Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018-10-10 Planning Commission Packet
Agenda Plan n ing Com m ission City Of Edina, Minnesota City Hall, Council Chambers Wednesday, October 10, 2018 7:00 PM I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Minutes: Planning Commission, September 26, 2018 V.Special Recognitions And Presentations A.Advisory Board & Commission Minutes - Scott Neal VI.Public Hearings A.Variance request B-18-26, 4712 Annaway Drive for 1st 1oor height and no basement for a new home. B.Variance request B-18-27 for front yard setback at 5100 Skyline Drive C.Variance Request B-18-28 for 5420 Halifax Lane D.CUP: 6645 McCauley Trail, Cross View Lutheran Church E.Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 4100 West 76th Street VII.Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for consideration at a future meeting. VIII.Reports/Recommendations A.TIF District - 44th and France B.Sketch Plan Review - New Horizon Day Care IX.Correspondence And Petitions X.Chair And Member Comments XI.Sta> Comments XII.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortable being part of the public proc ess . If you need as sistance in the way of hearing ampli@c ation, an interpreter, large-print documents or s om ething els e, pleas e c all 952-927-8861 72 hours in advanc e of the m eeting. Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommis s ion, S eptember 26, 2018 Ac tion 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: P lease approve the S eptember 26, 2018, P lanning Commission M eeting M inutes. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Minutes : Planning Commis s ion, September 26, 2018 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 1 of 6 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers September 26, 2018 I. Call To Order Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM II. Roll Call Answering the roll call was: Commissioners Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Mangalick, Melton, Nemerov, Hamilton, Bennett, Berube, Chair Olsen. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner, Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Technology Services Director, Liz Olson, Support Staff Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Miranda III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the September 26, 2018 meeting agenda. Commissioner Hamilton seconded the motion. The motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Commissioner Lee suggested to make a change on page 3 on the last bullet of Discussion/Comments/Questions to read, “Commissioners asked if the non-conforming setback of the old patio would have needed a variance with the same footprint and Staff replied yes.” Commissioner Lee also suggested to make a change on page 4 on the second bullet of Discussion/Comments/Questions to read, “Commissioners requested to coordinate a work item with the Transportation Commission to jointly review the traffic studies.” Commissioner Thorsen moved to approve the September 12, 2018, meeting minutes. Lee seconded the motion. The motion carried. V. Public Hearings Staff Presentation A. Planner Aaker presented the staff report for 6205 Spruce Road, Edina, MN. The applicants have submitted a variance application to rebuild a two story home with an attached three car garage at the same nonconforming front yard setback as existing on the property located at 6205 Spruce Road. No portion of the proposed front building wall will be extended closer to the front lot line than the existing Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 2 of 6 front face of the home. The existing home is nonconforming regarding front yard setback. The new home is required to match the only other home on the same side of the block that fronts Spruce Road. The adjacent home is located deep within their lot providing a front yard setback of 169.7 feet from Spruce Road ROW. Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Discussion/Comments/Questions • Commissioners asked Aaker to explain the how the setbacks are determined for the house to the south and which homes it’s related to. Aaker explained that the house to the south fronts Belmore Lane and if it were to be redeveloped, the home to the south would need to match the front yard setback of the house to east and match the front yard setback of the home to the north. Aaker noted that if this variance is not approved, it would affect the opportunity of the home directly to the south. • Commissioners asked if all 3 houses have driveway access off Spruce Road and Aaker responded in the affirmative. • Commissioners asked if the home owner was asked to meet the setback, a large amount of tree removal be required and more impervious surface coverage. Aaker replied in the affirmative and commented that there would be a larger driveway extension to the house. Appearing for the Applicant None. Public Hearing Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hamilton seconded the motion. The motion carried. Discussion/Comments/Questions • Commissioners commented that this variance application is being presented due to a product of circumstance. The house was once conforming because of a neighboring property being built. The applicant is doing their best to match the existing footprint of the house. Commissioners stated that it is a beautiful addition and they support the variance. • Commissioners commented that this variance makes sense because of the possible disruption of the trees and the difficulties of the home to the south. • Commissioners commented that they were appreciative the applicant didn’t make it more difficult by trying to go in front the where existing garage is or a little wider than the existing house. Commissioners stated that from a resident’s standpoint, it makes it easier to visualize and the size and design seem to match well with the neighborhood. • Commissioners commented that they received a well written and persuasive letter from a neighbor in favor of approving the variance due to the variance being more in spirit of the ordinance’s goal. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 3 of 6 Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved approval of the variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Hamilton seconded the motion. The motion carried. VI. Community Comment None. Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the Community Comment. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. The motion carried. VI. dfd VII. Reports/Recommendations VII. A. Solar Energy Systems Ordinance Amendments Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator, and Casey Casella, City Management Fellow, gave a presentation explaining that the City of Edina staff are applying to be a SolSmart Designated Community. Discussion/Comments/Question Commissioners asked what the City of Edina gets, other than the designation and Casella responded that it helps advertise the community to businesses and residents in addition to providing a great deal of resources. Commissioners asked if the program helps open up the opportunity to grants or access to funding to help support it. Brown replied that they don’t have grants specifically under SolSmart, but it showcases for other grant potentials. Commissioners asked if the City has a vision for a plan to communicate to residents regarding education. Brown responded that the City plans to host events, publish About Town articles, create website articles, and create Sun Current articles. Commissioners discussed the possible snow blockage and the difficulties with low slope solar application as well as the difficulties with the maintenance problem when re-roofing. Commissioners also suggested looking at future consideration regarding technologies and possibly limiting the maintenance problem by using the Tesla shingle. Commissioners asked if the SolSmart discussion is about the desirability of changing the zoning to be more accommodative to solar or to pick from the options presented. Director Teague responded that the ordinance is drafted and the City currently allows energy collection systems. Teague also explained that this draft ordinance provides more detail and definition. Teague stated that feedback from the Planning Commission will be collected, a public hearing would be made, and a formal recommendation to the City Council would be made. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 4 of 6 Commissions asked if the solar arrays would be subject to height limitations. Teague responded that the height definition would need to be looked at and contain language that include the structures within the height. Commissioners agreed with Teague’s response. Commissioners asked staff if there was anything the City could do to help people get a good idea of the financial impact of their decision and how to make selections. Casella replied that the individual solar page on the website provides several resources that were sent to staff by the SolSmart provider. Student Commissioners asked if there were any financial incentives from the City for installing solar panels and Brown replied that there are not at this time, but there are tax breaks and possible bill credits for working with Xcel Energy. Commissioners discussed needing to consider allowing the solar panels in the front yard and not allowing them to encroach in the setbacks. Teague explained that section 36-1269 of the existing ordinance talks to setback requirements for these facilities including front, side, and rear yard setbacks. Commissioners discussed new homes and the potential of removing trees to accommodate sun exposure for solar panels and the impact of new design. Brown replied that staff has not researched how other cities have applied these ordinances changes and how it affects the tree canopies. Commissioners discussed where in Edina it would be an appropriate use of land for solar panels and where wouldn’t be a nuisance to neighbors. Brown replied that other cities have had solar panels on roofing for a patio in back or on top of a commercial building. Commissioners expressed concern that some solar panels on the yard could affect the character of some areas negatively. Director Teague made a suggestion to Commissioners to potentially exclude the exception of the building coverage and include it specifically in a building coverage requirement to prevent residents from putting them all over the yard. Student Commissioners asked if the installation of the panels and associated electrical equipment create safety hazards and if there sufficient regulations to see that harm doesn’t occur. Brown replied that the electricity code is done by the state and permitted and inspected by the state. Commissioners asked Brown if the City started with the education process, would it be expected that the solar panels are primarily being taken advantage of initially by commercial or residential. Brown replied both commercial and residential. Commissioners asked Brown what law it refers to in regards to selling excess energy back to a public utility. Brown replied that she would get that information after the meeting, but noted that it is all regulated by the Public Utilities Commission. Commissioners suggested changing the word “the” law to “applicable” law or “laws” in the ordinance. Student Commissioners asked where the excess energy goes and Brown explained that it goes on the distribution line and is re-distributed. In conclusion, Brown summarized the following: How we are educating the consumer and helping to inform residents. Installations beyond the roof and how that could look in the future. Word adjustments to applicable law Adding a section to the ordinance that would address the building height regulations Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 5 of 6 Planner Aaker thanked Brown and Casella for presenting on this because it’s given the Planning Department an opportunity to look at the current zoning ordinance and the fact that we only have 1 sentence that discusses solar and wind energy. Casella concluded with the information for the opening of the Solar Community Garden Launch at Public Works. It takes place on Monday, October 1st at 4pm. RSVP online at EdinaMN.gov/SolarLaunch VII. B. 2109 Planning Commission Work Plan Director Teague discussed the following: Reviewing all of the land use requests and making recommendations to the City Council. Finishing the Comprehensive Plan update and everything that results from that. Zoning ordinance amendments in addition to what is the result of the Comprehensive Plan, including the impervious surface regulations, basement requirements for single family homes, 1 foot rule, 2 car garage requirement, consideration of single family homes in the R-2 district and allowing duplexes within the R-1 district, and a work session with the Transportation Commission. Director Teague recommended to approve the work plan. Commissioners discussed the following: Tree ordinance. Give-to-Get and reference it as a different name. Variances being approved for purposes of living in the home versus selling it. Regarding the Transportation Commission and input on transportation related issues, the Planning Commission should have an independent consideration of the pros and cons of having them do the review, and not just to discuss the possibility of doing it. Commissioners suggested changing the wording to, “review the pros and cons of having the Transportation Commission do the review,” or “the benefits and disadvantages of having the Transportation Commission do the review.” Not postpone the area study for the Cahill Industrial Park. Director Teague discussed keeping it on the work plan because it’s a known implementation step that is going to come out of the Comprehensive Plan, and it has been noted as funds not available right now. Explore a process where any development review where Mic Johnson would provide formalized input, look into how communities implement design quality/standards, or have residents help with a review system for developments. Director Teague suggested that the design guidelines, those things are mentioned and covered in the experience guidelines. Teague also recommended that the Commissioners look at amending the PUD ordinance to talk about the give-to-get under the zoning ordinance amendment. Zoning ordinance amendments, bring them to the Commissioners periodically or discuss in work sessions. Teague responded that the list is long and we should do 3-4 at a time and discuss when to do them. Teague suggested a work session would. Commissioners suggested a work session would be a good time to discuss. In conclusion, Director Teague summarized what is being added to the list of zoning ordinance below to explore: Tree ordinance PUD ordinance Next year discussing, with the City attorney, the variances being approved for purposes of living in the home versus selling it. Commissioners suggested prefacing it with encouraging and supporting the affordable housing component. VIII. Correspondence And Petitions Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Click here to enter a date. Page 6 of 6 None. IX. Chair and Member Comments Director Teague stated that the open house for the Greater Southdale area study has been postponed from the October 11, 2018 date and the new date will be publicized when the date is set. Commissioners commented that the 50th & France community meeting will be held on October 23, 2018 at the Public Works building at 7:00 PM. X. Staff Comments Director Teague commented that the City Council actions include denying the Pentagon North/ Sienna on the Park project. XI. Adjournment Commissioner Melton moved to adjourn the September 26, 2018, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 8:22 PM. Commissioner Mangalick seconded the motion. The motion carried. Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: O ther F rom:S cott Neal, C ity Manager Item Activity: Subject:Advisory Board & C ommission Minutes - S c ott Neal Information 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: I N TR O D U C TI O N: C ity M anager, Scott Neal will inform the P lanning Commission on the format used for minutes for all of the C ity's Advisory Boards and Commissions and C ity C ouncil. Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker Assistant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e reques t B-18-26, 4712 Annaway Drive for 1st floor height and no basement for a new home. Ac tion 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 I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 2 feet higher than the current home’s first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 4712 Annaway D rive. T he applicant is also requesting a variance from the basement requirement. T he proposed house will not have a basement so as to avoid elevating the new 1st floor well above the existing and surrounding homes. 4712 Annaway Drive is approximately 50,337 square feet in area and is located on the west side of Annaway, and is located in the floodplain. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report with attachments Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker Assistant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e reques t B-18-27 for front yard s etbac k at 5100 S kyline Drive Ac tion 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 requested I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 5100 S kyline D rive, is approximately 15,929 square feet in area and is a corner lot located on the south side of Skyline cul-de-sac and west of Skyline Drive. T he existing lot is vacant. T he previous home on site was demolished in 2016 and had consisted of a rambler with a two car garage. T he applicant is proposing two setback variances from the north lot line along the S kyline D rive Cul-de-sac to re-build a home on the property. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report with attachments Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.C . To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Varianc e R eques t B-18-28 for 5420 Halifax Lane Ac tion 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 requested. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 4.7 feet higher than the current home’s first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 5420 Halifax L ane. 5420 H alifax Lane is approximately 26,159 square feet in area and is located on the west side of H alifax Lane, east of M innehaha C reek and is located within the floodplain. T he City of E dina’s Engineering standards require the basement elevation of the new home to be 2 feet higher than the F E M A base flood elevation. T he requirement for increased height in basement elevations impacts the ability for the project to conform to the maximum first floor height requirement of one foot. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Applicant Submittal Aerial Map Engineering Memo The applicant is requesting to increase the first floor elevation 4.7 feet higher than the current home’s first floor elevation in order to construct a new home at 5420 Halifax Lane. 5420 Halifax Lane is approximately 26,159 square feet in area and is located on the west side of Halifax Lane, east of Minnehaha Creek and is located within the floodplain. The City of Edina’s Engineering standards require the basement elevation of the new home to be 2 feet higher than the FEMA base flood elevation. The requirement for increased height in basement elevations impacts the ability for the project to conform to the maximum first floor height requirement of one foot. The existing home is a rambler built in 1958 prior to the FEMA floodplain study conducted in 1979 to determine flood risk areas. It is a City and Watershed District goal to elevate and remove homes out of the flood hazard areas when the opportunity presents itself. A variance is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home more than one foot. The current home at 5420 Halifax Lane has a first floor elevation of 869.8 feet above sea level. The established flood elevation is 861.9. The minimum basement elevation must be no less than 2 feet above the flood elevation so the minimum basement elevation is 863.9. The proposed 1st floor is to be at 874.5, which after discounting floor trusses, spacers, subfloor, etc. provides a finished basement ceiling height around 8 feet 10 inches. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential.. October 10, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-18-28, A 3.7 foot first floor height variance (4.7 feet total) for a new home at 5420 Halifax Lane Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The existing 26,159 square foot lot is located on the west side of Halifax Lane and east of Minnehaha Creek. The property is within the flood zone. The existing single story rambler is to be removed. 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 October 3, 2018 memorandum. Drainage will be directed to either Halifax Lane in the front of the property or to the rear of the property into Minnehaha Creek. The project requires a storm water management plan which has been reviewed by the Environmental Engineer. The applicant is proposing using graded swales to control any existing and proposed runoff. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side – East Side - South– West Side – 10 feet 35.2 feet 10 feet 25 feet 12 feet 36.5 feet 15.4 feet Roughly 186 feet Building Coverage 25% 13.4% First Floor Elevation 869.8 feet 874.5 feet* *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 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 4.7 feet higher than the existing home? Staff believes the proposal meets the criteria for a variance to allow the first floor elevation 4.7 feet higher than the existing home for the following 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 to an elevation two feet above the 100-year FEMA flood elevation of 861.9 removing it from the flood zone. 2. The variance allows the new home to be elevated out of the flood zone and maintain the required distances from the neighbors to the east and west. 3. The proposed home design project fits the character of the neighborhood in height, scale, and mass. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot and the improvements will enhance the property. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance, as requested subject to the findings listed in the staff report above, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: • Survey date stamped September 11, 2018. • Building plans and elevations date stamped September 11, 2018. 2. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer’s memo dated October 3, 2018. September 12th, 2018 To: City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West Fiftieth Street Edina, MN 55424 From: Gonyea Homes 1000 Boone Ave. North Ste 400 Golden Valley, MN 55427 RE: Variance Request for 5420 Halifax Lane Edina, MN 55424 To Whomever this May Concern, Please accept this letter as a description for our variance request. We are requesting the variance because of the FEMA Base Flood Elevation that is required. This has been set at 861.9 which we need to be 2’-0” above at 863.9 for the lowest floor elevation. The current lowest floor elevation on the existing house is 861.1 which is currently in the flood plain. Because of this raised lower level elevation, we can no longer meet the required first floor elevation and overall height of the structure on this lot. The first-floor elevation of the existing home is 869.8. Per City Ordinance, the allowable first-floor elevation is 870.8 – 1 foot above existing. Because the lowest floor needs to be raised 2.8 feet due to the floodplain requirement, we cannot meet the Code required first floor elevation of 870.8. We are requesting a variance of 3.7 feet, or a first-floor elevation of 874.5. There is not a direct correlation between what the height the lowest floor needs to be raised (2.8 feet) and the first-floor elevation request (3.7 feet) due to different construction and energy code requirements in place. Please let me know if there is any additional information you need to process our request. Regards, Rick Packer – Land Manager 763-317-8830 5L20 aft ax Lane Edina. VN 5420 Halifax Lane FEMA Base Flood Elevation = 861.9 ft (NGVD29) Panel 27053C0364F (2016) Legend Building Footprint Parcels Water Roads Contours 2ft FLOODWAY AREA 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD // / acso March 2017 2016 FEMA Map N Sv4wA s3N14c1 IcV4v4vii r t4;?9 .44rel 0:1, lfc'ekakt 1443Vi `t4. "WA1 8624,-9 _ ul I • •-• .14ewt tt,L 114)frn No44 vyttjt iPS Property information address search result Search tip Search By: Parcel Data for Taxes Payable 2018 n Current year taxes due n 2018 state copy (used when filing 2017 M-1PR state refund) n View map of property. n Current year values n Prior year taxes n Print details This database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID number: 19-028-24-11.0037 Address: 5420 HALIFAX LA Municipality: EDINA School district: 273 Watershed: 3 Sewer district: Construction year: 1958 Owner name: ONCU ER Taxpayer name & ONCU ER address: 5425 HALIFAX LANE EDINA MN 55424 Sale information Sales prices are reported as listed on the Certificate of Real Estate Value and are not warranted to represent arms-length transactions. Sale date: June, 2018 Sale price: $720,000 Transaction type: Warranty Deed Tax parcel description The following is the County Auditor's description of this tax parcel. It may not be the legal description on the most recent conveyance document recording ownership. Please refer to the legal description of this property on the public record when preparing legal documents for recording Addition name: "ELMWOOD TERRACE" Lot: Block: 004 Approximate parcel E 100X265X100X258 size: Metes & Bounds: LOT 1 AND THAT PART OF LOT 2 LYING Common abbreviations S OF THE N 10 FT FRONT AND REAR Abstract or Torrens: ABSTRACT Value and tax summary for taxes payable 2018 Values established by assessor as of January 2, 2017 Estimated market value: $697,700 Taxable market value: $697,700 Total improvement amount: Total net tax: $9,937.26 Expand for details Total special assessments: Solid waste fee: Total Tax: $9,937.26 Expand for taxes due Property information detail for taxes payable 2018 Values established by assessor as of January 2, 2017 Values: Land market: $486,400 Building market: $211,300 Machinery market: Total market: $697,700 Qualifying improvements: Veterans exclusion: Homestead market value exclusion: Classifications: Property type: RESIDENTIAL Homestead status: HOMESTEAD Relative homestead: Agricultural: Exempt status: Hennepin County is providing this information as a public service. Tax related questions: taxinfo@hennepin.us Hennepin County, Minnesota Open government I Privacy. I Copyright 2018 nepin Date: 9/1 0/2018 Hennepin County Property Map 59:10 551)1 5500 5504 1 inch = 100 feet 5412 5413 401 5 541(5 5417 5429 4113 5421 5420 542 5 5433 5428 5429 5,437 5432 5437 5441 5440 5440 PARCEL ID: 1902824110037 OWNER NAME: Oncu Er PARCEL ADDRESS: 5420 Halifax La, Edina MN 55424 PARCEL AREA: 0.6 acres, 26,159 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: $720,000 SALE DATA: 06/2018 SALE CODE: Warranty Deed ASSESSED 2017, PAYABLE 2018 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $697,700 TAX TOTAL: $9,937.26 ASSESSED 2018, PAYABLE 2019 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $745,800 Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2018 NOTE: BLACK WINDOWS INTERIOR & EXTERIOR • G ALUM. FASCIA & SOFFIT -- 8.875:12 8 875 12 r - 4 5.12, 12 12 012 12 2 0 0 6.12 ett X 0 (r) 8 875 SADDLE 8.875:12 n 4.12 SADDLE 12 16:12 0.12 GONYEA 0512 HARDIE SIDING • COMPAN 1 ES • 1000 BOONE AVENUE N. SUITE 400 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 OFFICE: 763-432-4500 FAX: 763-432-4501 BUILDER LICENSE #2459 5 6". 3'a n 4" HARDIE TRIM SADDLE 6 Cr --t- 12 2 ADDLE i I wrin 1••••n•. °'• 12 —14 5:12 4 HARD E 10 5-6" 10:12 HARDIE SIDING= • G 3' HARDIE SIDING Tr. IIIIIIII 01=11011111INO.1.1. GONYEA 4" HARDIE- \. • CUSTOM HOMES • RETURN J VER. GRADE IN FIELD 6" HARDIE REVISION RECORD IN FIELD 07-30-2018 1 -1 I 1 rj STEP FTG'S. AS REID°. STEP FTG'S. AS REDD. 08-03-2018 1 I 5 08-08-2018 1 RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION 09-11-2018 1 SCALE: 1/8" = 1.-0" SCALE: 1/8" = 1.-0" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 7-CIN 6x6 CEDAR 09-12-2018 1 4:12 EDGE OF ROOF PORCH 1' 4' NOTE: BLACK WINDOWS INTERIOR & EXTERIOR 4,1111/8" 0' 14,6 7/8- 19,10" HARDIE SOFFIT El P# BUILD-OUT 60' RADIUS ALUM. FASCIA & 4OFFIT 8 875:12 r 6" HARDIE FRIEZE 6" BUILD-OUlt. A - HARDIE MINI-LAP f 7' HARDIE ON 1810 HARDIE BD. IMA W/ CEDAR CORBELS BELOW 6 411, _101311a1111.1111.. GABLE-END PORCH ROOF (@ SIDE) 8.875:12 1 12 ALUM. FASCIA & SOFFIT CEDAR BRACKETS & CORBEL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 8.875:12 6" HARDIE FRIEZE 8 87512 8.875:12 8.875:12 5:12 5:12 CEDAR BRACKET 12 14A Nik 11 5:12 HARDIE BD & BATTEN Q 14" O.C. 5:12 12 6' BUILD-OUT W/ HARDIE MINI-LAP 0_ w W > Z w e a N X O Z 0 7: < X 0 Z N O it 0 18 ALUM. FASCIA & SOFFIT HARDIE SHAKES 12 686 TREATED. POST 16'816' HARDIE BUILT-UP COLUMN WITH 6" HARDIE TRIM TOP & BOTTOM ON 30-x30- STONE BASE WITH STONE CAP 11111& H 11_17 ., TATA ref z Anplimiwa, „M -Awn WNW 4PMENI EMEME 2" HARDIE ON 1810 HARDIE BD. W/ CEDAR CORBELS BELOW 6" BUILD-OUT W/ HARDIE MINI-LAP W/ CEDAR CORBELS BEL W 2- HARDIE ON 1x10 HARDI En 18 18 =_ 1 5: 2 r— 188 HARDIE EXTEND AS SHOWN 186 HARDIE TRIM 184 HARDIE TRIM EXTEND AS SHOWN 186 HARDIE 8" HARDIE TRIM rorAlaiJUMMIIII WM NM INIIIIIIIMME Irall MEN NIMKIVEMNINEEMMT soma. radar IMIEIHre MIINDY6 a•• 11•11110, IMF n i`i 1E1111111 n 8 875 2 21 A50 ICT c-OU CONC. PORCH MEM= 1111/111ritivesiMiNVINEL MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM 01. 3' co 2 2 0 0 0 co O IE EN H BA 16 O.C. -st in PLATE DROP — 42— 2 4: 1' -g 3'-9 HARDIE BD & i BATTENS 14: O.C. • ... •1111111111=111 7 RADIUS I I j O)COLUMN DTL. Q./SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 8" HARDIE SOFFIT 0:12 ....m.n••••••••••=• ••--i-.-..-... r*AMIN.W.C.,IBMI 130111.1•M,11.11MI .•..- ,...m._,"M.. I asoa.....r.... TYP. WDW. TRIM RIM n SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" HOUSE WALL 7-9 5, NOTES: IL' I HARDIE TRIM w SOFFIT 6" PROJECT 1.) ELEVATION IS ARTIST RENDERING ONLY. ACTUAL ELEVATION MAY VARY uii=•• "111 m.1117.= FOUNDATION 1615 FINISHED SQUARE FEET M. a m 1..." IMMai ...." .. gm ....... maMEN• • . .,.=.1-: •-•--aamm=•---="2M1 - ".'AIIIIIIII 2.) ALL OVERHANGS: DEPTH SHALL BE 1,6" TYPICAL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 1468 1637 2575 624 H DIE LAP DING BASEMENT FIRST SECOND SPORT COURT 3.) ALL RAKES: DEPTH SHALL BE I-0" TYPICAL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE REC. RISER CONCIPDRCH -• O P 4.) ALUMINUM FASCIA & SOFFIT ALL SIDES 686 TREATED. POST 16)(16t HARDIE BUILT-UP COLUMN WITH 6' HARDIE TRIM TOP & BOTTOM ON 30830" STONE BASE WITjI STONE CAP '872-3 PR -0' '867.1 EXIST. GRADEL P GRADE TOTAL 6304 x'870.0 PROP. GRADE 5.) HARDIE SIDING! BD. & BATTEN HARDIE SHAKES I STONE: FRONT ONLY HARDIE SIDING ALL OTHERS 9'88' OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR 1688' OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR I FULL HEIGHT STONE '8681ST. GRADE PROJECT NO. LANDINGi ADDRESS STONE- — — 86g 4 EXIST. GRADE 6.) FINAL GRADE TO BE DETERMINED ON SITE BY OTHERS GH0862 867.8 EXIST. GRADE 11 EDGE OF CONC. PORCH 7.) ALL EXTERIOR GLAZING TO BE LOW - E FRONT ELEVATION l SHEET OF 8 686 TREATED. POST 16'816" HARDIE BUILT-UP COLUMN WITH 6" HARDIE TRIM TOP & BOTTOM ON 30-x30" STONE BASE WITH STONE CAP SCALE: 1/4" =i1.-0" 8.) WINDOW MANUFACTURER: PELLA EMCOMPASS SERIES STONE ASE EXTERIOR WALK-OUT WALLS 2,6 STUDS (4) 16' O.C. ON 22,0' 12,0' 10,0' 38,0' 3670 367011fICTI 170 PIC /2-12x10s TRTD `,2-2,(10s1 \ SCREEN PORCH ABOV 10,0' 13,6' 13,6' 2,1V , 67,0' 35'-6" O PROJ. NO. 31,6' LOWER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SHEET n Z, OF 8 GH0862 9 4 :C NC 2' . -• 0 DR i0 x8' 4,0' H. x 8' W. POURED I /, v 1 r sr r _ _ / 1- SOLO= _...1 LOOK-OUT / 56-0" CONC. FOUND. HALLS VI/,'; 4 1,4 REQUEST ' OR ALTER 9.2 • . DECK ABOVE 12 . R-10 DRAINAGE 205[8' CONT. CONC. REBAR PER COD BOARD ON FTGS. F. 3-2x6 ON 27')L27"x12" CONC. PAD FTG. 2-9112' L T S C I R CO TO NT D . IN RIM PT. LOAD FROM ABV.MEANS R. HGT. HR. /1.,s ,, cZ TO • SIMPSON DT ACH DECK 12 AS NEED / i 1- D. i 8 oI E.., - . - 2 TRIMMERS .1070 PICT r- \ 4070 -ft --L__ piqr_ _ j ft -1(S0 PICT _ / "''5 7, 0 PT. LOAD FROM • # 3-2x6 ON 26"x26'xis' CONC. PAD FTG as Ti 0 1 Of NI I v a, ,„ / H.. _ r Ili / , FOU Dir RIM sl, _ j_ _ i__ SR ARCH 090 , 7/-1 • IN, ;ON MA CH TO DR. HGT. 2-9 /2' LSL CONT. PT. LOAD FROM, s T YP. TALL WALL FRAMING. (2) 2x6 62 SPF STUDS @ 12' O.C. WALKCONDITION I / , RE ON 35')(35"x1 I / @ -OUT 42' H. x 8' W. POURED ll 5' CONC. PAD F PT. LOAD FROM ABV. 7,0' X 13,6' i I / CONC. FOUNDATION WALL 1 TRTD. PLATE I I x' ON 29'x29'x12' t7,L EXERCISE I R-10 DRAINAGE BOARD ON n n n 20'xti,CONT. CONC. FTGS. / / CONC. PAD FTG. SPACE • / ....-- -71 ' LL _a -REB )PER ENG:DWG . it,, - '-'1' 19,0' X 18,6' 1 Fs CONC. I h.' / '""-. TYP. TALL WALL FRAMING: ---4 REC. ROOM 6. PAINT (EPDXY) i '.••- # / CARPET r. 06 AP ii., 0 --''' f, ,:. . L,' 7 I; / (1) 2x6 tk2 SPF STUD (O 12' O.C. @ LOOK-OUT CONDITION 10 n I N NYI b co, 'II r 2 g. V 1 ! i 624 412. FT. ADJUSTABLEHOOP- \ I 25,0' X 22,0' \ I -I, I ,, $ / f, SPORT OURT 9,0'H. x 8-W. POURED i r ' 36"x 36' x 12' 0 GONG. I I CONC. FlOTURNTDD..W FLA ALTLES CON ETE t/' CONC. PAD FTG. BEARING POINT CPT F PDXY 2 , PAINT ( PDXY) R-10 DRAINAGE BOARD ON I I I sr" A I , 42'00' CONT. CONC. FTGS. VER. EXTENT IN FIELD l u " BEARING WALL DS TO MATCH -T SPACING ON s" CONT. CONC. FTGS. . 3 s • REBAR PER ENG. DWGS. . .9 \ FURN. I , I • , s I FRAME TO 12. W/ SR. LEDGE ';': AR PER CODE DR. 2-2x10 I ST In I ii • I )7,; - 4-- " I SR ARC I r- I-1 v 1.1,1 /. CONC. I : 8, \ \ \ „ LINES ARE rur- _,,_ r r L_H NOTE: FOR I I ' V ; , BAR LVT. \ REFERENCE ONLY. 18'D. WIRE SHVS. 10,4' x 5,0' fis L / I Is , 6" DEEP NICHE ROUGH-IN TO BE HIDDEN PLUMBING ROUGH NS !Is '" P.O. W. . \ _ __\ FRAME TO 12,0'H WI SR. LEDGE I J STORAGE L" - -- ,- .17% '1, I \ - ' / / ,s/ // , / , / ) LL: 2-2x10 g — — 7 MIMI= 22,0' , U 356 LL HALL / 4 I 9,0"H. x W. POURED L . 1,10' x CPT '', I 1 . CONC. FOUND. 2' EXTERIOR mom. Ri WALLS LEDGE i . AN ATGE LAYOUT OF MECH ROOM —I ADJUST WALL HGT. & -----r- - ' 1.— M #5 9' ."' "0. —I FL. 2-2x1 _ L. g2i1r1 4._I 20"x8' CC E BOARD ON NT. CONC. FTGS. TO BE DETERMINED BY STEP FOOTINGS AS REQ'D. 5 -r, - REBAR PER CODE MECH SUBCONTRACTOR FOR ADEQUATE FROST DEPTH ' ' < 0 . ,.., F tY,T 11 MO- H V' IB I-4- (111- OURED . ET, LL LBATH yam - If_ - _11 11 . WALLS LEDGE 9 ,4's A. -DT I- I PLATE s . 3-Tea. MI ON • - POINT LOAD 29, FROM POINT LOAD 29,0009 FROM .FTGS. 2 CODE / A -1 I r • TRUSS SUPPLIER, 51" x51"x12* W/ I/5 DOTING TM. E.W. TRUSS SUPPLIER, FOOTING 48' x 48' x12' W/ (4)10 BTM. E.W. . L i 4,11' Fe=3000 PSF REB =GRADE 60 Fc =3000 PSF REBAR= GRADE 60 L_ J. RE N — II UNEXCAVATED ,"1(1.• !? I I I I mo• I : r — —I us .Lizzi:,. I sEN. 7 4 i • I 2' FOL NDATION DROP I 4 I 410 UNEXCAVATED I _J L J ti, r.-1" inti z • , i 22,0' 0 0 0 0 - : _ _ CONC.PQR _ ___I-__ H - A - -, i I 48" H. x 8' W. POURED CONC. FOUND. WALL 2' INT. LEDGE i I i xs : i 1 TRTD. PLATE ON —L19,0" x 8'W. POURED . I I 205s8" CONT. CONC. FTGS. — — L__=_.7— — -C — —j CON'. FOUND. WALLS I 8' H. x 8' W. POURED REBAR PER CODE CONC. FROST WALL ON 20"x8" CONT. CONC. FTGS. REBAR PER CODE R-10 DRAT 20'x8' C • 1 TRTD. PLATE • GE BOARD ON T. CONC. FTGS. BAR PER CODE I . I ' L — — — 40'H. COAG. r • IT. x fr W. POURED FOUND. WALL LEDGE 1 T CTD. 20' PLATE ON B' CONT. CONC. FTGS. L _ PER CODE NOTE: DRAFT STOPPING AS REQ'D. @ 1000 OF MAX. .REBAR J .16" 1,11' 9,2* M.O. 2,5' 2,11' NOTES: 1.) ALL INTERIOR & EXTERIOR HEADERS TO BE 2-2x10 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 16,2' M.O. 22,0" 1 2 3 4 07-30-2018 08-03-2018 08-08-2018 09-11-2018 SPORT COURT BASEMENT FIRST SECOND 624 1468 1637 2575 GONYEA COMPANIES 1000 BOONE AVE. N. SUITE 400 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 OFFICE: 763-432-4500 FAX: 763-432-4501 BUILDER LICENSE #2459 REVISION RECORD > O 0 F: (/) TOTAL 6304 PROJECT FOUNDATION 1615 FINISHED SQ. FT. 0 2 O OEXERCISE SPACE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 3,6' 6,0' 9 / 3,0' , 6,0' ---,........ SR CHASE SR ARCH I I L s. 6000 C 91 7, (7)REC. ROOM FIREPLACE \Z./SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2.) STAIR TREAD CUT SHOWN @ 10' - 7 3/4" MAX RISE 3.) ALL ANGLED WALLS AT 45° UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 4.) ALL EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS TO OUTSIDE OF SHEATHING 5.) MAIN AND UPPER WINDOWS @ 6,10' HGT. (TRANSOMS ABOVE) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 6.) GARAGE WALL 2x6 7.) TRUSS & FLOOR JOIST MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY SIZE 8 SPACING OF JSTS. 8 TRUSSES 8.) 4 1/2' RETURNS ON ALL DOORS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 9.) ROOM DIMENSIONS FOR FINISHED ROOMS ARE APPROXIMATE 8 USED FOR GENERAL PLANNING. EXACT ROOM DIMENSION WILL VARY. I REC. ROOM 1,3 \ 2,6' 18,0' SR ARCH 6' DEEP SR RECESS -• (7.\GAME ROOM / HALL 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" L DR. 2x10 'DR. 0 MINN a SR ARCH .R ARCH BAR ROUGH-N 6 GAME ROOM 2_,./ SCALE: 1/4" = 1L0" MATCH HGT. OF DR HGT. 4070 PE:7 0' *9' rr) REC. ROOM WDWS. 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 5060 PICT O HORS. IN RIM • PATCH HGT. OF DR HGT. 3670 PICT A, 2 GAME RM WDWS. ‘..21 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 71,0" 16,0' EXTERIO C WALK-OUT WALLS 6x6 TRTD. POS ON 2,6 STUDS @ 16' O.C. ON 18' DIA SONO BE 1 TRTD. F LATE ON FROST FOO ING 4,0' H. x 6- W. POURED FLARE TO 30 DIA CONC. FOUND. WALLS R-10 DRAINAGE BOARD ON 20',28* CCNT. CONC. FTGS. REBAR Pr IR CODE 14,0' it 7,0" 3 -1 3 Ilii-------L3-2)710s TRTD "'"/ 01 26,0IT 4,0" /- KEN WOOD SURROUND 4 6000 C 6;° TOSR 2 FIREPLACE ELEV. V SCALE: 1/4" = 1LO" SH 3046 8,0" HD. SEE CAB. DWGS. FOR FINAL TRIM IN THIS AREA BENCH W/ HOOKS DESK DROP SPORT COURT BASEMENT FIRST SECOND 624 1468 1637 2575 _,720 Ali litir 23,0' 16,4r 33,0 13,0" 10,0" 8,0' 8,0' 7 0" 26,0' 6x6 CEDAR STRUCTURAL GA • LE-END TRUS COLUMNS, TYP. 1 51117 11" Per -1" IF ,jr ,ie. Air 47 1 .. 1 ir 1 1.1 17/8" LSL .111.. I ' 0 - 1-'0' PLATE D OP FROM MA 4 if 14,0' SCREE 14,0" PORCH .1, o / " TREX ECKING i 1 ALUMINUM ' • IL SYSTEM . 8 4-2x6 LBL 6 TRAN 3616 POSTS 11 TED FM FILING 'G.SCIS•ORTRUSSE• " ° • • 4 -Cr 4,0" • PICT 3656 t 6 AWN 3616 TRAN 36167•cl PICT 3656 PICT AWN 3616 AWN D.C.56 @ •• 01 8,0 X 8,0' ./7.4 I L 1 GRILLING DECK z ,-. z GI Irl I 10,1-1/8" VVDW. HD. HGT. TALL WALL: 1-2x6 LSL @ 12' O.C. / 1 dr% 2:12 2:12 0!1 TREX DECKING ALUM. RAIL SYSTEM rn 2 • IMMERS PT. LOAD i- .'1 FROM ABV. .0 0 1-3 1/4"x9 HT LSL CONT. VAULT VAULT • .. 3-2x6 . - 15,0' X 13,0' PT. LOAD "":" 4016 IXED 4016 FIXED 1 4016 FIXED e, . DINETTE ••/ ROMABV. ABV. @ W JAMBS AB @ VVDW JAMBS AB ^ 4066 • ICT 4066 PICT 4066 PICT 5 WOOD , m N 3°2x6 2-2x6 LS - 2-2x6 LS ;. /- 2-2x6 LSL./- 2-2x6 . L LSL /-2-2x6 /74/ / / / Al -....#4/41 18,9" CLG. HGT. / 1551 ,,,,, 9 ,0" WDW. HD. HGT. 2-9 1/2" LSL VAULTED CLG. ° ,,// (4) SHELVES I 7--------.?( 6,8*X 5,0" TYP. TALL WALL FRAMING: (2) 2x6 #2 SPF STUDS @ 12' O.C. I OPEN TO / ABOVE PANTRY a @ WALK-OUT CONDITION , I 18,4" X 17.0 , \ rY4) /' e. re VVOOD . 1 ci I 3-2x6 , PA. SIDE I Fe GREAT ROOM / el c., TYP. TALL WALL F ING: /ve.,/#. / / KENVVOOD SURROUND CARPET 10,1 I/O"" CLG. HGT. ro) #,0" S.(i‘'' 2,0' / V /,/ (1) 2x6 #2 SPF STUDS @ O.C.1 @ LOOK-OUT CONDITION ----"FGAS FP NO HEARTH SR. ARCH P )1) 0 6 '9 -) ), " 6' PLATE DROP FROM MAIN" erl g r - I _ I w 0 II 6,8*X 5,0" if30 21,0" X 22,0* I ilith:4> • w 9 CLOS% a g.,-,.., SPORT COURT BELOW I 43 ,--20 DW . - II Lvr 1 0 1- o 2C OO ni" V_GF. TI47. Nif Io / I .Lii - ' t.,,, - .1.: k_ k' ' 2480 C.O. / / 6Ve•`?'2' to I% I n . 1 1 E 3 iS, -2) P. © SR. LEDGE 1' H 1 •l000 .-:- I - 0 8 0 viIPIP - / 86" WIDE ICH W/ HOOKS (6 % E6 2-2x6 LSL TRW al- I-0' 1 15,0' \ 0 N , 6,6*X 11,2' % io CLG WOD 18,9 H G . \ / MUD RM I 0 I // / LVT / T-2' 3. 8,0' I 1.1 / 3-6' 4/ 9-1 1/6' CLG. it I )- 2 %111 1 It SR ARCH 4 yk ARC ./ -I WD LV7 j ' A L J ROSH P. - o 76:9 VT r9e- - E / ' LI OF FLOOR ABOVE re , . ETI a /,, 0 ii; A . m . A , / # ..„_. 