR/OWNER-BUILDER TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ALL DIMENSIONS AFTER DEMOLITION AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES OR UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION 4, ALL DIMENSIONS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION ARE TO FACE OF STRUCTURE IF.O.S.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE -0 5. ALL DIMENSIONS OF CASEWORK ARE TO FACE OF FINISH (F.O.F.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 6. ALL DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION ARE TO FACE OF FINISH (W.F.) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 7. ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS DIMENSIONED TO CENTER OF CLEAR OPENING 8. NEW EXTERIOR WALLS TO BE PROVIDED WITH MINIMUM R-20 INSULATION 9. NEW FRAMING IN BASEMENT AT EXTERIOR WALLS TO BE PROVIDED WITH R-13 BATT INSULATION 10. NEW INTERIOR WALLS AT BATHROOMS AND LAUNDRY ROOM 70 BE PROVIDED WITH MINIMUM R-13 INSULATION 11. NEW INTERIOR GYPSUM BOARD SHEATHING TO BE 1/2" SMOOTH WITH LEVEL 5 FINISH AND SQUARE CORNER BEAD. 12. CEILINGS TO BE PROVIDED WITH 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD SHEATHING. 13. WOOD FLOORING AT FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR TO MATCH EXISTING. ALL WOOD FLOORS TO BE REFINISHED PER ARCHITECTS SAMPLE. 14. BASEBOARD TO BE 5-1/2" X 1/2' MDF. 15. DOOR CASING TO BE TX 1/2" MDF. 16. INTERIOR DOORS TO BE FLUSH WOOD VENEER PER ARCHITECTS SAMPLE. 17. ALL WINDOW AND DOOR SIZES SHOWN ARE WxH AND MEASURED IN FEET-INCHES (I.E. 2668 ISA 2-6" x 6.-8" DOOR) 18. ATTIC TO BE PROVIDED WITH MIN R-49 INSULATION 19. NEW PAINT THROUGHOUT. KEYNOTES 1:1 SCALE: N/A I. 36" HIGH HANDRAIL 2. FLOATING WOOD TREADS AND LANDING 3. SHELF AND POLE 4. LINE OF FLOOR/ROOF BELOW 5. 36" HIGH PONY WALL WITH WOOD CAP 6. WINDOW SEAT WITH WOOD SURROUND. CENTER ABOVE FIRST FLOOR WINDOW BELOW. 7. OPEN SHELVES 8. 6S' FREESTANDING TUB AND FILLER 9. SHOWER CURB 10. FRAMELESS GLASS SHOWER ENCLOSURE 11. SOAP NICHE 12. METAL FLASHING 13. STEEL WINDOW SURROUND 14. LOW ROOF 15. CUSTOM CLOSET CABINETRY BY OWNER PRO 1FCT• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scoff terrace edlna, mn 55416 12FV1SIONS• SHFFT TITI F• SECOND FLOOR PLAN SHFFI WALL LEGEND SCALE: 1/4' = l'-0" 2X4 WOOD STUDS W 16" O.C. ROOF PLAN PLAN SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" ENGINEERING FOR ALL STEEL AND LUMBER SIZES, BEAMS, HEADERS, TRUSSES, POSTS, ETC TO BE PROVIDED ON-SITE BY CONTRACTOR 0:=B 2X6 WOOD STUDS @ 16" 0.C. :JLANNING DEPARTMC4g. EXISTING BRICK VENEER. MATCH I I EXISTING ITEM i z ] SOFFIT A2.2 SIIRMITTAI • VARIANCE REQUEST DATF• 4/7/21 VAI A KEYNOTES CI SCALE: N/A 1. FIREPLACE FLUE 2. PARAPET CAP FLASHING 3. VERTICAL WOOD SIDING 4. STEEL WINDOW SURROUND 5. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING 6. BRICK VENEER. MATCH EXISTING WHERE NEW. 7. 36" HIGH RAILING WITH WOOD CAP AND 1/T DIAMETER HORIZONTAL RAILS. 8. 3" DIAMETER STEEL POST, TYPICAL OF (4) 9. EXISTING STUCCO FINISH. REPAIR AS NEEDED. 10. LINE OF BASEMENT BELOW GRADE II. EXISTING WINDOW 12. DOWNSPOUT 13. LIGHT FIXTURE 14. IX4 WOOD WINDOW TRIM, TYPICAL AT BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING 15. 8x6x16 HONED CMU BLOCK E ELEV: 8'4" V F.F.E. (1st) A ELEV:0'-0" F.F.E. (BASEMENT) EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: ve =1.-o- Co o A ELEV: 32.-Cf TOP OF PARAPET t Err• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 RFVISIONS' I.:;1.1 • EDINA APh 1 2 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT S HFFT TITI F• EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHFFT FRONT STEPS OMITTED FOR CLARITY A3.1 SURAAITTAI VARIANCE REQUEST nATF • 3 4/7/21 EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: ve = r-o- 4,i ( L )rr Ey gr - 2 1/2" L._ ,11--17=' OPEN TO BEYOND T r /\ A ELEV: V F.F.E. ( I st) r r,`„._, • El u r- (sr z 9 _r j rQim J 1:1 L =1 AVERAGE FRONT YARD GRADE ELEV:0'-e. F.F.E. (BASEMENT) A ELEV: 19'-41/7' F.F.E. (2nd) ELEV: 17'-8" V 8.0. TRUSS TOP IDEV:03F2'. PARAPET A ELEV: 28'.5 1/2" V TOP PLATE \ ELEV: 19'-41/T F.F.E. (2nd) A ELEV: 17'-8" 1. 8.0. TRUSS SFAL• LINE OF EXISTING TOP PLATE z ELEV: 37-0' TOP OF PARAPET L ELEV:28L5 1/2" TOP PLATE z A ELEV: 19'-4 1/2" F.F.E. (2nd) \ A ELEV: 17-13" 1. B.O. TRUSS LINE OF EXISTING TOP PLATE CO ELEV:ty-r F.F.E. (1st) A C SFAI KEYNOTES El SCALE: N/A 1. FIREPLACE FLUE 2. PARAPET CAP FLASHING 3. VERTICAL WOOD SIDING 4. STEEL WINDOW SURROUND 5. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING 6. BRICK VENEER. MATCH EXISTING WHERE NEW. 7. 36^ HIGH RAILING WITH WOOD CAP AND 1/T DIAMETER HORIZONTAL RAILS. 8. 3' DIAMETER STEEL POST, TYPICAL OF (4) 9. EXISTING STUCCO FINISH. REPAIR AS NEEDED. 10. LINE OF BASEMENT BELOW GRADE 11. EXISTING WINDOW 12. DOWNSPOUT 13. LIGHT FIXTURE 14. IX4 WOOD WINDOW TRIM, TYPICAL AT BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING 15. 8x6x16 HONED CMU BLOCK ELEV:G-O' F.F.E. (BASEMENT) EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4 1-0 OO Ell 714/03FWRAPET PRO IFCT• 14 BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 ELEV: 28'-51/7' TOP PLATE 111111111 /\ ELEV: 19'-4 1/2' F.F.E. (2nd) /\ ELEV: 17.-8" B.O. TRUSS LINE OF EXISTING TOP PLATE RF VISIONS ELEV:8*-7" V F.P.E. (1st) - -I I I I I I I OH OF EDINA APR 1 2 2021 SHFFT TITI F• EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A ELEV: ty-a. F.F.E. (BASEMENT) PLANNING DEPARTMENT SliFFT EXISTING DECK OMITTED FOR CLARITY A3.2 SUIIMITTAI EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4 1-0 VARIANCE REQUEST nATF• 4/7/21 0 A ELEV; 32,0" ' TOP OF PARAPET ELEV: 28,5 1/T TOP PLATE A ELEV: 19,4 1/T F.F.E. (2nd) A EL EV: 17,8' B.O. TRUSS r t ; ELEV: (Y-Cf .1" F.F.E. (BASEMENT) BUILDING SECTION GARAGE BASEMENT BED 2 WIC 6666o666& M.BATH BED 3 BATH 2 1 1161 1111 666666666 4114 66 46 664 1161°6644 466 114 644 LIVING L 17 DINING KITCHEN Min i HE ME I ME MEM - -CI 11 II II 0 II II 11 IIf IT 11 II II II 0 11 II II It I_ 0 6 E PDR SI El 9 6 ili6414461616' 4t4t416t444*6 WM4496‘6141641176 941446111111 6666666666666666666666666 6666 4 6 " OFFICE ELEV: 32,C1' TOP OF PARAPET n A ELEV: 0,0" F.F.E. (BASEMENT) HALL 6 I1 o 6 BASEMENT A ELEV: 28,5 1/2" TOP PLATE A ELEV: 19,4 1/2" F.F.E. (2nd) A_ELEV: 17'-8" 8.0. TRUSS A ELEV: F.F.E. (151) LOFT IE BED 3 j, J 6 DINING SCALE: 1/4 = 1-0 BUILDING SECTION SCALE: 1/4 6 1'-0 PLAN /Th SCALE: N/A 1. SINGLE-PLY ROOFING MEMBRANE OVER PLYWOOD SHEATHING 2. R-49 INSULATION WITH 4 MILLIMETER MOISTURE MEMBRANE AT CEILING 3. ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSS. SIZE AND SPACING PER TRUSS MANUFACTURER 4. 2x6 WOOD STUDS 0 16" O.C. WITH 9/16" OSB SHEATHING TYPICAL AT EXTERIOR WALLS. PROVIDE BUILDING WRAP AND EXTERIOR FINISH PER ELEVATIONS 5. 5/8' DRYWALL AT CEILINGS 6. 1/2' DRYWALL AT INTERIOR WALLS, TYPICAL 7. R-20 INSULATION WITH 4 MILLIMETER MOISTURE BARRIER APPLIED TO INTERIOR SIDE OF WALL 8. ENGINEERED FLOOR TRUSS. PROVIDE HEEL AT BOTTOM TO EXTEND CEILING HEIGHT AS SHOWN. SIZE AND SPACING PER TRUSS MANUFACTURER. 9. FLOOR SHEATHING 10. EXISTING FLOOR JOIST 11. EXISTING CONCRETE BLOCK FOUNDATION WALL 12. EXISTING WALL FRAMING WITH 8'-o" TOP PLATE. 13. WINDOW/DOOR ASSEMBLY 14. R20 SPRAY FOAM INSULATION AT RIM JOIST 15. HEADER PER CODE 16. TONGUE AND GROOVE WOOD PLANK SOFFIT 17. EXISTING MASONRY CHIMNEY 18. TYPE A FLUE VENT 19. STEEL WINDOW SURROUND 20. WINDOW SEAT 21. ARCHITECTURAL POP-OUT FRAMING 22. CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 23. LINE OF EXISTING TOP PLATE 24. LINE OF EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL ;ITY OF EDINA APR 1 2 2021 \JING DEPARTMENT GENERAL NOTES SCALE: N/A 1. CONSTRUCTION MUST COMPLY WITH FIGURES R602,3(1) AND R602.3(2( AND FASTENED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TABLE R602.3(1) THROUGH R602.3(4) 2. SHEATH ENTIRE EXTERIOR SIDE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH OSB PER R602.10.4.2 FOR CONTINUOUS STRUCTURAL PANEL SHEATHING 3. CONSTRUCTION MUST COMPLY WITH FIGURE R602.10.7 FOR END CONDITIONS FOR BRACED WALL LINES W/ CONTINUOUS STRUCTURAL PANEL SHEATHING 4. FLOOR SHEATHING TO BE PLACED IN STAGGERED PATTERN NAILED W/ 8d NAILS (2-1/T x 0.131 0) @ 6" O.C. AT PANEL EDGES E. 0 1 2' O.C. AT INTERIOR 5. SILL PLATES TO BE ANCHORED WITH ANCHORS 0 6' O.C. MAX AND A MINIMUM OF TWO ANCHORS PER SILL SECTION. ALL SECTIONS ARE TO HAVE AN ANCHOR WITHIN 4" TO 12' OF EACH END. AN ANCHOR IS TO BE PLACED AT ALL WALL CORNERS AND INTERSECTIONS ON WALLS MORE THAN TWO FEET IN LENGTH KEYNOTES 0 SFAI • PRO IFC-T• BACKER RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION 4236 scott terrace edina, mn 55416 RFVISMNS• SHFFT TITI E• BUILDING SECTION SHEFT• A4.1 SURMITTA1 • VARIANCE REQUEST nATF• 4/7/21 I NO 0 N U ei • 0 . r " 00 '••• < ts. X 0 X GRADING & EROSION CONTROL NOTES: BEFORE DEMOLITION AND GRADING BEGIN • Install silt fence/bio roll around the perimeter of the construction area. • Sediment control measures must remain in place until final stabilization has been established and then shall be removed. Sediment controls may be removed to accommodate short term construction activity but must be replaced before the next rain. • A temporary rock construction entrance shall be established at each access point to the site and a 6 inch layer of I to 2 inch rock extending al least 50 feet from the street into the site and shall be underlain with permeable geotextile fabric. The entrance shall be maintained during construction by top dressing or washing to prevent trucking or flow of sediments onto public streets, walks or alleys. Potential entrances that are not so protected shall be closed by fencing to prevent unprotected exit from the site. • Contractor shall install inlet protection on all existing storm sewer inlets in accordance with the city standard details. Inlet protection shall also be provided on all proposed slums sewer inlets immediately following construction of the inlet. Inlet protection must be installed in a manner that will not impound water for extended periods of time or in a manner that presents a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. DURING CONSTRUCTION: • When dirt stockpiles have been created, a double row of silt fence shall be placed to prevent escape of sediment laden runolTand if the piles or other disturbed areas arc to remain in place for more than 14 days. they shall be seeded with Minnesota Department of Transportation Seed Mixture 22-11 I at 100 Ib/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. • A clumsier shall be placed on the site for prompt disposal of construction debris. These dumpsters shall be serviced regularly to prevent overflowing and blowing onto adjacent properties. Disposal of solid wastes from the site shall in accordance wills Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. • A separate container shall be placed for disposal of hazardous waste. Hazardous wastes shall be disposed of in accordance with MPCA requirements. • Concrete truck washout shall be in the plastic lined ditch and dispose of washings us solid waste. • Sediment control devices shall be regularly inspected and after major rainfall events and shall be cleaned and repaired as necessary to provide downstream protection. • Streets and other public ways shall be inspected daily and Whiter or soils has been deposited it shall promptly be removed. • If necessary, vehicles, that have mud on their wheels, shall be cleaned before exiting the site in the nick entrance areas • Moisture shall be applied to disturbed areas to control dust as needed. • Portable toilet facilities shall be placed on site for me by workers arid shall be properly maintained. • Hit becomes necessary to pump the excavation during construction, pump discharge shall be into the stockpile areas so that the double silt fence around these areas can filler the water before it leaves the site. 44.8 - - INSTALL SILT FENCE/810 ROLL • • r--PROPOSED WALK/STEPS • rn E - k 909,61 to X )10.9 EXISTING GARAGE 5 911 x • • Temporary erosion control shall be installed no later than 14 days ager the site is first disturbed and shall consist of broadcast seeding with Minnesota Department of Transportation Sccd Mixture 22-11 l at 100 lb/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. • Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan are the absolute minimum. The contractor shall install temporary earth dikes, sediment imps or basins and additional silt fencing as deemed necessary to control erosion. SITE WORK COMPLETION: • When final grading has been completed but before placement of seed or soil an "as built" survey shall be done per City of Edina requirements to insure that grading was properly done. • When any remedial grading has been completed, sod or seeding shall be completed including any erosion control blankets for sleep areas. • When turf is established, silt fence and inlet protection and other erosion control devices shall be disposed of and adjacent streets, alleys and walks shall be cleaned as needed to deliver a site that is erosion resistant and clean. • Contractor shall maintain positive drainage of a minimum 2% slope away from proposed building. No --t--T-x 912.6 ;sr EXISTING HARDCOVER EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE HOUSE 1,567 SO. FT. HOUSE 1,587 SO. FT. DECK 761 SO. FT. DECK 761 SO. FT. DRIVEWAY 736 SO. FT. FRONT STOOP 59 SO. FT. REAR STOOP 20 SO. FT. DECK CREDIT -150 SO. FT. FRONT STOOP/WALK 137 SO. FT. SIDE WALK 119 SO. FT. TOTAL EXISTING BUILDING 2,237 SO. FT. STONE WALLS 80 SO. FT. AREA OF LOT 9,798 SO. FT. TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 2,659 SO. FT. LOT COVERAGE 22.8% AREA OF LOT 9,798 SO. FT. LOT COVERAGE 27.1% (DECK NOT INCLUDED, PERVIOUS AREA BELOW) PROPOSED HARDCOVER PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE FT. HOUSE 1,567 50. DECK 761 SO. FT. HOUSE 1,567 SO. FT. DRIVEWAY 740 SO. FT. DECK 761 SO. FT. FRONT PORCH 122 SO. FT. FRONT PORCH 122 SO. FT. REAR STOOP 20 SO. FT. DECK CREDIT -150 SO. FT. FRONT WALK/STEPS 184 SO. FT. SIDE WALK 119 SO. FT. TOTAL PROPOSED BUILDING 2,300 SO. FT. RETAINING WALLS 51 SO. FT. AREA OF LOT 9,798 SO. FT. TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER 3,564 SO. FT. LOT COVERAGE 23.5'. AREA OF LOT 9,798 SO. FT. LOT COVERAGE 36.4% (DECK NOT INCLUDED, PERVIOUS AREA BELOW) LEGEND EXIST/NO CONTOUR EN/STING SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED CONTOUI? PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE ARCO, - FLOP' SILT FENCE/BM ROLL TREE REMOVAL PROTECT EXISTINC TREE /INSTALL ORANGE CONST FENCE AROUND TREE 212 PROTECT/ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The South 49 feet of Lot 36, Morningside, Hennepin County, Minnesota. SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: I. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. The scope of our services docs not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown. 2. Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey. 3. Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of the property. 4. Existing building dimensions and setbacks measured to outside of siding or stucco. 5. Showing and tabulating impervious surface coverage of the lot for your review and for the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over these requirements to verify they are correctly shown before proceeding with construction. 6. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topography of the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations for construction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey when determining other elevations for toe on this site or before beginning construction. 7. This survey has been completed without the benefit of a current title commitment. There may be existing easements or other encumbrances that would be revealed by a current title commitment. Therefore, this survey does not purport to show any easements or encumbrances other than the ones shown hereon. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: "•" Denotes iron survey marker,found, sinless otherwise noted. N 89 °25'29" E 199.85 x xgr..3.1 Sr EXISTING DWELLING X 910.5 .910 - SF - rn x 411-119 1x 90, 200.15 :4> .910 -90 6." EXISTING GARAGE X 912.5 X iie.2 2.2 912. X 913.2 N, EXISTING DECK N 89°43'29" (E *910.0 x X 913.7 IS.) 2' 2ND FLOOR OVERHANG EXISTING /DWELLING 5.9/ (PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR ADDITION / & INTERNAL REMODEL)/ FIRST F,L0pR/ GAFA9E FLOOR ELEV.=916.9 / / / / / / AELEV.= 908.0 1.1'-1ST /FLOOR OVERHANG 5'4.0 qiiNG to 913 X 91 ' x 909.3 EXISTING DWELLING /909 x 908.8 N x 908.7 t`--INSTALL SILT FENCE/810 ROLL 40.5 • . 2.8X • • OS 1O aP • 9, • j_ • 914.0tw • 908.0bw IU, PLANTER CITY OF EDINA APR 12 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMFNT \ I ! • EXIS7ING CURB - - - CUT TO REMAIN H fr V r - INSTALL SILT FENCE/810 ROLL 906.1 O ,-., 0 1\3 '-In DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE CLIENT/JOB ADDRESS Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPEOFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I MI A DULY UCENSED PROFESSION CHEER UNDER THE LAWS CF NE STAR OF MILAN DATE SURVEYED: MARCH 29, 2021 SHEET TITLE SHEET SIZE: 22 X 34 JOE BACKER SURVEYED BY PROPOSED SURVEY & TREE PROTECTION PLAN SHEET NO. ADVANCE SURVEYING. & ENG., CO. 4236 SCOTT TERRACE DRAWING NUMBER S1 17917 Highway No. 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952) 474-7964 Web: vuvw.advsur.com 210596 JR 1 INCH = 10 FEET 20' EDINA, MN DATE DRAFTED: APRIL 9, 2021 SHEEt 1 OF 1 0 10' • • UCENSE NO. APRIL 9, 2021 • MI IN DATE DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION AREA OF LOT 9,798 SQ. FT. LOT COVERAGE 34.9% LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The South 49 feet of Lot 36, Morningside, Hennepin County, Minnesota. EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE EXISTING HARDCOVER EXISTING DWELLING SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: 1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. The scope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown. 2. Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey. 3. Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of the property. 4. Existing building dimensions and setbacks measured to outside of siding or stucco. 5. Showing and tabulating impervious surface coverage of the lot for your review and for the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over these requirements to verify they are correctly shown before proceeding with - construction. 6. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give , I some indication of the topography of the site. We have also P4,13 provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations 0 for construction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the vi 4(8 survey when determining other elevations for use on this site b or before beginning construction. m 7. This survey has been completed without the benefit of a current title commitment. There may be existing easements or other encumbrances that would be revealed by a current title commitment. Therefore, this survey does not purport to - show any easements or encumbrances other than the ones 909.2x shown hereon. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: " • " Denotes iron survey marker,found, unless otherwise noted. 44.8 X 912.6 911.5 I4. X 913.1 913.4 X 913.7 DECK 910.9 x 912.2 907.5 9103 90'3'6 912.2 X 908.7 g0B- X 907.8 9,8 X 908.8 A ) 199.85 913.6 x91.4 ' 9p FIRST FLOOR ELEV.=916.9 EXISTING GARAGE 909.4J N J912.5 x EXISTING GARAGE N 89'25'29" E / 200.15 / 911.1 910 - N 89'43'29" (E * 910,0 912.6 x ( -913_ 912,5 9/ 540 /, GARAGE F_00R/2 ELEV.=908.0/ _s DRIVEWAY cl 1 BITUMINOUS EXISTING DWELLING CITY OF EDINA APR 1 2 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 40.5 HOUSE DECK DRIVEWAY REAR STOOP FRONT STOOP/WALK SIDE WALK STONE WALLS 1,567 SQ. FT. 761 SQ. FT. 736 SQ. FT. 20 SQ. FT. 137 SQ. FT. 119 SQ. FT. 80 SQ. FT. HOUSE DECK FRONT STOOP DECK CREDIT TOTAL EXISTING BUILDING AREA OF LOT LOT COVERAGE 1,567 SQ. FT. 761 SQ. FT. 59 SQ. FT. -150 SQ. FT. 2,237 SQ. FT. 9,798 SQ. FT. 22.8% TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 3,420 SQ. FT. S Wayne W. Prete7 #43503 LICENSE NO. APRIL 2, 2021 DATE DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE 0 10' 20' JOE BACKER 4236 SCOTT TERRACE EDINA, MN Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. 17917 Highway No. 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952) 474-7964 Web: www.advsur.com I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SURVEY OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM DULY REGISTERED SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE E TA. DATE SURVEYED: MARCH 29, 2021 DATE DRAFTED: MARCH 31, 2021 SHEET TITLE EXISTING SURVEY SHEET SIZE: 11 X 17 DRAWING NUMBER 210308 WP SHEET NO. S1 SHEET 1 OF 1 CLIENT/JOB ADDRESS 04.05,21 City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50 t h Street Edina, MN 55424 re: Variance Application 4236 Scott Terrace, Edina MN 55416 To whom it may concern, c,1"f' OF AP[t 1 1021 Like so many others in our neighborhood, we intend to remove the roof of our one-story home, located at 4236 Scott Terrace, and add a second floor to meet the demands of our growing family. We have lived here since 2015 and intend to live here for a long time. It is most desirable, economically feasible and architecturally appropriate to stack the new second floor directly above the first floor and existing foundations, However, it has come to our attention that when the existing home was built in 1963, it was built closer to the property line on the south side than what meets today's standards. We would like to formally request your approval to allow the second floor to match the existing setback along the south property line. Our lot is 49'-0" wide. According to Edina Zoning Ordinance Sec. 36-438, lots under 50' in width require 5' on each side. Per the attached survey, the existing home measures 4.3'-4.4" front to back from the south side property line, It also measures an abundant 14.6' along the north side for a total side setback of 20'-0". This is far greater than the total requirement of 10'-0". Our compact footprint offers an unusually large amount of open space between homes. I don't fully understand why, when this home was built, it was built as close as it is to the south property line, but it is what we've inherited. It is only a mere 7"- 8" from compliance. Keeping the floors aligned is the most architecturally suitable solution and will have no negative impact on the overall character of the neighborhood and relieve practical difficulties in creating an offset of 8" between floors. To step the entire second floor back 8" would not only create a challenge structurally as there is no bearing condition inside the home at that location, we believe it would result in an odd building design, Rather than creating a uniform two-story home that looks like it was always as intended, the new second floor would be appear as a separate addition rather than a harmonious architectural design solution. In addition, the 8" ledge created by the offset second floor would result in a tricky detailing condition that invites rain, ice or snow to build up on the ledge and eventually find its way into the building envelope. Please consider this extraordinary circumstance. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Kind regards, Joseph and Tisha Backer Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.D. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:C ary Teague, C o mmunity Development Directo r Item Activity: Subject:P reliminary R ezo ning & P reliminary Development P lan for S o lhem C o mp anies at 4660 77th S treet Wes t. Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : R ecommend the C ity C ouncil approve the project subject to the findings and conditions outlined in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he P lanning C ommission is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to redevelop 4660 77th Street West, which is part of the P entagon P ark office development. T he applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment. (See attached plans.) AT TAC HME N T S : Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Staff Report Applicant Narrative Propos ed Plans Sketch Plans Site Location, Zoning, & Comp Plan Building Height Overlay Dis trict Sus tainability Ques tionnaire AFO, Architectural Field Office Review - at s ketch plan (Mic Johns on) Draft PUD Ordinance Memo - Engineering Memo - Affordable Hous ing Manager Denied 2017 Plan Res olution denying the 2017 Plan Traffic and parking s tudy Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 20 May 2021 Public Hearing Comments-Pentagon North Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD, Planned Unit Development, at 4660 W 77th Street, Pentagon North VISITORS 12 CONTRIBUTORS 8 RESPONSES 11 0 Registered 0 Unverified 8 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 11 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 17, 2021 13:43:47 pm Last Seen:May 17, 2021 13:43:47 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jon Hebeisen Q2.Address 4700 West 77th Q3.Comment What is the anticipated completion/tenant occupation date? Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 18, 2021 14:49:31 pm Last Seen:May 18, 2021 14:49:31 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Colleen Bertino Q2.Address 4555 West 77th Street Q3.Comment Are there any plans for a traffic signal at the Seagate entrance? Without traffic controls it will be impossible to make a left turn from any driveway on 77th between the apt building and 76th/Parkway light to the east Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 08:33:55 am Last Seen:May 19, 2021 08:33:55 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Hellerman Q2.Address 7453 West Shore Drive, Edina, 55435 Q3.Comment We (my spouse Diana Hellerman and I) strongly support affordable housing on this site, and elsewhere in Edina where feasible. Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 11:48:52 am Last Seen:May 19, 2021 11:48:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Derek Johnson Q2.Address 7421 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I fully support the pursuit of affordable housing and am supportive in general of having an apartment building in this existing locaiton. Similar to other developments either proposed or in process near neighborhoods, I would like to see us commit to existing height and size restrictions, just as I have seen done in other Edina neighborhoods that have wrestled with this. My neighborhood should not be treated any differently because of our location or lower property values. As a result, the commission should work with the developers to either use other lot space to hit a larger number of units with fewer floors or move forward with a smaller unit count footprint. It would still accomplish our goals of having more housing, while also taking into account the surrounding areas. My only other ask is if something smaller does move forward, we use this opportunity to enhance the Fred Richards park a bit more, which was the City's promise to our neighboord many years ago when the decision was made to close the golf course despite our objections. In drawings I have seen on what an improved Fred Richards park coud look like, there was elements to help existing homeowners like myself that face the park to add more visual barriers like trees or tall bushes. This should be in scope if an apartment complex moves forward just to help create that natural visual barrier to what will likely be a large concrete building out our backyards. Thanks for your consideration. Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 13:35:57 pm Last Seen:May 19, 2021 13:35:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Thomas C Koon Q2.Address 4410 Grimes Avenue , Edina, MN Q3.Comment I support the development. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Edina Housing Task Force Report. It is a better use of the land then the current office space. It is near transportation and basic services therefore requiring less dependence on cars. Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 16:50:57 pm Last Seen:May 19, 2021 16:50:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 W Shore Dr Q3.Comment I am writing to kindly express my objection to the 4660 W. 77th St. rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD. My hesitation is not of mere aesthetics nor stems from a “not in my backyard” mindset, rather of a fact-based look into what higher concentrations of affordable housing can do to the existing, surrounding neighborhoods and its residents. Housing units do not exist in a vacuum; they affect the neighborhoods they are located in. The preponderance of my following argument comes from the discussion paper “The Impact of Affordable Housing on Communities and Households” released by the Minnesota Housing Financial Agency written by Spencer Agnew. When referencing the Edina zoning map and the identified affordable housing locations on the Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) website, there already exists a disproportionately high amount of affordable housing locations in the Cornelia Elementary area. The rezoning proposition of 4660 W. 77th St. is within this boundary. There are more existing and zoned affordable housing areas in this one Elementary school area than the sum of all other Elementary school areas combined in Edina. Housing has the potential to significantly influence education outcomes for residents and communities. High residential mobility (frequency of moves) is associated with significant deficits in educational achievement. Residential mobility is a particularly important factor because it impacts education outcomes for both mobile and non-mobile students; research finds that teachers in schools with highly mobile student populations tend to focus less on new material and more on review, which results in achievement deficits for mobile and non-mobile students alike. High residential mobility is associated with poorer scores on reading and math tests, higher rates of grade repetition, and higher high school dropout rates. Schools with higher rates of student mobility tend to slow the pace of curriculum and focus more on review-oriented lessons. This adversely impacts academic achievement of stable students compared with stable students in schools with lower student turnover. Cornelia Elementary School underperforms in both reading and math scores compared to other Edina elementary schools. Research indicates that increasing the already disproportionate number of high mobility students in this area will not result in those scores improving. In time, this may bring down the collective Edina Public School district academic ratings in terms of State rankings possibly impacting Edina’s ability to continue to be an attractive option for young middle and upper-middle class families to move and raise families. High concentrations of affordable housing can have a negative impact on crime rates, while smaller scale and dispersed projects do not. The most recent research on this topic has typically found that scale is the most important factor in determining the effect of affordable housing on neighborhood crime. Several studies have found that when affordable units occur in small quantities (less than 50 units), there is typically no impact on neighborhood crime. The project currently up for consideration for rezoning would yield 408 additional units. Large projects or a large concentration of affordable units within an area may have the effect of increasing crime. This finding is a common theme across multiple types of affordable housing, including nonprofit rental, supportive housing, and public housing. The city of Edina’s “crime report and map” indicates that this area (Cornelia Elementary) has an elevated incidence of crime compared to other Edina areas. Research suggests that adding another larger-scale affordable housing project to the area will not improve this statistic. Research indicates that affordable housing areas should be smaller in scope and better dispersed than the current Edina model of consolidating them in the Cornelia Elementary school area. Adding yet another affordable housing project to the Cornelia Elementary area of Edina (an area already hosting a disproportionate amount of affordable housing) will not improve the aforementioned issues. I respectfully recommend that other areas of Edina be considered – areas of Edina not already so disproportionately hosting affordable housing initiatives. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 09:25:42 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 09:25:42 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name George Tortorelis Q2.Address 7441 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment Stop trying to ruin a historic neighborhood with a cringe project. Propping up a massive development in a quiet area is a horrible idea and would bring noise and crime to a safe area. There is no support for this in the lake Edina neighborhood and this plan is viewed as a betreyal among the local community. Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 11:50:54 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 11:50:54 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment Currently in this Cornelia Elementary school area, there is already a disproportionate number of affordable housing locations. In referencing identified affordable housing on the Edina zoning map and on the NOAH website, there exists a disproportionate amount of affordable housing locations in the Cornelia Elementary school area. The rezoning of 4660 W 77th Street is in the boundaries of this existing elementary school area. I am not necessarily against increasing the amount of affordable housing within the city of Edina, but I am against consolidating it all in a single location. If one were to look at the Edina zoning map, its fairly evident that the lower right quadrant of Edina has a disproportionate amount of affordable housing already there. We suggest dispersing affordable housing that would result in minimal to no impact on crime or the public education system. Research does indicate that consolidating them into a single area will impact negatively both the crime rate and the education of those areas. I recently submitted online a more expansive and research-based explanation in terms of my brief comments this evening. Thanks for your time. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 6:56 PM) Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 12:42:39 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 12:42:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Geoff London Q2.Address 7424 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I am completely opposed to this proposal. I vote “no” big time because we don’t need more affordable housing stuff around. I think it is going to pull down the overall level of our city and I am against it. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 9:30 AM) Respondent No:10 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 13:20:27 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 13:20:27 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment From the committee, I would like further clarification on what rezoning would change with regards to building new apartments on the proposed site. My understanding is that a zone of MDD-6 Mixed Development District allows for buildings containing not fewer than 10 dwelling units or senior citizen units. Can apartment buildings be built without rezoning? Other than ensuring affordable housing on this site, what does changing the zoning at this location accomplish? If the rezoning is simply to create affordable housing on site, I have concerns. Southeast Edina already has a significant concentration of affordable housing. Adding another complex in this already dense area will lead to undesirable outcomes. Research has shown that concentrating low-income housing, greater than 50 units in one area, leads to increased crime rates and less desirable education outcomes. Since this area in Edina is already saturated with affordable housing, I am concerned that adding another 408-unit building is unwise. I suggest keeping the site zoned as-is and spreading out affordable housing options throughout Edina. If affordable housing is spread throughout the city, everyone will benefit from the increased options and not one local will suffer from the high concentration of affordable housing in one area. Thank you for listening to my concerns and thoughts on this request to rezone. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 10:45 AM) Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 13:54:25 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 13:54:25 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkens Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I am not necessarily against affordable housing in the city of Edina, but there does already exist a disproportionally high number of affordable housing zoning options within the Cornelia Elementary School district when referencing the Edina zoning map and identified affordable housing locations within the NOAH website. A discussion paper made available by the Minnesota Housing Financial Agency written by Spencer Agnew suggests that higher concentrations of affordable housing do have negative impacts on crime and education within certain areas. Communities wishing to increase the number of affordable housing within their areas should do so in smaller chunks and in a more dispersed area. Research indicates that when affordable housing is in small and widely distributed areas, crime and education are both negligibly impacted. The current city of Edina model to consolidate all of the affordable housing into just the Cornelia area I feel would not improve the statistics in terms of it being one of the higher crime rates in Edina. The Cornelia Elementary school is already underperforming compared to the other elementary schools in math and reading tests (compared to its peers). It is continuing to increase the already disproportionate amount of affordable housing areas within the Cornelia Elementary School area. I encourage other areas of Edina to be considered to increase Edina’s affordable housing areas. This Cornelia Elementary school area should not continue to be the aggregate for where most of the affordable housing is in terms of the zoning map. I encourage this committee to please consider spreading it out. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 7:08 PM) The Planning Commission is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to redevelop 4660 77th Street West, which is part of the Pentagon Park office development. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment. (See attached plans.) As this parcel is considered part of the Greater Southdale District, Mic Johnson, the City’s consultant has provided a review of the proposed plans at sketch plan. (See attached memo.) This site was rezoned to Mixed Development District – 6 (MDD-6) in 2008; however, no development ever took place. The MDD zoning designation was used before the City established PUD Zoning in 2011. Attached is a copy of the approved Overall Development Plan Concept that was approved as part of the rezoning. There was to be a mixture of office and residential uses. Note that the subject property was specifically contemplated for multi- family residential housing. Pentagon Village was part of this MDD-6 District and was where the office and retail uses were to be located. However, that site was recently rezoned to PUD, and is no longer part of the MDD. This site was considered for a PUD Rezoning in 2014 and 2017. However, that proposal was ultimately denied. (See attached resolution denying the project and the concept plan that was considered.) The request would require the following: 1. A Rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD. Flexibility would be requested through the PUD Ordinance to vary from parking and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements. The PUD Zoning is also used to ensure affordable housing on the site. May 26, 2021 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West. Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 The applicant has gone through the sketch plan process and has revised the plans to respond to comments from the Planning Commission and City Council. Below is a list of some of the changes: 77th Street Facade: • Revised entry level to be at sidewalk grade compared to 10 feet above grade. • Created architecturally strong building entrance with a new central massing. • Activated sidewalk and streetscape with added glass and active uses, blended with landscape to great a welcoming pedestrian experience along the porte cochere • Broke up massing along 77th Street into 3 primary facades; recessed the primary massing in two areas; followed the guideline to have no mass longer than 200 feet; created layers of landscaping and vines to soften the façade. 77th Streetscape: • Made curb cuts perpendicular to 77th Street in order to create safer pedestrian to vehicle sight lines. • Activated 77th Street streetscape, and revised massing and elevations to draw people into the building and the trails that connect to the park. • Added double rows of trees along the sidewalk. • Eliminated large change in elevation to connect the building entry with the sidewalk. • Added glass and building articulation to break up the facade and make more transparent/see- through. • Eliminated the idea of an “on-ramp” and made the sidewalk more pedestrian friendly. • Created a buffer area between sidewalk and street. East Side Fred Richards Park Connection: • Developed east side connection with a grove of trees and midpoint connection into the building courtyard. • Angled building to create enhanced pathway connections and view planes into the park. North Side Fred Richards Park Connection: • Seamlessly joined the apartment property with the Nine Mile Creek Trail and park. • Engaged the park with an added aspen grove that guides pedestrians into the park. • Lowered the property elevation to preserve storm water storage while blending with park topography. • Used native landscaping species that are compatible with existing park landscape and climate hardiness. West Side Woonerf: • Created landscape bays throughout parking and street areas to turn the west driveway and parking into a Woonerf. • Will plan to connect rainwater into landscape bays along Woonerf to emulate a green street. • End of Woonerf blends with parkway connection for both pedestrians and bikes that runs along northern edge of site, connecting with the east side park connection trail. Water: • Integrated water storage in the rooftop, added a courtyard stormwater infiltration stream bed, and built-in flood storage zones on the site while reducing impermeable surface area. • Addressed groundwater concerns by bringing basement level up, and relocating parking under the east wing. • Revised elevations to maintain water storage areas in the event of potential flooding. Sustainability: • Added rooftop garden/agricultural space for residents. • Reoriented landscape of the site to best allow for apartment access to light, air, trees, and views. STAFF REPORT Page 3 • Passive and active energy conservation. • Integrated stormwater management (see above). Affordable Housing: • Targeting affordability with typical units at approximately 73% AMI; focusing on an underserved population of lower middle-class families. This housing does not meet the definition of affordable housing. • Created direct park accessibility for lower income families. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Fred Richards Park and Regional Trail; zoned R-1, Single-dwelling Unit District, and guided Open Space and Parks. Easterly: Edina County Club; zoned R-1, Single-dwelling Unit District and public/semi-public. Southerly: Office building; zoned MDD-6, Mixed Development District, and guided OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Westerly: Office building; zoned MDD-6, Mixed Development District, and guided OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Existing Site Features The subject property is 5.44 acres in size and contains two office buildings. Planning Guide Plan designation: OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Zoning: MDD-6, Mixed Development District Parking Based on the proposal for a total of 408 residential units in a Mixed Development District, 714 parking stalls are required with 408 enclosed under the City’s existing off-street parking regulations. Under the draft off-street ordinance amendment, recommended by the Planning Commission, 510 total spaces are required, 408 enclosed. The proposal is to provide 552 stalls total with 502 enclosed and 50 surface stalls. Wenck/Stantec conducted a parking analysis and concluded that 534 spaces would be adequate to serve this development (See attached Traffic and Parking Study.) Site Circulation/Traffic Vehicular access to the site for the restaurant would be off 77th Street and access to the underground parking on the west side of the building. There would be pedestrian trails on all sides of the building. The main trail connection to the Regional Trail in Fred Richard Park is on the east side of the building. The applicant has enhanced this area compared to the sketch plan proposal. Because this is a primary access to the regional trail, staff recommends widening this path from 5 to 8 feet. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Wenck/Stantec Consulting conducted a parking and traffic study. (See attached study.) The study concludes that the existing roadway system would support the project. The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development would have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No roadway improvements are needed. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site 50 overstory trees would be required. The applicant is proposing over 100 overstory trees in the boulevard and around the perimeter of the site and within the courtyard. (See attached landscape plan.) A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are 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 their review memo. (See attached.) A developer’s agreement would be required for the construction of the proposed sidewalks and utilities. 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 primarily brick, fiber cement panel, vertical metal panel and glass. (See attached renderings.) Mechanical Equipment No mechanical equipment has been shown on the plans. Any rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Final Plans must include location of mechanical equipment and the means of screening. No ground level mechanical equipment shall be located within the front yard of the development. Signage The signage allowed on the site would correspond to the use. The signage proposed would be allowed within the PUD. No signage shall face the park. Way finding signage should be installed on 77th Street to direct pedestrian and bicycle traffic to the regional trail. Sustainability The applicant has provided the sustainability questionnaire. (See attached.) Additionally, the City’s sustainability coordinator has reviewed the plans and provided comments and recommendations in the engineering memo. (See attached engineering memo.) These shall be made conditions of approval. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Living Streets/Multi-Modal Consideration Sec. 36-1274. - Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the city and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (1) It is the policy of the city to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the city. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the city's sidewalk and trail plan; and b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails, or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist, or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. The applicant would be installing sidewalks on all sides of the building, including the boulevard style sidewalk on 77th. See the attached memo from the engineering department regarding the city’s Living Streets Policy. These recommendations would be in the conditions of approval. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Per Section 36-253 the following are the regulations for a PUD: STAFF REPORT Page 6 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; 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 of the above criteria would be met. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for “Office Residential,” which allows for residential, and office uses. The existing zoning and approved development plan for the site allows residential uses. There is not much housing location within this area. Introducing housing into the area will assist with the commercial areas to the west including the Pentagon Village commercial area on the south side of 77th; which was the intent of the original MDD-6 zoning district. The existing MDD-6 Zoning Designation is not appropriate as that zoning was designed with a specific plan in mind. Since that development did not STAFF REPORT Page 7 happen, and a portion of that MDD-6 Zoning District has already been rezoned to PUD (Pentagon Village), a rezoning to PUD is appropriate. Primary parking is located under and within the building, which is pulled up closer to the street, and separated from the street by green space to promote a more walkable environment. Sidewalks are provided all around the building including a significant connection to the regional bike trail. The proposed buildings would be a high-quality brick, with metal siding. The applicant has indicated that would meet the City’s affordable housing policy by buying in. Ten percent of the of development would include 41 units. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. (See attached memo from the city’s affordable housing manager.) 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 use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the existing zoning on the site. This site was originally contemplated for housing when the MDD was created. (See approved development plan for this site.) b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as Office Residential, as mentioned, the original Mixed-Use Development contemplated for this site was high density residential. 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; The proposed is a single-land use. However, because it is a use that is not prevalent in this area, the proposal is acceptable. As mentioned, this site was approved for a high-density residential development that was part of a horizontal mixed-use project. STAFF REPORT Page 8 The office and retail uses were contemplated for the Pentagon Park South Site, which is occurring in the Pentagon Village site. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and As mentioned, the uses allowed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The densities allowed would be specifically stated in the PUD Ordinance. The density proposed is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan at 75 units per acre. 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 the following page shows how the proposed new building would comply with the MDD-6 Zoning Ordinance Standards and the zoning standard in the new PUD-22 District. Please note that most standards are met under the conventional zoning. The notable changes are height and parking. Compliance Table City Standard (MDD-6) Proposed Building Setbacks Front – 77th Street Rear – Fred Richards Park Side – West Side – East 35 feet 35 feet 20 feet 20 feet 43-55 feet 26 feet 51 feet 55 feet Building Height 4 stories & 48 feet 5-7 stories & 52-86 feet Density 20-75 units per acre (5.44 acres) 75 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0% 1.5%* Parking Housing – 1 enclosed space per unit + .75 surface spaces per unit = 714 spaces required (510 required in draft ordinance) 552 spaces* *Does not meet base Zoning Standards-Flexibility would be requested through a PUD STAFF REPORT Page 9 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposal reasonable to justify PUD rezoning for this site? Yes. Staff does support the revised rezoning of the site, for the following reasons: 1. The project that was supposed to be built under the existing MDD-6 Zoning Designation never developed. Part of this original MDD-6 has already been rezoned with the Pentagon Village development that was rezoned to PUD in 2019. (See original MDD-6 Zoning District and the Pentagon Village PUD.) MDD zoning was the tool the City of Edina used before it had a PUD Ordinance. 2. Housing was proposed on this site in the MDD-6 Development that was not built. (See attached MDD-6 Plan.) 3. The project would provide a significant buy in to the City’s affordable housing fund. Ten percent of the of development units (408) would include 41. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. 4. The proposed height of seven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City in providing the buy in monies, additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units. The building height overlay district limits this site to four stories. The nearest single-family home to this site is 700 feet to the north. Section 36-618 (6) of the City Code requires that buildings that are 7 stories tall, be setback 4 times the height of the building from the 7-story portion of the building to the nearest single-family lot line. The building would be 86 feet tall, therefore, a 344-foot setback is required. Note that the building height steps down toward the Park and the single-family homes to the north. 5. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for “Office Residential,” which allows for residential uses. The existing zoning and approved development plan for the site allows residential uses. There is not much housing location within this area. Increasing housing into the area will assist with the commercial areas to the west including the Pentagon Village commercial area on the south side of 77th. Primary parking is located under and within the building, which is pulled up closer to the street, and separated from the street by green space to promote a more walkable environment. Sidewalks are provided all around the building including a significant connection to the regional bike trail. The proposed buildings would be a high-quality brick, with metal siding. The applicant has indicated that would meet the City’s affordable housing policy by buying in. Ten percent of the of development would include 41 units. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. STAFF REPORT Page 10 6. The proposed project would meet the following additional goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Per the Office Residential Land Use Description: Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. b. Façade Articulation. Primary facades should be designed with a well-defined base, middle and top, providing visual interest at ground level. Building entries and access points should be clearly visible from the primary street. Long building facades should be divided into smaller increments using contrasting materials, textures, detailing, setbacks, or similar techniques. c. Building Height Transitions. Taller buildings (generally four stories or higher) should step down to provide a height transition to surrounding residential buildings, including buildings across a street or pathway, and to avoid excessive shadowing of sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. d. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods and key destinations, and with other communities, to improve multimodal transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on cars. Staff Recommendation Options for Consideration & Recommendation A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below are options for the planning commission and city council to consider for approval and denial: Approval Recommend the City Council approve the request for Preliminary Rezoning of the site from MDD-6 to PUD-22, Planned Unit District-22. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses, and density are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the existing Zoning on the site. 2. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The PUD zoning would: a. Promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. c. Provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements include sustainable design, greater utilization of new STAFF REPORT Page 11 technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street. d. Project is of high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. e. Maintains the efficiency of public streets and utilities. f. Provides a mixture of land uses within the development. g. Project would meet the City’s affordable housing policy. 3. The PUD would ensure that the development proposed would be the only building that would be allowed on the site unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council and ensures the buy-in funds to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City of Edina. 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Per the Office Residential Land Use Description: Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. b. Façade Articulation. Primary facades should be designed with a well-defined base, middle and top, providing visual interest at ground level. Building entries and access points should be clearly visible from the primary street. Long building facades should be divided into smaller increments using contrasting materials, textures, detailing, setbacks, or similar techniques. c. Building Height Transitions. Taller buildings (generally four stories or higher) should step down to provide a height transition to surrounding residential buildings, including buildings across a street or pathway, and to avoid excessive shadowing of sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. d. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods and key destinations, and with other communities, to improve multimodal transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on cars. 6. 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. 7. The proposed height of seven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City in providing the buy in monies, additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units. The building height overlay district limits this site to four stories. The nearest single- family home to this site is 700 feet to the north. Section 36-618 (6) of the City Code requires that buildings that are 7 stories tall, be setback 4 times the height of the building from the 7-story portion of the building to the nearest single-family lot line. The building would be 86 feet tall, therefore, a 344-foot setback is required. Note that the building height steps down toward the Park. 8. The proposed uses would be an upgrade to the current development on the site. STAFF REPORT Page 12 Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated April 30, 2021. 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. 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/Site Improvement Plan Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer must pay the buy-in amount for affordable housing of $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. 9. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the engineering memo dated May 27, 2021. 10. Compliance with the Wenck Consulting Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 11. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment revising the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. 12. Dedication of public access easement over the north-south sidewalk along the east side of the property and the east west sidewalk along 77th Street. The north-south sidewalk must be widened from 5 feet to 8 feet wide, and maintenance shall be the property owner’s responsibility. The City will maintain the sidewalk along 77th Street. The boulevard between the street and the sidewalk shall be 10 feet. 13. The Maintenance of sidewalks internal to the site to be responsibility of property owner. 14. Submittal of a construction management plan subject to review and approval of city staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 15. Hours of construction must be consistent with City Code. STAFF REPORT Page 13 Denial Recommend the City Council deny the request for Preliminary Rezoning of the site from MDD-6 to PUD-22, Planned Unit District-22. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed height and density are not reasonable for the site. The maximum height for the property is four stories and 48 feet. 2. The proposal does not meet the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The proposal does not meet 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. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request subject to the findings and conditions listed above. Deadline for a City decision: August 17, 2021 Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 April 23, 2021 Mr. Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Teague: Please find enclosed the summary for our proposed residential development at 4660 W 77th St, Edina, MN 55435, and a description of the requested variances and conditional use permit. Project Description: Pentagon Park Housing Development 4660 77th St W Edina, Minnesota We are proposing a 408-unit mixed use multifamily building. The building consists of seven levels and approximately 530,627 square feet. The building has a primary structure facing 77th Street that is seven levels tall and two wings reaching out to Fred Richards Park that are four and five levels tall. We are expecting to break ground in Fall of 2021 and complete construction in 2023. The existing site: The proposed project is located at 4660 W 77th St, Edina, MN 55435. This site is in the Greater Southdale District. The proposed project will replace two existing three-story office buildings and a large surface parking lot. The site is 236,950 square feet (5.44 acres). The proposed building: The proposed building is a 7 level above ground, 408-unit, residential building, with 2 levels of above ground parking, and a lower partially underground level of basement garage parking. The total gross proposed building square footage excluding the garage is 355,095. Including the garage, the total square footage is 530,627. There will be between 520 and 570 parking stalls in the project. Included in this number will be up to 51 surface parking stalls. The car parking ratio for the building is 1.25 to 1.39 per unit depending on the feasibility of a garage parking level under the east building wing. There will be approximately 400 bike parking stalls. The proposed FAR for the building is 1.5. The building height is 84’-8” feet to the main roof, with an additional elevator overrun of 14 feet for roof access. The 7 level above grade building will be constructed of 5 levels of wood framing over 2 levels of above grade concrete podium with a partially exposed concrete basement at the main building facing 77th Street. Additionally, the building includes two wings facing the park (5 levels of wood framing at the west wing, and 4 levels of wood framing over a potential 1 level concrete garage at the east wing). Architecturally, the project will be unique within the current framework and fabric of West 77th and the current office park area. This residence will be designed as an oasis, converting the current office building and paved parking of mostly impervious area, into a destination that embraces the park. The sige will be transformed from approximately 24% pervious surface to 40% pervious surface. The building will allow for a more thoughtful pedestrian and vehicular experience along W 77th Street. The building will also create new connections to the park via a highly landscaped pedestrian link along its east side. The west side is designed as a woonerf that connects to trails around the site. Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 A covered porte cochere and drop-off drive will be complemented by a beautifully landscaped connection to the building that expands and improves the pedestrian experience along 77th Street. The landscaping and porte cochere will help weave a new urban fabric that links to the park access points along the street frontage. How the building works within the neighborhood context: The building is designed to integrate into the existing built form of the Pentagon Park and Greater Southdale District neighborhood, while providing much needed transit and pedestrian oriented housing and redevelopment on an underutilized site within the vibrant activity center. The building mass and materials are designed to reflect the unique character of the Pentagon Park site. It is designed with a main building that reinforces the street presence of 77th Street West and two wings opening outward to Fred Richards Park. A setback of 55’ at ground level provides extra space to the public realm that creates an inviting streetscape. Particular attention is paid to adjacent relationships and scale. Mass is focused toward 77th, with lower masses appropriately scaling down toward the park. At 77th, the building utilizes material and sculptural modulation to break down the larger scale of the project. Multiple bays and setbacks create a dynamic building that limits unbroken planes and creates visually interesting scales and proportions. Material changes, extensive landscaping, and sculptural form bring scale down to pedestrian/neighborhood friendly dimensions. The design and variation of these surfaces creates energy and dynamism. Functionally, they provide varied view planes of windows, large balcony spaces for indoor/outdoor living, additional eyes on the street and community connections along the public corridor to enhance the neighborhood presence. The project brings a differentiated product to Edina that is sustainably designed and includes a significant amount of housing in the 80% of AMI range. Smaller floor plans, home offices, fitness options, outdoor recreation, and opportunities to build community are part of this model. Amenities include a pool, pickleball court, rooftop party area, sauna and hot tub, and indoor/outdoor pub and entertainment rooms. The landscaping is meant to embrace Fred Richards Park and integrate directly with the Nine Mile Creek Trail. The project provides much needed market rate affordable housing that is in close proximity to jobs, transit, and excellent schools. How Solhem helps build sustainable communities: At Solhem Companies, sustainability is built in. It is part and parcel of each new building we design and develop. Solhem’s sustainable communities are a combination of building features and personal practices. Together with our residents, we create sustainable communities. We have 5 focus areas: Energy, Water, Air, Waste, and Transportation. Solhem installed the first all LED apartment building in Minnesota (Soltvå), the first multi-family organics recycling program in Minnesota (Solhem), and we have pioneered the local use of multiple new sustainable exterior materials. Solhem typically exceeds the goals we establish through the Energy Design Assistance program, reducing expected energy use by up to 40%. Solhem installed one of the first downtown Minneapolis residential rooftop solar arrays at the Borealis project, and works directly with neighborhood groups to create pedestrian oriented landscaping with native shrubs and trees and an enhanced pedestrian streetscape that supports transit oriented streetscape goals for neighborhoods. Solhem supports bike transportation with bike repair stations and indoor bike racks for every resident. In addition, Solhem builds sustainable environments for our four-legged friends including pet washes, designated pet relief areas, and dog runs designed into our projects. Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 The Pentagon Park project includes standards consistent with LEED certification - advanced thermal and glazing techniques, low energy electrical systems, rain water barrel irrigation, rooftop storm water ponding, electric car charging spots, rooftop gardens for herbs and vegetables, sustainable landscaping with native plantings, low or no allergen interior finishes, and organics recycling. The sustainability measures for the Pentagon Park project include the following: ● A carbon footprint approximately 33% lower than comparable new developments ● Opportunities for herb and vegetable gardens on our rooftops and elsewhere on the site ● On site organics recycling ● Recycling chutes that serve every floor of the building ● Decreased water usage through use of dual flush toilets and rainwater harvesting ● Native landscaping that restores permeability to the flood plain and does not require fertilizers or pesticides ● Roof and site retention of stormwater in order to help replenish the aquifer ● Our plans include shifting the site from 15% permeable to 45% permeable; this will help manage long term flooding events for the entire neighborhood ● Electric vehicle charging that can be expanded to meet demand as needed ● Durable exterior materials that stand the test of time ● Low-E dual pane argon-filled windows that increase solar gain in the winter and prevent heat gain in summer ● Low- and No- VOC paints that improve interior building conditions for human health ● Elimination of carpeting in individual apartments in order to decrease repeated contributions to the landfill ● Bike repair station and bike cafe for encouraging bicycle transit ● Create a direct on-site connection to the Nine Mile Creek Trail Proposed site work: The site is approximately 236,950 square feet. The first-floor footprint is approximately 92,387 square feet, covering 39% of the site. The garage entrance is located on the west side of the site. By locating all services and garage traffic on one side of the building, we are able to greatly decrease the number of curb cuts and maximize pedestrian safety and streetscape along the site, and create a pedestrian and bike connector on the east side of the site. The building is set back at the ground level providing extra sidewalk space. To create a welcoming pedestrian presence and varied public space and greenery, we propose multiple levels of landscaping. A boulevard with a street fronting layer of larger hardwoods and internal layer of ornamentals will enhance a walk/public corridor. A porte cochere and access drive rise up from street grade to create an intermediate zone of public enhancement that brings occupants into a grand entrance flanked by planting walls, varied shrubs and climbing vines, trellises and pergolas. Above this zone there will also be activated roof terraces with plantings and amenities that enhance the frontage. Landscaping throughout the frontage will include new boulevard trees, planters, a wide pedestrian- friendly sidewalk, and hardy plantings. Fred Richards Park abuts the north edge of the site. The project slopes gently down to the park, creating connections for residents and visitors to the Nine Mile Creek Trail and the amenities of the park. The building steps back from the park in a way that allows long views into the park for building residents, while also respectfully giving air and light to other homes that abut the park. Lawn areas and recreational facilities in the project complement and expand the Fred Richards Park. Who we are: Solhem is 50% Female-owned, and employs 26% BIPOC employees, and 22% Immigrant employees. All Solhem employees and direct subcontractors share ownership in our developments through a unique profits and capital interest program. Solhem is the primary customer for five subcontractor companies of whom 40% are female Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 owned, and 20% are BIPOC owned. Solhem actively mentors women, BIPOC, and immigrant members of our community to help form their own businesses. Solhem Companies owns, manages, and develops multi-family housing and has 1,468 units currently under management and 391 under construction. Since 2009, Solhem has developed or co-developed over 2,000 housing units in the Twin Cities. Solhem is committed to including Minority, Women, and community members in all aspects of business. Solhem is 50% Woman-owned, works with multiple Woman-owned subcontractors for management and design services, and has a majority female leadership team. Solhem works directly with Women Ventures to promote WBEs. Solhem works actively to hire, mentor, and promote BIPOC and female employees, and has spun off several BIPOC and WBEs. Solhem’s art program, which brings local art into all of our buildings, focuses on diverse talent, including both experienced artists and youth artists. Solhem Companies has been recognized for innovations in green construction and in creation of affordable housing, with a focus on building housing affordable to residents who earn 60-80% of AMI. All of Solhem’s projects use cutting edge, eco-friendly design that is focused on building community. Solhem has been a leader in remediation of environmentally damaged sites while at the same time incorporating organics recycling, rain barrel irrigation, sustainably-sourced materials, bike storage, renewable on-site power generation, and electric vehicle usage in multi-family housing. ● Solhem, LLC is a partnership that has sponsored over 2,000 units of new construction housing over the past 12 years. ● Solhem has completed 16 consecutive projects on time and on budget. ● Solhem delivered 312 apartments in 2020, 375 apartments in 2021, and has three projects totaling 391 apartments currently under construction. ● Learn more about Solhem at: solhem.com Proposed Rezoning and PUD: The project fits well within proposed zoning and long range planning guidelines for Edina. The project does not require TIF or other public assistance. The project requires a PUD for accomplishing the long range goals of the city and our development objectives. The project will require rezoning to meet these goals. See attached zoning summary for proposed modifications. In Conclusion: We share a common goal with the city in that we intend to create a project that is sustainable, urbanely dynamic, and respectful of the existing environment. The building will use high quality, long-lasting materials. The site plan will provide new connectivity to Fred Richards Park for residents and members of the community. This project will provide much needed market rate affordable housing for the City of Edina. Sustainable, durable, affordable. Thank you for considering our proposal. We look forward to discussing your thoughts about our project. Sincerely, Curt Gunsbury Jason Lord Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 Zoning Review Memo - Solhem Pentagon Park Edina, MN ELEMENT Current Zoning Proposed Reference Notes Total Site Area (SF) 236,950 236,950 Total Site Area (acres) 5.44 5.44 District MDD-6 Mixed Use MDD-6 Mixed Use, PUD Zoning Map Total Units 109-408 408 36-552 2040 Edina Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Units /Acre 20-75 74 36-552 2040 Edina Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Height 144 feet (12 Stories) 85'-0" Max (8 Stories) Section 36-510 Lot Coverage max lot coverage 30% 200 sf of useable lot area req'd per unit 39% as Proposed in PUD 36-553 (a) F.A.R. Residential Uses shall not exceed 0.5 1.5 36-553 (b) PUDs on adjacent properties allow up to 1.5 Fronting a Street/Front Street (ft) 35 feet Miniumum 45 feet Table 36-553 Porte Cochere Minimum 15 feet Side Street (ft) 35 feet NA Table 36-553 Interior Side Yard (ft) 20 feet Minimum 45 feet Table 36-553 Rear Yard (ft) 35 feet 50 feet Parking Setback >20' from public street ROW or >10' from interior side lot line Minimum 20' from public ROW, 4' from interior lot line 36-1316 As proposed in PUD Total Impervious Surface Current Site 82 % Impervious Proposed PUD 60% Impervious No Standard Required Parking (1 per bedroom) 508 Required Miniumum 520 - Maxmimum 570 36-1311 (w) Visitor Parking Based on PUD Based on PUD Standard 90 degree Parking 8'-6" x 18 ' - 24' drive aisles 8'-6" x 18 ' - 22' drive aisles 36-1317 Parking per private interior garage standards Compact 90 degree Parking 7'-6" x 18 ' - 24' drive aisles 7'-6" x 18 ' - 22' drive aisles 36-1318 Max 20% required parking can be compact; Parking per private interior garage standards Accessilble Parking State Accessibilty Code State Accessibilty Code Bike Parking 1 per every 14 units (30 required) Minimum 408 63.210SITE DATASETBACKSPARKING Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE ULTANTS CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/26/2021 9:34:22 AMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-3 RENDERINGS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION VIEW FROM 77TH VIEW FROM THE PARK AERIAL LOOKING SOUTH A1-0 SOLHEM COMPANIES 724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Edina - Pentagon Park 4/26/2021 Unit Type Total Lobby/Leasing Amenity MEP & Services Loading& Trash Parking Area Parking Count Gross Building Area GRSF NRSF Efficiency Area (SF)(NRSF / (GROSS BLDG − PARKING)) 12 4 0 16 1,749 1,786 950 969 79,905 190-240 97,581 12,222 11,067 62.61% 24 8 0 32 654 967 169 65,755 193 92,387 24,842 22,729 85.34% 39 10 1 50 12,966 1,174 162 29,512 87 87,713 43,899 35,349 60.74% 2 66 16 2 84 816 182 67,577 66,579 59,769 88.45% 2 38 8 2 48 828 182 39,144 38,134 34,287 87.59% 36 8 2 46 733 828 182 39,144 37,401 33,336 85.16% 319 78 11 408 1,749 16,139 6,379 2,028 175,172 470-520 530,267 327,790 290,593 81.8% 1.00 Per Unit 2.00 Per Unit 3.00 Per Unit 319 Stalls 156 Stalls 33 Stalls 508 520-570 470-520 50 Total Unit 408 236,950 Site Area 5.44 Acres Bed Count 75.0 Density =Total units / Acreage NRSF by Type 290,593 0.39 Lot Coverage =Ground Floor/Site Area NRSF Ave. unit 712 355,095 GFA =Gross Bldg Area - Parking Area Unit Mix 1.50 FAR =GFA / Site Area Unit per Type Parking Ratio Parking Required Surface parking Total Parking Provided 319 33 Tabulations B Level 1 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOMS Amenities & Support2 BEDROOMS 78.2%2.7% G 2 Parking Garage 5-6 3-4 7 156 19.1% Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE NSULTANTS CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/22/2021 1:38:06 PMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-2 EXISTING PHOTOS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS 1 1 & 22 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3 45 & 678 9 10VIEW LEGEND ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION N A1-1 SOLHEM COMPANIES 724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET............PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIALEDINA, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC0.0TITLE SHEETSITE SURVEYV1.0UTILITY PLANC4.0ISSUED FOR: CITY SUBMITTALSWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0C5.0C5.1CIVIL DETAILSSWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0SITE PLANSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3CIVIL DETAILSC1.0REMOVALS PLANC5.2CIVIL DETAILSKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.5DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT: CURT GUNSBURY612-598-9416ENGINEER:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416612-615-0060SURVEYOR:GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION11001 HAMPSHIRE AVE SMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55438CONTACT: GERARD HAHN952-995-2000ARCHITECT / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:BKV GROUP222 N 2ND STSUITE 101MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT: MATHEW H. NUGENT612-339-3752SUNDE LAND SURVEYING9001 E BLOOMINGTON FWY, SUITE 118BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420-3435CONTACT: LEONARD CARLSONSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE LOCATIONALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AREAPPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS,48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIESTHAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.C5.3CIVIL DETAILS REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONV1.0SITE SURVEY............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSREMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES, FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS& BASE MATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES & UTILITIES PER UTILITYCOMPANY AND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGLIGHT POLE, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL, PARKING SIGNS,BOLLARDS, LIGHT POLES, ETC., TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSEXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT AND BASE MATERIAL,CONCRETE CURB, WALLS, WALK, & STAIRS, UTILITYMANHOLES, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, LIGHT POLES,LANDSCAPED AREA, AND PARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENTAND BASE MATERIAL ANDPARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES,FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS & BASEMATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE &FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES& UTILITIES PER UTILITY COMPANYAND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGCURB AND GUTTER,TYP.REMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERCITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING HYDRANTAND VALVE, COORD. W/ CITYREMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING LANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES, AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES,TREES AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGEXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TANKPER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDSEXISTING BUILDINGTO REMAIN,PROTECT FROMDAMAGE DURINGCONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE WITHINPROPERTY LINE TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNERREMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNEREXISTING SIGN TO REMAIN,PROTECT FROM DAMAGEDURING CONSTRUCTION.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPARTIAL WATERMAINSERVICE PER CITYSTANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGREMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES, FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS& BASE MATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES & UTILITIES PER UTILITYCOMPANY AND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGLIGHT POLE, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL, PARKING SIGNS,BOLLARDS, LIGHT POLES, ETC., TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSEXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT AND BASE MATERIAL,CONCRETE CURB, WALLS, WALK, & STAIRS, UTILITYMANHOLES, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, LIGHT POLES,LANDSCAPED AREA, AND PARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENTAND BASE MATERIAL ANDPARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES,FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS & BASEMATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE &FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES& UTILITIES PER UTILITY COMPANYAND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGCURB AND GUTTER,TYP.REMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERCITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING HYDRANTAND VALVE, COORD. W/ CITYREMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING LANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES, AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES,TREES AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGEXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TANKPER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDSEXISTING BUILDINGTO REMAIN,PROTECT FROMDAMAGE DURINGCONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE WITHINPROPERTY LINE TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNERREMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNEREXISTING SIGN TO REMAIN,PROTECT FROM DAMAGEDURING CONSTRUCTION.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPARTIAL WATERMAINSERVICE PER CITYSTANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGREMOVALS LEGEND:TREE PROTECTIONREMOVAL OF PAVEMENT AND ALL BASE MATERIAL,INCLUDING BIT., CONC., AND GRAVEL PVMTS.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALLFOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS.TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING ROOTS AND STUMPS4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/2101" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.0REMOVALS PLAN............Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALREMOVE CURB AND GUTTER. IF IN RIGHT-OF-WAY,COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT.REMOVAL NOTES:1.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM WATERMANAGEMENT PLAN.2.REMOVAL OF MATERIALS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT, STATE AND LOCALREGULATIONS.3.REMOVAL OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES.4.EXISTING PAVEMENTS SHALL BE SAWCUT IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR THE NEAREST JOINTFOR PROPOSED PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS.5.REMOVED MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF TO A LEGAL OFF-SITE LOCATION AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATEAND LOCAL REGULATIONS.6.ABANDON, REMOVAL, CONNECTION, AND PROTECTION NOTES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE.COORDINATE WITH PROPOSED PLANS.7.EXISTING ON-SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OFTHE CONTRACT.8.PROPERTY LINES SHALL BE CONSIDERED GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THEDRAWINGS. WORK WITHIN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL INCLUDE STAGING, DEMOLITION ANDCLEAN-UP OPERATIONS AS WELL AS CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.9.MINOR WORK OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANAND PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.10.DAMAGE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LIMITS CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE REPAIRED IN A MANNERAPPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.11.PROPOSED WORK (BUILDING AND CIVIL) SHALL NOT DISTURB EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ONTHE DRAWINGS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.12.SITE SECURITY MAY BE NECESSARY AND PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO PROHIBIT VANDALISM, AND THEFT, DURINGAND AFTER NORMAL WORK HOURS, THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. SECURITY MATERIALSSHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.13.VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR DELIVERY AND INSPECTION ACCESS DURINGNORMAL OPERATING HOURS. AT NO POINT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT SHALL CIRCULATIONOF ADJACENT STREETS BE BLOCKED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.14.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTAMANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BELIMITED TO, SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALLREMAIN OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THECITY.15.SHORING FOR BUILDING EXCAVATION MAY BE USED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR AND ASAPPROVED BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.16.STAGING, DEMOLITION, AND CLEAN-UP AREAS SHALL BE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON THEDRAWINGS AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.17.ALL EXISTING SITE TRAFFIC/REGULATORY SIGNAGE TO BE INVENTORIED AND IF REMOVED FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHALL BE RETURNED TO LGU.18.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.CITY OF EDINA REMOVAL NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC REMOVAL NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES: GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING12187754332435' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITS55.7'56.2'86.7'76.7'43.8'55.7'9.0'40.0'20.0'TYP.9.0' TYP.5.3'8.5'TYP.6.3'20.0'5.7'20.0'7.3'22.0'5.1'5.0'5.0'8.5' TYP.8.9'46.6'18.6'26.4'28.3'16.8'13.3'10.0'9.0'TYP.55.7'51.7'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R100.0'R78.0'R3.0'R6.0'R3.0'R8.0'R100.0'R3.0'R10.0'R10.0'R10.0'R7.0'R8.0'R3.0'R3. 0 'R3.0'R3. 0 ' R 3 6 . 0 ' R2 0 . 0 'R4.0'R4.0'R4.0 'R4.0'R 4 . 0 'R4.0'R8.0'R3.0'R 3 . 0 'ACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPSM.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPVMT.STRIPINGTYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTIONCONCRETE SIDEWALKPER CITY STANDARDS,TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.M.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPB612 C&G,TYP.B612 C&G,TYP.B612 C&G,TYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.CONCRETE SIDEWALKPER CITY STANDARDS,TYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION3' CURBTAPERMATCHEX. C&GMATCHMATCHMATCHMATCHB612 C&G,TYP.B612C&G,TYP.L.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPVMT.STRIPINGTYP.CONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPBITUMINOUS PATH, TYPPICKLE BALL COURT,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSWOOD DECK BRIDGE,SEE ARCH'L PLANSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSPLAZA DECK WITH RETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILSPLAZA DECK WITH RETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. WALK, TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPLAZA DECK WITHRETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSM.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPATIO, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSDOG RUN AREA,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSSEE LANDSCAPINGPLAN, BY OTHERSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. PAVEMENT3' CURBTAPER3' CURBTAPERRIBBONCURB3' CURBTAPER22.0'MATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHACCESSIBLE ROUTEARROW. DO NOT PAINT,FOR CODE REVIEW ONLY,TYP.PERMEABLEPAVEMENTAREAS, TYP. SEEDETAIL.16.0' 12.2' 6.0'4.0' 16.0'11.5'8.0'44.0'5.7'18.0'TYP.22.0'4.7'8.0'24.0'5.7'9.0'TYP.22.0'18.0'TYP.4.7'20.0'TYP.9.0'TYP.22.0'18.0'TYP.4.7'20.0'TYP.2.9'5.0'29.8'6.0'14.8'18.0'TYP.24.0'8.3'18.0'TYP.24.0'10.1'18.0'TYP.24.0'8.9'18.0' 24.3'35.6'24.6'35.4'22.6'8.0'8.4'8.0'16.0'13.1'6.0'4.0'8.0'44.0'TOP=821.00EOF=820.80SITE 100-YR HWL=823.203:1 SIDE SLOPESMIN. BOTTOM AREA=5800 SF4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN............SITE AREA TABLE:1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNINGCONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES,EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINALLOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OFCONSTRUCTION, DUE TO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOOWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIORTO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING ARIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TOINSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FORREVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.5.LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS AREAPPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BYTHE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETEFOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO BUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BYTHE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENTMATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS,BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THERIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.8.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCEWITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEE DETAIL.9.CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TOTHE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BEWHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES.10.SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND GUTTER TYPE. TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.11.ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TOSITE IMPROVEMENTS.13.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.14.PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.15.ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.16.BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENTSECTIONS.17.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THEDRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.18.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:SITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSCITY OF EDINA SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"N1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCONCRETE PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) ASSPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETEDEPTHS, SEE DETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE).SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE& WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DEATIL.MEDIUM DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE).SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE &WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DETAIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOSPECIALTY PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) - PROVIDE BIDFOR THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS, INCLUDE VARIATIONSOF BASE MATERIAL AND OTHER NECESSARYCOMPONENTS.1. STAMPED & COLORED CONCRETE2. CONCRETE PAVERSMAKERS, COLORS, MODELS, & PATTERN TO BEINCLUDED IN SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.OPERATIONAL NOTES:SNOW REMOVAL:ALL SNOW SHALL BE STORED ON-SITE AT OUTSIDE EDGES OF PARKING LOT. WHEN THOSEAREAS ARE FULL, SNOW REMOVAL COMPANY WILL REMOVE TO OFFSITE LOCATIONTRASH REMOVAL:TRASH SHALL BE COLLECTED IN INTERIOR COLLECTION AREA AND STAGED OUTSIDE,WHERE DESIGNATED, ON DAY OF PICK-UP BY BUILDING PERSONNEL. PICK-UP SHALL BE BYCOMMERCIAL REFUSE AND RECYCLING HAULER COMPANY.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE VIA STANDARD COMMERCIAL DELIVERYVEHICLES (UPS, FED EX, USPS). MOVE-IN/OUT OPERATIONS MAY BE STAGED AT OTHEREGRESS LOCATIONS WITH COORDINATION AND OPERATIONS ORGANIZED BY BUILDINGSTAFF, INCLUDING TRAFFIC CONTROL, AS REQUIRED.ACCESSIBILITY ARROW (IF APPLICABLE) DO NOTPAINT.PERVIOUS PAVEMENT - INCLUDE ALL BASE MATERIALAND APPURTENANCES AS SPECIFIED PERMANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS & INSTRUCTIONS.MAKE: T.B.D.MODEL: T.B.D.COLOR: T.B.D. - PROVIDE SAMPLES, SHOP DRAWINGS & PRODUCT DATA REQUIRED PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITS4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN............1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITEPREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION, EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONSWITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTIONDISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS & PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.ALLEXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLREPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1% MIN. AND 2% MAX. CROSSSLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS. MAXIMUMSLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:17.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4' INHEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL ENGINEER. DESIGNDRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATIONOF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AFINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TOTOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.9.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOILMATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THESITE.10.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREASDESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THESITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS,ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BEESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TOA MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.11.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITSOF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHINSPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARESHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BEPROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THATHAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALLAREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THANORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.12.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND/ORPARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSSWEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BECOMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICHSECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BECOMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. NO TEST ROLL SHALL OCCURWITHIN 10' OF ANY UNDERGROUND STORM RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEMS.13. TOLERANCES13.1.THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOTABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.2.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHEREMEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.3.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THEREQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.13.4.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.14.MAINTENANCE14.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION, AND KEEP AREAFREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.14.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TOSPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD,ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDED AND MULCHED.14.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONSOR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE, AND COMPACT TO REQUIREDDENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSGROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF EDINA GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TOPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY XXXXX, INC., DATED XX-XX-XX GROUNDWATER WASOBSERVED AT ELEVATIONS RANGING FROM XXX.XX TO XXX.XXTHE BORINGS & GROUNDWATER ARE AS FOLLOWS:SB-1XXX.XXSB-2XXX.XXSB-3XXX.XXSB-4XXX.XXPROPOSED FOOTING DRAIN TILE INVERT ELEVATION = XXX.XXSPOT GRADE ELEVATION MATCH EXISTINGGRADE BREAK - HIGH POINTS GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSSTUB 8" SANITARY TO5' FROM BUILDINGIE @ STUB=813.15COORD. W/ MECH'L82 LF 8" PVC SDR 26SANITARY SERVICE@ 2.00%MAKE CONNECTION TO EXISTING12" TRUSS SANITARY SEWEREX IE (E/W)=811.51(FIELD VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION)PROP IE (N)=811.51COORD. W/ CITYSTUB 8" COMBINED DIP WATERSERVICE AND VALVE, STUB TOWITHIN 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LPROPOSED GATEVALVE & VALVE BOXMAKE WET TAP CONNECTION TOEXISTING 8" CIP WATER MAIN,(FIELD VERIFY LOCATION PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION)COORD. W/ CITYEXISTINGHYDRANTHYD &GV, TYP.HYD &GV, TYP.MAKE WET TAP CONNECTION TOEXISTING 8" CIP WATER MAIN,(FIELD VERIFY LOCATION PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION)COORD. W/ CITY8" DIPWATERMAIN10" DIP WATERMAIN8" DIPWATERMAIN10"X6"TEE45° BEND8"X6" TEEMAKE CONNECTIONTO EX. 8" DIP(FIELD VERIFY SIZEAND LOCATION)45° BENDPROPOSED GATEVALVE & VALVE BOX10"X8"TEE10" TO 8"REDUCER10"PLUGPROP. FDC LOCATIONRAINWATER REUSE/IRRIGATION CISTERN(2) 65 LF ROWS OF 60" DUAL WALL PP PIPEW/ STONE SEPARATION, TOP, ENDS & SIDESPER MANUFACTURER'S SHOP DRAWINGMIN. STORAGE VOLUME (BELOWOVERFLOW) REQUIRED=2,500 CFCISTERN IE=812.9015" OVERFLOW IE=817.90FLOOD STORAGE BASIN, SEE GRADINGPLAN.12" FES 8IE=819.00INSTALL RIP RAP PER MNDOT SPEC155 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=819.0012" FES 7IE=818.00INSTALL RIP RAP PER MNDOT SPEC33 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE 5RE=822.00IE(S/N)=818.30CONSTRUCT WEIR WALL IN MHTOP OF WEIR WALL=820.00STMH 6RE=822.00IE(S/N)=818.30IE (E)=819.006 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=818.30UNDERGROUND POND 2PFOOTPRINT=202' X 17'1 ROW OF 202 LF 29"T X 42" WPERFORATED CMP ARCH PIPE6" STONE BASE AND TOP12" STONE ENDS6'-9" STONE SIDESSTONE BASE IE=817.80CMP IE=818.30CMP TOP=820.72STONE TOP=821.22SEE DETAIL100-YR HWL=820.46NWL=820.00UNDERGROUND POND 1PTWO CONNECTING SECTIONS OF 48" PERF. CMPSECTION A FOOTPRINT=140' X 30'SECTION B FOOTPRINT=102' X 30'INCLUDING 12" STONE SIDES AND ENDS6" STONE BASE AND TOPSTONE BASE IE=816.00CMP IE=816.50CMP TOP=820.50STONE TOP=821.00100-YR HWL=822.29NWL=818.00SEE DETAILOUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE 2RE=823.00IE(E/W)=816.50CONSTRUCT WEIR WALL IN MHTOP OF WEIR WALL=818.503" ORIFICE IN WEIR WALL, IE=818.0061 LF 24" HDP @ 0.00%IE=816.50STMH 1RE=821.40±IE=815.818 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=816.5073 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.94%EX. MHRIM=820.30EX IE (S)=815.30(FIELD VERIFY)PR IE (NE)=815.50CORE DRILL NEWCONNECTION TOEXISTING MHCOORD. RELOCATIONOF EXISTINGELECTRIC MH WITHUTILITY OWNER33 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.94%CBMH 3RE=821.33IE=817.4112" INLETIE=816.5091 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%69 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%CB 4RE=821.98±IE=818.1061 LF 24" HDP @ 0.00%IE=816.50STUB 10" STORM TO 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=819.14STUB 10" STORM TO 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=819.147 LF 10" PVC SCH. 40 @ 2.00%10" BUILDING STORMDRAIN INLETIE=819.00, TYP.823.24 SURFACE INLET CBSTMH 9RE=825.00IE=816.8115" INLETIE=816.5062 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.50%182 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.50%CISTERN OVERFLOW OUTLETIE=817.90±CISTERN PUMP HOUSE FOR IRRIGATION &REUSERAINWATER FILTER MHSTUB 12" STORM SEWER TO 5' FROM BLDG,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=816.50INLET IE=816.304931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.0UTILITY PLAN............GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:UTILITY LEGEND:CITY OF EDINA UTILITY NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC UTILITY NOTES.01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCATCH BASINGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLEFES AND RIP RAP1. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIESAND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLIMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THEPLANS.3. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHERSTATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURSPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANYUTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION" AND "SANITARYSEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERSASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE CITY AND THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.5. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED ORPLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE OWNER.6. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) AWWA C151, ASME B16.4,AWWA C110, AWWA C153 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) ASTM D3034 & F679,OR SCH 40 ASTM D1785, 2665, ASTM F794, 1866) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE ASTM F714 & F2306 WITH ASTM D3212 SPECFITTINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OFFLARED END SECTION.10. UTILITIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THECONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BUILDINGLINES. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS.11. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALLCATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS. RIMELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CONNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITYREQUIREMENTS. HYDRANT EXTENSIONS ARE INCIDENTAL.14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATERMAIN, UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 18"VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTHWATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL.15. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTALSEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITIES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITYSTANDARDS AND COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.17.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SHALL BE CORE-DRILLED.18. COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICALDRAWINGS.19. COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIESWITH ADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF.20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE CITY. ALL PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE SAWCUT. ALL TRAFFICCONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHEDPER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROLDEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TOSIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETSSHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTEDWITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADESWHERE REQUIRED. THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH.STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTSFOR TRAFFIC LOADING.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES.COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOTIMPACT INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION ANDSUBMIT THESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK.25.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT ORWATERTIGHT. APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKEWATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES.26.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THEBUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULES,CHAPTER 4714, SECTION 1109.0.27.FOR ALL SITES LOCATED IN CLAY SOIL AREAS, DRAIN TILE MUST BE INSTALLED AT ALLLOW POINT CATCH BASINS 25' IN EACH DIRECTION. SEE PLAN AND DETAIL. INSTALL LOWPOINT DRAIN TILE PER PLANS AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ANDREQUIREMENTS. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.0CIVIL DETAILS............6"8"12"13 1/2" 6"1/2" RADIUSFINISHED GRADE3" RADIUS CORNERS1:3 BATTER SLOPE GUTTER3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPONSOIL CONDITIONSCLASS V AGGREGATE SUBBASE-SEEBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT DETAIL (6" MIN.)FINISHED GRADE0.5% SLOPE-CONSTRUCT WITH REVERSE SLOPEGUTTER (T.O. GUTTER) WHERE THE PAVEMENT SLOPESAWAY FROM CURB. SEE PLANN T SB-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER7"37"20"FINISHED GRADESLOPE GUTTER 3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT 10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPON SOIL CONDITIONSCONTINUOUS SLOPE CONCRETE CURBAND GUTTERPAVEMENT MATERIALSSEE DETAIL6"6"RIBBON CURBN T S4EXTEND POST PAST TOP OF POST10 DEGREE SLOPE1 INCH SILICONE RUBBEROR ASPHALTIC CAULKINGCOMPOUNDFILL ANNULAR SPACE TO 1 INCHFROM TOP WITH SILICA SANDCONCRETE FOOTING AS SPECIFIED6"3'-6"2'-6" 60"-66" FROM PAVEMENT TO BOTTOM OF SIGN 1/2"MATERIAL VARIES-SEE PLANMETAL SIGN ACCORDINGTO MN STATE CODENOTE:1. SIGN SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED.2. VERIFY POST PAINT C0LOR WITH LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POSTN T S1'-6"6" O.D. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE PAINTED WITH 1COAT OF APPROPRIATE PRIMER AND TWO COATSSIGN ENAMEL. FILL ANNULAR SPACE WITH GROUT.COVER WITH YELLOW "IDEAL SHIELD" PLASTICCOVER.GREEN POWDER COATED STEEL SQUAREPOST AS SPECIFIED1/4" METAL PLATE WELDED TOBOTTOM OF 6” PIPEGALVANIZED STEEL FASTENER(TYP. OF 2)6MEDIUM-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT8" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)2.0" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)1.5" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T S1NOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.LIGHT-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)1.5" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)1.5" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T SNOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.2UNREINFORCED CONCRETE PAVEMENTN T SNOTES:1. SEE GEO-TECHNICALREPORT FOR BASERECOMMENDATIONS.2. INSTALLATION SHALLBE IN ACCORDANCE TO ACERTIFIED, ON-SITEM.A.P.A. TECHNICIAN ASSPECIFIED.6" UNREINFORCED CONCRETEPAVEMENT (MNDOT 2461)6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE SUBBASE(MNDOT 3138)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OFSTANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRYDENSITY)5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.1CIVIL DETAILS............ 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.2CIVIL DETAILS............PERMEABLE PAVEMENT - #1 (1P)N T SNOTES:1. INSTALLATION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.2. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS.3. A SUBGRADE CONSISTING OF GRADED AGGREGATES MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN SUBGRADE CONDITIONS ARE POOR.1.5"6"3/4" - 2"ANGULARWASHEDSTONERETENTION PIPINGASTM NO. 8 STONESETTING BED ANDIN-FILLPERMEABLE PAVEMENT- COORD. WITH OWNER,SEE MANUFACTURERSPECIFICATIONS18" 29"6"818.00 GWB612 CURB& GUTTERLIGHT DUTYPAVEMENTCOMPACTED SUBGRADE821.771OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTUREN T SWEIR PLATEGEOTEXTILE, TYPICAL TOWRAP AROUND FILTERMATERIALNATIVE MATERIALCOMPACTED PERGEOTECHNICAL REPORT,TYPICAL48"Ø CMP0.75"-2" STONEELEV=MH RIMSEE UTILITY PLANOUTLETELEV=SEE PLANELEV=SEE PLAN (TOP WEIRWALL)SUBGRADE SOILS(IN-SITU SAND)2148" 6" MIN.6" MIN.KEY1. TOPSOIL2. FREE DRAINING ANGULAR WASHED STONE 3/4" - 2" PARTICLE SIZE (NON LIMESTONE MATERIAL THAT CONTAINS LESS THAN 5% DELETERIOUS MATERIALS). INSTALL TO MIN. 95% STANDARD DENSITY PER AASHTO T99.FABRIC WRAP TOP ANDSIDES WITHCONTECH C-40NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILESECTION DETAILNTS1.INSTALL SILT FENCE AND/OR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSIONCONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THEPRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE INPLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.4.INSTALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC,ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINAL GRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.PERFORM ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.6.SEED AND MULCH ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE.7.CONSTRUCT RETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA.8.IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMENATE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.9.PLANT AND MULCH SITE.10.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING ORIMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION.2.GRADING OF RETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USINGLOW-COMPACTION EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OFUNDERLYING SOILS.3.ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED RETENTION DEPTH (ELEVATION)SHALL BE UNDISTURBED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCINGGRADEPAVEMENT/LANDSCAPING / SOD12"(TYP)24"PERFORATEDCMP PIPEUNDERGROUND RETENTION SYSTEM (4P)N T S12"(TYP321P2P 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.3CIVIL DETAILS............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS BEINGREMOVEDCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEPLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS.PLACE EROSION CONTROLBLANKET ON ALL SLOPES4:1 OR STEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS............01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"N1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF EDINA EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPPLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS.PLACE EROSION CONTROLBLANKET ON ALL SLOPES4:1 OR STEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS............01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKET1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF EDINA EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:ALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS............OVERFLOW AT TOP OFFILTER ASSEMBLYOVERFLOW IS 12 OF THE CURBBOX HEIGHTHIGH-FLOW FABRICFILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER, 6"ON-GRADE 10" AT LOW POINTEXISTING CURB, PLATE, BOX,AND GRATENOTES:1. REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEMAFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT.3. REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ERO-4C.CURB INLET FILTERN T S1PROFILE6" MIN CRUSHED STONE75' MINIMUMPLANFINISHEDGRADETO CONSTRUCTION AREA35' REXISTINGUNDISTURBEDROADWAYN T S30' FROM EDGE OF ROADTO FRONT OF SPEED BUMPGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC4" HIGH, 18" WIDESPEED BUMPSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ACCESS24' (MIN)NOTES:1.PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND UNDISTURBEDROADWAY.2.THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENTONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE OR ADDINGSTONE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE.3.REPAIR AND CLEANOUT MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT.4.ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY SHALL BE REMOVED ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.5.FINAL LOCATION AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6.CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIA. CLOSE GRADED, AND IN ACCORDANCE TO MNDOT SECTION 2118.EXISTING UNDISTURBED ROADWAY35' RTO CONSTRUCTIONAREA2TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S3FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.4FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24" 24" 24" MIN. 6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE............OWNER:SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT:CURT GUNSBURY612-598-9416OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING SECTION 21PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMPERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO MEET NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THEPROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES:SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS A REDEVELOPMENT OF AN EXISTING GAS STATION BUILDING INTO TWO NEW COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT BUILDINGS. SITE ANDLANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WILL OCCUR.NATIVE BUFFER NARRATIVE:PRESERVING A 50' NATURAL BUFFER AROUND WATER BODIES IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WATER BODIES ARE NOTLOCATED ON SITE.INFILTRATION NARRATIVE:INFILTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PROJECT BECAUSE PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.SOIL CONTAMINATION NARRATIVE:SOILS ONSITE HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTAMINATED. AN MPCA SOILS ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THATTHIS SITE IS APPROPRIATE FOR INFILTRATION.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE AND DISCHARGES TO BOTH EDINA LAKE AND NINEMILE CREEK - THEY ARE IDENTIFIED AS IMPAIRED WATERBODIES PER THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST. EDINA LAKE IS IMPAIRED FOR NUTRIENTS AND NINEMILE CREEK IS IMPAIRED FORBENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE BIOASSESSMENTS; FISHES BIOASSESSMENTS. BECAUSE THESE WATERS ARE LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THESITE, BMPS AS DEFINED IN THE NPDES PERMIT ITEMS 23.9 AND 23.10 APPLY. THESE ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.DURING CONSTRUCTION:A.STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETEDLATER THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASED.B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 14. MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THATSERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE (5) OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERAL PERMIT (DATED AUGUST 1, 2018 # MNR100001) AND ANY LOCALGOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL.STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPPTHE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A:CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLBMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS4. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AT ALL ADJACENT AND DOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS5. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL6. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (SECTION 14)7. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE8. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL9. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE10. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES11. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES12. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S13. INSTALL STREET SECTION14. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER15. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS16. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH17. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND18. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)19. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING, REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION:THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONALCONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THE SITE. THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 4. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYRECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 11, INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY, CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUALMAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OFBMPS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCT INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDETRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION ORAS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER SECTION 21 OF THE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER IS EXPECTED TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSSWPPP AMENDMENTS (SECTION 6):1.ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.A OR ITEM 21.2.B OR ANOTHER QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL MUST COMPLETE ALL SWPPP CHANGES. CHANGES INVOLVING THE USE OF A LESS STRINGENT BMP MUSTINCLUDE A JUSTIFICATION DESCRIBING HOW THE REPLACEMENT BMP IS EFFECTIVE FOR THE SITE CHARACTERISTICS.2.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN,CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER INSPECTIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS BYTHE SITE OWNER OR OPERATOR, USEPA OR MPCA OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE IN ELIMINATING OR SIGNIFICANTLY MINIMIZING THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS ORGROUNDWATER OR THE DISCHARGES ARE CAUSING WATER QUALITY STANDARD EXCEEDANCES (E.G., NUISANCE CONDITIONS AS DEFINED IN MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) OR THE SWPPP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THEOBJECTIVES OF A USEPA APPROVED TMDL.BMP SELECTION AND INSTALLATION (SECTION 7):1.PERMITTEES MUST SELECT, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN THE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP AND IN THIS PERMIT IN AN APPROPRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVANT MANUFACTURERSPECIFICATIONS AND ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES.EROSION PREVENTION (SECTION 8):1.BEFORE WORK BEGINS, PERMITTEES MUST DELINEATE THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED.2.PERMITTEES MUST MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR DISTURBANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT WITH STEEP SLOPES. WHEN STEEP SLOPES MUST BE DISTURBED, PERMITTEES MUST USE TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PHASINGAND STABILIZATION PRACTICES DESIGNED FOR STEEP SLOPES (E.G., SLOPE DRAINING AND TERRACING).3.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS, INCLUDING STOCKPILES. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY ORTEMPORARILY CEASED ON ANY PORTION OF THE SITE AND WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS. STABILIZATION MUST BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON TEMPORARYSTOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) BUT PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SEDIMENTCONTROLS AT THE BASE OF THE STOCKPILE.4.FOR PUBLIC WATERS THAT THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS PROMULGATED "WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS" DURING SPECIFIED FISH SPAWNING TIME FRAMES, PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSEDSOIL AREAS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE WATER'S EDGE, AND THAT DRAIN TO THESE WATERS, WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING THE RESTRICTION PERIOD.5.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF THE LAST 200 LINEAR FEET OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES OR SWALES THAT DRAIN WATER FROM THE SITE WITHIN 24 HOURSAFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF REMAINING PORTIONS OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDARDAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASES.6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK-DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILT DIKES, ETC.) DO NOTNEED TO BE STABILIZED. PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THESE AREAS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THEIR USE AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM CEASES7.PERMITTEES MUST NOT USE MULCH, HYDROMULCH, TACKIFIER, POLYACRYLAMIDE OR SIMILAR EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES WITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF A TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE SECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS SLOPE OF GREATER THAN 2 PERCENT.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT ALL PIPE OUTLETS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER OR PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENTSYSTEM.9.PERMITTEES MUST NOT DISTURB MORE LAND (I.E., PHASING) THAN CAN BE EFFECTIVELY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 11.SEDIMENT CONTROL (SECTION 9):1.PERMITTEES MUST ESTABLISH SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS OF THE SITE AND DOWNGRADIENT AREAS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO ANY SURFACE WATER, INCLUDING CURB ANDGUTTER SYSTEMS. PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENTLAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN AND MUST KEEP THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES IN PLACE UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER.2.IF DOWNGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE OVERLOADED, BASED ON FREQUENT FAILURE OR EXCESSIVE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLPRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS TO ELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING AND AMEND THE SWPPP TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN ITEM 6.3.3.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK-CHECK DAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS.4.A FLOATING SILT CURTAIN PLACED IN THE WATER IS NOT A SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP TO SATISFY ITEM 9.2 EXCEPT WHEN WORKING ON A SHORELINE OR BELOW THE WATERLINE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT TERMCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (E.G., INSTALLATION OF RIP RAP ALONG THE SHORELINE) IN THAT AREA IS COMPLETE, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL AN UPLAND PERIMETER CONTROL PRACTICE IF EXPOSED SOILS STILL DRAINTO A SURFACE WATER.5.PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ADJUSTED OR REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGE OF VEHICLES, IMMEDIATELYAFTER THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED. PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.6.PERMITTEES MUST PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS USING APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER ON ALL AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THEINLET.7.PERMITTEES MAY REMOVE INLET PROTECTION FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (E.G. STREET FLOODING/FREEZING) IS IDENTIFIED BY THE PERMITTEES OR THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY(E.G., CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER). PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE NEED FOR REMOVAL IN THE SWPPP.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF STOCKPILES ON THE DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER.9.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE STOCKPILES OUTSIDE OF NATURAL BUFFERS OR SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACEFOR THE STORMWATER. 10. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A VEHICLE TRACKING BMP TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK OUT OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE OR ONTO PAVED ROADS WITHIN THE SITE. 11. PERMITTEES MUST USE STREET SWEEPING IF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT TRACKING ONTO THE STREET. 12. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 14. 13. IN ANY AREAS OF THE SITE WHERE FINAL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WILL OCCUR, PERMITTEES MUST RESTRICT VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT USE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. 14. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE TOPSOIL ON THE SITE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 15. PERMITTEES MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 16. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR, IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE ON THE SITE, PROVIDE REDUNDANT (DOUBLE) PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS WHEN A SURFACE WATER IS LOCATEDWITHIN 50 FEET OF THE PROJECT'S EARTH DISTURBANCES AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT LEAST 5 FEET APART UNLESS LIMITEDBY LACK OF AVAILABLE SPACE. NATURAL BUFFERS ARE NOT REQUIRED ADJACENT TO ROAD DITCHES, JUDICIAL DITCHES, COUNTY DITCHES, STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS, STORM DRAIN INLETS, ANDSEDIMENT BASINS. IF PRESERVING THE BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE, PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE REASONS IN THE SWPPP. SHEET PILING IS A REDUNDANT PERIMETER CONTROL IF INSTALLED IN A MANNER THATRETAINS ALL STORMWATER. 17. PERMITTEES MUST USE POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVALDESIGN SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS PRIOR TO CHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATEDSTORMWATER TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEM FOR FILTRATION OR SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (SECTION 10):1.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING (E.G., PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT SEDIMENT BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MAY DEWATER TO SURFACE WATERS IF THEY VISUALLY CHECK TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED ANDNUISANCE CONDITIONS (SEE MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. IF PERMITTEES CANNOT DISCHARGE THE WATER TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING A SURFACEWATER, PERMITTEES MUST TREAT IT WITH APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SURFACE WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.2.IF PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE WATER CONTAINING OIL OR GREASE, THEY MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR OR SUITABLE FILTRATION DEVICE (E.G., CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TODISCHARGE.3.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS ORINUNDATION OF WETLANDS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.4.IF PERMITTEES USE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THEY MUST HAUL THE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURN THE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, ORINCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (SECTION 11):1.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE A TRAINED PERSON, AS IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 21.2.B, WILL INSPECT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION SITE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 1/2 INCH IN 24 HOURS.2.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS.3.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS. PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR,REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY UNLESS ANOTHER TIME FRAME IS SPECIFIED IN ITEM 11.5 OR 11.6.PERMITTEES MAY TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME IF FIELD CONDITIONS PREVENT ACCESS TO THE AREA.4.DURING EACH INSPECTION, PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS BUT NOT CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, FOR EVIDENCE OF EROSION ANDSEDIMENT DEPOSITION. PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABILIZE THEAREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED SOIL. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL,REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMITTEES MUST USE ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OFOBTAINING ACCESS. PERMITTEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK INSURFACE WATERS.5.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS, STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT FOR SEDIMENTATION FROM EROSION OR TRACKEDSEDIMENT FROM VEHICLES. PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES WITHIN ONE (1) CALENDAR DAY OF DISCOVERY OR, IF APPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO AVOID A SAFETY HAZARDTO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS.6.PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE.7.PERMITTEES MUST DRAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND REMOVE THE SEDIMENT WHEN THE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME.8.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE THAT AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE SITE (OR AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITE IN THREE (3) CALENDAR DAYS) IS TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.B.9.PERMITTEES MAY ADJUST THE INSPECTION SCHEDULE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 11.2 AS FOLLOWS:a. INSPECTIONS OF AREAS WITH PERMANENT COVER CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH, EVEN IF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY CONTINUES ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE; ORb.WHERE SITES HAVE PERMANENT COVER ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL AND NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING ANYWHERE ON THE SITE, INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH AND, AFTER 12MONTHS, MAY BE SUSPENDED COMPLETELY UNTIL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RESUMES. THE MPCA MAY REQUIRE INSPECTIONS TO RESUME IF CONDITIONS WARRANT; ORc.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS, INSPECTIONS MAY BE SUSPENDED. INSPECTIONS MUST RESUME WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RUNOFF OCCURRING, ORUPON RESUMING CONSTRUCTION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. 10. PERMITTEES MUST RECORD ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BEING CONDUCTED AND THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED WITH THE SWPPP. THESE RECORDS MUST INCLUDE:a.DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTIONS; ANDb.NAME OF PERSONS CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS; ANDc.ACCURATE FINDINGS OF INSPECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE NEEDED; ANDd.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN (INCLUDING DATES, TIMES, AND PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES); ANDe.DATE OF ALL RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL FOR EACH EVENT. PERMITTEES MUST OBTAIN RAINFALL AMOUNTS BY EITHER A PROPERLY MAINTAINED RAINGAUGE INSTALLED ONSITE, A WEATHER STATION THAT IS WITHIN ONE (1) MILE OF YOUR LOCATION, OR A WEATHER REPORTING SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES SITE SPECIFIC RAINFALL DATA FROM RADAR SUMMARIES;ANDf.IF PERMITTEES OBSERVE A DISCHARGE DURING THE INSPECTION, THEY MUST RECORD AND SHOULD PHOTOGRAPH AND DESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE DISCHARGE (I.E., COLOR, ODOR, SETTLED OR SUSPENDEDSOLIDS, OIL SHEEN, AND OTHER OBVIOUS INDICATORS OF POLLUTANTS); ANDg.ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 6 WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (SECTION 12):1.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TOMINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER. PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT A SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BEEXPOSED TO STORMWATER.2.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TOMINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE, (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE, HYDRAULIC FLUIDS, PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES,ADDITIVES, CURING COMPOUNDS, AND ACIDS) IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITHMINN. R. CH. 7045 INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT AS APPLICABLE.4.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY STORE, COLLECT AND DISPOSE SOLID WASTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7035.5.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.6.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS, INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADEDINCLUDING THE USE OF DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ARE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT ANAPPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS. PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLS IMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BY MINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UPMEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE.7.PERMITTEES MUST LIMIT VEHICLE EXTERIOR WASHING AND EQUIPMENT TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. PERMITTEES MUST CONTAIN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA IN A SEDIMENT BASIN OR OTHER SIMILARLYEFFECTIVE CONTROLS AND MUST DISPOSE WASTE FROM THE WASHING ACTIVITY PROPERLY. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORE SOAPS, DETERGENTS, OR SOLVENTS.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUT OPERATIONS (E.G., CONCRETE, STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS ANDOTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PERMITTEES MUST PREVENT LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUT WASTES FROM CONTACTING THE GROUND AND MUST DESIGN THECONTAINMENT SO IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA RULES. PERMITTEESMUST INSTALL A SIGN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE WASHOUT FACILITY.PERMIT TERMINATION (SECTION 4 AND SECTION 13):1.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ALL TERMINATION CONDITIONS LISTED IN SECTION 13 ARE COMPLETE.2.