0 / 'i , / ,,, "N , I N Wr AL F C OS A :17 , 3 2x'1'3: I "le ''''' cc . Zo 0°- SR. LEDGE @ 12,0H io !..C' b . A . A' V z rn I I PWDR - I I 8,4" X 15,2' „, , FOYER . , , q .A 24" ,„1 wiw 1 0 WALL . • . LEDGE '..1"........,, ,r 6° CANT ,,..', ' 2 R R SIDE / F., . r, .7 / --/fr WOOD / / 10,1 1/8' CLG. HGT. c, I ,:e I /, 20 MIN. STL. Fl T D D D OR 2 re 0 2 ig.610,4/ x10 FLUSH '/ LL / ,14 i..943 c, IOPNG. AB . . RISER IZIIV. CEDAR L TREATED MB WO R STEPS • D ON CONC. 0- 0 • , o cc /, /.. t..._ / / OFFICE I. ic-c n ./ 9 N WOOD 6 / Icr g o 1,1 - m 9 / # ,.'1+ CPT 4;"5.': F. 1-. e "1,6" PLATE DROP FROM MAIN " i'. °) § .N to ,,,. 3 CAR GARAGE :,, 12" 3-2x10 ,,-. _, M' PT. LOAD FROM AB I.2 31/2• CONC. FLOOR SLOPE TO DOOR / ,,,, e ,i- ..1 5x7 PS 2' FOUNDATION DROP ;." TAI AS REOD. /, V in -2x10 .' fr." gi 12' TRANS. Mill 4,1 r; % ,... PT. LOAD FROM ABV. 5x7 PSL POST - NO PLATE / AI .e., xl.W.---111-,111.....-. r/ Z.,: wALCW3OVE - ;4: LO DING ..' WAIT-ABOVE- . ../0 -- - -- - -- - -- - • L ---. . -L --.1-z - .. - . - , - 0 , --...-7".. =.."--..-----*1---'--;-- -------"- Ili S 550- /1111 - - COVD. ';''''' 2 2x6 FR0 ABV. 35 5x 007PT. PS LOAD FROMASV. POST-NO PLATE ROOF GIRDER 0 . P. 9' impd cc ALUMN ORCH'I c M CLG. 417EIK' / Al HOLD WOW • ..,. • l' / ,6",./'/ / Alf .4 44g 8 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR 1 te I 1)1 o Ord of STONE o AA 04CIFIXED 4.500 2 E'c'.) (-3 "0- r - 16'x8' OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR -1 erfli ral___”, DR. 2 2 I °7- ' --- 0 ce . 0) f_ • o Ec / / • • tl!air .A .e -f WEJ". # LA 4 0 "I I . o 0 Li x a,,i I o MFG. ROOF TRUSSES - .- 4,0' 4,0' 1 lei' 2 T. g @ 24' O.C. / 2 /m E) 6x6 TREA HARDIE B 6' HARD! Er. POST 16"x16' IL -UP COLUMN WITH 7•IM TOP & BOTTOM . . 2-2 12 ////// /zz724-- - -s- z p ON 30"x3 S ONE BASE WITH 2-11 7/8* LS /////// " ',71ITI *..)7URER ISIS. STONE C 5,0' 5,0" 2,0' Al grIr STONE 2'-6' 0' 16,0" 3,0 6' 0,0' 13,6' r 22,0 4,0' 31,6' 39,6' MAIN LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" IS 9.) ROOM DIMENSIONS FOR FINISH ROOMS ARE APPROXIMATE & USED FOR GENERAL PLANNING. EXACT ROOM DIMENSION WILL VARY. 40 6 FIXED to 1 1 4068 PICT 1 f. GREAT ROOM WDWS. 3 SCALE: 1/Er = 1'-0" • SR ARCH OGREAT ROOM ARCH SCALE: 1/4" = l'-O" me dinfta I oo' OSR. ARCH (7\STAIR AT FOYER SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" \a/SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" NOTES: (F.\ MUD ROOM ELEV. a/ SCALE: 1/4° = 1'-0" G Nlr EA COMPANIES 1000 BOONE AVE. N. SUITE 400 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 OFFICE: 763-432-4500 FM: 763-432-4501 BUILDER LICENSE #2459 REVISION RECORD 07-30-2018 2 08-03-2018 3 08-08-2018 4 09-11-2018 ST. CROIX - ELEV A PROJECT FOUNDATION 1615 FINISHED SQ. FT. TOTAL 6304 PROJ. NO. GH0862 SHEET el OF 8 2018 GONYEA COMPANIES O 1.) ALL INTERIOR & EXTERIOR HEADERS TO BE 2-2x10 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 2.) STAIR TREAD CUT SHOWN @ 10* - 7 3/4' MAX RISE 3.) ALL ANGLED WALLS AT 45' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 4.) ALL EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS TO OUTSIDE OF SHEATHING 5.) MAIN AND UPPER WINDOWS @ 6,10' HGT. (TRANSOMS ABO UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 6.) GARAGE WALL 2x6 7.) TRUSS & FLOOR JOIST MANUFA TO VERIFY SIZE & SPACING OF. & TRUSSES 8.) 4 1/2" RETURNS ON ALL DOORS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED CLG. L NE Q VAULT • 0 , . ,,- OPEN -7/ 111111111111111111111011 - NOTES:s HEADERS TO BE 2-2x10 1. ) ALL UNL ESS INTERIOR OTHERWISE & EXTERIOR NOTE D 2.) STAIR TREAD CUT HOWN © 10' - 7 3/4' MAX RISE 0 Gil • • COM GO NY PANEES 1000 BOONE AVE. N. SUITE 400 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 OFFICE: 763-432-4500 FAX: 763-432-4501 BUILDER LICENSE #2459 3.) ALL ANGLED WALLS AT 45° UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 67,0" III 4.) ALL EXTERIOR TO 22,0' 16,0' 29.-0* ELEV A 31-8" 2/ / DIMENSIONS OUTSIDE OF SHEATHING 9,3" 16,0' 13,0" 1,1'..4'4 SR OPG f1,4't 7 5.) MAIN AND UPPER VVINDOWS @ 6,10' HGT. ABOVE) (TRANSOMS 6,6" 4,10' ' 8,0 7,10' 5,4' 0" CD HALLWAY ELEVATION 1111 DETAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 6.) GARAGE WALL 2x6 TALL WALL: 1-2x, LSL @ 12' 0.D. SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" 4 SCALE: 1/4" = l'Ar TRUSS & FOR JOIST MANUFACTURER 7.) TO VERIFY SIZE & SPACING OF JSTS. & TRUSSES • 112" 1-3 1/2"x5 3616 1RANS 3650 LSL (PLANK) PICT REVISION RECORD \ FLAT CLG. -- I 8.) 4 112' RETURNS ON ALL DOORS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED / 04v / / - A .........1./ .. , / ST. CROIX - 1 07-30-2018 \ i I -I SLOPE 9.) ROOM DIMENSIONS FOR FINISHED ROOMS ARE APPROXIMATE & USED FOR GENERAL PLANNING. EXACT 2-200 3-2x6 FLAT CLG. MFG. j2Cr A, • 1,4" OLE' ' '4L.0 2 08-03-2018 3 08-08-2018 r4 '.0A ROOM DIMENSION WILL VARY. SH 3050-2 3-2x10 SH2630 @ 24' 0.C. A • A,.., 3-2x6 SH 3050 I SH 3050 ' H 3050 I SH 2348-2 2-2100 4 09-11-2018 11,4' 3,8" 6,4* 1.-111 17 / ,.I 6 - V A/ -1p WDW. HGT. 41....-.......... , / GIRDER TRUSS r 3-2x10 6-10 WDYV GT. • / /47,z1,14/7 S' 4 ..- 1 ER RESIDENCE 5420 HALIFAX LANE EDINA, MN 55424 ; 131 r" PLAN DETAIL 0 o WALL ABV. IP )01 36"x66' /4 X h 15,0" X 25,0' ' r__ _ _ 4d, _ _ _ N t.1, FREE-STANDING TUB 0 UPPER LVL. 0LG. 4' WALL OPEN TO • MAIN LEVEL . / 12.0 X 16,0" 3 I , ") . '44'1 BEDROOM #4 0,____ 9,2' X 12,4" LAUNDRY 395 SO. FT. - 6 . cce 0. MASTER BATH 12 CARPET .0 , s FLAT CLG. ' • 61.0, X 1T-0" 1- 0 F5; OPEN -7./1 1 III 3611M 8,1 1/8' CLG. HGT. Ej LVT ar, a /1 . .. MAST 4 BEDROO 0' g, TILE FLOOR E'd i.1 CARPET 2 a L6[2q •-- -- 3650 PIC 101_ 12 I I- 0 . / • A (;* \ • _.. • to 9a, :1-111Bilf VCAAL:UL Li THHGGT; . 6 . 2 ..,,, cn - AP 2. 41 GLS. A : ,/ ; :YING , AI-4-- a I ° 11t 30' UPPER aj • ••1./ / PNLS. NO SOFFIT HOLD SILL TO IT: drj x ABOVE. TOP OF PANEL 1-1 . t 0 DO'. ,..i 11_11- S.R. OPG. ..1.. d 47/, 2868 BARN DR. . 31 -•- 0.7/ ,N,7, '''' a A / / / . Al g. 6 . LE FL - , 4, • LS • & 0 7 _ 0 1-. , r - EMIn 3613:21 11 5' A k \ 0 / , 2o g L _Li 1,6\ ,, 4 •ky o ... 11 OPENING TO - (§) w A I ,/,.aiooiooaiaiaiaaoa , ‘ u. V" MATCH WALL LINE 3656I PIC I. x / /7„,x, ; .,111 5 w rt / ;1'. ''' / 2 r// / SR ARCH rt- v . . j - - , vid / / arrrrr.,,,,, , I '1, co'' 2110 // Ad/ / R&S ATH #4 ,,e 0 . FLAT CLG. / . -I_ k° KITCHEN/DINETTE 5 9 6,6° X 6,2' LVT 30. vA B N a. w a. `lir, op, ' A • r C . vgi E a i ,, 0 cli 1Z z 2 °.'" , II 2' 6. 7-tr 13,10" X 7,0' MASTER CLOS-4ET ---=WT=1.:=7! 50' X II CARPET - P :_-, le o' IA / IS iof'" ",,,, , . .1 ,T) 1;1 . / II CARPET 1 no =I mg R&SH = / 7 3,6' .,,,, 1-4" -`13,8° 11.1,4" x II 1 CARPET 8,1 118" CLG. HGT. L_ s il / //// .,/ / A fr/////////////////////////%//%sdE% ///x:, CLR. _ei 4 • r Wal_BILOR IL _ 11 -- -I JJ 6,4" 2,10' \ I _ _ _ 4-_-L_ _-i-- _ _ R&SH `1, / HALLWAY \ I I i I /A/ Ax et, &// 1,4 DINETTE END ELEV. DINETTE WDW. ELEV. , / 4' CARPET I 1 4,1" 1 I 1 x -S1 °SCALE: , , 1/4" = 1.-0" (D r 1 ca -0 / .,. ,-,, -= SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0" o re . ; II 8,8' x 4,6" il / ROOF TRUSSES I . / , .,, ...." 2-2x10 6-10 HD. HC Ii SH 3056 I- W.I.C. 11 LVT ' (.0 ' X 14,0" 0 A CPT 1! 15,6' X 15,4* LOFT / 0 /C < A PT . al BE E- oom #3 2 0 4; CARPET Lji 14,0" X 12,4' ..10 W W/ WOOD SR OPENING GLS. PANEL •R&SH •io • - PET LL / 3 5' 8,1 1/8" CLG. HGT. ‘§ • BEDROOM #2 SHE VS. ON TILE CURB ' NO SOFFIT ABV. 8,1 I • ' CLG. HGT. 2 / /AZ% , ^ BOX VAULT I 9,1 1/8' VAULT HGT. / -/ ATH #2 i- o CARPET Z SH 2646-2 I L J 5 19: '1)I 4' LVT 16- g 8,1 1/8' CLG. HGT. FRAMED BENCH SOFFIT W/ ABV. 0' VAN = 2 I ' PC. FBRGL 2O) / 8 / 6 ... CL. WALL BELOW 2 , CP , 7 BATH #3 3„2„6 -I UPPE R LANDIN 3-2x6 e STRUCT. POST- /ER. LVT LVT 0,__ II OPEN 01C---F1=__ .. g A 0 7 • t'' 10,/;./,./ A_ .r . r• OP •• '' --71---lorns-"-- 6 :/,' pLOP 7 , fOr////"/ V // d / / ///// // / A - 1626 CSMT , 3 2x10 SH 3050-2 0 I 36 x I FREES TUB ANDING SH 3060-2 • V 4, /AB 2-2x10 2-2,10 r / - 1/,; , ' 4,4' 14,10 .,, 3) 1/8" WDW Hifi. .. // /41 °° 4-ir . :5 ifklip MASTER BATH TUB 4" CURB 0-)MASTER BATH NO CAN r 2 FT. I r - -1 I I I 2 I I FIRST I r - -I 2 I I I 1 7 .L. r--I 2060-2 F 2-2x10 11 LLI >". SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0" \AI SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" I L_J I- L - 1 L-J L H J I 2 1 L--1 I Z 0 PROJECT FOUNDATION 1615 FINISHED SQ. FT. • SPORT COURT 624 SR OPENING \ ,.1 L -1 WPICTECOVY- -I I 49,6' SH 2646 BLACK OUT CO BASEMENT 1468 SHELVS. W/ WOOD - 4 -1 I 9-8' 2 2 0 r L , AI I, /,', WALL BEuswi, N--• FIRST 1637 13,6 &-0" 10,0" 35,6' 0 SECOND 2575 106' VANITY r 67,0' (v TOTAL 6304 46), PROD. NO. UPPER LEVEL PLAN il NT GH0862 SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" MASTER BATH VANITY OPEN TO BELOW 395 SQ. FT. ° SCALE: 1/4" = 1.-0" NOT INCLUDED IN UPPER LEVEL TOTAL SHEET A OF 8 -t%R1611141k(--)--14=6 1-_-16.4'"E Edina, H ennepin, MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates 2013, HN Aerial 2015, ©WSB & Associates 2013 5420 Halifax Lane October 3, 2018 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates 1 in = 75 ft / DATE: October 3, 2018 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Charles Gerk, PE – Graduate Engineer RE: 5420 Halifax Lane - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed include the proposed site plan dated 8/29/18 and the stormwater management plan date 8/28/18, updated 10/3/18. Grading and Drainage Grading for the proposed work will closely match existing drainage paths. Drainage will be directed to either Halifax Lane in the front of the property or to the rear of the property and into Minnehaha Creek. The proposed stormwater management plan does not propose any additional drainage to neighboring private properties and the public infrastructure on Halifax Lane has capacity to accept the runoff. Stormwater Mitigation City of Edina Building Policy SP-003 does not require stormwater mitigation for this project, however it does require a stormwater management plan. The applicant is proposing using graded swales to control any existing and proposed run off as described in the grading and drainage section above. Flood Plain The subject site is located in the FEMA 1% annual chance flood plain which has an identified regional base flood elevation of 861.9’. City of Edina code requires the low floor elevation for redeveloped lots to be no less than 2’ above the base flood elevation. For this property the regulatory elevations require the low floor elevation to be no less than 863.9’. The subject property has a proposed a low floor elevation of 863.9’. Additionally the applicant has proposed fill in the flood plain, this fill is allowed per city code as long as there is an equal amount of cut on the site. Erosion and Sediment Control No Comments Street and Curb Cut A curb cut permit will be required if the applicant proposed replacing or relocating existing curb cut. Public Utilities No Comments O ther Items A Minnehaha Watershed District permit will be required. A final grade as-built survey and inspection will be required to verify compliance with the approved stormwater plan. Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:C UP : 6645 Mc C auley Trail, C ross View Lutheran C hurch Ac tion 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 approval of the Conditional U se P ermit (C U P ). I N TR O D U C TI O N: S ee attached staff report. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Applicant Submittal Letter Applicant Submittal Aerial Map Engineering Memo Building Official Memo Traffic and Parking Study October 10, 2018 Planning Commission Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit for Cross View Lutheran Church at 6645 McCauley Trail West Information / Background: Cross View Lutheran Church, the applicant, is proposing to construct a 16,000 square foot addition to the existing church. The proposed addition would include youth gathering space, an early childhood entrance, kitchen, narthex and main entrance expansion. The proposed work would not include any expansion to the existing Sanctuary. To accommodate the request, the following is requested: Conditional Use Permit for the religious institution. Religious Institutions are a conditional use in the Single Dwelling Unit District. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Highway 62 and Double Dwelling Units; zoned R-2 and guided LDAR, Low Density Attached Residential Easterly: Single Family Residences; zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and Guided Low Density Residential Southerly: Single Family Residences; zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and Guided Low Density Residential Westerly: Single Family Residences; zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and Guided Low Density Residential STAFF REPORT Page 2 Existing Site Features The subject property, 6645 McCauley Trail, is 4.76 acres (207,350 square feet) and is the current site of the existing Cross View Lutheran Church. Planning Guide Plan designation: LDR, Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Site Circulation, Traffic & Parking There would be minimal change in traffic based on the proposed project. The proposed project is estimated to generate 11 net trips during the 7:30-8:30 am hour, 17 net trips during the 9:155-10:15 am hour, 15 net trips during the 10:15-11:15 am hour and 14 trips during the 11:45 am -12:45 pm hour. The traffic generated would have minimal impact on the surrounding intersections and does not change the level of service. All intersections have capacity available to accommodate future growth in the traffic study area. The proposed number of parking spaces can accommodate the expected peak parking demand based on existing usage and future growth assumptions. There is no additional sanctuary space proposed and therefore no additional parking is required. Building/Building Material The building materials on the proposed building addition include brick, metal panel, glass curtain wall, precast bands, and solider course brick banding to match the existing building. Conditional Use Permit Per Section 36-305, a conditional use permit shall meet the following: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and 6. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff believes that the above criteria are met. Churches are an allowed use in all zoning districts in the City. The Church use on the property currently exists but is just expanding on site. The STAFF REPORT Page 3 site would not have an adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities or services. The existing roads do, and can support the site. The expansion of the current Church use would not have an impact on adjacent property. All minimum zoning ordinance requirements would be met. PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Are the plans proposed reasonable to minimize impacts for the conditionally permitted Use? Yes, the proposal would not negatively impact surrounding properties. The proposed project is just expanding the church use at the subject property. The traffic generated would have minimal impact on the surrounding intersections and does not change the level of service. Per the requirements of a conditional use permit it can be determined that the project: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and 6. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Cross View Lutheran Church at 6645 McCauley Trail. Approval is subject to the following findings: The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria in Section 36-305 of the City Code as follows: a. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; STAFF REPORT Page 4 b. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; c. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; d. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; e. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and f. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site & building plans date stamped June 27, 2018. • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 3. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Environmental Engineer’s memo dated October 3, 2018. 4. Compliance with the conditions and comments listed in the Building Official’s memo dated September 10, 2018. Conditional Use Permit Statement of Intent July 26, 2018 Cross View's mission, based on Christ's Great Commission, is to develop fully devoted followers of Jesus Christ along life's journey. We are all about teaching and sharing the Gospel's saving message. Our Lord entrusts us with a beautiful campus that serves as an equipping station to accomplish His mission. This building project is ultimately about proclaiming the Gospel and saving souls. We are called to enhance our missional footprint, benefiting current members and expanding the Good News of Jesus Christ. The new addition and remodel includes approximately 16,000 square feet on the church's south side. Features include a new multi-purpose space, youth gathering area, Early Childhood Center entrance, as well as an expanded and more inviting entry and narthex. Remodeled area will improve Early Childhood Center safety, security, and bathroom facilities. Our current sanctuary meets Sunday morning worship needs. We do not have enough Sunday School, Vacation Bible School, and small group Bible Study space. New flexible use areas, combined with repurposing existing space, will increase teaching, learning, and fellowship opportunities. Sharing the Gospel's saving message through positive Christ centered relationships at all age levels will continue to equip members to accomplish Christ's Great Commission. Pope Architects a firm of more than 70 creative professionals shaping environments that enhance lives. Pope Architects began in 1974 as a 3 person practice. Now, more than 40 years later, the firm serves a wide array of markets locally and nationally. Nearly everything has changed in that time, except the core value on which the company was founded. This value is to provide a high level of customer service and design expertise for every client. Today, our work in Worship, Workplace and Industrial, Senior and Multi-Family Housing, Retail, Education, Community, and Healthcare markets drive continued growth and provide many opportunities to serve our client's needs by developing creative and responsive solutions. In every arena, we dedicate ourselves to careful listening, clear communication, respectful collaboration, and truly successful outcomes. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Pope has done many Projects of similar scope. Please see the attached Statement of Qualifications. 'UL 2 018 CITY OF EDINA I. -.I ..1y- dP WORSHIP DESIG =1EXP PLANNING DEPARTMEW ail 2 ri ?018 CITY OF EDNA 411 - 11-AMIOL` POPE T EC TS 111011- POPE A R C II I T E C TS HISTORY t OVERVIEW Pope Architects was started as a 3-person firm in 1974. Today our office is filled with nearly 70 people providing architecture and interior design services to an incredibly unique collection of clients. We focus in Commercial, Housing / Senior Living and, Healthcare design. The firm has lived by the same guiding principle — we strive to provide the highest level of personal and professional service to our clients. In each arena, we are dedicated to providing outstanding service and responsive, creative solutions. POPE ARCHITECTS STAFF Registered Architects 22 Architectural Staff 29 Interiors Designers 12 Administrative Staff 9 Total Staff 72 FIRM PROFILE WORSHIP OVERVIEW Pope Architects is an architectural and interior design firm that cares about our clients, our community and our contribution to both. We specialize in planning and design for worship communities, including new construction, expansion and renovations. PLANNigt-i Architecture Design Interior Design 2 Furniture, Finishes & Equipment 7 2018 Site Design and Planning • Master Planning CITy • Facility Assessment OF EDINA Sustainable Design and LEED Process We begin by actively listening, understanding challenges and together defining a solution. Collaborating with the client and project partners, we create a building design that responds to the owner's needs, mission and values. We incorporate best practices and research outcomes to develop innovative design. Worship Experience POPE ARCHITECTS 1 POPE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE A R C II I T E C T S Lord of Life Lutheran Church — Expansion MAPLE GROVE, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Lord of Life Lutheran Church selected Pope Architects to further the design of a 20,000 sq. ft. expansion to their existing church and community facilities. A growing congregation, expanding day care program, and the need for additional youth and adult learning spaces drove the project. It included an 18,000 sq. ft. two-story expansion including large and small classrooms, a prayer chapel, and support spaces, as well as a smaller two-level expansion that increased the capacity of fellowship hall and the youth program space. The daycare was expanded and remodeled, as were the church's administrative offices. Finishes were updated through much of the existing space. The architectural language and materials of the existing church were carried forward in the addition to insure continuity. Stone was used both inside and outside the building, as was masonry and stucco. 