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SELLING OR OTHERWISE LEGALLY TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRE SITE, INCLUDING PERMIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROADS (E.G., STREET SWEEPING) ANDSTORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINAL CLEAN OUT, OR TRANSFERRING PORTIONS OF A SITE TO ANOTHER PARTY. THE PERMITTEES' COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT TERMINATES AT MIDNIGHT ON THE SUBMISSIONDATE OF THE NOT.3.PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND MUST INSTALL PERMANENT COVER OVER ALL AREAS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. VEGETATIVE COVER MUST CONSIST OF A UNIFORM PERENNIALVEGETATION WITH A DENSITY OF 70 PERCENT OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. VEGETATION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF A SPECIFIC AREA DICTATES NO VEGETATION, SUCH AS IMPERVIOUSSURFACES OR THE BASE OF A SAND FILTER.4.PERMITTEES MUST CLEAN THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND MUST ENSURE THE SYSTEM MEETS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 15 THROUGH 19AND IS OPERATING AS DESIGNED.5.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.6.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. PERMITTEES MAY LEAVE BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE ON-SITE INPLACE.7.FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ONLY, PERMIT COVERAGE TERMINATES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IF THE STRUCTURES ARE FINISHED AND TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION AND DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROLIS COMPLETE, THE RESIDENCE SELLS TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND THE PERMITTEE DISTRIBUTES THE MPCA'S "HOMEOWNER FACT SHEET" TO THE HOMEOWNER.8.FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND (E.G., PIPELINES ACROSS CROPLAND), PERMITTEES MUST RETURN THE DISTURBED LAND TO ITS PRECONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL USE PRIOR TO SUBMITTINGTHE NOT.SEED NOTES:ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SALVAGE AND PRESERVE EXISTING TOPSOIL NECESSARY FOR FINAL STABILIZATION AND TO ALSO MINIMIZE COMPACTION IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDINGTHE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATS COVER CROP) FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT ASEEDING RATE OF 100 LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEED GERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90% COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OFSTRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS.DESIGN ENGINEER: DAVID J. KNAEBLE P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 8/22/2012- 8/23/2012TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12DATE OF RECERTIFICATION: 5/31/19EXPIRATION: 5/31/2022 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT A: SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTPROJECT NAME: PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIALPROJECT LOCATION (BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCCURS. INCLUDE ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE.)ADDRESS: 4660 W 77TH STCITY OR TOWNSHIP: EDINASTATE: MNZIP CODE: 55435LATITUDE/LONGITUDE OF APPROXIMATE CENTROID OF PROJECT: 44.863799 N, 93.342648 WMETHOD OF LAT/LONG COLLECTION (CIRCLE ONE): GPS ONLINE TOOL USGS TOPOGRAPHICALL CITIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: EDINAALL COUNTIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: HENNEPINALL TOWNSHIPS WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: NAPROJECT SIZE (NUMBER OF ACRES TO BE DISTURBED): 5.8PROJECT TYPE (CIRCLE ONE): RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL & RD CONSTRUCTION OTHER (DESCRIBE): XXXXXCUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE (TO THE NEAREST TENTH ACRE)EXISTING AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE : 4.1POST CONSTRUCTION AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 3.6TOTAL NEW AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: -0.5RECEIVING WATERSWATER BODY IDNAME OF WATER BODY WATER BODY TYPE SPECIAL WATER? (Y/N) IMPARIED WATER (Y/N)07020012-51827-0027-00..NINEMILE CREEKEDINA LAKE..CREEKLAKE.. NN..YY..DATES OF CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION START DATE: 06/22ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 11/24GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT INFORMATIONDESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WHAT WILL BE BUILT, GENERAL TIMELINE, ETC): THE CONSTRUCTION IS TO BE A PROPOSED 400-UNIT RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT FACILITY WITH RELATED PARKING, STORMWATERMANAGEMENT AND MISC. SITE FEATURES ON A +/- 5.44-ACRE SITE.DESCRIBE SOIL TYPES FOUND AT THE PROJECT: XXXXXSITE LOCATION MAP - ATTACH MAPS (U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPS OR EQUIVALENT) SHOWING THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL RECEIVING WATERS, INCLUDINGWETLANDS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, STORMWATER PONDS, OR BASINS, ETC. THAT WILL RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT. USE ARROWS SHOWING THE DIRECTION OF FLOW AND DISTANCE TO THE WATER BODY.GENERAL SITE INFORMATION (III.A)1. DESCRIBE THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICIES (BMP'S). INCLUDE THE TIMING FOR INSTALLATION AND PROCEDURESUSED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY BMP'S AS NECESSARY. (III.A.4.A)THE PROJECT IS PROTECTED BY TWO (W) MAIN BMP'S, SILT FENCE AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES. THE SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE AND MONITORED AS NECESSARY. INLETPROTECTION DEVIDES WILL BE INSTALLED IN ALL CATCH BASINS ON THE SITE AND ANY OFF SITE THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THIS SITE. AS THE PROJECT PROGRESSES ADDITIONAL BMP'S SUCH AS EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET MAY BE UTILITZED.2. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A TABLE WITH THE ANTICIPATED QUANITITIES FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT FOR ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (III.A.4.B) SEE PAGE SW1.33. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A SITE MAP THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING FEATURES (III.A.3.B-F):EXIST AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMRWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS.LOCATIONS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND SOIL TYPES.·EXISTING AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS.·LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTRUBED.·LOCATION OF AREAS OF PHASED CONSTRUCTION.·ALL SURFACE WATERS AND EXISTING WETLANDS WITHIN ONE MILE FROM THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE SITE (IDENTIFIABLE ON MAPS SUCH AS USGS 7.5 MINUTEQUADRANGLE MAPS OR EQUIVALENT. WHERE SURFACE WATERS RECEIVING RUNOFF ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL NOT FIT ON THE PLAN SHEET, THEY MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH AN ARROW,INDICATING BOTH DIRECTION AND DISTANCE TO THE SURFACE WATER.·METHODS TO BE USED FOR FINAL STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREA4. WERE STORMWATER MITIGATION MEASURES REQUIRED AS THE RESULT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, OR OTHER REQUIRED LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW THESE MEASURES WERE ADDRESSED IN THE SWPPP. (III.A.6)N/A5. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED IN A KARST AREA SUCH THAT ADDITIONAL MEASURES WOULD BE NECESSARY OT PROJECT DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN MINN. R. CHAPTERS 7050 AND 7060? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO BE USED. (III.A.7)N/A6. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A CALCEREOUS FEN LISTED IN MINN. R. 7050.0180, SUBP. 6 B? NOIF YES, A LETTER OF APPROVAL FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO APPLICATION FOR THIS PERMIT. (PART I B.6 AND PART III.A.8)7. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A WATER THAT IS LISTED AS IMPARED FOR THE FOLLOWING POLLUTANT(S) OR STRESSOR(S): PHOSPHORUS, TURBIDITY, DISSOLVED OXYGEN OR BIOTIC IMPAIRMENT? USE THE SPECIAL ANDIMPAIRED WATERS SEARCH TOOL AT: WWW.PCA.STATE.MN.US/WATER/STORMWATER/STORMWATER-C.HTMLN/AIF NO, SKIP TO TRAININGDOES THE IMPAIRED WATER HAVE AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS (TMDL) WITH AN APPROVED WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY? NOIF YES:A. LIST THE RECEIVING WATER, THE AREAS OF THE SITE DISCHARGING TO IT, AND THE POLLUTANT(S) IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.B. LIST THE BMP'S AND ANY OTHER SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RELATED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.IF THE SITE HAS A DISCHARGE POINT WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE IMPAIRED WATER AND THE WATER FLOWS TO THE IMPAIRED WATER BUT NO SPECIFIC BMPS FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL, THE ADDITIONALBMPS IN APPENDIX A (C.1, C.2, C.3 & (C.4-TROUT STREAM)) MUST BE ADDED TO THE SWPPP AND IMPLEMENTED. (III.A.7). THE ADDITIONAL BMPS ONLY APPLY TO THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT THAT DRAIN TO ONE OF THEIDENTIFIED DISCHARGE POINTS.N/A8. IDENTIFY ADJACENT PUBLIC WATERS WHERE THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) HAS DECLARED “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS” DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMEFRAMESN/ASELECTION OF A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (III.D.)1. WILL THE PROJECT CREATE A NEW CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO ONE ACRE? NOIF YES, A WATER QUALITY VOLUME OF ONE INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE CUMULATIVE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE (SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT) THROUGH INFILTRATION UNLESS PROHIBITED DUETO ONE OF THE REASONS IN PART III.D.1.J. IF INFILTRATION IS PROHIBITED IDENTIFY OTHER METHOD OF OTHER VOLUME REDUCTION (E.G., FILTRATION SYSTEM, WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN, REGIONAL PONDING OR EQUIVALENTMETHOD2. DESCRIBE WHICH METHOD WILL BE USED TO TREAT RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE PROJECT (III.D):·WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN·INFILTRATION/FILTRATION·REGIONAL PONDS·COMBINATION OF PRACTICESINCLUDE ALL CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN INFORMATION FOR THE METHOD SELECTED. SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH METHOD.INFILTRATION / FILTRATION / REGIONAL PONDINGCALCULATIONS ARE WITHIN THE SITE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT AND PART OF THIS SWPPP AS ATTACHMENT D.3. IF IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO MEET THE TREATMENT REQUIREMENT FOR THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME, DESCRIBE WHY. THIS CAN INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAYPRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT, SUCH AS GRASSES SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS, WILL BE IMPLEMENTEDTO TREAT RUNOFF PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. (III.C)IT IS FEASIBLE TO MEET REQUIREMENT FOR WATER QUALITY VOLUME.4. FOR PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE TO TROUT STREAMS, INCLUDING TRIBUTARIES TO TROUT STREAMS, IDENTIFY METHOD OF INCORPORATING TEMPERATURE CONTROLS INTO THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEM.N/AEROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES (IV.B)DESCRIBE THE TYPES OF TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION BMP'S EXPECTED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCITON:1. DESCRIBE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE EROSION. DELINEATE AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED (E.G., WITH FLAGS,STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) BEFORE WORK BEGINS.SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT ATHE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE.2. DESCRIBE METHODS OF TEMPORARILY STABILIZING SOILS AND SOIL STOCKPILES (E.G., MULCHES, HYDRAULIC TACKIFIERS, EROSION BLANKETS, ETC.):TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION WILL BE SEED AND MULCH AND EROSION BLANKETS WHERE REQUIRED, WITH PERMANENT COVER BEING EITHER SOD OR LANDSCAPE FEATURES.3. DESCRIBE METHODS OF DISSIPATING VELOCITY ALONG STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND AT CHANNEL OUTLETS (E.G., CHECK DAMS, SEDIMENT TRAPS, RIP RAP, ETC.):SOD WILL BE UTILIZED ALONG CHANNELS AND RIP RAP AT CHANNEL.4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STABILIZATION OF DITCH AND SWALE WETTED PERIMETERS (NOTE THAT MULCH, HYDRAULIC SOIL TACKIFIERS, HYDROMULCHES, ETC. ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE SOIL STABILIZATION METHODSFOR ANY PART OF A DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE)FINAL STABILIZATION OF SWALES WILL BE SOD5. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS (E.G., RIP RAP, SPLASH PADS, GABIONS, ETC.)RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT PIPE OUTLETS6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO PROMOTE INFILTRATION AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL ON THE SITE PRIOR TO OFFSITE DISCHARGE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE (E.G., DIRECT STORMWATER FLOW TO VEGETATED AREAS):DISCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA AND INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE UTILIZED7. FOR DRAINAGE OR DIVERSION DITCHES, DESCRIBE PRACTICES TO STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET OF THE PROPERTY EDGE OR POINT OF DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATER. THE LAST 200LINEAL FEET MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO SURFACE WATERS AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED FOR ALL DISCHARGES TOSPECIAL, IMPAIRED OR “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS”. ALL OTHER REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER,PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.N/A, NO DITCHES ON SITE8. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION (E.G., CONSTRUCTION PHASING, MINIMIZING SOIL DISTURBANCE, VEGETATIVE BUFFERS, HORIZONTALSLOPE GRADING, SLOPE DRAINING/TERRACING, ETC.):OTHER EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO; MINIMIZING SITE EXPOSURE WHEN POSSIBLE.9. IF APPLICABLE, INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN APPENDIX A PART C.3 REGARDING MAINTAINING A 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE OR INSTALLING REDUNDANT BMPS FOR PORTIONS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO SPECIALWATERS).N/A10. IF APPLICABLE, DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE TO PROTECT PLANNED INFILTRATION AREASMINIMIZE SITE EXPOSURE IN AREAS ADJACENT TO INFILTRATION AREAS.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICIES (IV.C)DESCRIBE THE METHODS OF SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMSSILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE SITE2. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SOIL STOCKPILES:SEED AND MULCH AS WELL AS EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS WILL BE UTILIZED AS NECESSARY3. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION:SEE INLET PROTECTION DETAILS4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO MINIMIZE VEHICLE TRACKING AT CONSTRUCTION EXITS AND STREET SWEEPING ACTIVITIES:THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.5. DESCRIBE METHODS, IF APPLICABLE, ADDITIONAL SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G., DIVERSION BERMS) TO BE INSTALLED TO KEEP RUNOFF AWAY FROM PLANNED INFILTRATION AREAS WHEN EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FINALSTABILIZATION OF THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA:SILT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING TO PROTECT INFILTRATION AREAS.6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND PRESERVE TOP SOIL (UNLESS INFEASIBLE) AT THIS SITE:LIGHT TRACKED EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED, TOPSOIL WILL BE STRIPPED AND STOCKPILED7. DESCRIBE PLANS TO PRESERVE A 50-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT'S SOIL DISTURBANCE AND A SURFACE WATER OR PLANS FOR REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE:DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG WETLAND. PROJECT WILL NOT DISTURB WITHIN 200 FEET OF WETLAND.8. DESCRIBE PLANS FOR USE OF SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS (E.G., POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, ETC.) SEE PART IV.C.10 OF THE PERMIT:N/A9. IS THE PROJECT REQUIRED TO INSTALL A TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN DUE TO 10 OR MORE ACRES DRAINING TO A COMMON LOCATION OR 5 ACRES OR MORE IF THE SITE IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPAIRED WATER?NOIF YES, DESCRIBE (OR ATTACH PLANS ) SHOWING HOW THE BASIN WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.C OF THE PERMIT.N/ADEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (IV.D)1. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE MEASURES TO BE USED TO TREAT/DISPOSE OF TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER AND METHOD TO PREVENT EROSION OR SCOUR OF DISCHARGE POINTS (SEE PART IV. D OF THE PERMIT):N/A 2. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE USE OF FILTERS FOR BACKWASH WATER? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW FILTER BACKWASH WATER WILL BE MANAGED ON THE SITE OR PROPERLY DISPOSED (SEE PART III.D.3. OF THE PERMIT):N/AADDITIONAL BMP'S FOR SPECIAL WATERS AND DISCHARGES TO WETLANDS (APPENDIX A, PARTS C AND D)1. SPECIAL WATERS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE TO SPECIAL WATERS? NO2. IF PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAY PRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, THEN OTHER TREATMENT SUCH ASGRASSED SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED.N/A3. DESCRIBE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS FOR EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH A CONTINUOUS POSITIVE SLOPE TO A SPECIAL WATERS, AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS FOR AREAS THAT DRAIN FIVE OR MORE ACRESDISTURBED AT ONE TIME.N/A4. DESCRIBE THE UNDISTURBED BUFFER ZONE TO BE USED (NOT LESS THAN 100 LINEAR FEET FROM THE SPECIAL WATER).N/A5. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL ENSURE THAT THE PRE AND POST PROJECT RUNOFF RATE AND VOLUME FROM THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION EVENTS REMAINS THESAME.N/A6. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL MINIMIZE ANY INCREASE IN THE TEMPERATURE OF TROUT STREAM RECEIVING WATERS RESULTING IN THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATIONEVENTS.N/A7. WETLANDS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE STORMWATER WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO A WETLAND (E.G., CONVERSION OF A NATURAL WETLAND TO A STORMWATER POND)? YES OR NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE WETLAND MITIGATION SEQUENCE THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART D OF APPENDIX A.N/AINSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (IV.E)DESCRIBE PROCEDURES TO ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE:·ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND·WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND WITHIN (7) DAYS AFTER THATINSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION,AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S AND INFILTRATION AREAS.INSPECTOR WILL FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND FILL OUT "ATTACHMENT B - CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST"1. Describe practices for storage of building products with a potential to leach pollutants to minimize exposure to stormwater:ALL BUILDING PRODUCTS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE EXPOSURE2. Describe practices for storage of pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers, treatment chemical, and landscape materials:ALL LANDSCAPE TREATMENT CHEMICALS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZED EXPOSURE3. Describe practices for storage and disposal of hazardous materials or toxic waste (e.g., oil, fuel, hydraulic fluids, paint solvents, petroleum-based products, wood preservative, additives, curing compounds, and acids) according to Minn. R. ch. 7045, includingrestricted access and secondary containment:ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS.4. Describe collection, storage and disposal of solid waste in compliance with Minn. R. ch. 7035:ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND SOLID WASTER WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS5. Describe management of portable toilets to prevent tipping and disposal of sanitary wastes in accordance with Minn. R. ch. 7040:SANITARY AND SEPTIC SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED TO WORKERS WITH PORTABLE FACILITIES MAINTAINED AS NEEDED BY THE PROVIDER.6. Describe spill prevention and response for fueling and equipment or vehicle maintenance:EMPLOYEES WILL BE TRAINED IN TECHNIQUES DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE SPILLS. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS.7. Describe containment and disposal of vehicle and equipment wash water and prohibiting engine degreasing on the site:ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE WASHED OFF SITE8. Describe storage and disposal of concrete and other washout wastes so that wastes do not contact the ground:ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR OFF SITE.FINAL STABILIZATION (IV.G)1. DESCRIBE METHOD OF FINAL STABILIZATION (PERMANENT COVER) OF ALL DISTURBED AREAS:FINAL STABILIZATION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH PAVEMENT, SOD AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS.2. DESCRIBE PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING FINAL STABILIZATION AND TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE (SEE PART IV.G.1-5):UPON STABILIZATION DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE CONTRCTOR AND OWNER SHALL MUTUALLY TRANSFER THE NPDES PERMIT TO THE NEXT OWNER WITH DOCUMENTS DESCRIBING THE NATURE OF TERMINATION PROCEDURE.DOCUMENTATION OF INFEASIBILITY: (IF APPLICABLE)SOILS INFORMATIONMAP UNITSYMBOLL50AMUSKEGO AND HOUGHTONSOILS, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPESMAP UNIT NAMEU1AURBAN LAND-UDORTHENTS, WETSUBSTRATUM, COMPLEX, 0 TO 2PERCENT SLOPES....U1AL50A 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.5SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT B: SWPPP INSPECTION FORMATTACHMENT C: MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMNOTE: THIS INSPECTION REPORT DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL ASPECTS OF THE NATIONAL APOLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS) CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT ISSUED ON AUGUST 1,2013. THE COMPLETION OF THIS CHECKLIST DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE; IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE(S) TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.FACILITY INFORMATIONSITE NAME: FACILITY ADDRESS: PERMIT NUMBER:CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:INSPECTION INFORMATIONINSPECTOR NAME: _______________________ PHONE NUMBER: _________________________DATE (MM/DD/YYYY): _____________________TIME: ____________ AM / PMIS THE INSPECTOR CERTIFIED IN SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL AND IS IT DOCUMENTED IN THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)?IS THIS INSPECTION ROUTINE OR IN RESPONSE TO A STORM EVENT:RAINFALL AMOUNT (IF APPLICABLE): ____________IS THE SITE WITHIN ONE AERIAL MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPARED WATER?IF YES, FOLLOW APPENDIX A AND OTHER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTSNOTE: IF N/A IS SELECTED AT ANY TIME, SPECIFY WHY IN THE COMMENT AREA FOR THAT SECTION.EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.B)1.SOIL STABILIZATION WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR 14 DAYS? (7 DAYS WHERE APPLICABLE)2.HAS THE NEED TO DISTURB STEEP SLOPES BEEN MINIMIZED?3.ALL DITCHES STABILIZED 200; BACK FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE WITHIN 24 HOURS? (NOT MULCH)4.ARE THERE BMP'S FOR ONSITE STOCKPILES?5.ARE APPROPRIATE BMP'S INSTALLED PROTECTING INLETS/OUTLETS?6.DO PIPE OUTLETS HAVE ENERGY DISSIPATION?COMMENTS:SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.C)1.PERIMETER CONTROL INSTALLED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS?2.PERIMETER CONTROL TRENCHED IN WHERE APPROPRIATE?3.50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER MAINTAINED AROUND ALL SURFACE WATERS?3.1.IF NO, HAVE REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS BEEN INSTALLED?4.INLET PROTECTION ON ALL CATCH BASINS AND CULVERT INLETS?5.VEHICLE TRACKING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AT ALL SITE EXITS?6.ALL TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITHIN 24 HOURS?7.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS STAKED AND MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?8.ARE ALL INFILTRATION AREAS PROTECTED WITH A PRETREATMENT DEVICE?9.DO ALL STOCKPILES HAVE PERIMETER CONTROLS?COMMENTS:MAINTENANCE-EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (PART IV.E.)1.ARE ALL PREVIOUSLY STABILIZED AREAS MAINTAINING 90% GROUND COVER?2.ANY DITCH EROSION OBSERVED?3.PERIMETER CONTROL--HAS SEDIMENT REACHED ONE HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE?4.ARE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MAINTAINED AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY?COMMENTS:OTHER1.ARE ALL MATERIALS THAT CAN LEACH POLLUTANTS UNDER COVER?2.HAS ACCESS BEEN RESTRICTED TO ONSITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS?3.DOES ON-SITE FUELING ONLY OCCUR IN A CONTAINED AREA?4.ARE ALL SOLID WASTES BEING PROPERLY DISPOSED OF?5.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA COMPLETELY CONTAINED?6.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA MARKED WITH SIGN?COMMENTS:7.WERE ANY DISCHARGES SEEN DURING THIS INSPECTION, SEDIMENT, WATER, OR OTHERWISE?7.1.IF YES, STATE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL POINTS OF DISCHARGE. PHOTOGRAPH THE DISCHARGE AND DESCRIBE THE DISCHARGE (COLOR, ODOR, FOAM, OIL SHEEN, ETC). HOW WILL IT BE REMOVED? HOW DID THE DISCHARGEHAPPEN? HOW MUCH WAS DISCHARGED? HOW WILL IT BE STOPPED, AND HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO STOP? IS THE DISCHARGE GOING INTO AN ADJACENT SITE? WAS THE DISCHARGE A SEDIMENT DELTA? IF YES, WILL THE DELTA BERECOVERED WITHIN 7 DAYS?8.WILL A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BE UTILIZED IN THIS PROJECT AS REQUIRED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.D OF THE PERMIT? DESCRIBE:9.IS ANY DEWATERING OCCURRING ON SITE?9.1.IF YES, WHERE? WHAT BMP IS BEING USED? HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING DEWATERED? IS THE WATER CLEAR? WHERE IS THE WATER BEING DISCHARGED TO?10.IS A COPY OF THE SWPPP LOCATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE?11.HAS THE SWPPP BEEN FOLLOWED AND IMPLEMENTED ON SITE?12.IS A SEDIMENTATION BASIN REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?12.1.IF YES, ARE THEY MAINTAINED AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?13.IS THE TOPSOIL ON THIS PROJECT BEING PRESERVED?13.1.IF YES, EXPLAIN HOW THE TOP SOIL IS BEING PRESERVED. IF NO, EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS INFEASIBLE.14.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?14.1.DO ALL INFILTRATION AREAS HAVE PRETREATMENT DEVICES?15.DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTED DURING THE INSPECTION, REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, AND RECOMMENDED DATE OF COMPLETION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:16.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP:17.POTENTIAL AREAS OF FUTURE CONCERN:18.ADDITIONAL COMMENTSDISCLOSURES:·AFTER DISCOVERY, THE PERMIT REQUIRES MANY OF THE DEFICIENCIES THAT MAY BE FOUND IN THIS CHECKLIST BE CORRECTED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME. SEE PERMIT FOR MORE DETAILS.·THIS INSPECTION CHECKLIST IS AN OPTION FOR SMALL CONSTRUCTION SITES. LARGE CONSTRUCTION SITES AND LINEAR PROJECTS REQUIRE MORE EXTENSIVE/MORE LOCATION SPECIFIC INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS.·THE PERMITTEE(S) IS/ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMP'S AS WELL AS EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S UNTILANOTHER PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT ACCORDING TO PART II.B.5., OR THE PROJECT HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION AND A NOTICE OF TERMINATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.Y N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AATTACHMENT C - CHAMBERFACILITY MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE1.ALL GRIT CHAMBERS, SUMP CATCH BASINS, SUMP MANHOLES, OUTLET STRUCTURES, CULVERTS, OUTFALL STRUCTURES AND OTHERSTORM WATER FACILITIES FOR WHICH MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED HEREIN MUST BE INSPECTED IN THESPRING, SUMMER AND FALL OF EACH YEAR. WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE INSPECTION DATE, ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS MUST BEREMOVED SUCH THAT EACH STORM WATER FACILITY OPERATES AS DESIGNED AND PERMITTED. CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BEKEPT CLEAR OF LITTER AND VEGETATIVE DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES AND OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS KEPT CLEAR, INLET AREAS KEPT CLEAN, ANDUNDESIRABLE VEGETATION REMOVED. EROSION IMPAIRING THE FUNCTION OR INTEGRITY OF THE FACILITIES, IF ANY, WILL BE CORRECTED,AND ANY STRUCTURAL DAMAGE IMPAIRING OR THREATENING TO IMPAIR THE FUNCTION OF THE FACILITIES MUST BE REPAIRED.2.VOLUME CONTROL FACILITIES AND CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED EVERY THREE MONTHS DURING THEOPERATIONAL PERIOD (BETWEEN SPRING SNOWMELT AND FIRST SUBSTANTIAL SNOWFALL) AND MONITORED AFTER RAINFALL EVENTS OF 1INCH OR MORE TO ENSURE THAT THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS CLEAR OF LITTER AND DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES AND OVERFLOWSPILLWAYS ARE CLEAR, INLET AREAS ARE CLEAN, UNDESIRABLE VEGETATION IS REMOVED AND THERE IS NO EROSION IMPAIRING ORTHREATENING TO IMPAIR THE FUNCTION OF A FACILITY. IF SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED IN A INFILTRATION FEATURE, WITHIN 30 DAYS OFINSPECTION DEPOSITED SEDIMENTS MUST BE REMOVED, THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS MUST BE RESTORED,AND ANY SURFACE DISTURBANCE MUST BE STABILIZED. INSPECTION MUST ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT TRAPS AND FOREBAYS ARE TRAPPINGSEDIMENT AND THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE STORAGE VOLUME REMAINS, THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS STABLE (I.E., NOEROSION IS OBSERVED), AND INLETS AND OUTLET/OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS ARE IN GOOD CONDITIONS WITH NO EROSION. MAINTENANCETECHNIQUES USED MUST PROTECT THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE PRACTICE BY LIMITING SOIL COMPACTION TO THE GREATESTEXTENT POSSIBLE (E.G., BY USING LOW-IMPACT EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT).3.UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS MUST BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR TO ENSURE THAT ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY REMAINS.CAPACITY WILL BE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE IF SEDIMENT HAS DECREASED THE STORAGE VOLUME BY 50 PERCENT OF ITS ORIGINAL DESIGNVOLUME. ACCUMULATED DEBRIS AND SEDIMENT WILL BE REMOVED, AND INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURES WILL BE CLEARED OF ANY FLOWIMPEDIMENTS. 768. 0'408. 0'240. 0' 528. 0' 12 0.0'264. 0' 84. 0'84. 0'180. 0'180.0'35'BUILDINGSETBACKNOPARKING1 A PAINTED SHARED BIKE LANE SPECIAL PAVING AT PLAZA FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AT ENTIRE BUILDING PERIMETER; MIX OF SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, GROUNDCOVERS COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL SPECIAL PAVING AT ENTRY PLAZA AND IN PARKING BAYS ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT ENTRY STAIR ORNAMENTAL TREES AT DRIVE EDGE SHRUB HEDGE AT DRIVE EDGE CANOPY TREES IN GRASS BOULEVARD ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT SITE ENTRY ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT SITE ENTRY COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL SIDEWALK WITH DRIVEABLE CRUSHED STONE SHOULDERS FOR FIRE ACCESS ACCESSIBLE WALK CONNECTION TO PARK ASPEN BOSQUE BOSQUE OF COLUMNAR TREES PICKLEBALL COURT ACCESSIBLE WALK CONNECTION TO PARK HOT TUB SUN DECK LOUNGE SEATING AREAS TERRACING DOWN HILLSIDE STORMWATER FEATURE CASCADES DOWN THROUGH ENTIRE COURTYARD AMENITY DECK WITH GRILLS, BAR, SINK, FIRE PIT, LOUNGE FURNISHINGS DOG RUN WITH 4' TALL, BLACK VINYL-COATED CHAIN LINK FENCE AND DOGIPOT WASTE STATION PUBLIC TRAIL ACCESS TO PARK TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH G Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering B K V R O U P 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2019 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CONSULTANTS N O T FO R C O N S TR U C TIO N CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_LAND_2021.rvt4/29/2021 6:55:31 PMBH BH 2395-03 L100 OVERALL SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION 04-30-2021 SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 1" = 20'-0"L100 1 OVERALL SITE LANDSCAPE REFERENCE PLAN PROPOSED PLANT SCHEDULE: QTY SYM COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME PLANTING SIZE PERENNIALS/VINES/ANNUALS 1 ac MAGGIE DALEY ASTILBE Astilbe chinensis 'Maggie Daley' #1 CONT. 1 ca FEATHER REED GRASS Calamagrostis arundinacea var. brachtytricha #1 CONT. 1 hb BLUE ANGEL HOSTA Hosta 'Blue Angel'#1 CONT. 1 hh HAPPY RETURNS DAYLILY Hemerocallis 'Happy Returns' #1 CONT. 1 pa HAMELN FOUNTAIN GRASS Pennisetum alopecuroides 'Hameln' #1 CONT. 1 pt PACHYSANDRA 'Green Carpet' Pachysandra terminalis 'Green Carpet' #1 CONT. 1 pv NORTHWIND SWITCHGRASS Panicum virgatum 'Northwind' #1 CONT. 1 rh WALKER'S LOW CATMINT Nepeta x faassenii 'Walker's Low' #1 CONT. 1 sh PRAIRIE DROPSEED Sporobolus heterolepis #1 CONT. 1 ss LITTLE BLUESTEM 'Blue Heaven' Schizachyrium scoparium 'Minnblue A' (PP17, 310) #1 CONT. ORNAMENTAL TREES 7 AG AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY Amelanchir x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' 2" CAL. 2 BP WHITESPIRE BIRCH (CLUMP) Betula populifolia 'Whitespire' 2.5" CAL. 8 CC NORTHERN CLUMP REDBUD Cercis canadensis #20 CONT. 5 SR SUMMER STORM LILAC Syringa reticulata 'Summer Storm' (PPAF) 2" CAL. DECIDUOUS TREES 8 AS GREEN MOUNTAIN SUGAR MAPLE Acer saccharum 'Green Mountain' 2.5" CAL. 7 BN RIVER BIRCH Betula nigra 2.5" CAL. 6 BP DAKOTA PINNACLE BIRCH Betula platyphylla 'Fargo' 2.5" CAL. 3 GB AUTUMN GOLD GINKGO Ginkgo Biloba 'Autumn Gold' 2.5" CAL. 8 GT SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis 'Skycole' 2.5" CAL. 6 PT PRAIRIE GOLD ASPEN Populus tremuloides 'NEArb' 2.5" CAL. 8 QA QUAKING ASPEN Populous tremuloides #20 CONT. 7 QB SWAMP WHITE OAK Quercus bicolor 2.5" CAL. 5 QW KINDRED SPIRIT OAK Quercus x warei 'Nadler' 2.5" CAL. 5 TA AMERICAN SENTRY LINDEN Tilia americana 'MnKSentry' 2.5" CAL. DECIDUOUS SHRUBS 1 Bw NORTHERN CHARM BOXWOOD Buxus 'Wilson'#3 CONT. 1 Cc SUGARTINA CLETHRA Clethra alnifolia 'Crystalina' (PP21, 561) #2 CONT. 1 Cf ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOOD Cornus stolonifera 'Farrow' (PP18,523) #5 CONT. 1 Cs CARDINAL DOGWOOD Cornus sericea 'Cardinal' #5 CONT. 1 Ds BUTTERFLY BUSH HONEYSUCKLE Diervilla sessilifolia 'Butterfly' #5 CONT. 1 Dw DWARF WINGED EUONYMOU Euonymous alatus 'Compactus' #10 CONT. 1 Ra GRO LOW SUMAC Rhus aromatica 'Gro Low' #5 CONT. 1 Sm DWARF KOREAN LILAC Syringe meyeri 'Palibin' #5 CONT. 1 Sr RED ELDERBERRY Sambucus racemosa #5 CONT. 1 Ss SEM FALSE SPIREA Sorbaria sorbifolia 'Sem'(PP16,336) #2 CONT. CONIFEROUS TREES 1 JC SPARTAN JUNIPER Juniper chinensis 'Spartan' 6' B&B 12 PA NORWAY SPRUCE Picea abies 8' B&B 7 PS WHITE PINE Pinus Strobus 6' B&B CONIFEROUS SHRUBS 1 Cp KING'S GOLD CHAMAECYPARIS Chamaecyparis pisifera 'King's gold' #5 CONT. 1 Ct HEATHERBUN CHAMAECYPARIS Chamaecyparis thyoides 'Heather Bun' #5 CONT. 1 Jh BLUE CHIP JUNIPER Juniperus horizontalis 'Blue Chip' #5 CONT. 1 Jp SEA GREEN JUNIPER Juniperus x pfitseriana 'Sea Green' #5 CONT. 1 Js BLUE FOREST JUNIPER Juniperus sabina 'Blue Forest' #5 CONT. 1 Pb SCHOODIC PINE Pinus banksiana 'Schoodic' #3 CONT. 1 Tc TECHNITO ARBORVITAE Thuja occidentalis 'Bailjohn' (PP15, 850) 6' B&B *PLANT SCHEDULE FOR SPECIES REFERENCE ONLY, FINAL QUANTITIES TO BE DETERMINED IRRIGATION NOTE: ALL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE DRIPLINE IRRIGATION, ALL TURF AREAS TO RECEIVE SPRAY NOZZLES RESIDENTIAL UNITS 7TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN STAIR ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW 5TH - 6TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN3RD - 4TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 2ND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN1ST LEVEL FLOOR PLANP1 LEVEL FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLANS A2-0 ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS STAIRSTAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR. STOR.STOR. M T M T M TM T M T M T M TELEVATORSELEVATORSELEVATORS RESIDENTIAL UNITS PLAZA DECK PLAZA DECK PUB GUEST SUITE COWORKLOUNGELOUNGEOPEN TO BELOW CONF. FITNESS WEIGHT ROOM FITNESS YOGA GAME ROOM PLAZA DECK GARAGE ENTRY RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS CLUB ROOM SAUNA POOL MECH RAMP DN.RAMP DN.RAMP UPMECH STOR. M TSTAIR HALF STORY USE TBD OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW MECH RESIDENTIAL UNITS MECH TRASH LOBBY LEASE MAIL PACK.TRASH BIKE CAFE 8% RAMP MECH RAMP UPREFLECTING POOLEXT. METAL GRATE STAIR AMENITY 0 40 80 N COLORED, PATTERNED ROCK BALLASTED ROOF 388'-8"184'-0"65'- 0"65'-0"65'-0"177'-0"402'-0"AMENITY 40'-0"131'-10"65'-0"86'-10"65'-0" STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIR ELEVATORS ELEVATOR ELEVATORS201'-8"ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATORS8'-0"22'-0"OPTIONAL PARKING AREA (BASED ON FEASIBILITY) BUILDING AREA:97,581 SF MEP STORAGE:950 SF TRASH/LOADING:969 SF AMENITY:1,786 SF LOBBY/LEASING:1,749 SF GROSS RES. AREA:12,222 SF CIRCULATION:1,155 SF NET RES. AREA:11,067 SF UNIT COUNT:16 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:79,905 SF 190-240 SPACES BASEMENT TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:92,387 SF MEP STORAGE:967 SF TRASH/LOADING:169 SF AMENITY:654 SF GROSS RES. AREA:24,842 SF CIRCULATION:2,113 SF NET RES. AREA:22,729 SF UNIT COUNT:32 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:65,755 SF 193 SPACESTOTAL PARKING: GROUND LEVEL BUILDING AREA:87,713 SF MEP STORAGE:1,174 SF TRASH/LOADING:162 SF AMENITY:12,966 SF GROSS RES. AREA:43,899 SF CIRCULATION:8,550 SF NET RES. AREA:35,349 SF UNIT COUNT:50 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:29,512 SF 87 SPACES LEVEL 2 TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:67,577 SF MEP STORAGE:816 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:66,579 SF CIRCULATION:6,810 SF NET RES. AREA:59,769 SF UNIT COUNT:84 UNITS LEVELS 3-4 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:38,134 SF CIRCULATION:3,847 SF NET RES. AREA:34,287 SF UNIT COUNT:48 UNITS LEVELS 5-6 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF AMENITY:733 SF GROSS RES. AREA:37,401 SF CIRCULATION:4,065 SF NET RES. AREA:33,336 SF UNIT COUNT:46 UNITS LEVEL 7 SOLHEM COMPANIES 724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3-0 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV)P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) ROOF 85'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV) ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES 1. P1 ELEVATION AT 823.0 BASED ON LOWEST ALLOWED ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 2. LOWEST ALLOWED OPENINGS ON BUILDING TO BE AT 825.2 ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 3. MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF 85' BASED ON AVERAGE GRADE PLANE OF 829 4. COLORED ELEVATION SKIN KEYED BELOW - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES ELEVATION EXTERIOR SKIN KEY FACE BRICK PATTERNED PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL (NOTED ON ELEVS AT GARAGE AREAS ONLY) UTILITY FACE BRICK FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL WALL MOUNTED BUILDING SIGNAGE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PERMITTING BY LICENSED SIGN CONTRACTOR - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR POTENTIAL LOCATIONS - SIZE AND QUANTITY TBD PER ZONING CODE FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ ACCENT TRIM BANDING FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. INSULATED O.H. GARAGE DOOR FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT TRELLIS VERTICAL METAL PANEL FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) PORTE COCHERE FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING COURTYARD ELEVATION (EAST FACING) NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION COURTYARD ELEVATION (WEST FACING) SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION TRELLIS & PERGOLA PORTE COCHERE POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATION ENLARGED SIGNAGE ELEVATION ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDINGFACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL VERTICAL METAL PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING TRELLIS & PERGOLA FIBER CEMENT PANEL SOLHEM COMPANIES 724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 UTILITY BRICK VENEER FIBER CEMENT PANEL SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL VINYL WINDOW FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING PRECAST PANEL BRICK PATTERN * VARIED COLOR EXPOSURE HUNG ALUMINUM BALCONY FIXED AWNING * TO MATCH UTILITY BRICK VENEER VINYL SLIDING DOOR Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/26/2021 10:39:35 AMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-1 EXTERIOR MATERIALS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION SOLHEM COMPANIES 724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 A3-1 SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW EDINA, Minnesota Entitlements Package DEC 22, 2020 PENTAGON PARK PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.22.2020 04SITE VISION Dog runs Promenade – Pedestrian Connection to ParkCourtyard Sense of Place – Park Connection Green Infrastructure – Creative Stormwater Treatment Entry Plaza – Arrival & Public Space Whimsy - Placemaking SITE Art Screen PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.22.2020 05 NORTHEAST AXON VIEW NORTHWEST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW SOUTHWEST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW OVERALL SITE VIEWS PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.22.2020 SECTIONS 13 (5) LEVELS OF TYPE III CONSTRUCTION OVER (3) LEVELS OF TYPE I CONSTRUCTION -TYP. TYPE III FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT INCLUDING GARAGE = 74'-0" TYPE I CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES P1 LEVEL WITH FULLY BELOW GRADE CONSTRUCTION (AVERAGE GRADE PLANE TBD) -MAX BUILDING CODE HEIGHT FOR TYPE III IS 85'-0" (4) LEVELS OF TYPE V CONSTRUCTION OVER (1) LEVEL OF TYPE I CONSTRUCTION -TYP. TYPE V FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT 53'-4" (5) LEVELS OF TYPE III CONSTRUCTION OVER (1) LEVEL OF TYPE I CONSTRUCTION -TYP. TYPE V FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT 64'-0" EdinaMN.gov 3 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 4 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 5 2008 Approved Overall Development Plan Site Site City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 1 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire The City of Edina has set ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the community. To help achieve these goals, developers seeking City approval must complete this form as part of their their zoning application. Upon receipt of this form, please email Sustainability Coordinator, Grace Hancock, GHancock@edinamn.gov, to set up a time to walk through the form and discuss sustainable building strategies. Please email the completed form to Cary Teague, CTeague@edinamn.gov, and copy Grace Hancock. Topics Answers Yes or No Brief Description Sustainable Design & Energy Consumption Will you utilize Xcel Energy’s Energy Design Assistance and/or Centerpoint Energy’s Builder and Developer programs for this development? Yes We have used this program on almost all of our projects and have achieved substantial savings beyond code on recent developments. Will the buildings meet SB2030 energy goals? Yes The building is expected to perform beyond code. Actual energy use will be determined through the EDA process mentioned above. Sustainable design is a key value we incorporate into all buildings that we build. Past residential projects have met LEED Gold Multifamily standards and we will use similar design principles for this project. Will the building be LEED certified? No However, the building will follow Gold LEED guidelines for multifamily housing. Will all appliances and equipment be Energy Star or EPA WaterSense certified? Yes All appliances that can be Energy Star cerified will be. Will different strategies to conserve energy (beyond those required by code) be included? If so, please describe Yes We will be assessing multiple strategies such as high efficiency HVAC equipment, water efficient fixtures, extra insulation, use of fans for ambient cooling, lighting control sytems, low-E argon filled windows, and LED lighting systems. Will there be renewable energy such as solar or wind be generated on site? Yes/No However, we will be planning portions of the main roof to be solar ready where feasible, and incorporating plantings and green roof elements within the center courtyard plaza and our City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 2 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire planned rooftop patio. Our windows will be maximized for solar thermal gain in winter months. Will the project include a geothermal system? No Not planned Will the completed project subscribe to a community solar program or other renewable energy program? No Not planned; however Solhem’s sister company Renew22 invests directly in solar gardens in MN to offset ALL electrical demand generated by this project. Will there be purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs)? No Not planned; however Solhem’s sister company Renew22 invests directly in solar gardens in MN to offset ALL electrical demand generated by this project. Comments: Managing Storm Water What percent of the property is pervious surface before the redevelopment? What is the percent post development? Yes 82% Existing Pervious Surface. The proposed new development will more than double the Pervious Surface area. What new surfaces will be pervious? (i.e. Sidewalks, driveways, overflow parking) TBD We are reviewing options for possible incorporation. Will a green roof be included on the new structure to assist in storm water retention? Yes Green roof elements within the center courtyard plaza and our planned rooftop patio. Will rain gardens or similar features be included on site to filter and retain the storm water? Yes This is a core principle of development for our buildings that also serves to enhance a healthy environment for humans. The exact percentage of landscape elements have not been determined at this time. Comments: Landscaping Features to Manage Air Quality and Heat Island Effect Will existing healthy trees be protected and saved? Yes We will preserve as many healthy trees as possible. What percent of the property is covered by tree canopy before redevelopment? What is the percent post development? The existing site has approximately 8% of tree canopy. The long term goal post developmet is 35% tree canopy. 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)? Yes Best planting practices for trees will be followed to insure a vibrant and healthy landscape. In our landscape design we aim City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 3 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire to protect as many mature trees on the site as possible and add bio-diversity and climate hardiness with tree selections. Will shade trees be provided along roadways, drives and surface parking areas beyond those required by code? Yes Almost all of our required parking is within a structured garage. We will meet the code for the few exterior spaces. Will native plantings be used in the landscaping? Yes The landscaping will have extensive use of climate hardy native plants and trees. Will landscaping include pollinator-friendly varieties? Yes We will use pollinator friendly plantings wherever possible. Will future owners and managers be trained in methods to avoid harmful chemicals being used on landscaping? Yes The goal is to eliminate the need for pesticides and other in landscaping. Comments: Managing Construction Waste Will demolition of existing structures meet LEED Green Building Demolition and/or B3 State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines? TBD To be determined pending an environmental analysis of the existing structures. Will existing building elements be salvaged for reuse? Example, timber, steel, asphalt, cabinets, etc. TBD Significant reuse and recycling has already occurred in the existing buildings. Further recycling to be determined pending an environmental analysis of the existing structures. As much material as possible will be recycled. Are scrap and excess construction materials being separated and recycled? Yes We will work with the General Contractor for execution. Are workers provided with separate recycling dumpsters and training in proper use? Yes We will work with the General Contractor for execution. Comments: Managing Operational Waste Will a recycling service be provided to those in the multifamily complex? To any businesses on site? Yes Recycling chutes are being provided on each floor. Will an organic recycling service be provided to those in the multifamily complex? To all businesses on site? Yes Organics recycling will be provided and encouraged. Will future users of the building be provided with education and training regarding proper recycling practices? Yes The owner has an active resident training agenda including manual that helps educate future tenants. Comments: Managing Water Consumption City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 4 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire Is the project including features to reduce water consumption beyond features required by code? Yes We will be using low flow plumbing fixtures and native plants to reduce irrigation. Is there a grey water system included to reuse water on site? Will future users of the building be provided with education and training regarding conservation of water? TBD This is something that is being strongly considered in capturing run off from the roof areas. Will outdoor landscaping watering system include a water sensor to automatically reduce watering in wet conditions? Yes Comments: Sustainable Transportation Features Is the site accessible by public transit within ½ mile? Yes There are bus routes along W.77th Street. Are site features included to make the use of public transit convenient and simple? Examples include sheltered waiting areas, paved sidewalks and clear site lines. Yes The project plans on sidewalks along W. 77th as well as waiting areas for riders. If there is no public transit within ½ mile, is the project providing features to help bridge the distance to allow flexibility to use public transit? NA Is bike Parking available near the main entrance for guests? Space in parking structure (e.g. bike corral, bike lockers) for residents’ bikes? Yes There will be several guest bike parking spots at various points on the site in addition to bike parking for each unit, with bike paths woven throughout the site landscaping that connect to the Nine Mile Creek Trail. We are aiming for a ratio of one bike stall per bedroom. Is bike parking and a shower facility provided for employees? Yes There is a planned a bike lounge for use by both employees and residents. Do you have EV Charging Stations for owners, guests or customers to use? Yes A substantial amount of EV garage parking stalls will be provided, and the electrical service will be set up to easily allow expansion as more of the vehicles in the garage convert to electric. We typically install about 5% of stalls with EV charging on new construction buildings Will there be parking spaces provided for car- sharing vehicles to reduce the overall number of cars? TBD To be determined. City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 5 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire Updated January 2021 1 2200 Zane Ave N | Minneapolis, MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.com Cary: Per your request, we reviewed Solhem’s proposal for the Pentagon Park redevelopment on West 77th Street based on our experience working with the Greater Southdale Work Group to craft a physical vision for the future district, translating their guiding principles to the built environment. The resulting vision for development in the Greater Southdale District is to create an enhanced human experience along existing major and new connector streets, with overall experience shaped via landscape setbacks, building st ep backs, a hierarchy of street typologies, transparency at street level, a minimized impact of the car, and managing storm water as an amenity. The outcome of our collaborations with the Work Group is described in the urban design chapter of the Greater Southdale District Plan and resulted in the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. Fred Richards Park is one of the most valuable assets in the southwestern quadrant of the Greater Southdale District. With Pentagon Park offering ample opportunity for redevelopment, the potential addition of housing would dramatically transform West 77th Street, and add new public life to Fred Richards. Because of the scale and quality of the park, it is poised to be considered as cultural destination within the district, with opportunities for park venues to share in and support the quality of life in the neighborhood. To that end is important all new development, especially housing, embrace the park, with edges that are integral with the park. Water is already present in the park, and each new development should positively contribute to both the natural water conditions and water management at the southern edge of the park. It is a unique opportunity in creating a more ecological framework for how the district will continue to develop. In addition, it is important to provide welcoming, inclusive, and shared outdoor places within new developments. Providing continuity between parkland and new development will enhance the social connections between neighbors, especially those who live on the park edges. The need for healthy neighborhoods and healthy ecosystems is a shared responsibility and should be reflected in how new and existing landscape work together for the health of both made and natural systems. This proposal adds significant green space along the edge of the park and increases the site’s permeability, which should mitigate storm water run-off. We look forward to seeing how the integration and connections between the northern edge of the proposed development and Fred Richards Park are resolved in further iterations of the design. To City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date January 20, 2021 2 Concerns for the scale of buildings along the park should be noted in terms of an already measurable distance between the northern edges of the park where single family residents will have a direct view across the park to new development along W est 77th Street. In general, buildings with expansive walls parallel to the park should minimized. This U-shaped footprint is a good model for consideration for future developments along West 77th Street at the edge of the park. Similar to the Cornelia transition zone, this proposal has reasonable building heights that step back as a transition in height relative to other residential buildings surrounding the park . It also introduces appropriate building form perpendicular to the park, which should minimize the intrusion from any building appearing too massive. The building facade along West 77th Street is different than that facing Fred Richards Park in its relationship to the street. As noted in the Experience Guidelines, the quality of the street wall is vital to pedestrian continuity of the public realm. Building scale and massing along the street carries with it a measure in how the building mass is seen as part of the pedestrian experience. The Guidelines recommend that buildings do not exceed 200 feet in length without significant change in the direction of the building wall. In the current proposal, the building is over 420 feet in length. It does have significant changes in the building at both ends from base to top but the center section is only marked by the entry canopy. It is suggested that the architects introduce a bottom-to-top expression that beaks up the length of the façade in the center of the south elevation along West 77th Street. In addition, the transition between W est 77th and the drop-off canopy seems disconnected in elevation. The fundamental idea of a street room is easy access to the main entry of buildings, and a sense of transparency of the building wall. The grades along West 77th need to be carefully delineated to understand what the experience for pedestrians will be; that is not entirely clear in the submitted package. It should also be noted that West 77th is a major district street, similar to France Avenue. In the general setbacks for these major streets, the expectation is that there would be a double row of street trees that would mark a more formal approach to the overall street landscape. The east and west sides of the proposed development will eventually become part of a larger and connected place, when considered along with future neighbors. Thinking about and anticipating how the proposal can align with these future adjacent developments should be a consideration of the development team. As an example, the guest parking located on the west side of the property is currently shown as up against the building and the adjacent property line. This area could be developed as a Woonerf, a combined/shared street to include a pedestrian-friendly walkway and parking area, and then extended to the north without cars as a pedestrian and bike connection as the “Greenway Link” to Fred Richards Park. This would create a purposeful pedestrian street and can be a local connection that will evolve in new ways over time with the adjacent buildings. The west connection should be addressed as a pedestrian walkway with appropriate landscaping on both sides, and not located immediately next to the property line as currently depicted. It must be noted that the most important aspect of this project is the achieved density, and the integration of open landscape space with the park, without which, the effort to conceal all parking below grade would not have worked as well. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mic DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION JUNE 15, 2021 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2021-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD PUD-22, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-22, AT 4660 77th STREET WEST The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Chapter 36, Article VIII, Division 4 is hereby amended to add the following: Sec. 36-505 Planned Unit Development District-22 (PUD-22) – Pentagon Park Apartments (a) Legal description: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1218 Hennepin County Minnesota. (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 ___________ except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2021-___ on file in the Office of the Planning Department. (c) Principal Uses: Office & Medical Office Multifamily Residential (d) Accessory Uses: All accessory uses allowed in the PCD-1 Zoning District. (e) Conditional Uses: None Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 2 (f) Development Standards. Standard Building Setbacks Front – 77th Street Rear – Fred Richards Park Side – West Side – East 43-55 feet 26 feet 51 feet 55 feet Building Height 5-7 stories & 52-86 feet Density 75 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.5% Parking 552 spaces* (g) Signs shall be regulated per the PCD-1 Zoning District for the retail uses, and PRD, for the residential uses. Signs shown on the final development plans shall be allowed. Section 3. This ordinance is effective immediately. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 3 ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of _______, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of ____________, 2021. ________________________________ City Clerk DATE: 5/27/2021 TO: 4660 77th Street, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Grace Hancock, Sustainability Coordinator Ross Bintner, PE, Engineering Services Manager RE: 4660 77th St – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, flood risk, and storm water. Plans reviewed included survey, site plan, grading and drainage, utility, stormwater management plans dated April 30, 2021. Review Comment Required For General 1. Deliver as -build records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. Certificate of Occupancy 2. Maintenance of sidewalks within the property is the responsibility of property owner. Sidewalks in ROW along 7 7th Street are the City’s responsibility . City snowplowing operations are 5 -ft wide on these sidewalks. General Comment Survey 3. An existing and proposed site condition survey is required. Grading/Building Permit 3.1 Show all existing and proposed public and private easements. - City records indicate easements running east-west along the south property line and running north-south along the west property line for public road right -of -way, signals, utilities, and walkways recorded in Doc #3598236 dated July 2002. Grading/Building Permit 3.2 Provide 15-ft road and walkway easement along 77 th Street for public sidewalk maintenance purposes and space to allow future installation of on street bike lanes. Certificate of Occupancy 3.3 Provide walkway easement along east property line for public sidewalk connected to NMCRT. Living Streets 4. City supports north-south sidewalk along east property line and the connection to the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail (NMCRT) Grading/Building Permit managed by Three Rivers Park District (TRPD). TRPD will allow connections to regional trails if the City holds an easement on the s idewalk and if the sidewalk connects to other public sidewalks. Sidewalk size and corners need to meet TRPD standards to be connected. Provide 8-ft wide sidewalk unless otherwise approved by City and TRPD. Corner at north end of the project needs to be softened so cyclists can navigate. Soften corner and provide public walkway easement to the City. Property owner is responsible for maintenance of this sidewalk connection from 77th Street to NMCRT. This future connection location on City property must also b e used for future development of 4600 77th Street. 5. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan notes plans for on-street bike lanes and public sidewalk on 77th Street. Grading/Building Permit 6. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 7. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit 8. Public sidewalk to be minimum 5’ in width with a 5’ boulevard. Applicant showing 6-ft wide sidewalk with a 4 -ft wide boulevard. Recommend placing sidewalk with a 10 -ft blvd to create space for a future on street bike lane. Grading/Building Permit 9. Replace Xcel owned street lighting along 77 th Street with lighting to support the public sidewalk along 77th Street and resident drop -off area. Lighting shall be property owner’s infrastructure and maintenance responsibility. Traffic and Street 10. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Fire truck turning template attached. Grading/Building Permit 11. Driveway Entrance permit required for entrance construction/ relocation/ removal. Comply with standard plate 415. Indicate the radii; must be 15’. Note maximum width for 2-way entrance is 30’. Close up existing entrances, standard plate 500. Building Perm it 12. 77th Street scheduled for mill & overlay in 2023. Road patching shall conform to Edina Standard Plates at the time of any required road patching. Certificate of Occupancy Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations with fire department. Comply with standard plate 100. Grading/Building Permit 14. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 15. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 16. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with Building Inspections. Three existing connections to abandon at the main. Prior to Starting Utility Work 16.1 Sanitary service shall be planned for flood risk on trunk line. Use eith er an overhead sanitary service line with minimum service fixture opening 2’ above flood level, or backflow prevention. 16.2 Meter required for building service line and combined lines. No meter required for fire only service line. Grading/Building Permit 16.3 Public Works to determine acceptable installation methods. Grading/Building Permit 17. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. 18. A SAC determination will be required by the Metropolitan Council. The SAC determination will be used by the City to calculate sewer and water connection charges Grading/Building Permit 19. Single connection from main for fire and domestic, split after main connection if building code allows. Grading/Building Permit 20. An internal watermain loop exists between 4660 and 4600. Water service changes to 4600 will be the responsibility of the applicant. The City has a need to create a watermain loop along west and north side of the property. City willing to discuss partial funding to upsize watermain with applicant. Watermain loop will require easements provided by the applicant. Floodplain 21. Site drains to NMS_95 to the south, and NMS_74 local subwatershed to the north. The 1%-annual chance flood elevation is 822.7, and 823.2 respectively. The LFE is 824.0 , 2’ above the creek tailwater elevation of approximately 822. The lowest opening elevation is 2’ above the local flood elevation. Indicate the proposed lowest opening and lowest floor elevations. No net fill is allowed below local flood elevations. Grading/Building Permit Certificate of Occupancy 22. Per CWRMP Section 3.1.2.2 (2), construction of below-grade parking garages is permitted, provided the structure (including the parking garage) is flood proofed to two feet above the applicable 1 -percent-annual-chance flood elevation in accordance with the following design standards: a. Together with associated utility and sanitary facilities, the structure must be designed so that below two feet above Grading/Building Permit the 1%-annual-chance flood elevation the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy. b. A Floodproofing Certificate and Inspection and Maintenance Plan must be provided by a registered professional engineer or architect. c. A floodproofing design that entails human intervention, such as the installation of flood gates or flood shields, will require a Flood Emergency Operation Plan Storm Water Utility 23. Provide final, signed geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 24. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and state construction site permit requirements. Grading/Building Permit 25. Hydraulic design must consider restricted tailwater condition in 10% and 1% annual exceedance events, City hydraulic model is available for developer review. Grading/Building Permit 26. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading/Building Permit Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 27. A SWPPP consistent with the State General Construction Site Stormwater Permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Constructability and Safety 28. Construction staging and traffic control plans will be required. Grading/Building Permit 29. Retaining walls over 4 -ft in height require design by a structural engineer. Provide drawings and calculations signed by MN licensed civil engineer. Grading/Building Permit 30. Any short-term road or lanes closures shall be approved by the City Engineer. General Comment 31. Construction staging or construction fencing shall not impede the City’s ability to snowplow the adjacent streets. If construction fencing removes storage space for snow, developer shall be responsible for snow removal in the street adjacent to any impacts to City operations. General Comment Other Agency Coordination 32. Provide copies required permits (e.g., MDH, MPCA, and MCES) Grading/Building Permit MPCA permit shall be closed out for permit closeout. Certificate of Occupancy 33. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Sustainability 34. Staff recommends installing EV chargers for a minimum of 5% proposed parking in addition to wiring 10% for EV conversion in the future. General Comment 35. Staff recommends development consider applying to join HOURCAR multi-family carsharing program to s upply residents with electric car-sharing options General Comment 36. Site plan shows a bike café within the underground parking. Staff recommends providing a minimum of one bike parking stall for every 10 residential units (41) and one surface bike parking stall for every 20 residential units (21). These parking stalls should be in convenient, well-lit locations within 50’ of a public entrance to the building. Rack style and spacing should follow the recommendations of the Association for Pedestrian and Bicy cle Professionals (APBP). General Comment 37. Staff recommends implementing four (min.) suggested additional Travel Demand Management strategies : • Provide surface bike parking (21 stall min.); • Provide a bike repair station on -site, located adjacent to surface or underground bike parking; • Construct perimeter and internal sidewalks 8’ wide or more to safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists; • Provide directional signage/information for adjacen t pedestrians, bicycle and transit facilities and ride-sharing services; • Work with Metro Transit to construct a bus shelter on 77th Street for Local Routes 6 and 540; or • Subsidize Metro Transit passes for tenants and employees. General Comment 38. Staff recommends development consider participating in the Met Council’s Solar for Vouchers program to receive technical advice and support for solar panel installation. General Comment 39. The Metropolitan Council's Extreme Heat map shows that during an extreme heat event (when air temperatures are 90 or above), this area of Edina can be 9-25 degrees F hotter than surrounding areas. Green roofs reduce the urban heat island effect, reducing amount of greenhouse gas emissions trapped in the atmosphere and energy needs to cool a building. Staff recommends adding a General Comment green roof or garden to reduce this urban heat island effect and energy costs to cool the building. 40. The University of Minnesota's Solar Suitability map rates 4660 W 77th St as "good " for solar roof installations with a grade of 81 out of 100. Staff recommends considering this assessment when assessing the roof for green roof or solar options. General Comment 41. See Sustainable Design Questionnaire for additional considerations. General Comment City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Community Development Department Phone 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0390 • EdinaMN.gov Date: May 20, 2021 To: Planning Commission cc: Cary Teague, Community Development Director From: Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable Housing Development Manager Subject: Compliance with Affordable Housing Policy Pentagon Park Housing Development, 4660 77th Street West The proposed development at 4660 77th Street West complies with the Policy for New Multifamily Affordable Housing. The Policy offers developers 3 main options: 1) 10% of the units at 50% AMI rent levels; 2) 20% of the units at 60% AMI rent levels; or 3) a buy-in amount of $100,000 per units for 10% 0f the units. The developer is opting for option 3: contributing $100,000 per unit for 10% of the developed units, which amounts to $4,100,000. Although the City has adopted the goal of developing between 992 and 1,804 new affordable units, the Buy- in funds are a flexible source to for the development and preservation of affordable housing in the absence of other eligible sources. For example, Buy-In funds can be used for the development and preservation of single family and multi-family ownership opportunities unlike TIF and Low-Income Housing Tax Credits which can only be used for rental properties. Affordable Housing programs that were financed with Buy-In funds: • Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing preservation program. • Acquisition and rehabilitation of moderately priced single-family homes for Community Land Trust program for long term affordable ownership. • Gap financing for affordable units at Nolan Mains. • Emergency Rental Assistance during COVID. File #227702810 May 20, 2021 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Traffic and Parking Study for 4660 77th Street W in Edina, MN May 2021 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-1 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 ............................................................. 3-3 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES ................................................ 4-3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR LOS RESULTS .......................................... 5-4 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: May 20, 2021 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 May 2021 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed new residential building located at 4660 77th Street W. in Edina, MN. The project site is located on the north side of 77th Street east of Computer Drive. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking lot. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp • 77th Street W./development access The proposed project will involve removal of the existing building and constructing a new apartment building with 408 dwelling units. The project is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. As shown in the site plan, two access points are provided on 77th Street W. The project is expected to be completed in 2023. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. Net trips account for new trips generated by the development and trips eliminated by removal of the existing office space. • The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. • Traffic volume data collected for previous studies in this area was used at all intersections to avoid traffic volume reductions that have occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. This process resulted in reasonable estimates for the weekday peak hours that would occur under non-pandemic conditions. • Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and May 2021 1-2 outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. • The proposed 470 to 520 parking spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per un it, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. • The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. o Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. o Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed new residential building located at 4660 77th Street W. in Edina, MN. The project site is located on the north side of 77th Street east of Computer Drive. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking lot. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp • 77th Street W./development access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve removal of the existing building and constructing a new apartment building with 408 dwelling units. The project is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. As shown in the site plan, two access points are provided on 77th Street W. The project is expected to be completed in 2023. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. May 2021 2-2 May 2021 2-3 May 2021 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site is currently occupied by an office building with 108,528 square feet of office space. The site is bounded by 77th Street on the south, office uses on the east and west, and Fred Richards park on the north. Near the site location, 77th Street is a five-lane roadway with a center left turn lane. Computer Avenue and Parklawn Avenue are two-lane roadways. To the west of the site, 77th Street intersects with TH 100 at a full grade separated interchange. The speed limit on all local streets in the study area is 30 miles per hour. Existing conditions at the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides two left turn lanes and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through lane and two right turn lanes. The northbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The south leg provides access a commercial use on the south side of 77th Street. 77th Street W./Computer Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one left turn/through lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The north leg provides access to an office use on the north side of 77 th Street. 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides on left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The northbound approach provides two left turn lanes and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides two left turn lanes, one through lane, and one channelized right turn lane. Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides on left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lane s, and one channelized right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides two left turn lanes, one through lane, and one right turn lane. May 2021 3-2 Traffic Volume Data Existing turn movement data previously collected for other studies in the area was obtained from City staff for the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp May 2021 3-3 May 2021 4-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2024. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2021 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. • 2024 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2024 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth due to additional development in the area. • 2024 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2024 No-Build volumes to determine 2024 Build volumes. Estimation of Existing Volumes Due to COVID-19 Impacts The impacts of COVID-19 have resulted in significant reductions in traffic volumes due to changes in work and travel habits. Traffic volume data collected for studies completed prior to the pandemic were used for the traffic forecasts presented in this report. Trip Generation for Proposed Project 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). The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Trip Generation for Proposed Project and Existing Uses Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Proposed use Apartments 408 DU 38 109 147 110 70 180 2220 Existing use to be removed Office 108,528 SF 108 18 126 20 105 125 1057 Total net trips -70 +91 +21 +90 -35 +55 +1163 DU=dwelling unit, SF=square feet As shown, the project adds 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. May 2021 4-2 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 con centrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 25 percent to/from the north on TH 100 • 25 percent to/from the south on TH 100 • 25 percent to/from the west on Edina Industrial Boulevard • 2 percent to/from the south on Computer Avenue • 11 percent to/from the north on Parklawn Avenue • 12 percent to/from the east on 77th Street Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figure 4. May 2021 4-3 May 2021 5-1 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. May 2021 5-2 The LOS results for the study intersections are shown in Figure 5 and are discussed below. 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. 77th Street W./Computer Avenue (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. 77th Street W./development access (minor street stop control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. May 2021 5-3 Overall Traffic Impact The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided on the south side of 77th Street, the west side of Parklawn Avenue, and the west side of Computer Avenue. The Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail is located immediately north of the project site. All intersections in the study have crosswalks across all or a portion of the approaches. Bicycles are allowed on all the surrounding streets. Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. Transit Facilities The subject site presently is served by the Metro Transit bus routes 6 and 540. Bus stops exist on 77th Street at the development access. Potential Travel Demand Management Measures The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: • Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. • Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. • Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. • Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 5-4 May 2021 6-1 6.0 Parking Analysis As described earlier, is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. 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 for the proposed land uses. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 5th 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 534 spaces. The 470 to 520 spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per unit, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. May 2021 7-1 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. Net trips account for new trips generated by the development and trips eliminated by removal of the existing office space. • The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. • Traffic volume data collected for previous studies in this area was used at all intersections to avoid traffic volume reductions that have occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. This process resulted in reasonable estimates for the weekday peak hours that would occur under non-pandemic conditions. • Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk a nd bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. • The proposed 470 to 520 parking spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per unit, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. • The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. o Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. o Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 8-1 8.0 Appendix • Level of Service Worksheets HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 97 555 18 63 480 57 30 28 218 650 75 337 Future Volume (veh/h) 97 555 18 63 480 57 30 28 218 650 75 337 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 102 584 19 66 505 0 32 29 229 684 79 355 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 492 1502 49 442 1480 411 700 593 952 700 593 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.43 0.39 0.06 0.42 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3512 114 1781 3647 0 954 1870 1585 2176 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 102 295 308 66 505 0 32 29 229 684 79 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 954 1870 1585 1088 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 10.3 10.3 1.8 8.7 0.0 2.0 0.9 9.5 26.2 2.5 16.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 10.3 10.3 1.8 8.7 0.0 4.5 0.9 9.5 27.1 2.5 16.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 492 760 791 442 1480 411 700 593 952 700 593 V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.15 0.34 0.08 0.04 0.39 0.72 0.11 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 760 791 465 1480 488 852 722 1130 852 722 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.3 17.7 17.8 13.6 17.9 0.0 19.9 17.9 20.6 26.5 18.4 22.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.5 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 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 1.1 4.4 4.6 0.7 3.5 0.0 0.4 0.4 3.4 6.7 1.1 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.4 19.2 19.2 13.7 18.0 0.0 19.9 17.9 20.8 27.8 18.4 23.1 LnGrp LOS B B B B B B B C C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 705 571 A 290 1118 Approach Delay, s/veh 18.3 17.5 20.4 25.7 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.8 42.5 37.7 10.8 41.5 37.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 27.0 39.0 6.0 26.0 39.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 12.3 29.1 4.8 10.7 11.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.2 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.4 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 173 1173 187 5 246 83 42 30 10 120 43 319 Future Volume (veh/h) 173 1173 187 5 246 83 42 30 10 120 43 319 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 182 1235 197 5 259 87 44 32 11 126 45 0 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 885 2073 329 469 2398 1070 404 152 52 404 213 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3072 487 1781 3554 1585 2640 1331 457 2645 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 182 711 721 5 259 87 44 0 43 126 45 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1585 1320 0 1788 1323 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.3 1.7 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.1 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.3 1.7 3.3 0.0 2.0 6.1 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 885 1199 1203 469 2398 1070 404 0 204 404 213 V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.59 0.60 0.01 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.21 0.31 0.21 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 885 1199 1203 469 2398 1070 689 0 397 690 416 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 5.1 5.0 37.7 0.0 36.4 38.9 36.2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.9 1.3 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.1 1.8 1.8 2.9 5.1 5.0 37.8 0.0 36.6 39.1 36.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1614 351 87 171 A Approach Delay, s/veh 1.9 5.1 37.2 38.4 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.7 14.3 11.0 64.7 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 48.5 18.0 5.0 48.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.1 4.7 4.3 5.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.6 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 968 109 63 480 57 30 28 218 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 968 109 63 480 57 30 28 218 1 0 1 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 58 1019 115 66 505 60 30 31 229 1 0 1 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 545 1363 586 387 1227 145 504 613 519 268 0 240 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3200 379 1781 1870 1585 1119 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 58 1019 115 66 280 285 30 31 229 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1802 1781 1870 1585 1120 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 18.0 3.6 1.4 8.4 8.5 0.9 0.8 8.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 18.0 3.6 1.4 8.4 8.5 0.9 0.8 8.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 545 1363 586 387 681 691 504 613 519 268 0 240 V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.75 0.20 0.17 0.41 0.41 0.06 0.05 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 668 1662 720 424 746 756 704 862 730 292 0 273 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.6 19.4 15.6 11.7 16.4 16.5 18.9 16.7 19.2 26.2 0.0 26.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.9 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.2 1.3 0.5 3.3 3.4 0.4 0.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.7 21.2 15.8 11.8 17.0 17.1 18.9 16.7 19.8 26.2 0.0 26.2 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1192 631 290 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 16.5 19.4 26.2 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 31.9 27.8 13.0 31.9 12.8 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 20.0 10.3 3.2 10.5 2.9 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 1.1 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 348 476 1 0 140 30 0 0 0 22 1 280 Future Volume (veh/h) 348 476 1 0 140 30 0 0 0 22 1 280 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 366 501 1 0 147 32 0 0 0 23 0 296 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 964 1128 2 4 780 166 0 348 0 499 0 591 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 4 1781 2916 619 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 366 0 502 0 88 91 0 0 0 23 0 296 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1759 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.7 0.0 6.2 0.0 1.6 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 0.0 6.2 0.0 1.6 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 964 0 1130 4 475 470 0 348 0 499 0 591 V/C Ratio(X) 0.38 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1567 0 2043 331 1487 1472 0 1000 0 1120 0 1695 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.5 0.0 4.6 0.0 12.1 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 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 1.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 12.4 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 868 179 0 319 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.3 12.5 0.0 16.2 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.0 15.5 15.5 12.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 * 47 22.0 17.5 34.5 22.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.2 5.6 5.7 3.7 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 1.4 1.7 0.9 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.7 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 588 19 65 508 73 31 29 225 686 77 347 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 588 19 65 508 73 31 29 225 686 77 347 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 105 619 20 68 535 0 33 31 237 722 81 365 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 461 1432 46 411 1405 425 735 623 985 735 623 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.41 0.37 0.07 0.40 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3513 113 1781 3647 0 944 1870 1585 2156 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 313 326 68 535 0 33 31 237 722 81 365 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 944 1870 1585 1078 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 11.4 11.4 2.0 9.6 0.0 2.1 0.9 9.6 28.0 2.5 16.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 11.4 11.4 2.0 9.6 0.0 4.5 0.9 9.6 28.9 2.5 16.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 461 724 754 411 1405 425 735 623 985 735 623 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.43 0.43 0.17 0.38 0.08 0.04 0.38 0.73 0.11 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 499 724 754 431 1405 484 852 722 1120 852 722 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.4 19.2 19.3 14.8 19.4 0.0 18.8 16.9 19.5 25.8 17.3 21.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.9 1.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 0.0 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 1.2 4.9 5.1 0.8 3.9 0.0 0.4 0.4 3.4 7.0 1.0 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.5 21.0 21.1 14.8 19.5 0.0 18.8 16.9 19.6 27.5 17.4 21.9 LnGrp LOS B C C B B B B B C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 744 603 A 301 1168 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 19.0 19.3 25.1 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 40.7 39.4 11.1 39.6 39.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 27.0 39.0 7.0 25.0 39.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 13.4 30.9 5.0 11.6 11.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.3 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 178 1241 193 5 280 99 43 31 10 140 44 329 Future Volume (veh/h) 178 1241 193 5 280 99 43 31 10 140 44 329 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 187 1306 203 5 295 104 45 33 11 147 46 0 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 840 2057 317 448 2369 1057 424 164 55 425 229 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3086 476 1781 3554 1585 2638 1342 447 2643 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 187 748 761 5 295 104 45 0 44 147 46 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1785 1781 1777 1585 1319 0 1790 1321 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 2.1 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.8 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 2.1 3.4 0.0 2.0 6.8 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 840 1184 1190 448 2369 1057 424 0 219 425 229 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.63 0.64 0.01 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.20 0.35 0.20 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 840 1184 1190 448 2369 1057 688 0 398 689 416 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 5.5 5.4 37.1 0.0 35.8 38.6 35.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.9 1.5 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.3 2.1 2.1 3.1 5.5 5.4 37.1 0.0 35.9 38.8 35.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1696 404 89 193 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.2 5.4 36.5 38.0 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.0 15.0 11.0 64.0 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 48.5 18.0 5.0 48.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.8 4.9 4.7 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.9 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 1009 112 65 510 59 31 29 225 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 57 1009 112 65 510 59 31 29 225 1 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 1062 118 68 537 62 32 32 237 1 0 1 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 532 1386 597 375 1252 144 504 611 518 262 0 235 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.39 0.38 0.12 0.39 0.38 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3211 370 1781 1870 1585 1110 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 1062 118 68 296 303 32 32 237 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1804 1781 1870 1585 1110 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 19.3 3.7 1.4 9.1 9.1 1.0 0.9 8.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 19.3 3.7 1.4 9.1 9.1 1.0 0.9 8.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 532 1386 597 375 693 703 504 611 518 262 0 235 V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.77 0.20 0.18 0.43 0.43 0.06 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 652 1629 705 411 731 742 690 845 716 284 0 267 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 19.7 15.6 12.1 16.6 16.7 19.3 17.1 19.8 26.9 0.0 26.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.8 1.3 0.5 3.6 3.7 0.4 0.4 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.8 21.9 15.8 12.2 17.2 17.3 19.3 17.1 20.4 26.9 0.0 26.9 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1240 667 301 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.7 16.7 19.9 26.9 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 32.9 28.2 13.0 32.9 13.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 21.3 10.8 3.3 11.1 3.0 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.1 0.1 3.8 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 365 496 1 0 152 31 0 0 0 23 1 295 Future Volume (veh/h) 365 496 1 0 152 31 0 0 0 23 1 295 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 384 522 1 0 160 33 0 0 0 24 0 312 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 960 1124 2 4 785 158 0 354 0 504 0 601 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 4 1781 2946 594 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 384 0 523 0 95 98 0 0 0 24 0 312 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1763 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 960 0 1126 4 473 470 0 354 0 504 0 601 V/C Ratio(X) 0.40 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.52 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1400 0 1862 495 1564 1552 0 866 0 992 0 1468 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.7 0.0 4.7 0.0 12.3 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 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 1.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 12.5 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 907 193 0 336 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 12.7 0.0 16.3 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.2 15.5 15.5 12.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 43 19.0 15.5 36.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.7 5.8 5.9 3.9 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.2 1.4 1.6 1.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.9 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 570 19 65 531 95 31 29 225 669 77 347 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 570 19 65 531 95 31 29 225 669 77 347 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 105 600 20 68 559 0 33 31 237 704 81 365 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 460 1466 49 427 1443 415 716 607 963 716 607 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.42 0.38 0.07 0.41 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3509 117 1781 3647 0 944 1870 1585 2156 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 304 316 68 559 0 33 31 237 704 81 365 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 944 1870 1585 1078 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 10.8 10.8 1.9 10.0 0.0 2.1 0.9 9.8 27.4 2.5 16.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 10.8 10.8 1.9 10.0 0.0 4.6 0.9 9.8 28.3 2.5 16.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 460 742 773 427 1443 415 716 607 963 716 607 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.41 0.41 0.16 0.39 0.08 0.04 0.39 0.73 0.11 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 480 742 773 429 1443 463 810 687 1072 810 687 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.9 18.4 18.5 14.2 18.8 0.0 19.4 17.4 20.1 26.3 17.9 22.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.0 0.6 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 1.2 4.6 4.8 0.8 4.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 3.5 6.9 1.1 6.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.0 20.1 20.1 14.2 19.0 0.0 19.4 17.4 20.3 28.1 17.9 22.9 LnGrp LOS B C C B B B B C C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 725 627 A 301 1150 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.2 18.5 19.9 25.7 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.9 41.6 38.5 11.0 40.5 38.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 30.0 37.0 6.0 28.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 12.8 30.3 5.0 12.0 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.4 2.2 0.0 2.4 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 178 1206 193 5 325 121 43 31 10 123 44 329 Future Volume (veh/h) 178 1206 193 5 325 121 43 31 10 123 44 329 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 187 1269 203 5 342 127 45 33 11 129 46 0 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 804 2068 329 459 2393 1067 406 155 52 406 216 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3072 488 1781 3554 1585 2638 1342 447 2643 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 187 730 742 5 342 127 45 0 44 129 46 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1585 1319 0 1790 1321 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.1 2.6 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.1 2.6 3.4 0.0 2.0 6.2 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 804 1197 1200 459 2393 1067 406 0 207 406 216 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.61 0.62 0.01 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.21 0.32 0.21 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 823 1197 1200 459 2393 1067 629 0 358 629 374 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.1 0.0 0.0 2.9 5.3 5.2 37.6 0.0 36.3 38.9 36.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.9 1.4 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.2 1.9 1.9 2.9 5.3 5.2 37.7 0.0 36.5 39.1 36.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1659 474 89 175 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.1 5.3 37.1 38.3 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.6 14.4 11.0 64.6 14.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 50.5 16.0 6.0 49.5 16.