2 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS TYPE t.)F H;( )11 t 20,000 sq. ft. expansion including meeting, multi-purpose and youth spaces and an expansion on the fellowship hall and narthex ( N I Lord of Life Lutheran Church SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1111 2 2018 CITY OF EDINA RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Hosanna! Lutheran Church Chapel LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Pope Architects was selected by Hosanna! Lutheran Church and Ebenezer to design and implement a phased master plan for their intergenerational, faith- based campus, starting with the new 134,600 sq. ft. senior living community, support services and a new 350-seat chapel. The Chapel addition offers the church a more traditional chapel for events, weddings and funerals. The chapel features natural materials, including stone and stucco. The design includes a water feature and fuklidilmoratio boljsrliTIVENT font. 2 7 2018 CITY OF EDINA TYPE OF PROJECT 9,800 sq. ft. New Chapel CLIENT Hosanna! Lutheran Church CONTRACTOR Kraus-Anderson Construction Company SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design Worship Experience I POPE ARCHITECTS RELEVANT EXPERIENCE A It l II I T E C T S St. Paul's Monastery Campus MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Pope Architects partnered with McGough Construction, over a three year period, to assist the Sisters of St. Benedict in a master plan for their existing 100,000 sq. ft. Monastery, and it's generous site. The result is a transformational project that develops a Benedictine Village on the 34-acre site, and a partnership between the Sisters, and two other organizations; CommonBond Communities and Tubman Family Alliance. The new Monastery is better-sized and equipped for the needs and resources of the Sisters. It includes housing, a spiritual retreat center, bell tower, dining area, chapel, community room, health center, and offices. Century Trails Senior Housing is a 40-unit HUD 202 apartment complex providing housing for the very low income elderly on the monastery campus. The project team incorporated sustainability in site and building design, indoor air quality and material selection, and the facility achieved LEED® for Homes Gold Certification. 4 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS (1,1, (); 'Tuft( 50,000 sq. ft. Monastery 50 Townhomes and 40 Senior Apartments for CommonBond Communities Renovation of existing 100,000 st. ft. Monastery for Tubman ( 1 im St. Paul's Monastery— Sisters of St. Benedict SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design, Sustainable Design PLANNING LiEt-eAti i iviEN ' Jill 2 2018 CITY OF EDINA RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Cerenity Senior Care White Bear Lake Repositioning WHITE BEAR LAKE, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Cerenity Care Center White Bear Lake is a continuing care campus owned and operated by Cerenity Senior Care and Benedictine Health System. Pope Architects partnered with Cerenity and BHS to develop a master plan to re-position the campus to remain competitive in a changing market. The initial phase opened in 2014 and includes a major Transitional Care wing expansion, new wellness center with therapy pool, and a new chapel. In addition to the expansions, portions of the existing campus were remodeled. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ilil 2 7 2018 CITY OF EDINA Worship Experience I POPE ARCHITECTS S DESCRIPTION Pope Architects teamed with Hutchinson Area Health Care to design a replacement campus for their cramped, outdated existing nursing home facility. The design creates a continuum of care campus featuring skilled nursing care beds, memory care, assisted living, independent living, and outpatient therapy. The community is designed around a vibrant town center including a large chapel with accommodations for residents to participate in events from both the upper and lower levels. popE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE ARCHITECTS Harmony River Living Center HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUL 2 7 2018 CITY OF EDINA 6 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS Ilrol k 01170101;J Ilirl RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Live Oaks Church Ministry Center WILDWOOD, FLORIDA DESCRIPTION Live Oaks Community Church desired to expand and partnered with Minnesota- based Elim Care to develop a new church and senior housing campus. The partnership selected an existing 25-acres of farmland in Wildwood, Florida. Pope Architects is designing Live Oaks' new 21,220 sq. ft. church and 9,900 sq. ft. ministry center. It is part of a faith-based senior housing development called Elim Care Trinity Springs. TYPE OF PROJECT 21,220 sq. ft. church and 9,900 sq. ft. CLIENT Live Oaks Community Church Elim Care si:Rvicrs Architectural and Interior Design The property is golf cart accessible, offering residents and parishioners the opportunity to easily travel around the community and attend worship and social events. PLANNING DEPARTMENT i.il JOIE; CITY OF EDINIA Worship Experience I POPE ARCHITECTS / POPE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE A R C II I T E C T S Crown of Life Lutheran Church & School WEST ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Crown of Life Lutheran Church in West St. Paul, Minnesota is the result of the merger of two older Twin Cities-area Lutheran congregations. Since neither group had a facility that would meet the needs of the larger community, both aged churches were sold and operations combined into an existing building housing one congregation's K-6 school program. Pope Architects designed an addition and remodel that included a 450-seat worship center, narthex, fellowship hall, kitchen and expanded classroom facilities. The design of the worship space focuses attention on the communion table, baptismal font and cross, while using natural light to reinforce the church's central role in the community. A historic organ, moved from one of the previous church buildings, was completely renovated and is incorporated into the worship space. A wood screen wall was designed to shield the aging organ pipes from view without having a negative impact on acoustical clarity. Finally stained-glass windows, and a hand-carved statue of Christ removed from the old churches, were re-used and given special attention as focal points in the narthex. 8 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS TYPE OF PROJECT 26,000 sq. ft. Expansion/Remodel of Church for merging congregation CLIENT Crown of Life Lutheran Church DESIGN-BUILDER McGough Construction SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design PLANNING DEPARTMENT it it 2 '1 ?0 18 CITY OF EDINA. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Bethlehem Baptist Church — North Campus MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Bethlehem Baptist Church's primary location is in downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota, but their ministry extends well beyond the core city. Pope Architects was asked to assist in the development of a satellite worship center, accommodating members of the congregation living in the northern Twin Cities suburbs. An existing 70,000 square foot office/showroom building in Mounds View was purchased by Bethlehem Baptist Church, and Pope Architects designed a major renovation that transformed the space. Phase 1, completed in 2005, includes a 1,200 seat worship center, gathering space, classrooms and offices. Phase 2, finished in 2009, includes a chapel, additional classrooms, kitchen and multi- purpose room. TYPE OF PROJECT Phased remodel of existing office/showroom building into 70,000 sq. ft. New Church CLI EN f Bethlehem Baptist Church CONTRACTOR Kraus-Anderson Construction Company SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2? ?_018 CITY OF EDINA Worship Experience I POPE ARCHITECTS 9 popE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE A R C II I T E C T S Salem Lutheran Church and School Expansion/Renovation STILLWATER, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION Growing day-school enrollments and inadequate Sunday School facilities drove Salem Lutheran Church to engage Pope to design a major expansion to their 1960s era church building. The project added a two-story classroom addition, school offices, gymnasium, kitchen and storage space. The most challenging aspects of the project were to design an addition with an exterior that blended with the existing architecture, and secondly, to develop circulation through the facility that allowed an adequate separation between church and school functions. 10 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS TYPE OF PROJECT 26,000 sq. ft. Classroom and Gymnasium and 10,000 sq. ft. Church addition CLIENT Salem Lutheran Church & School CONTRACTOR George W. Olson Construction SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design PLANNING DEPAH i tVIENT JUL. 2 F.1 2018 CITY OF EDINA r RELEVANT EXPERIENCE PLANNING DEPArTI MEN Maternity of Mary/St. Andrew School — Expansion/Renovation -JCI 2 1 2018 ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA CITY OF EDINA DESCRIPTION Maternity of Mary/St. Andrew School occupies a building that has been expanded and remodeled several times since its construction in 1949. In 2010, Pope Architects partnered with McGough Construction to completely remodel the existing school building, provide a new main entry, and a new gymnasium. As part of the remodeling, all existing windows were replaced with new thermally broken aluminum windows, new HVAC systems, new acoustical tile ceilings and classroom entry doors for security. The new gymnasium is equipped with high-grade wood flooring and it accommodates both full court and half court basketball. In addition it will have standards for three sets of volleyball nets, again both full court and cross court. The new gymnasium addition included space for restrooms, locker rooms, significant gym storage, as well as a large gathering space in its lobby. Retractable bleachers provide seating for up to 340 spectators. TYPE OF PROJECT Remodel of existing 37,500 sq. ft. K-8 School and 13,500 sq. ft. addition, including entry, lobby, gymnasium, locker rooms, storage and offices CLIENT Church of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin CONTRACTOR McGough Construction SERVICES Architectural and Interior Design Worship Experience I POPE ARCHITECTS 1 1 CD ID BADGE ABOVE POPE A IL 0 II I I I. IS POPE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1295 BANDANA BLVD N. SUITE 200 ST. PAUL MN S510.2735 (651) 642,2200 I FM (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN STOP 'NSF 0 CI wow. \ • '22.;2222,2)117 TEACHER REFOURCE I'S SF Si. 153 SF 07 CLASS'S( 51.0 EE57211 SU Low. 10697 SF BEN D/1050 7687SP OFFICE 108F CLASSR001.11 NS SF 21,78 WCNDES 12637 CP1 LP Dt LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN sun rd 1eiis REVIEW SET 12/11/17 1.001 1,131Sr ACTA,' 1,413 SF PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA 1,5213,71 16579-17093 :r JDH BL L/ 76,P LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/8" = V-0" SHEET A2.1 POPE SIICIIIILE \ POPE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SURE 200 ST. PAUL MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (0=1)642-1101 www.popearch.co Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN 51,CiLIARY 3.S1 I SF NNET11. SF g.rp. IN SF 8108 .USTCS"..99 FOI SP ASSIST CLA.99 PO SF SF 7 L trg STOP .8F OFFICE .8F WORK 165 SF PECEP110,1 I/2 SF BUSTP19 CLXXI NEVI FLODR OVEREV3T STAIR (STMi REAMS) MOLT CLASS 677 SF ST VOSTN OFFICE 224 SF ALCOVE 31 SF 0 260 9F 0 CPT BOSTPIG PU LONG 21100 SO HEW ED 05159 96255F OVEIS IPS SF POSSE. . 9F Exi$mo BUM% 2120)SF NEWEIULLBJG 2625SP I SW 4G PASTORS OFFICS SP SF STOIG 0.0 10 GLASS RA% C) SFS SF MIR? 1z1.::ip. 0 11.1 EX6ING PC LONG ... su LONG 95255F I AVPLATFOVJ MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 51004 leint REVIEW SET 12/11/17 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ' 174.2 6.4. SCREEN 1411.11rUPPOSE MSS SF PLATFORM: 1210.420 -I- -1- (7-05 6-9 SCREEN CITY OF EDINA CHI6k1k 16579-17093 16151 JOH txued BL SHEET MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A2.2 1/8" = 1,-0" COATS 119 SF CPT TIE fly- X Ii / 71 rd yr *4 W iut-2-/ xi' 1/1 rf r5. 4 tee RP • 010105,11 o 510.11/.0.00 o surf.. WAVLE • WA71010..1010 o Prierker N GATE 0.90 1:1 WNTPOLE 0 ELECT.% 112AN540RAMI M 1ELET0NE PONS./ T SON Mee SPOT ELLVATON TC TOP °MILS TW TOP OF WALL THSD ELEV• THIESSOID O DER= WIER O 0.• METER fee ROOFDILUN • ELECTeC MOUT • reLEGONNEVON WARR SeCOT • WATER CUB STOP e .1.450.35T • WELL -.-STOAI SEWER - -56ele..S.VER - I -WK... -WM. SEWERS... - -MAMMA. )---(COLVFAT -em'-teMENOROUNEI CARE IV 11C- .03.1.01). ELECT= n- VOSROROUNO FlBFA OPPC - ea-1,0010 ROM GM -113.-UNDERG001.0 MEM.. _._•-e-CROI U. FENCE __,-e--o-WOCO FENCE -21-11-eON FENCE Ce......11-ETNN. WALL 1COP.REIr ',..011011e 12 PeRten sour co tea meneszonsmsam 12.07-17 SURVEY MUM FKOFWIONAL slatuktimv, „.„ x, teoetzete..... fe mote 4004e46 than. No. 46988 Oats 12-07-17 HMININIEMIMMEI Laub Project r.. 11135 Reject Lead X41.5 Dann By 1540 Checked Ey MIS F:44.1 0 0. EWE? State ifighwaY No 62 McCoy/8y Troll en, Lee Mr• f Pee • erel WWI 1.401745 . 846100 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ilii 2 7 2018 CITY OF EDINA DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (The property depicted on this survey and the easements of record shown hereon are the same as the property and the easements described In the Commitment for Thie insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company, File No. NCS-879163.MPLS, issued on November 14, 2017, effective date October 31, 20173 Parcel 1: That part of Lot 16, Block 1, laden Hills 2nd Addition, according to the plat thereof on Ole or of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, lying North of the North Inc of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Guarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 21, except that part embraced within the plat of Arrowhead Pointe. (Abstract Property) Parcel 2: That part of Lot 16, Block 1, Inden Hills 2nd Addition embraced within the South 814.5 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Sutton 6, Township 116, Range 21 as measured along the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, except that part of said Lot 16 embraced within the plats of Indian Hills 3rd Addition and Arrowhead Pointe. 111.0 LOUCKS MANNING CML ENGINEERING IAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPEARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 flezek.ek lone. Stile 3130 Ms.So GICK,MINS5.109 763424.55(6 Avovirukthnt.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN alo m=t NORTH 30 60 SCALE IN FEET o DENOTES 1/2 Nal X 14 931 001 1101121ENT SET. IMMO 48168. • 00100E5 NOV 140,11.11•31T P0010 • 001006 FOLHO (NFO) 001016 0.011/ATION 9101111 01 OTY N.M5. Nor irt.0 mutat. . al IE I/4 w.. 1/4 Lc a III& RD .0 4 / 11 SURVEY LEGEND (Torten Property, Certificate of Title No. 852175) Parce13: Loll, Block 1, Arrowhead Pointe. (Torrent Property, Certificate of Title No. 855098) Parcel 4: Oudot B, Arrowhead Pointe. (Torrent Property, Certificate of Tide No. 852176) Parce15: Oudot A, Arrowhead Pointe. (Torten, Properly, Certificate of Title No. 852176 and Abstract Property) NOTES 1. The address observed while conducting the fieldwork is 6645 McCauley Trail West, Edina, MN. 2. This property Is contained In Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 27053C0344F, Community Panel No. 270160.0344F, effective date of November 4, 2016. 3. The Gross land area Is 241,427 61- square feet or 5.54 0/- acres. 4. Benchmark MnDot Monument 2763F In Southeast corner of Gleason Road Bridge 927082 over Hwy 62. Elevation .898.03 (NGVD29) Site Benchmark: Threshold of entrance to balding et southeast side of building as shown hereon. Elevation - 890.31 (609029) 5. We have shown underground utilities on and/or serving the surveyed property per Gopher State One-Call Ticket 1405. 172992366, 172992376, 172992385, 172992455, 172992482, 172992522, 173000181 and 173000198. The following utilities and munidpalides were notified: Cly of Ede: Water, Sanitary &Storm Sewer, Elecbic, & Fiber Optic 952-626-0375 City of Eden Prairie: Water & Street 952.949-8530 City of Eden Prattle Perim 612-716-4588 Comcast ROO-762-0592 Century Link 855.742.6062 Center Point Energy 406-541-9571 MnDot 651-366-5750 Qwest Communkations 800-283-4237 Level 3 Communications 877-366.8394 Xcel Energy 800.848-7558 Zayo Bandwidth 8118-267-1063 I. Willy operaton do not consistently respond to locate requests through the Gopher State One Call service for surveying purposes such as this. Those utility operators that do respond, often MI not locate utiltles from their main forte the customer's structure or fecillty. They consider those utlItles "private instaladores that are outside their jurisdiction. These 'private' utilities on the surveyed WO pe IV Of adjoining properties, may not be located since most operators will not mark such 'private' utilities. A private utility locator may be contacted to Investigate these utilities further, if requested by the dent. • The locations of underground utility lines shown hereon Is an approximation based on available mem unless otherwise noted on the survey. Ii. Maps prodded by those notified above, either along with a geld location or in lieu of such • location, are very often inaccurate or inconclutive. EXTREME CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED BEFORE AN EXCAVATION TAKES PLACE ON OR NEAR THIS 5113. BEFORE DIGGING, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT LEAST 48 HOUR5 IN ADVANCE AT 811 or (651) 454-0002. 6. The Surveyor was not provided utilty easement documents for the subject property euept for those shown on the Survey. 7. Snow and Ice conditions during winter months may obscure °then*. visible evidence of on site Improvements and/or utilities. 8. The hearings for Ns survey are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System NAG 83 (1986 Adjust) 9. Parcel 1 description appeals to be Incorrect. It reads lying North of the North Ine of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter.. The north line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter Is north of the property. Possibbt the description should read, 'lying north of the South 8195 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 21, as measured along the west line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northnvest Quarter.. 10. Oudot A, ARROWHEAD POINTE does not show the easements shown on Lot 16, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 2ND ADDITION. We lave no documents that vacate the easements. 11. That part of Outlet A, INDIAN HILLS 390 ADDITION Is described In Certificate of Title No. 852175 along with that part of Lot 16 as Parcel 2, but was not Included on the 1160 Commitment for this survey. Boundary ani: Topographic Survey of 0 ..... ••- .. / ,' • 4.,1 at ..... ... 'Wx -"••• • • —735/26 \ • 1:„. 1418.5415T 701.48 n " S < ertuAti •"" - , SANSEWFR & WATER UNE 1 ..„ ..., ...OA REMOVE) TO Ma s • IREM07 MGM ipput NEW.BUILDING -t• e / .... / • / / AlOCildey rive ;PFF• atm,. re me, r. *awn,. • ..c...-"g"7,17)71%),T+G SAWCUT BITUMINOUS EDGE , .ST},7,11243.Vg" MECHANICAL tam APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WATERLINE PER OWNER pf iV REMOW SIGN REMOVE LIGHT POLE ALVAGE IF POSSIBLE f'gPOP POThIC k t.47 roominx :(-1/totat V; 7— -f -f L.45100 Are 33150' 339 for 0 _CL CO O 8 0 0 REM* NCA 1149 'S nuiNG BITMIW-5 RAWMF ENGINEER FOR RESOLLRION SAVOCUTIMJAINf-IP.- . -SAN-SEWER LINE PER OWNER. REMOVE CONTRACTOR TO VETBM_LocAnoN, PROTECT WATER METER GYM ........... •Nmaa ...SAWCUT BITUMINOUS EDGE L-45 Rr 520 . R.4 00 S earth IA .... — .... ........ I .... — L71.1 0 20 40 POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD 151, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearchtom Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN go LOUCKS PLANNING CML ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LAN CSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 72a0 Hark,* L668. Suite 300 Moak Geo., MN S5369 763.424.5505 vreew.luodmilts.rn DEMO PLAN loso kat RR teas I tett mil LLi Pa Rag,:chdeRR trrt Septi re a a* erixl wag rd Rd I al I &ram! Riaird Ritz Rd, H Ba d N Rh [111=6 At (ma. Da kr 0:44 SHEET Ii RT C1-1 TR. OF-Fr MALE LEGEND REMOVE MISTING FENCE AND CURB & GUTTER -//////////////////////// REMOVE MISTING UNDERGROUND UTILMES REMOVE MISTING CONCRETE 0 REMOVE DUSTING LIGHT POLES, METERS AND UTILRY MANHOLES & VALVES REMOVE EXISTING BINDINGS REMOVE MISTING BITUMINOUS REMOVE EXISTING TREES TREE PROTECTION FENCE SCALE IN FEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT ;iii Z018 CITY OF EDINA DEMOLITION NOTES 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION IS BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY BY LOUCKS AND RECORD UTILITY DRAWINGS FROM THE CITY. LOUCKS DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVDED BY OTHERS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY 70 AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF INS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OEMS PROJECT. 3. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS,DIRECTONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND UGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENTOF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL REAPPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS. 4. IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON ME JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OFALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. WB REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. 5. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF ME CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF ME ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTORS SAFETY MEASURES IN, OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. 6. BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL A TEMPORARY ROCK ENTRANCE PAD AT ALL POINTS OF VEHICLE EXIT FROM THE PROJECT SITE. SAI) ROCK ENTRANCE PAD SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. SEE SHEET C3.2 FOR LOCATION AND SHEET C3-3 FOR DETAILS. 7. PRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION, EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AROUND THE SITE PERIMETER AS SHOWN ON SHEET C3.2 AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH NPOES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, CITY REQUIREMENTS AND THE DETAILS SHOWN ON SHEET C3-3 OF THE PROJECT PLANS. 8. ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY INCLUDING STOCKPIUNG, STAGING & PARKING MUST TAKE PLACE ON-SITE. 9. TEMPORARY STREET SIGNS, UGHTING & ADDRESSES SHALL BE PROVIDED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A CITY &COUNTY PERMIT FOR OBSTRUCTIONS AND WORK WITHIN RIGHT-OF-WAY. PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO REMOVALS OR INSTALLATION. 11. PROTECT DUSTING SITE FEATURES THAT ARE NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL F DISCREPANCIES ARISE, NOTIFY ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY FOR RESOLUTION. 12. WE HAVE SHOWN MISTING SERVICES BASED ON cnyAS-GUILTS & A GOPHER ONE LOCATE. THERE MAY BE SERVICES THAT ARE NOT SHOWN. THE CONTRACTOR S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL OF ANY SERVICES ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION THAT ARE NOT SHOWN. 13. NO WORK 70 BE DONE OUTSIDE OF CONSTRUCTIONSILT FENCE WITHOUT PRIOR AUTHORIZATION FROM ENGINEER. 14. ME REMOVAL OF MISTING SERVICES WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION uMr0SHALUIE COORDINATED WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND UTUTY OWNER. ADDITIONAL SERVICES MAY MST THAT ARE NOT SHOWN. 15. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION & REMOVE. WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SNAIL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL MISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEN SERVICE AND /OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CALL BEFORE YOU 13101 Gopher State One Call TNN CITY AREAL 881-454-0002 TOLL FREE: I-B00-252-1188 V )44 MATCH t ti I !WINM dI,a 114.32 t ta.7 3 CURB T1ANSMON ;ED RAMP NE-WAY IRECTIONAL FIAT CURB & GUTTER OW.) 8-FT CURB TRANSITION RE INTO EXISTING SOEWALK LOFT CURB TRANSITKDIL E DOWN CURB It 'MEET AND MATCH EX LNG BITUMIN CROSSWALK ;v. n.133 4/11,,f; 1141.. McCauley Trail WatrOir 84113 / BQ Mrklatl. d IE I/2 -491 SM R 1 CURB & GLITTER 4.814_, RI BOLLARD WITH ADA SIGNAGE AND 'NO PARKING' SIGNS PER MN RULES 13410502 (TTP) 10FT CURB TRANSMON I OFT CURB SAY/CUT TRANSITION MEET & MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS (TYPI 44Becl sunex 8612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER /z // / 0 LL I // 0 // 0 20 Z // SCALE IN FEET / w-Tw. L=15699 co' MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL BE DESIGNED BY OMS „„- '1 c2; .v.44_111 onto Fe: Fr: OVA. LOSENO • • • O 4 WNW' LOC IETVOC WillEIS40 144664046 Ikrtpai IN S Ft4NtrfaVAII.4u1 89 ged !.1 rt trtir LI Ca rd EIA I a" 4111aced SANDRA 1*o rev h kad Pe 0551 'Wes* trk Irrizia lir RIS ER Deckd ER SHEET 11k C2.1 PC/PE PCHIII I, POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 vv.., 60944mA-corn Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN in LOUCKS PLANNING CML ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LAN CUCAP E A Rai/TEC-TUBE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 414mIack into, 51115 XIX) 43,,,8, MN 5.5309 761.424.550S SITE PLAN Id HAM SITE NOTES 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION IS BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY BY LOUCKS ASSOCIATES AND RECORD UTILITY DRAWINGS FROM THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH. LOUCKS ASSOCIATES DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHER& 2. hl IN NESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL' PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND WORK. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTNITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A CITY & COUNTY PERMIT FOR OBSTRUCTIONS AND WORK VERHIN RIG ILTO F.WAY. PERMIT E REQUIRED PRIOR TO REMOVALS OR INSTALLATION. 5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6. PROVIDE A 3 FOOT TAPER AT ALL CURB TERMINL 7. ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND S EV1A LK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. SEE LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR ALLY ADDITIONAL HARDSCAPE APPLICATIONS. 8. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT. AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE SWEET RIGHT OF WAY (SUEWALK, STREET OR DRIVEWAYS) ANY SIGN OR FEKTURES REMOVED WITH IN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR AS PART OF THE SITE WORK SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN ANY EXISTING STREET LIGHTS MID TRAFFIC SIGNS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF DIE CITY. 1D. A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS NOT SHOWN ON THE SHEET ARE DESCRIBED AND PROVIDED IN FURTHER DETAIL ON THE ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS. THE INCLUDES LANDSCAPING, UG FETING AND OTHER FIXTURES. 11. 8612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE al GE OF ALL COMMON DRIVES AND PARKING LOTS WITHIN 1HE SITE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 12. ALL PARKING LOT PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE 4' WIDE WHITE PAINTED STRIPING. 13. DISABLED PARKING SIGNAGE & PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ADA & MINNESOTA RULES 1341.0502. 14. CRY ENGINEERING STAFF MUST BE PRESENT TO INSPECT ALL CONCRETE FORMS IN PUBLIC RIGHT.OF.WAY PRIOR TO POUR. MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED. 15. ILO PARKING FIRE LANE' SIGNS MUST BE INSTALLED AS INDICATED BY THE CITY FIRE CHEF. VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND NUMBER OF REQUIRED SIGNS MTH THE CITY FIRE CHIEF. SIGNAGE MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE FINAL OCCUPANCY INSPECTION. CALL BEFORE YOU 1)101 Gopher State One Call TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 TOLL FREE: I-800-252-11E16 WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EMSTENG UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651454-0602 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. PLANNING DEPARTMENT .1111 27 2018 CITY OF EDINA. GL-889. Gs. :. ' i I:t ;L=4.164 I -• . R=3 ..-&rostv • 400 1-- GL-619." 1.222,21-(7.774 .t I C-889.2 GL-888.7 1.45609 smoacie ... .. . 41A" , 4/6 *-10PCHAMITER-.8861 ii, BOTTOM cHAKI.BER-13840 / .,/ .....1R2TIOM RIOCK.883.5 ...... 5'24. HOPED OS FES 8 ....... ..... • / ....!...„, ........ .," W/ RIP RAP ...,..„.. .... ... i / ..., 4 dig.,16- "NFILTRATION BASIN I / - 4 •••••-•• .... Y -4 ......... > • ::, .., ... STORM iltH SC•140CHAMBERS: TOP ROCK-887.0 • / / 0 7 /- / , L.L. , N.,/ N I / / N / ,III iilri / 0A- SCALE IN FEET ..... ...... .... es .,.......„. ... ; . . , '.......---...4.;;;".::'4'....v" j.° 1.41 ... ,,,,, amtaxifealc , i. ....... / % i ..... •,„,k,„•.,„„,•••••,...::F•;•.,4,z•,.....,„.,,44„v.4:.,,„;::..:.Kt•.,,x,„,:•.-..,,,„,:.,:,„.•,,„.,,,,,,,p4,:::: y. ,:: i•• 1/, i •• / ,.... , : :E, $.•:7 ".• .i A-- -"‘t‘.•.• y" ..... ‘,. / s ' ......,, ... ...... ...... ... 1 J ...„ ...... .... Tne 1 L-1,265 8=18600 \ \ r .4,. 4 .4":447W/X Tc-401.0 nt;••••-• GL-900.5 0 ...... , .... . • ... -"• ........ ••• . .... ...,•• / 20 40 IS POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL MN 55100-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (651) 6424101 www.popearch.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN LOUCKS PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANCSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. ENVIRONMENTAL 7205 Hemlock 1460,SO. 300 Maple Lim,e, MN 5530 743424.550S retro.1...cksintcrn CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN fr,±ri I At, rall, BIT heal s.14417.1ht I clA 6441F,ael Imo u.h I`, uCT 01\1 C005 ttk C.46511E Bank Itedaltf SHEET 03,1 TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE SLOPE STORM SEWER STORM MANHOLE CATCH BASIN SANITARY SEWER WATER MAW BENCHMARK EMERGENCY OVERFLOW CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ADA ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PROPOSED ``.• X 8000 0 • EXISTING LEGEND O WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CAWNG FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL DOSING ununes.114EY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UllUlY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF TINES. Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU MOI TON OTT AREA 851-454-0002 TOLL FRIT: I-BOO-252-1155 PLANNING DEPARTMENT: NOTE: CATCH BASINS RIMS ARE 21NCHES LOWER MAN FLOW UNE ELEVATION. NOTE: SPOT ELEVATIONS AT CURB LINES INDICATE BASE OF CURB AND GUTTER LINE U.E. FLOW UNE ELEVATIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. GRADING NOTES 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 6 BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY BY LOUCKS AND RECORD UTILITY DRAWINGS FROM THE CITY. LOUCKS DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVDED BY OTHERS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF BUILDINGS, VESTIBULES, SLOPED PAVING, EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, TRUCK DOCKS, ENTRY LOCATIONS AND LOCATIONS OF DOWNSPOUTS. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOD PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCDON PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. 4. Pi ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COMMONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDNG SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. MS REQUIREMENTWILI. APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. 5. BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL A TEMPORARY ROCK ENTRANCE PAD AT ALL POINTS OF VEHICLE EXIT FROM THE PROJECT ETC SAD ROCK ENTRANCE PAD SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. A. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE ESTABIEHED AROUND THE ENTIRE SITE PERIMETER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RIDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, AND CITY REQUIREMENTS. 7. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN REPRESENT ENDUED SURFACE OR GUTTER UNE ELEVATIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING INFORMATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY MAN DISCREPANCIES. 9. MISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS AS-PER CDT AS.BUILT PLANS AND FIELD SHOTS. 10. SEE SHEET C3.2 FOR EROSION CONTROL INFORMATION. 11. GENERAL CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL TIE RI GRADES. 11. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION. 13. ADA ACCSSIBLE ROUTE SHALL HAVE A 5.0% MAXIMUM SLOPE IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND A 2.0% MAXIMUM CROSS-SLOPE. 14. ACCESSIBLE STALLS, ACCESS AISLES AND BO' TURNING CIRCLES SHALL HAVE A 2.0% MAXIMUM SLOPE PI ANY DIRECTION. ABBREVIATION LEGEND FFE.ENISHED FLOOR ELEVATION TW-TOP OF RETAINING WALL GW-GRADE ELEVATION AT FACE OF RETAINING WALL HP-HIGH POINT LP-LOW POINT TC-TOP OF CURB GL-GUTTER UNE THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. JO 2018 CITY OF ED INA :PTT APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SAN-SEWER UNE PER OWNER. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION, DEPTH, AND IF ANY ISSUES AR B E CONTACT ENGINEER FOR RESOLUTION 66' IV HOPE 0 2.84% ,08giV138,0 \\ \ S INV-896.0 ,^ L-4 RFT SUMP-893.0 \ tA t a,2 7 IAAI•o. an.,1 24' 12. 'ADP Elk0A% FES A `3NV-885 W/ RFPRAP A 4 aaff AN • PArEtIni Poc McCauley Trail AV IN 42 46,v Ovf APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF - WATERLINE PER OWNER MAII4A122 WATER MET? INV W-887.5 V INV E-885.1 6 STORMTECH=-740 CHAMBERS TOP ROCK-8217W TOP CHAMBER-118E5 BOTTOM CHAMBER-884.0 BOTTOM ROCK-883.S 15' 24' HOPE 00% MAINTAIN LIGHT POLE IPCMPIE 8 Itt-IIIILL POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SHOE 200 5T. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN ;TIE LOUCKS PLAN MNG CIVIL ENGINEERING LANG SURVELLNG LANESCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL ;WO H,rnSock LA., Suitt MO IA,Ak CAA,e, MN 5530 767.420.5505 V.6,67•67e6:16t.t6r6 UTILITY PLAN ks Rd Tri.. INticallifd Es pigeflftr rTrIrs pAN,44 re fflyir rNSai NRRRT Rd M t al o dlylinaMizeird bias eel N ENd N 5I1,1 d IhacD hA IrrNiA INA II DAJA3If SHEET C4.1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA UTILITY NOTES I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION IS BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY BY LOUCKS AND RECORD UTILITY DRAWINGS FROM THE CITY. LOUCKS DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 2. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATERMAR4 UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS, THE CITY AND THE STANDARD UTIUBES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAML 2013 EDITION. HDPE PIPE CONNECTIONS INTO ALL CONCRETE STRUCTURES SHALL BE MADE WITH WATER TIGHT MATERIALS, UTILIZING AN A.LOK OR WATERSTOP GASKET OR BOOT, CAST-IN-PLACE RUBBER BOOT, OR APPROVED EQUAL WHERE THE AUG N MENT PRECLUDES THE USE OF THE ABOVE APPROVED WATERTIGHT METHODS, CONSEAL 231 WATERSTOP SEALANT, OR APPROVED EQUAL WILL ONLY BE ALLOWED AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. ALL SANITARY SEWER MAIN LINE SHALL BE SDR 35. ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE SDR 26. 3. SEE SHEETS C8-1 AND THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS FOR SPECIFIC UTREY DETAILS AND UTILITY SERVICE DETAILS. 4. ALL 1.111UTY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION. 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO PERFORMING ANY EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND WORK. 6. ADJUST ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TO THE PROPOSED GRADES WHERE DISTURBED AND COMPLY WITH AU. REOUREMENTS OF THE UTIUTY OWNERS. STRUCTURES BERM RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING. 7. PROPOSED PIPE MATERIALS: 22 STORM SEWER PVC CE•60 IV • 10. C64.7,E7ER 71 ROOF ORAN LFAOS 11 1•OFFA, CORRIFTER. 7 3 WATER SCE COFFER TOE N.) 5 E.' DEPTH 7 4 WATER SERVICE 6' MP CR 51 I'S' PIM DEM StalliARE SEWER 6• MOOR 33 7 6 SAIMARE ROWE 6' MC 59R 26 SEROCE B. STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL MEET OF EXCEED AASHTO M294 MINIMUM PIPE STERIESS PER ASTM 01412 60111 FOR 21,1B•. 9. PROPOSED GAS, TELEPHONE& ELECTRIC SERVICES ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS ONLY. COORDINATE EACH SERVICE WITH THE UTRITY OWNER AHD GENERAL CONTRACTOR. IF ANY PROPOSED SERVICE LOCATION VARY SIGNIFICANTLY OR CONFLICT, THE ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE SERVICE. 10. THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING SERVICES WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE COORDINATED PATH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND UTILITY OWNER. ADDITIONAL SERVICES MAY BOST. 11. ALL WATER SERVICES MUST BE INSTALLED AT A 7.5-FT BURY DEPTH. 11.1. INSULATE ALL CROSSINGS INVOLVING WATER AND SEWER. UTILITY NOTES I. PVC SANITARY SEWERS MUST MEET ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ASTER STANDARDS: 23034, F789, D1665, OR F891. ASTM D2241 PIPE MAY BE USED FOR SEWERS 6-INCH AND LARGER. THE INSTALLATION MUST COMPLY WITH A511.1 02321, WHICH REQUIRES INSTALLATION BY OPEN TRENCH ON A CONTINUOUS GRANULAR BED (SEE CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714). 2. RCP STORM SEWERS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM C76 GEE CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714). 3. HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (IMPOSTOR/A DRAINS hIUST COMPLY WITH CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714: 3.1. PIPES 4-RICH TO 104NCH IN SEE MUST COMP LY WITH AASHTO M252. 3.2. PIPES 12.12ICH TO 60-INCH IN SIZE IA UST COMPLY WITH ASTM F2306. 3.3. ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM D3212. 3.4. WATER-TIGHT JOINTS MUST BE USED AT ALL CONNECTIONS INCLUDING STRUCTURES. 4. ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT (SEE CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714). APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JORMS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CON NECIION5 TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES. 5. WATER SERVICE UN ES MUST BE INSTALLED AT LEAST 10FEET HORIZONTALLY FROL1ANY MANHOLE, CATCH BASIN, OR OTHER SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION, MEASURED FROM OUTER EDGE OF THE PIPE TO THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CONTAMINATION SOURCE (SEE CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714). 6. THE BOTTOM OF WATER SERVICE PIPES LOCATED WITHIN ID-FEET OF THE SEWER CROSSING MUST BE AT LEAST 12-INCHES ABOVE THE TOP OF THE SEWER. WHEN THIS IS NOT FEASIBLE, THE SEWER PIPE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF MATERIALS LISTED IN CURRENT MINNESOTA TIRES, PART 4714. THE WATER SERVICE SHOULD NOT CONTAIN ANY JOINTS OR CONNECTIONS WITHIN 10-FEET OFA CROSSING. 7. ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10-FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE UNE MUST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714. 