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.2 4.8 5.1 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.8 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.6 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 957 112 68 577 59 31 29 223 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 57 957 112 68 577 59 31 29 223 1 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 1007 118 72 607 62 32 32 235 1 0 1 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 501 1352 581 387 1238 126 511 620 525 267 0 239 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3255 332 1781 1870 1585 1112 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 1007 118 72 331 338 32 32 235 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1811 1781 1870 1585 1112 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 17.9 3.7 1.5 10.3 10.4 0.9 0.8 8.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 17.9 3.7 1.5 10.3 10.4 0.9 0.8 8.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 501 1352 581 387 676 689 511 620 525 267 0 239 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.74 0.20 0.19 0.49 0.49 0.06 0.05 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 624 1658 718 423 744 758 703 860 729 290 0 272 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.1 19.5 15.8 11.9 17.2 17.3 18.7 16.6 19.1 26.3 0.0 26.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.1 1.3 0.5 4.1 4.2 0.4 0.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.1 21.3 16.1 12.0 18.0 18.1 18.8 16.6 19.7 26.3 0.0 26.3 LnGrp LOS B C B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1185 741 299 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.2 17.5 19.3 26.3 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 31.7 28.2 13.0 31.7 13.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 19.9 10.5 3.3 12.4 2.9 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 1.1 0.1 4.2 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.2 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 375 507 1 0 144 31 0 0 0 23 1 287 Future Volume (veh/h) 375 507 1 0 144 31 0 0 0 23 1 287 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 395 534 1 0 152 33 0 0 0 24 0 303 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 964 1128 2 4 780 165 0 349 0 499 0 591 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 3 1781 2918 618 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 395 0 535 0 91 94 0 0 0 24 0 303 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1759 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 1.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 1.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 964 0 1130 4 475 470 0 349 0 499 0 591 V/C Ratio(X) 0.41 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.19 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.51 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1406 0 1869 497 1569 1554 0 870 0 995 0 1474 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.6 0.0 4.7 0.0 12.2 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 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 1.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 12.4 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 930 185 0 327 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 12.6 0.0 16.3 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.0 15.5 15.5 12.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 43 19.0 15.5 36.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.8 5.7 6.0 3.8 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.3 1.3 1.6 1.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.8 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th TWSC 05/18/2021 14: W. 77th St & access T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 29 1235 633 9 25 84 Future Vol, veh/h 29 1235 633 9 25 84 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 200 - - - 50 - 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 31 1300 666 9 26 88 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 675 0 - 0 1383 338 Stage 1 - - - - 671 - Stage 2 - - - - 712 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 912 - - - 135 658 Stage 1 - - - - 470 - Stage 2 - - - - 447 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 912 - - - 130 658 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 130 - Stage 1 - - - - 454 - Stage 2 - - - - 447 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 17.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 912 - - - 130 658 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - - 0.202 0.134 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - - 39.6 11.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.7 0.5 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 361 783 27 77 271 419 18 83 337 269 41 141 Future Volume (veh/h) 361 783 27 77 271 419 18 83 337 269 41 141 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 380 824 28 81 285 0 19 87 355 283 43 148 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 786 1935 66 440 1611 368 485 411 570 485 411 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.55 0.52 0.06 0.45 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3507 119 1781 3647 0 1192 1870 1585 1838 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 380 417 435 81 285 0 19 87 355 283 43 148 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 1192 1870 1585 919 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.3 12.4 12.4 2.2 4.3 0.0 1.1 3.3 19.2 12.7 1.6 6.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.3 12.4 12.4 2.2 4.3 0.0 2.7 3.3 19.2 16.0 1.6 6.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 786 980 1020 440 1611 368 485 411 570 485 411 V/C Ratio(X) 0.48 0.43 0.43 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.18 0.86 0.50 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1046 980 1020 440 1611 377 499 423 584 499 423 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.7 11.8 11.9 12.0 14.6 0.0 26.3 25.9 31.8 32.1 25.3 27.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.4 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.6 0.2 0.0 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 3.2 4.9 5.1 0.8 1.7 0.0 0.3 1.4 8.9 2.8 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 8.8 13.2 13.2 12.0 14.7 0.0 26.3 26.0 47.4 32.3 25.3 27.4 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1232 366 A 461 474 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 14.1 42.5 30.2 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 53.7 27.3 17.8 44.8 27.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 46.0 22.0 25.0 24.0 22.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 14.4 18.0 11.3 6.3 21.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.9 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.2 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 305 903 138 10 461 329 218 163 11 48 38 95 Future Volume (veh/h) 305 903 138 10 461 329 218 163 11 48 38 95 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 321 951 145 11 485 346 229 172 12 51 40 0 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 638 1947 297 517 2078 927 533 275 19 314 298 Arrive On Green 0.25 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.58 0.58 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3091 471 1781 3554 1585 2652 1728 121 2328 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 321 546 550 11 485 346 229 0 184 51 40 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1786 1781 1777 1585 1326 0 1849 1164 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.9 10.4 7.3 0.0 8.4 1.9 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.9 10.4 9.0 0.0 8.4 10.3 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 638 1119 1124 517 2078 927 533 0 294 314 298 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.02 0.23 0.37 0.43 0.00 0.63 0.16 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 855 1119 1124 517 2078 927 730 0 431 487 436 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 9.0 9.9 36.4 0.0 35.4 40.1 32.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 2.1 3.3 2.3 0.0 3.8 0.5 0.7 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 1.3 1.3 5.3 9.0 10.0 36.6 0.0 36.2 40.2 32.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B D A D D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1417 842 413 91 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.1 9.4 36.4 36.9 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 60.7 18.3 15.0 56.6 18.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 47.5 19.0 20.0 32.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 12.3 8.0 12.4 11.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.1 1.0 1.6 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.6 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 814 43 127 434 130 21 84 314 17 6 54 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 814 43 127 434 130 21 84 314 17 6 54 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 8 857 45 134 457 137 22 88 331 18 6 57 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 528 1240 529 440 942 280 478 623 528 225 62 264 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.35 0.33 0.14 0.35 0.33 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2700 803 1781 1870 1585 775 372 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 857 45 134 300 294 22 88 331 24 0 57 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1726 1781 1870 1585 1147 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 13.7 1.3 2.8 8.7 8.9 0.6 2.2 11.6 0.1 0.0 2.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 13.7 1.3 2.8 8.7 8.9 0.6 2.2 11.6 0.7 0.0 2.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 528 1240 529 440 620 602 478 623 528 287 0 264 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.69 0.09 0.30 0.48 0.49 0.05 0.14 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 663 1804 780 494 821 797 749 949 804 312 0 300 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 18.4 15.1 11.3 16.8 17.1 17.0 15.4 18.6 23.2 0.0 23.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.0 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 0.1 5.3 0.4 1.0 3.4 3.4 0.2 0.9 4.1 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.4 19.5 15.2 11.4 17.7 18.0 17.1 15.5 19.8 23.3 0.0 24.2 LnGrp LOS A B B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 910 728 441 81 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.2 16.7 18.8 23.9 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 27.0 26.0 13.0 27.0 11.0 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 32.5 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 15.7 13.6 2.2 10.9 2.6 4.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.4 1.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 500 427 0 0 355 47 0 0 0 41 0 374 Future Volume (veh/h) 500 427 0 0 355 47 0 0 0 41 0 374 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 526 449 0 0 374 49 0 0 0 43 0 394 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 955 1090 0 4 796 104 0 411 0 549 0 697 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3162 411 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 526 449 0 0 209 214 0 0 0 43 0 394 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1796 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 955 1090 0 4 448 452 0 411 0 549 0 697 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1703 1597 0 468 1128 1141 0 983 0 1094 0 1666 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 14.5 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 15.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 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 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.7 5.6 0.0 0.0 15.5 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.6 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 975 423 0 437 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.5 15.6 0.0 16.4 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.6 14.0 16.1 15.5 14.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 39 23.0 20.5 27.5 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.0 7.1 7.9 6.6 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 2.0 2.7 2.2 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.1 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 372 825 28 79 290 443 19 86 347 295 42 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 372 825 28 79 290 443 19 86 347 295 42 145 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 392 868 29 83 305 0 20 91 365 311 44 153 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 770 1874 63 428 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.53 0.50 0.07 0.44 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3509 117 1781 3647 0 1186 1870 1585 1814 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 440 457 83 305 0 20 91 365 311 44 153 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 1186 1870 1585 907 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.9 13.8 13.8 2.2 4.7 0.0 1.2 3.4 19.8 14.4 1.6 7.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.9 13.8 13.8 2.2 4.7 0.0 2.8 3.4 19.8 17.7 1.6 7.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 770 949 988 428 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.46 0.46 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.18 0.87 0.54 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1000 949 988 428 1567 388 520 440 596 520 440 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.1 13.0 13.0 12.2 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.5 31.5 32.3 24.8 26.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.6 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.1 0.4 0.0 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 3.5 5.5 5.8 0.9 1.9 0.0 0.3 1.5 9.1 3.1 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.3 14.6 14.6 12.2 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.6 46.6 32.8 24.9 27.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1289 388 A 476 508 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.0 14.8 41.7 30.4 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 52.1 27.9 18.4 43.7 27.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 44.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 15.8 19.7 11.9 6.7 21.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.1 0.6 0.5 1.2 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.7 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 966 142 10 497 350 225 168 11 67 39 98 Future Volume (veh/h) 314 966 142 10 497 350 225 168 11 67 39 98 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 331 1017 149 11 523 368 237 177 12 71 41 0 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 614 1927 282 490 2020 901 560 293 20 333 317 Arrive On Green 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.57 0.57 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3110 455 1781 3554 1585 2650 1732 117 2317 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 331 581 585 11 523 368 237 0 189 71 41 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1788 1781 1777 1585 1325 0 1849 1158 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.7 11.7 7.5 0.0 8.5 2.6 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.7 11.7 9.2 0.0 8.5 11.1 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 614 1101 1108 490 2020 901 560 0 313 333 317 V/C Ratio(X) 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.02 0.26 0.41 0.42 0.00 0.60 0.21 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 840 1101 1108 490 2020 901 758 0 452 507 457 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.6 0.0 0.0 5.8 9.8 10.9 35.6 0.0 34.6 39.7 31.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.4 3.8 2.4 0.0 3.8 0.7 0.8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 5.2 1.5 1.5 5.9 9.8 11.0 35.8 0.0 35.3 39.9 31.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B D A D D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1497 902 426 112 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.3 10.3 35.6 36.9 Approach LOS A B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 59.8 19.2 15.6 55.2 19.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 46.5 20.0 21.0 30.5 20.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 13.1 8.5 13.7 11.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.1 1.1 1.7 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.9 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 849 44 131 463 134 22 87 324 18 6 56 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 849 44 131 463 134 22 87 324 18 6 56 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 8 894 46 138 487 141 23 92 341 19 6 59 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 517 1269 542 429 972 280 474 619 524 221 58 259 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.36 0.34 0.13 0.36 0.34 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2723 783 1781 1870 1585 775 352 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 894 46 138 317 311 23 92 341 25 0 59 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1729 1781 1870 1585 1128 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 14.5 1.3 2.9 9.4 9.5 0.6 2.3 12.3 0.2 0.0 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 14.5 1.3 2.9 9.4 9.5 0.6 2.3 12.3 0.9 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 517 1269 542 429 634 617 474 619 524 279 0 259 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.70 0.08 0.32 0.50 0.50 0.05 0.15 0.65 0.09 0.00 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 649 1770 766 482 806 784 732 932 790 303 0 295 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 18.6 15.0 11.5 16.9 17.1 17.4 15.8 19.2 23.9 0.0 24.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.0 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 0.1 5.7 0.5 1.0 3.7 3.7 0.2 0.9 4.4 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.4 19.7 15.1 11.7 17.8 18.1 17.5 16.0 20.6 24.0 0.0 24.9 LnGrp LOS A B B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 948 766 456 84 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 16.8 19.5 24.6 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 28.0 26.2 13.0 28.0 11.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 32.5 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 16.5 14.3 2.2 11.5 2.6 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.5 1.8 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.7 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 520 445 0 0 374 48 0 0 0 42 0 393 Future Volume (veh/h) 520 445 0 0 374 48 0 0 0 42 0 393 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 547 468 0 0 394 51 0 0 0 44 0 414 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 970 1087 0 4 782 101 0 422 0 556 0 715 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3167 407 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 547 468 0 0 220 225 0 0 0 44 0 414 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1797 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 970 1087 0 4 439 444 0 422 0 556 0 715 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1670 1567 0 459 1107 1119 0 964 0 1073 0 1634 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.3 5.4 0.0 0.0 15.1 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 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 2.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 16.2 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 16.8 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 1015 445 0 458 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 16.3 0.0 16.6 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 32.1 14.5 16.6 15.5 14.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 39 23.0 20.5 27.5 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.5 7.4 8.3 7.0 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 2.1 2.8 2.3 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 372 847 28 79 281 434 19 86 347 318 42 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 372 847 28 79 281 434 19 86 347 318 42 145 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 392 892 29 83 296 0 20 91 365 335 44 153 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 775 1876 61 420 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.53 0.50 0.07 0.44 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3512 114 1781 3647 0 1186 1870 1585 1814 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 451 470 83 296 0 20 91 365 335 44 153 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 1186 1870 1585 907 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.9 14.3 14.3 2.2 4.6 0.0 1.2 3.4 19.8 15.7 1.6 7.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.9 14.3 14.3 2.2 4.6 0.0 2.8 3.4 19.8 19.1 1.6 7.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 775 949 988 420 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.19 0.05 0.18 0.87 0.58 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1005 949 988 420 1567 388 520 440 596 520 440 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.1 13.1 13.2 12.2 15.3 0.0 25.9 25.5 31.5 32.9 24.8 26.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.1 0.8 0.0 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 3.5 5.8 6.0 0.9 1.8 0.0 0.3 1.5 9.1 3.4 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.3 14.8 14.8 12.3 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.6 46.6 33.7 24.9 27.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1313 379 A 476 532 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.1 14.7 41.7 31.1 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 52.1 27.9 18.4 43.7 27.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 44.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 16.3 21.1 11.9 6.6 21.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.2 0.4 0.5 1.2 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.9 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 1011 142 10 479 342 225 168 11 90 39 98 Future Volume (veh/h) 314 1011 142 10 479 342 225 168 11 90 39 98 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 331 1064 149 11 504 360 237 177 12 95 41 0 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 618 1911 267 473 1985 885 584 309 21 356 334 Arrive On Green 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.56 0.56 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3131 438 1781 3554 1585 2650 1732 117 2317 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 331 603 610 11 504 360 237 0 189 95 41 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1792 1781 1777 1585 1325 0 1849 1158 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.6 11.7 7.4 0.0 8.4 3.5 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.6 11.7 9.1 0.0 8.4 11.9 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1085 1094 473 1985 885 584 0 330 356 334 V/C Ratio(X) 0.54 0.56 0.56 0.02 0.25 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.57 0.27 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 803 1085 1094 473 1985 885 730 0 431 484 436 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.8 0.0 0.0 6.2 10.2 11.3 34.9 0.0 33.9 39.3 31.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.4 3.8 2.4 0.0 3.8 1.0 0.7 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 5.4 1.7 1.7 6.2 10.2 11.5 35.0 0.0 34.5 39.5 31.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A B B D A C D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1544 875 426 136 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.5 10.7 34.8 36.9 Approach LOS A B C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 58.9 20.1 15.7 54.3 20.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 47.5 19.0 19.0 33.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 13.9 8.7 13.7 11.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.1 0.1 1.0 1.7 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.1 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 917 44 129 437 134 22 87 326 18 6 56 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 917 44 129 437 134 22 87 326 18 6 56 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 8 965 46 136 460 141 23 92 343 19 6 59 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 534 1328 570 414 1003 305 462 604 512 214 56 252 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.36 0.13 0.37 0.36 0.09 0.32 0.32 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2684 816 1781 1870 1585 774 352 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 965 46 136 303 298 23 92 343 25 0 59 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1723 1781 1870 1585 1126 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 16.2 1.3 2.8 8.9 9.1 0.7 2.4 12.9 0.3 0.0 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 16.2 1.3 2.8 8.9 9.1 0.7 2.4 12.9 0.9 0.0 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 534 1328 570 414 664 644 462 604 512 270 0 252 V/C Ratio(X) 0.01 0.73 0.08 0.33 0.46 0.46 0.05 0.15 0.67 0.09 0.00 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 662 1745 755 452 783 759 710 905 767 294 0 286 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.2 18.6 14.6 11.7 16.4 16.6 18.3 16.7 20.3 24.8 0.0 25.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.0 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 0.1 6.3 0.5 1.0 3.5 3.5 0.3 1.0 4.7 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.2 20.1 14.7 11.9 17.1 17.4 18.3 16.8 21.8 25.0 0.0 25.9 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1019 737 458 84 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.7 16.3 20.6 25.6 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 29.9 26.4 13.0 29.9 11.4 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 18.2 14.9 2.2 11.1 2.7 4.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.7 1.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 516 442 0 0 384 48 0 0 0 42 0 403 Future Volume (veh/h) 516 442 0 0 384 48 0 0 0 42 0 403 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 543 465 0 0 404 51 0 0 0 44 0 424 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 963 1081 0 4 781 98 0 429 0 563 0 728 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3177 399 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 543 465 0 0 225 230 0 0 0 44 0 424 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1799 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 963 1081 0 4 437 442 0 429 0 563 0 728 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1662 1519 0 457 1064 1077 0 1000 0 1106 0 1694 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.4 5.5 0.0 0.0 15.2 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 16.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 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 2.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 16.4 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.8 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 1008 455 0 468 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.9 16.5 0.0 16.5 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 32.0 14.7 16.5 15.5 14.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 38 24.0 20.5 26.5 24.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.5 7.6 8.3 7.2 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.5 2.2 2.7 2.4 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.6 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th TWSC 05/18/2021 14: W. 77th St & access T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 85 1190 667 25 17 53 Future Vol, veh/h 85 1190 667 25 17 53 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 200 - - - 50 - 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 89 1253 702 26 18 56 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 728 0 - 0 1520 364 Stage 1 - - - - 715 - Stage 2 - - - - 805 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 871 - - - 109 633 Stage 1 - - - - 446 - Stage 2 - - - - 400 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 871 - - - 98 633 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 98 - Stage 1 - - - - 401 - Stage 2 - - - - 400 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 20.6 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 871 - - - 98 633 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.103 - - - 0.183 0.088 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - - 49.8 11.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0.6 0.3 Date: May 26, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:P lanning C o mmis s io n Item Type: R eport and R ec o mmendation F rom:C ary Teague, C o mmunity Development Directo r Item Activity: Subject:S ketc h P lan R eview – 6500 Barrie R o ad Dis cus s ion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED : N o action requested. P rovide the applicant non-binding comments on a potential future re-development application. I N TR O D U C TI O N : T he P lanning C ommission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the existing 16,032 square foot medical office building and build a new 3-story, 24,00 square foot medical office and surgery center. T he site is currently zoned P O D -1, P lanned O ffice D istrict. AT TAC HME N T S : Description Staff Memo Applicant Narrative Propos ed Plans Site Location, Zoning, Height & Comp Plan City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861 Fax 952-826-0389 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: May 26, 2021 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Sketch Plan Review – 6500 Barrie Road The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the existing 16,032 square foot medical office building and build a new 3-story, 23,320 square foot medical office and surgery center. (See applicant narrative and plans.) The site is currently zoned POD-1, Planned Office District, and guided Regional Medical District. The height overlay district allows up to 12 stories. (See attached location, zoning, comp. plan and height overlay zone.) The site is very small (30,492 square feet), and narrow (100 feet wide) for a medical office site. Given the required setbacks on the site, a variance would be likely for any new structure. The table on the following page demonstrates existing and proposed setbacks. To accommodate the request the following is required: Site Plan Review with setback, parking, and FAR variances. As with all sketch plan reviews; the Planning Commission is asked to provide non-binding comments and direction on a potential future development request. Areas of focus should be on setbacks (especially toward 65th), parking drive entrance, and how this proposal fits in to the surrounding area. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 The following table demonstrates compliance with POD-1 Zoning: COMPLIANCE TABLE City Standard (POD-1) Proposed Structure Setbacks Front – 65th Street Front – Barrie Road Side – West Rear – South 35 feet (30 feet existing) 35 feet (35 feet existing) 20 feet (20 feet existing) 20 feet (50 feet existing) 10 feet* 25 feet* 10 feet* 50 feet Height 12 stories and 144 feet 3 stories and 40 feet Floor Area Ratio (FAR) .50% (.53 existing) .80 s.f.* Building Coverage 30% (28% existing) 45% Parking 1 stall per 200 s.f. plus one space per physician = 120 stalls (1 per 300 s.f. proposed Ord) = 80 stalls 70 stalls* *Variance Required Issues/considerations: Impact on the residential property to the north. Should there be an entrance to the parking lot from 65th? Should that entrance be eliminated and just access from the south? Setbacks. It is reasonable to expect setback variances for any building on this property due to the narrow lot width. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 A traffic and parking study would be required. Sustainability. The applicant will be required to address sustainability through the City’s Sustainability Questionnaire. Sidewalks. The sidewalk should continue west of the drive entrance on 65th. 04/28/2021 Cary Teague Community Development Director, City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: Site Sketch Submittal - Project Narrative PROJECT: Bhatti G.I. Consultant, P.A. Medical Office Building and Surgery Center 6500 Barrie Road, Edina, MN 55435 Project Team: Developer MSP Commercial 1215 Town Centre Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Contact: Alex Young, President Phone: (651) 287-8891 Email: ayoung@MSPCommercial.net Design Team / Architecture Pope Architects, Inc. 1295 Bandana Boulevard N. Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55108-2735 Contact: Don Rolf, AIA, Senior Project Manager Phone: (651) 789-1628 Email: drolf@popearch.com Property Owner Bhatti G.I. Consultants, P.A. 1447 White Oak Drive Chaska, MN 55318 Contact: Dr. Ahsan Bhatti Phone: 952-361-3800 The enclosed package contains the sketch plan documents, plans and exterior renderings, for City Planner and Planning Commission initial review and comments. We look forward to reviewing the project goals and overall vision for the property at 6500 Barrie Road, Edina, MN. The site is currently zoned POD 1 and is 0.7 acres (30,286sf) in size. The existing building on site is proposed to be removed and replaced with a new structure as shown in the attached documents. Please contact me through email or 612-209-3042 with any comments or questions. I look forward to hearing from you. Don Rolf, AIA, GGP Senior Project Manager BARRIE RDW 65TH ST RAMP DOWN TO LOWER LEVEL PARKING MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 13,665 GSF FOOTPRINT 54,660 GSF TOTAL 3 LEVELS ABOVE GRADE 1 LEVEL BELOW GRADE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINESETBACK 10'-0"SETBACK10'-0"SETBACK 25'-0"SETBACK6'-0"GENERATORRTU RTU RTU TRASH DISCHARGE EXIT MAIN ENTRANCE OUTDOOR PATIO FIRST LEVEL PARKING 35 STALLS GARAGE DOOR PARKING ENTRANCE/EXIT FUTURE CLINIC SPACE 11,660 SF UTILITY LOWER LEVEL PARKING 35 STALLS GARAGE DOOR PARKING ENTRANCE/EXIT 66'-4"206'-0"BHATTI GI MOB EDINA, MN 04/23/21 | COMM#13177-21008 LOWER LEVEL PARKING 1" = 40'-0" FIRST LEVEL PARKING 1" = 40'-0" SECOND & THIRD LEVEL 1" = 40'-0" SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN 1" = 40'-0" BHATTI GI MOB EDINA, MN 04/27/21 | COMM#13177-21008 SOUTH-EAST PERSPECTIVE NORTH-EAST PERSPECTIVE EdinaMN.gov 1 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 2 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 3 S i t e