0 20 40 SCALE IN PEST WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL (DIVING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES RI MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002AT LEAST 48 HOURS 21 ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CALL BEFORE YOU DIOT Gopher State One Call MN OTY AREA: 151-454-0002 TOLL FREE: I-BOO-252- MB 2040 2037 2010 2012 2036 I.Loucxs 1.,LoucKs g.LoucKs tx LOUCKS tx LOUCKS FLAT CURB AND GUTTER or) CROSSWALK BAR TYPICAL ADA PAR ICING CONCRETE SIDEWALK/ SLAB SECTIONS BATTERED CONCRETE B612 CURB & GUTTER ..3.urnuoaa 2037 les LOUCKS CURB /BITUMINOUS TRANSITION TYPICAL ADA PARKING &•NO PARKING' SIGN / BOLLARD COMBO ..04141911 TO 1021.1./AILE MOWS .10.1.311 TO 11.1.111 „.„.„ (°(P...)C9Z-L- 11 76-2014 STANDARD PLAN 5-297.2501 2 OF 5 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAP DETAILS csossw.x...sarovaTartstoorsoarmosYrxouos 7' [0,1CIIETE1,0 NOOL SPEC 2.371 041.4,411.115.4. 11512101" WEL Mt CONCRETE PAD (ACCESSOILE PARKING, TRASH ENCLOSURE PAD 6 ERNE-THRU PAD) CCNCEFIEWALI 1/%1UOTSPEG 251.1 TSPEC.U3'101 laVENSOCHS COOC411,41.1. TOMS,. ----------- r4A172 NISTIOS.VIDOESISATIO :TOME 0.7OLTZ01:0 ITOVUAT37% CONSMICTOIK[OOMICENITli LOt00T;321. r'''"""rt17:41.1,018010 910..0 VIATEOWITI, VLICSAVEC0040L9rXrAg=3730. ""111 011.M.DINCE.1111.103T2331. COtICRETE SOEWAIK ACCESSIRE PARKING '°'MALL POLK 11.6 NIERNAIKNAL mom cr Atoossaure 9015 100116-010 VAN ACCESSNAE SPADES WNL C01185 US 00101.1AD06 NAN Ammar; N. DULL IEET ALL UCH, STATE. NO DECORAL ACCESSISLITT REENBOMITS -DONS N MOPED CET ACCESS 1013 WALL MAD 110 PARKWY. Y RCARO STEEL PIPE SET RI CANCRETE B' STEEL PPE BOIL AD (Ell N1111.101-6.01 Mart, NORA TCP) NIN RUE PLUTO IMMO COY.J.I.gE: STE • STREET 91E0) VIONEE LOCK WOES MR =DR REOJNEL10611 PRIINADEO 0P 5901 MKT MENA. BURMA? SEEWALK IS L010 14 MAR (TIP OF 4 POT MARC) CINIGIETE MONO tn, ,11.11 77: TI 0/E-TAT DIRE uwer.MIZ CTIONAL EASE CONOlrf..0 TO PSCIME 11WOrtlONIOC61 MIA 60 ZS:M=1 V; SOEWHA 10 SE 11111+1.11411AVELENT 1..10/01 reAroirsosi F1.1010 0. PLANNING CML ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCRITECTURE ENVIRONMENTA1. 1200 Hemlock CLOT, Suite 300 Ma* CV.6,00155309 753.424.5505 v.w.lacksinc.t CONSTRUCTION DETAILS MS ad Preto IFMA WYPEd ri *mein*, 401 rI p7VA re Pd M IRAigieted Pdeird bcCees lee ksktrili dFl CTI e.4 oN CO S1- ht Coven IR 10 NW it SHEET enes IN ANY VAN 904 CR 01110 9013 PLACED BELOW TNE LARCOI 901. mew. coroacr. 1../MAI UV to PLANNING DEPARTMENT .1t11 2? 2018 CITY OF EDINA CARO EDI DIRECTIONAL RAPS 0 ffrrOgrar-F-ra--4024.4.01:-.-.7- 1) A' LIMO WI Mt Lei 14 ALL IIIKLIZEL T. Ian • as, O • om.v. ank c n.gm arna uar, •,340,4 Alms. 1•21:MTOI mu, RAM =1.127,8,11Mrrei =1,117MP•ut`• Ntn.,ka ,,,n,nvn, t, myna. pa ennumwan /RE ncetse.nr coven aita a num NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 2031 2038 13.1.1•••• LOUCKS r.LoucKs STANDARD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL SYMBOL MOTTO 34.11 TYPICAL ADA WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL & PARKING SIGN Law or rrJrt.......CD .ssa SECTION C-C T +WM .71=AV " '174 • r,44:=1.SiNtrp,AM, 4144,4W01r64.-.91SWORefit ==To' SECTION B-11 DA IsTen=0417.n. FaleiVene, v.INAre • o'="E urdtm,'•"=.7,887.17,1`" """" s. azets v.s va.orK n max...ma aRra, Aret, Mredir ....11`,1=1.11/.4?=/,!•18.= = 11.7 ny =MURIA= raw. ® :7 • ': r .7",...F.P=111= 7:" • O 0 A CD co DEPRESSED CORNEA = saNS SA PERIFENTIELLNI TIDIED PERPE/DICU.N1 co-" 0--/® PARALLEL /0wo 11.1 o ratrevr.... 0CTION MONBLUNATook404,46 We I. CM Al OTTO 661.1;19166 ••210-11.10 'IRE 1St TOM DO I VI OIL WEAt COOOSE. 1.01,00T23•054.V.A.2.03 CCIAT.10,090TILO I' 1.1.2AR CIV1SE .001,160.16.1.0 0,0115ASE.OASS-30.124.00901,130 SOEMECC0MKTON 0 ZYMIONTIOZ6:3:0 as MATEO 101.1> OVAMTIN NI MK 3,DE rOOYDEWITTO VAITEL00.13,1[501. EACI.PE901.0TED MAYOKAP MOM STALL POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL. MN 5510B-2735 (651) 642-5200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearth.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN LOUCKS 2044 MUM tralern%8721,8"41.1=77===.' comae .111 mu. occonssns Allme NJ. CM RAM CUff NEM 12M1111[1.1....• ISOMMil. TO PE WV le TRAM. Le. r°7,1 in &NS au..1111= AMMOTL11.13 1.3-41OS MOS SILCOO MAN WM Ye MIT • Cr 1-11•1 anT.K. DOLLS a• COrniat Omaam. COMBER ORECTIONAL 0 704.1.1,,L,T21 --,, 0-1-112-7 crTo iikkr) fl 8-6-2014 DETECTABLE MOW PUCDOIT MEN SETIMOt CINTOUA 15 EXCEEDED PEDESTRIAN CURB RAPD DETAILS STANDARD PLAN 5-297.2501 1 or 5 .... ,„„„ „ .... "as, PH +au $ IFAIDPE I, t li 1 II 11 POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 5T. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642.9200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 vnew.pope•rch.com ... ... ..... „,/ / LEGEND: mi CONSTRUCTION / GRADING LIMITS SCALE IN FEET McCauley Trail .... ' • Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN LOUCKS PLANNING CML ENGINEERING IANDSLOVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 I-1..4o* Lane, Suite 300 14,010 0,00E, AIN 55369 763,424.5505 ree.w.kockimc.cm: I • • 4-2 r1.2' 7.::21'..: .• * - f ..... .... PLANNING DEPARTMENT MI 27 2018 CITY OF EDINA TREE PROTECTION NOTE INSTALL SNOW FENCE AROUND EACH TREE TO BE PROTEtlED PRIOR TO GRADING. FENCE SHALL BE PIACED AT THE DRIP EDGE OR CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES. FENCING SHALL BE NO CLOSER THAN 6' TO THE TRUNK OF ANY TREE TO BE PROTECTED. THE PERIMETERS FOR TREES BEING PROTECTED SHALL BE DESIGNATED AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ALL TREE PROTECTION AREAS 11 IAT INSTRUCTS WORKERS TO STAY OUT. CONTRACTOR SHALL AVOID ALL AREAS WITHIN TREE PROTECTION FENCE. SOIL SHOULD BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND CHANGES IN CHEMISTRY FROM CONCRETE OR TOXIC MATERIALS SUCH AS FUELS AND PAINTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE 'TREE PAINT' ON MEAT ALL TIMES. IFA! OAKS WOUNDED DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR MUST IMMEDIATELY APPLY PAINT TO THE WOUND IN ORDER TO PREVENT OAK WILT. ALL DAMAGE TO TREES TO BE PROTECTED SHALL BE BROUGHTIO THE ATTENTION OF OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. EXISTING GRADE 1,1 TREE PROTECTION SCALE Pcc4X..!, ii ilr PROTECTED TREES TO BE REMOVED THERE ARE 96 PROTECTED TREES ON-SITE. THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING WILL RESULT IN REMOVAL OF THE FOLLOWING TREES: TREE # SPECIES DIAM / HT FORM DISPOSITION 1 LOCUST 25' SINGLE REMOVED 2 ASH 24' SINGLE REMOVED 3 ASH 23' SINGLE REMOVED 4 ASH 23' SINGLE REMOVED 5 ASH 27' SINGLE REMOVED 6 MAPLE 21' SINGLE REMOVED 7 MAPLE 10' SINGLE REMOVED 8 SPRUCE 20. SINGLE REMOVED PROTECTED TREE REPLACEMENTS - SEE SHEET L2.1 PER CITY ORDINANCE, PROTECTED TREES MUST BE REPLACED AT A 1:1 RATIO WITH SPECIES OF SIMILAR TYPE. REPLACEMENT DECIDUOUS TREES MUST BE 2-1/2' CAL. MIN., REPLACEMENT CONIFEROUS TREES MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 7' IN HEIGHT. REMOVED PROPOSED PROTECTED DECIDUOUS TREES 7 8 PROTECTED CONIFEROUS TREES 1 1 X PROTECTED TREE TO BE REMOVED p3 PROTECTED TREE TO BE RETAINED / I PROTECTED - SEE 1/L1.1 PROTECTED TREE TO REMAIN (OUTSIDE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY LIMITS) CALL BEFORE YOU 0101 Gopher State One Call TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 TELE FREE: I-500-252-1150 WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF ONES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-434-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WOES, CABLES, CONDUITS, RPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. TREE INVENTORY tem .4 Iran I tut La) td ea Fill,Vddr4,11 PW Ft c16xt geed Fd 6:117. dif Beal HEird Lviver Rh N kvs tf 1. d Fo RTI Bat So kr Lay IF SHEET L1.1 EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN DRIP EDGE OF TREE NOTED O ST O RING A ' K HIGH, ORANGE AS POLYETHYLENE LAMINAR SAFETY NETTING BETWEEN WOOD STAKES PLACED S' ON CENTER AND BETWEEN TREE PROTECTION AND DISTURBED AREAS. NOT FOR CONSTRUC ," \ ......... ....... . ...... .. A . .. ..... • ....... o 0 71.17..1 20 4- 0 EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN C) OVIRSTORY TREES CONIFER TREE ORNAMENTAL TREES 4Ir SCALE IN FEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT li Ut CITY OF EDINA Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU 0101 TWIN OW MEN 851-404-0002 TOLL FREE: I—BOO-252-1160 .5•414). ROCK MULCH - I-I/2. RIVER ROCK 4. DEPTH McCauley Tree ... rirzr0,131 ..................... ... `-4.. i' ‘. t „e c ... VJ ; .......... atc. ..... 080—/ .... ..... \ ........... LANDSCAPE LEGEND PLANT LIST KEY COY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME SIZE COMMENTS .'.:'ll'Iga l':.??..; ..,3rdz ...SWPOSAMIlgiVag7.77:7g.7: :7).:le77!.MSE-Millililalli7l i7l..ljiiggli lilikiilil7M".4.7-M.-r-1::;YLMS1.4. RS 4 RED SUNSET MAPLE Acer rubrum 'Franksred' 2-1/2' CAL B.C. H45' W35' IH 1 IMPERIAL HONEYLOCUST Gledihia triacanthos inerrnis 'Impcole' 2-1/2• CALB.B. H 30-35' W 30.35' QA 3 QUAKING ASPEN Populus homicides 2-1/2' CAL B.B. H 40-50' W 20-30' M.( ogi mow : - .• .,././..%;•,<" ;Or 40:?::miKtomi? .g.5;goOMMORa.',.1ar.M.ir:-M PR 3 PRAIRIE ROSE CRABAPPLE Mahn 'Prairie Rose' 1-1/2' CAL B.B. H 20' W 20' 55 ,/./Cl' 3 4.40.64'i SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE .''7 MK' l''P's ''' -a., Mobs 'Spring Snow' (clump H 6') ...':: ' ' . ..i.,.. '.".7 //; /... .';'' .4'. 1-1/2' CAL B.B. ' Alill / ' H 25-30 -'3, W 15-20' ','5 -,-4:. CS 1 COLORADO SPRUCE Picea pungens 7' HT. H40-60' W 15-30' '''E'.?"'?"'''' SG ,./Mi70J 7 ik'f ;viika.sign• ,:, SEA GREEN JUNIPER -:-'-"---- Junipenn clunensis Sea Green' . -4""?'",:<.;:1: 85 CONT 4,./-"=" H 4-6' . /2,/ / W3-5' TA 6 TECHNITO ARBORVITAE Thuja occidentalis 'Bailijohn' (PP15,850) 45 CONT H 8-10' W 4-5' TY 4 TAUNTON YEW Taunton x media 'Taunton' $5 CONT H 3' W 3-4' .---": . ',. ., maymsfr:-........, . .... ... ... „„ a,:.5mi,-A---:;,, ,,,,„5::;ra • ..X'7.0W`yrja72.0.2.E. RG 16 RED GNOME DOGWOOD Cornus alba sibirica 'Red Gnome 45 CONT 1145' W 4-5' TS 113 TOR SPIREA Soiree betulifolia 'Tor' 45 CONT H 3' W 3' LP 10 UTILE PRINCESS SPIREA Spires japonica 'Little Princess' 85 CONT H 2-3' W 3' NF 18 NEON FLASH SPIREA Soiree japonica 'Neon Flash' #5 CONT H 3' W 3-5' DV 25 DWARF EUROPEAN VIBURNUM Viburnum ...Tutus 'Nanum' F5 CONT H 24' W 2-3' llaiii7nrs.47-; .177 ''''''' ' ''''''''' 7 7.lil'. "re7).`i'..7 pii7.72',`:;:',/in'2'/,„..s7g77.ilililElililijilg.„ --,M)2'2" - -i'' /-. PM 24 PARDON ME DAYLILY Hemerocallis 'Pardon Me' 41 CONT 18' O.C. WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND /OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651.4544002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DINGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CCCO DECIDUOUS SHRUBS 000 CONIFEROUS SHRUBS s52;59, GRASSES/ PERENNIALS IRRIGATION LIMITS GROUNDCOVER LEGEND SOD/ TOPSOIL -SEE NOTES MNDOT NATIVESEED MIX 33-261 STORMWATER POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55105-2735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (653) 642-1101 www.popmrch.com LANDSCAPE PLAN Ey; I te4prV, Tel ti {bweis`ing gel Ty ppref I; TT e v3 n16x1 lIrtie r4 5/ I al o (1.1, Tread NEYNNI LETITIA& Pr Ix 4 Fe 35 if Wert; tok 3. Eierrifia MIN INN IF SHEET L2.1 LANDSCAPE INSTAUATPN COORDINATE THE PHASES Of CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED MITE COMPLETE GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED Ri THE IMMEMATEAREA. WHERE SCO ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD SHALL BE HELD I' BELOW SURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC. SOD ALL DESIGNATED AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING. SOD SHALL BE LAD PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER TRANI/OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, THE SOD SHALL BE STAKED TO THE GROUND. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY MEM THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL SHRUBS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 5 CANES AT THE SPECIFIED MINIMUM SHRUB HEIGHT OR WIDM. ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL HAVE NO V.CROTCHES AND SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 3' ABOVE ROOT BALL OVERSTORY TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 5' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. ANY CONIFEROUS TREE PREVIOUSLY PRUNED FOR CHRISTMAS TREE SALES SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL BE FULL FORM, NATURAL TO THE SPECIES, WITHOUT PRUNING. PIAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER PLANT-SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTMES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSITTUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PR/OR TO THE SUBMISSION OFA BID AND/OR QUOTATION. ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED AND STAKED AS SHOWN ON PLAN. ADJUSTMENTS RI LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS MAY BE NEEDED IN FEED. SHOULD AN ADJUSTMENT BE ADVISED, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FETTERED UPON INSTALLATON WITH A 27-33 SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER MIXED IN WITH THE RANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. PLANTS MAY RETREATED FOR SUMMER AND FALL INSTALLATION WITH AN APPUCATION OF GRANULAR 273-3AT 6 02 PER 2.5. CALIPER PER TREE AND 3 02 PER SHRUB WITH AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION 0E27.3-3 THE FOLLOWING SPRING IN RE TREE SAUCER. ALL PLANTING AREAS RECEMNG GROUND COVER, PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, AND/OR VINES SHALL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 12' DEPTH OF PLANTING SOIL CONSISTING OF AT LEAST 45 PARTS TOPSOIL 45 PARTS PEAT OR MANURE AND 10 PARTS SAND. ALL PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER PLANTING DETAILS. REMOVE ALL RAGGING AND LABELS FROM PLANTS. WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE CORRUGATED PVC PIPING I' GREATER IN CALIPER THAN THE TREE BUNG PROTECTED OR QUALITY, HEAVY, WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12.1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING AFTER 5.1. COMMERCIAL GRADE 5' RACK POLY EDGER TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, AND ANNUALS WHERE BED MEETS SOD UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MULCH SHALL BE CLEAN SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH UNIFORM PECK SIZE. All ANNUAL AND PERENNLAL BEDS TO RECEVE 3' OF MULCH WITH NO WEED BARRIER. ALL TREES TO RECENE 4" DEEP MULCH WITH NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACTWITH TREE TRUNK. SPREAD GRANULAR PRE EMERGENT HERBICQE (PREEN OR EQUAL) PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER ALL MULCHED AREAS. ROCK MULCH SHALL 8E14/2' RIVER ROCK. 4' DEEP OVER A FIBER MAT WEED BARRER. FINE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR 15 CONCERNED OR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOL CONDIT/C/NS OR ANY OTHER SITE CONDIT/ON WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR GUARANTEE, HE MUST BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR 70 PROCUREMENT AND/OR INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A WHITEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION OF ALL LANDSCAPE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ON-GONG MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHEN MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBIUTY OF THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM INCLUDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY UNTIED TO, PRUNING, FERTILIZATION AND DISEASE/PEST CONTROL CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH ONE CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE WARRANTY ONE RAL GROWING SEASON) FOR LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BEGIN ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION AND SEED/SOD PLACEMENT IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE IS. FALL SODDING IS GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 - NOVEMBER 1. FALL SEEDING FROM AUGUST 15 - SEPTEMBER 15; DORMANTSEEDING IN ME FALL SHALL NOTOCCUR PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1. FALL CONIFEROUS PLANTING MAY OCCUR FROM AUGUST 15 -OCTOBER 1 AND DECIDUOUS PLANTING FROM THE FIRST FROST UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. PLANTING OUTSIDE THESE DATES IS NOT RECOMMENDED. ANY ADJUSTMENT MUST REAPPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH TO HE SATISFACTION THAT SOL AND COMPACTION CONDITIONS ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE AT AND AROUND THE BUILDING SITE. --- EDGE VANES-SEE PLAN SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING SET PLANT ON UNDETERRED NATNE SOIL CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. MOTET LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE OUSTS. SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL 3 PERENNIAL PLANTING 4 GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALLVISIT SETE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID. HE SHALL INSPECT SITE MO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH MISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TOME NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. WHEY LAYOUTAND ANY DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND WING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN AND/OR INTENT OF THE PROJECT'S LAYOUT. ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPUCABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SIM ELEMENTS DURING PLANTING OPERATONS. ANY DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AUGNMEN7 AND LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GRADE mos AND PROVER THE NECESSARY PROTECTION FOR SAME BEFORE CONSTRUCTION/ MATERIAL NSTAUATION BEGINS (MINIMUM W • 0' CLEARANCE/ ALL UNDERGROUND UTRITTES SHALL BE LAIR SO THAT TRENCHES DO NOT CUT THROUGH ROOT SYSTEMS OF ANY EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. DIETING CONTOURS, TRAILS, VEGETATION, CURB/GUTTER AND OTHER MISTING ELEMENTS BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTTERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ANY AND ALL OECREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY IANDSCAPEARCHITECT OF SAME. THE AUGNMENT AND GRADES OF THE PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS AND/OR ROADWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO FEW ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LOCALIZED TOPOGRAPHIC CONDMONS AND TO MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL AND GRADING. AW CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCAR: 1/2" OR. CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE U2'-1'-0' SHRUBS TO BE PLACED SO THAT TOP OF CONTAINER SITS RUSH WITH PROPOSED GRADE. PLANTING SOIL-SEE NOTES OR SPEC. MULCH -3' DEPTH-SEE NOTES OR SPEC. LANDSCAPE FABRIC -SEE NOTES OR SPEC. EDGING MATERIAL-SEE NOTES OR SPEC. EDGE VARIES- REFER TO PLAN LOOSEN ROOTS OF ALL CONTAINERIZED PLANTS. SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SITES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING MULCH. 3' MIN. DEPTH • SEE NOTES OR SPECS. TIENOTTS CB SPECS. EDGE WAES• SEEPIAN I I 12' CEIRIMW LOAM MAME SOIL.91NOTES OR sncs. U:OSEPIROOTS OF RAM IAATERIAL POOR TOPLANTING VARIES E PLAN 1 L3.1 13.1 SCAIE1/4'. II-0. L3.1 SCALE 3/4' L. 1,0' THE CONTRACTOR N RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES INA PLUMB POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STATING MUST CONFORM NEM PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ANA GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES , PRUNE DAMAGED AND CROSSING BRANCHES YE AFTER PLANING IS COMPLETE. CUT BACK WIRE BASKET WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN 612. LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. TREE WRAP TO FRET BRANCH ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH OR JUST ABOVE GRADE. MULCH - 4' DEEP. NO MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK -SEE NOTES OR SPECS. BACKFILL WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL jEk 2x ROOT THE CONTRACTOR 5 RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB PORTION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED. BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ANA. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES. PRUNE ANY DAMAGED BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN B-12. UFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. MULCH • 4' DEEP • SEE NOTES OR SPECS. MULCH MUST NOT BE IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK. BACKFIRE WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL EDGE VARIES • SEE PLAN SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SINS OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING ROOT BALL SET ON UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. IRRIGATION NOTES POPE DESIGN, LLC 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 551062735 (651) 642-9200 I FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN LO U C KS NANNING CML ENGINEERING LANO SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 FlemLode Lane, SILO 300 1/12,0k Gm., MN 55369 763424.5SOS w......L.Eurksincxem LANDSCAPE DETAILS I Let WS, IA Pa Limpederim UNI T2 - LL re 1.7.-S• II Cal Asa al I ail NSA' Lrgamir TB tvs kest FILL 2x111 Ot OM if SHEET L3.1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL BEFORE YOU DO Gopher State One Call TWIN OTY AREA: BSI-454-0002 FULL WEE 1.-1100-251-1166 VERIFY MISTING AND PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM LAYOUT AND CONFIRM COMPLETE LIMNS OF IRRIGATION PRIOR TO SUPPLYING SHOP DRAWINGS. IANDSCAPECONMACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AN IRRIGATION LAYOUT PLAN AND SPECIFICATION ASA PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHTTECT PRIOR TO ORDER AND/OR INSTAUATION. ITSHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS RESPOWELITY 10 INSURE THAT ALL SODDED/SEEDED AND RANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREAS DIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH AN IRRIGATON SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONON/DNS AND TO PLANT MATERIAL GROWTH REQUIREMENTS. IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL NOT SPRAY ACROSS PAVEMENT. THE SYSTEM SHALL INCORPORATE A RAIN SENSOR WTO IRRIGATION SYSTEM IF A RAIN SYSTEM S NOT ALREADY INSTALLED ON THE MING SYSTEM, PLANNING DEPART!' /"--17 ii II Cal +Lk LW W-4 WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALUNG FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE 555114 ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND /OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 451.454.0102 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING-THE CONTRACTOR SHALE REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DMIAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. I/O, = P.4451'6490 BRICK SOWER COURSE BRICK RANO BACKLIT VET. SIGN DUAL PANEL LOA. LEVEL DOOR PUVI 6R-8. TO FTG METAL PANEL CURTAPAVALL TO-17n* EVSTP:G BRICK - PRECAST BAND EAST ELEVATION PRECAST BAND BRICK METAL PANEL METAL PANEL SOLD ER COURSE BRICK RAND CURTAIRVAU. fI I I I JOBB HARES SRO UST ROOF 4, PAN ,itr&L.,, SORER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 666 115 108.6R1.6.1. 8T-6 POKE A N l II I I P A 16 POPE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108-273' (651) 602-9200 I FA)( (651) 642-1101 vATA2,20 pea rch.com Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS, EXTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH SCHEDULE 16579-17093 Author Checker SHEET A3.1 EXISTING BRICK SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION 1/6" = 1'-0' PRECAST BAND BRICK SOLDER COURSE BRICK BAND BACKLIT METAL 6011 METAL PANEL METAL CANOPY CU RTAN NAIL WEST BUILDING ELEVATION 1/8" =1-0" E'leT1=-4 -";n s SOUTHEAST AERIAL PERSPECTIVE SOUTHWEST AERIAL PERSPECTIVE POPE A I( t II I rFl IS POPE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 PAUL, MN 56106-2735 (661) 6429200 I FAX (651) 692-1101 www.popearch.corn Cross View Expansion & Remodel Edina, MN EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVES 16579-17093 Author Checker SHEET A3.2 Edina, Hennepin, MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates 2013, HN Aerial 2015, © WSB & Associates 2013 6645 McCauley Trail October 4, 2018 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates 1 in = 200 ft / DATE: October 3, 2018 TO: 6645 McCauley Trail, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner, PE – Director of Engineering Charlie Gerk, PE – Graduate Engineer RE: 6645 McCauley Trail – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, and storm water. Plans reviewed were; Civil, Landscape, and Survey drawings dated 07/27/2018. Review Comment Required For General 1. Deliver as-build records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. Certificate of Occupancy 2. Vacate and provide new public / private easements as needed. Grading/Building Permit 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. Grading/Building Permit Living Streets 4. No Comments Grading/Building Permit Traffic and Street 5. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Fire truck turning template attached. Grading/Building Permit 6. Curb cut permit required for entrance reconstruction. Prior to Reconstructing Entrance 7. Road patching shall conform to Edina Standard Plates 540-545. Full width, saw cut to saw cut on Sunnyside Ave. Certificate of Occupancy Sanitary and Water Utilities 8. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations. Grading/Building Permit 9. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 10. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 11. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with public works. Prior to Starting Utility Work Storm Water Utility 12. Provide geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 13. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and state construction site permit requirements. Grading/Building Permit 14. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading/Building Permit 15. Subject site is tributary to subwatershed AH_9. No net increase in flood elevation for the 1% Atlas-14 event. Limit rate to existing site conditions for the 1% Atlas-14 event. Grading/Building Permit Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 16. Provide an erosion and sediment control plan. Grading/Building Permit Constructability and Safety 17. No Comments Grading/Building Permit Other Agency Coordination 18. Hennepin County, MDH, MPCA and MCES permits required as needed. Grading/Building Permit 19. Nine Mile Creek Watershed Districts permit is required. Grading/Building Permit City Hall • Phone 952-833-9520 Fax 952-826-0390 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: September 10, 2018 To: Cary Teague, Community Development Director From: David Fisher, Chief Building Official Re: 6645 McCauley Trail West — Cross View Lutheran Church CUP to Build Addition & Remodel The Building Department has reviewed the above proposed project with following comments: - Provide a complete building code analysis when the construction plans are submitted to the city for building permits. - All exiting must go to a public way. - Provide adequate fire department access to the buildings. - Retaining walls over 4 feet require engineering and a building permit. - Provide fire sprinklers to NFPA 13 and certify the whole building. - Recommend meet for a 30%, 60% & 90% review with the planning, engineering, building & fire department staff for this project City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 WENCK File #3022-10 July 23, 2018 Prepared by: WENCK Associates, 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 Cross View Church in Edina, MN July 2018 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 ............................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 4 SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (1 OF 2) ...................................... 4-3 FIGURE 5 SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (2 OF 2) ...................................... 4-4 FIGURE 6 SUNDAY PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE (1 OF 2) ......................... 5-5 FIGURE 7 SUNDAY PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE (2 OF 2) ......................... 5-6 FIGURE 8 PARKING SUB-AREAS ................................................................ 6-2 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: July 23, 2018 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 July 2018 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Cross View Church expansion project. The project site is located at 6645 McCauley. This study examined Sunday peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • McCauley Trail/Timber Trail • Timber Trail/south access • McCauley Trail/east access • McCauley Trail/west access Sunday church services occur at 8:15 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. with an education hour offered from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Wednesday evening education occurs from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. The proposed project will add approximately 9,500 square feet of space to the existing building, 3,500 of which will be a new Multi -Purpose room with seating for up to 320 people. The Church does not intend to have both the existing 400 seat sanctuary and the new 320 seat Multi-Purpose room used at the same time. The addition will also include larger youth spaces and will increase the number of child and adult Sunday School classrooms. The proposed building expansion will eliminate the existing east/west connection between the two parking areas. The overall parking space count will be reduced from 238 to 209 under the proposed plan. The existing site has two acces s points on McCauley Trail and one access on Timber Trail. The proposed project will not impact any of the existing access locations. The proposed project is expected to be compete and fully occupied by the end of 2019. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is estimated to generate 11 net trips during the 7:30-8:30 a.m. hour, 17 net trips during the 9:15-10:15 a.m. hour, 15 net trips during the 10:15-11:15 a.m. hour, and 14 trips during the 11:45 a.m.-12:45 p.m. hour. • The traffic generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on the surrounding intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at the study area intersections to accommodate the proposed project. All intersections have capacity available to accommodate future growth in the study area. • Under existing conditions, no bicycle or pedestrian facilities are provided in the area. Observations at the site indicated a minimal number of bicycles and pedestrians using the street system during the Sunday time periods. Bicycle and pedestrian trips in the study area would be accommodated by the future proposed shared use path on McCauley Trail. • The proposed number of parking spaces can accommodate the expected peak parking demand based existing usage and future growth assumptions. July 2018 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Cross View Church expansion project. The project site is located at 6645 McCauley Trail and is shown in Figure 1. Based discussions with City staff, this study examined Sunday peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed redevelopment at the following intersections: • McCauley Trail/Timber Trail • Timber Trail/south access • McCauley Trail/east access • McCauley Trail/west access Existing Operations Sunday church services occur at 8:15 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. with an education hour offered from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Wednesday evening education occurs from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Proposed Project Characteristics The proposed project will add approximately 9,500 square feet of space to the existing building, 3,500 of which will be a new Multi -Purpose room with seating for up to 320 people. The Church does not intend to have both the existing 400 seat sanctuary and the new 320 seat Multi-Purpose room used at the same time. The addition will also include larger youth spaces and will increase the number of child and adult Sunday School classrooms. The proposed building expansion will eliminate the existing east/west connection between the two parking areas. The overall parking space count will be reduced from 238 to 209 under the proposed plan. The existing site has two access points on McCauley Trail and one access on Timber Trail. The proposed project will not impact any of the existing access locations. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. The proposed project is expected to be compete and fully occupied by the end of 2019. July 2018 2-2 July 2018 2-3 July 2018 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The site is bounded by McCauley Trail to the north, Timber Trail to the east, McIntyre Pointe to the west, and residential uses to the south. McCauley Trail serves as the south frontage road for TH 62 and connects to Gleason Road to the east and Valley View Road to the south and west. McCauley Trail is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour. Both Timber Trail and McIntyre Pointe are two lane residential cul-de-sacs which extend south from McCauley Trail. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. McCauley Trail/Timber Trail (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the northbound Timber Trail approach. The eastbound approach provides one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn/through lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn/right turn lane. Timber Trail/south site access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the eastbound site access approach. The eastbound approach provides on e left turn/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one through/left turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through lane. McCauley Trail/east site access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the northbound site access approach. The eastbound approach provides one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn/through. The northbound approach provides one left turn/right turn lane. McCauley Trail/west site access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the northbound site access approach. The eastbound approach provides one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn/through. The northbound approach provides one left turn/right turn lane. Turn movement data for the intersections was collected on Sunday May 20, 2018 during all church services. July 2018 3-2 July 2018 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 2020. Traffic volume data collected at the site indicated the following four peak periods: • 7:30 – 8:30 a.m. – Captures trips entering for the 8:15 a.m. service • 9:15 – 10:15 a.m. – Captures trips exiting the 8:15 a.m. service and entering for the education hour • 10:15 – 11:15 a.m. – Captures trips entering for the 10:45 a.m. service and exiting the education hour • 11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. – Captures trips exiting the 10:45 a.m. service Traffic volumes forecasts were developed for the following scenarios: • 2018 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the existing church services. • 2020 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2020 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth in the area. • 2020 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2020 No-Build volumes to determine 2020 Build volumes. Trip Generation Discussions with Church staff indicated the focus of the project is to expand multiple use spaces including classrooms, multi -purpose rooms and youth rooms to handle current enrollment and improve adult education opportunities. Overall growth in attendance is not expected in the near future. For purpose of this study, an increase of 10 percent in the site trip generation was assumed by 2020. This allows for analysis of traffic and parking operations assuming a conservatively high amount of growth. The existing and future trip generation results are shown in Table 4-1. July 2018 4-2 Table 4-1 Sunday Trip Generation for Existing and 2020 Conditions Scenario and Time Period Trips Existing In Out Total 7:30-8:30 a.m. 114 3 117 9:15-10:15 a.m. 60 112 172 10:15-11:15 a.m. 95 48 143 11:45 a.m.-12:45 a.m. 31 109 140 Year 2020 In Out Total 7:30-8:30 a.m. 125 3 128 9:15-10:15 a.m. 66 123 189 10:15-11:15 a.m. 105 53 158 11:45 a.m.-12:45 a.m. 34 120 154 Trip Distribution Trip distribution for future trips are expected to following existing patterns. 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. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figures 4 and 5. July 2018 4-3 July 2018 4-4 July 2018 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, b ut 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 traffi c 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. July 2018 5-2 The LOS results for the study intersections are presented in Figures 6 and 7 and discussed below. Sunday 7:30 – 8:30 a.m. McCauley Trail/Timber Trail (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Timber Trail/south site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/east site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/west site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Sunday 9:15 – 10:15 a.m. McCauley Trail/Timber Trail (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Timber Trail/south site access (minor street stop sign con trol) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/east site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/west site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Sunday 10:15 – 11:15 a.m. McCauley Trail/Timber Trail (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. July 2018 5-3 Timber Trail/south site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/east site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/west site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Sunday 11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. McCauley Trail/Timber Trail (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Timber Trail/south site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/east site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. McCauley Trail/west site access (minor street stop sign control) Under existing, 2020 No-Build, and 2020 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS A or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. Overall Traffic Impact The traffic generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on the surrounding intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at the study area intersections to accommodate the proposed project. All intersections have capacity available to accommodate future growth in the study area. July 2018 5-4 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, no bicycle or pedestrian facilities are provided in the area. Pedestrians and bicycles must travel along the edge of streets in the study area. Observations at the site indicated a minimal number of bicycles and pedestrians using the street system during the Sunday time periods. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plans show a future shared use path on McCauley Trail. The trail would connect with Gleason Road on the east and extend south to the City limit. Bicycle and pedestrian trips in the study area would be accommodated by the proposed shared use path. The full sidewalk and bicycle facility plan maps are included in the Appendix. July 2018 5-5 July 2018 5-6 July 2018 6-1 6.0 Parking Analysis Existing Conditions To determine the existing parking conditions at the church, parking data was collected for the entire site, which was divided into the sub-areas shown in Figure 8. Parking usage data was collected during the 8:15 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. services on May 20, 2018 and June 10, 2018. The data collected is shown in Tables 6-1. Table 6-1 Existing Sunday Parking Usage Date and Time Area 1 Area 2 Total On-Site Available Used Available Used Available Used 5/20/18 – 8:20 a.m. 195 70 43 39 238 109 5/20/18 – 11:00 a.m. 195 76 43 34 238 110 6/10/18 – 8:20 a.m. 195 62 43 44 238 106 6/10/18 – 11:10 a.m. 195 71 43 40 238 111 As shown, the peak usage on Sunday occurred at 11:10 a.m. with 111 spaces used (46.6% of the total spaces) and 127 spaces unused. The table also show that sub-area 1 had the most spaces available while sub-area 2 was full or nearly full on both days. Future Conditions As described earlier, the project will reduce the total number of on-site parking spaces from 238 to 209. Discussions with Church staff indicated the focus of the project is to expand multiple use spaces including classrooms, multi-purpose rooms and youth rooms to handle current enrollment and improve adult education opportunities. Overall growth in attendance is not expected in the near future. For purpose of this study, an increase of 10 percent in the site trip generation was assumed by 2020. The increase in trip generation would also increase the overall parking demand. A 10% increase in the peak parking demand would result in a demand of 122 spaces. The proposed project includes 209 parking spaces, which will adequately accommodate the future parking demand. July 2018 6-2 July 2018 7-1 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is estimated to generate 11 net trips during the 7:30-8:30 a.m. hour, 17 net trips during the 9:15-10:15 a.m. hour, 15 net trips during the 10:15-11:15 a.m. hour, and 14 trips during the 11:45 a.m.-12:45 p.m. hour. • The traffic generated by the proposed project has minimal impact on the surrounding intersection operations and does not change the level of service of any movement. No improvements are needed at the study area intersections to accommodate the proposed project. All intersections have capacity available to accommodate future growth in the study area. • Under existing conditions, no bicycle or pedestrian facilities are provided in the area. Observations at the site indicated a minimal number of bicycles and pedestrians using the street system during the Sunday time periods. Bicycle and pedestrian trips in the study area would be accommodated by the future proposed shared use path on McCauley Trail. • The proposed number of parking spaces can accommodate the expected peak parking demand based existing usage and future growth assumptions. July 2018 8-1 8.0 Appendix • Bicycle and Sidewalk Facilities Maps • Level of Service Worksheets Braemar Golf Course Bredesen Park Rosland Park Pamela Park Lewis Park Highlands Park Walnut Ridge Park Todd Park Garden Park Heights Park Van Valkenburg Park Fred Richards Golf Course Creek Valley Park Lake Edina Park Krahl Hill Normandale Park Weber Field Park Arneson Acres Park Countryside Park Alden Park Utley Park Yorktown Park Wooddale Park Arden Park York Park Cornelia Park Strachauer Park Fox MeadowPark Edinborough Park KojetinPark McGuirePark BirchcrestPark SherwoodPark Melody LakePark Williams Park ChowenPark St. John'sPark TingdalePark BrowndalePark GrandviewSquare FrankTupa Park Courtney Fields ?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y Mud Lake )y ?ÞA@ ?úA@ LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake Hi ghlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake Minnehaha Creek N i n e M i l e C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVEFRANCE AVE SXERXES AVE SCAHILL RD70TH ST W 66TH ST W YORK AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 44 T H S T W 50TH ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST W GLEASON RD70TH ST W 76TH ST W DEW EY HILL RD VALLEY VIEW RD VALLEY VIEW RD M I N N E S O T A D R78TH ST W / Engineering DeptMay 2018 Pedestrian Facilities Proposed FacilitiesExisting Facilities Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pa thway Nine Mile Creek Regiona l Trail New Primary Sidewalk New Secondary Sid ewalk New Shared Use Path Upgrade to Sh ared Use Pa th Twin Loops Facility æ ¹» ¹» æ æ æ æ æ¹»æ æ ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ñ ¹»æ æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ ¹º æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ æ ñ æ ¹º ñ æ ñ ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark Koj etinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaPark St JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsGolf Course YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minnehaha Creek N i n e M i l e C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation Public W orks &Park Maintenance CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran WooddaleChurch St PatricksCatholic New CityCovenantChurch NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessori CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the H illsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlac hen Blvd Maloney Ave 44 th S t W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View Rd Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBe nton Ave Gl e a s o n RdMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLincoln DrWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinger Blvd 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St WValley V iew RdEngineering DeptMay 2018 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Existing Bicycle Facilities Bike Lanes Bike Lanes-Shared Lane Markings Shared Lane Markings Bike Boulevards Nine Mile Creek Regiona l Trail Advisory Bike Lanes Green Sha red Bike Lanes Sig ned Bike Routes Bike or Shared Use Paths ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark Koj etinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaPark St JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsGolf Course YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minnehaha Creek N i n e M i l e C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlac hen Blvd Maloney Ave 44 th S t W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View Rd Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBe nton Ave Gl e a s o n RdMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLincoln DrWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinger Blvd 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St WValley V iew RdEngineering DeptMay 2018 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Proposed Bicycle Facilities New Share d Use Path Upgrade to Share d Use Pat h St andard Bike Lane New Buffered Bike Lane Upgrade to Buffered Bike Lane Neighborhood Slow Stre et Nine Mile Creek Regiona l Trail Twin Loop s Facility 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 26 82 1 2 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 26 82 1 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 46 144 2 4 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 260 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 236 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 729 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 803 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 706 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 706 - Stage 1 - - - - 968 - Stage 2 - - - - 803 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.8 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 904 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.029 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 25 Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 2 2 2 2 44 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 30 24 46 0 - 0 Stage 1 24 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 984 1052 1562 - - - Stage 1 999 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 983 1052 1562 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 983 - - - - - Stage 1 998 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.6 3.7 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1562 - 1005 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.005 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.6 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 57 25 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 57 25 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 100 44 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 268 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 244 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 721 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 797 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 674 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 674 - Stage 1 - - - - 934 - Stage 2 - - - - 797 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 5.2 9.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 822 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.063 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 7 24 1 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 7 24 1 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 12 42 2 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 35 0 115 29 Stage 1 - - - - 29 - Stage 2 - - - - 86 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 881 1046 Stage 1 - - - - 994 - Stage 2 - - - - 937 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 857 1046 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 857 - Stage 1 - - - - 967 - Stage 2 - - - - 937 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.1 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 942 - - 1576 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.027 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 86 1 7 105 1 30 Future Vol, veh/h 86 1 7 105 1 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 105 1 9 128 1 37 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 106 0 252 106 Stage 1 - - - - 106 - Stage 2 - - - - 146 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1485 - 737 948 Stage 1 - - - - 918 - Stage 2 - - - - 881 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1485 - 732 948 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 732 - Stage 1 - - - - 912 - Stage 2 - - - - 881 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 939 - - 1485 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 - - 0.006 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 7 Future Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 37 1 1 1 1 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 9 6 10 0 - 0 Stage 1 6 - - - - - Stage 2 3 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1011 1077 1610 - - - Stage 1 1017 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1010 1077 1610 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1010 - - - - - Stage 1 1016 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1610 - 1012 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.037 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 41 4 34 72 3 45 Future Vol, veh/h 41 4 34 72 3 45 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 50 5 41 88 4 55 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 55 0 223 53 Stage 1 - - - - 53 - Stage 2 - - - - 170 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1550 - 765 1014 Stage 1 - - - - 970 - Stage 2 - - - - 860 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1550 - 744 1014 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 744 - Stage 1 - - - - 943 - Stage 2 - - - - 860 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.4 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 992 - - 1550 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.059 - - 0.027 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 9 6 69 9 25 Future Vol, veh/h 20 9 6 69 9 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 24 11 7 84 11 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 35 0 128 30 Stage 1 - - - - 30 - Stage 2 - - - - 98 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 866 1044 Stage 1 - - - - 993 - Stage 2 - - - - 926 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 862 1044 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 862 - Stage 1 - - - - 988 - Stage 2 - - - - 926 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.6 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 989 - - 1576 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - 0.005 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 97 1 13 126 1 15 Future Vol, veh/h 97 1 13 126 1 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 156 2 21 203 2 24 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 158 0 402 157 Stage 1 - - - - 157 - Stage 2 - - - - 245 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1422 - 604 889 Stage 1 - - - - 871 - Stage 2 - - - - 796 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1422 - 594 889 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 594 - Stage 1 - - - - 856 - Stage 2 - - - - 796 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9.3 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 862 - - 1422 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 1 1 1 1 12 Future Vol, veh/h 14 1 1 1 1 12 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 2 2 2 19 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 18 12 21 0 - 0 Stage 1 12 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1000 1069 1595 - - - Stage 1 1011 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 999 1069 1595 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 999 - - - - - Stage 1 1010 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1595 - 1003 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.024 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 80 2 58 68 1 17 Future Vol, veh/h 80 2 58 68 1 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 129 3 94 110 2 27 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 132 0 429 131 Stage 1 - - - - 131 - Stage 2 - - - - 298 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 583 919 Stage 1 - - - - 895 - Stage 2 - - - - 753 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 543 919 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 543 - Stage 1 - - - - 833 - Stage 2 - - - - 753 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 3.5 9.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 885 - - 1453 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - 0.064 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 72 7 16 52 7 10 Future Vol, veh/h 72 7 16 52 7 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 116 11 26 84 11 16 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 127 0 258 122 Stage 1 - - - - 122 - Stage 2 - - - - 136 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1459 - 731 929 Stage 1 - - - - 903 - Stage 2 - - - - 890 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1459 - 717 929 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 717 - Stage 1 - - - - 886 - Stage 2 - - - - 890 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.8 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 828 - - 1459 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - 0.018 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 116 1 8 69 2 25 Future Vol, veh/h 116 1 8 69 2 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 181 2 13 108 3 39 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 183 0 316 182 Stage 1 - - - - 182 - Stage 2 - - - - 134 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1392 - 677 861 Stage 1 - - - - 849 - Stage 2 - - - - 892 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1392 - 670 861 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 670 - Stage 1 - - - - 841 - Stage 2 - - - - 892 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 843 - - 1392 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.05 - - 0.009 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 27 1 1 1 1 8 Future Vol, veh/h 27 1 1 1 1 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 42 2 2 2 2 13 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 15 9 15 0 - 0 Stage 1 9 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1004 1073 1603 - - - Stage 1 1014 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1003 1073 1603 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1003 - - - - - Stage 1 1013 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1603 - 1005 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.044 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 69 1 14 57 8 48 Future Vol, veh/h 69 1 14 57 8 48 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 108 2 22 89 13 75 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 110 0 242 109 Stage 1 - - - - 109 - Stage 2 - - - - 133 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1480 - 746 945 Stage 1 - - - - 916 - Stage 2 - - - - 893 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1480 - 734 945 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 734 - Stage 1 - - - - 901 - Stage 2 - - - - 893 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.5 9.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 908 - - 1480 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.096 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2018 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 48 2 6 59 4 22 Future Vol, veh/h 48 2 6 59 4 22 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 75 3 9 92 6 34 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 78 0 187 77 Stage 1 - - - - 77 - Stage 2 - - - - 110 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1520 - 802 984 Stage 1 - - - - 946 - Stage 2 - - - - 915 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1520 - 797 984 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 797 - Stage 1 - - - - 940 - Stage 2 - - - - 915 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 950 - - 1520 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - 0.006 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 26 84 1 2 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 26 84 1 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 46 147 2 4 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 263 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 239 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 726 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 801 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 703 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 703 - Stage 1 - - - - 967 - Stage 2 - - - - 801 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.7 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 903 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.029 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 25 Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 2 2 2 2 44 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 30 24 46 0 - 0 Stage 1 24 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 984 1052 1562 - - - Stage 1 999 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 983 1052 1562 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 983 - - - - - Stage 1 998 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.6 3.7 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1562 - 1005 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.005 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.6 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 57 27 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 57 27 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 100 47 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 271 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 247 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 718 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 794 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 671 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 671 - Stage 1 - - - - 934 - Stage 2 - - - - 794 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 5 9.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 819 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.063 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.9 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 7 24 3 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 7 24 3 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 12 42 5 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 35 0 118 29 Stage 1 - - - - 29 - Stage 2 - - - - 89 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 878 1046 Stage 1 - - - - 994 - Stage 2 - - - - 934 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1576 - 854 1046 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 854 - Stage 1 - - - - 967 - Stage 2 - - - - 934 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 6.5 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 940 - - 1576 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.027 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 88 1 7 107 1 30 Future Vol, veh/h 88 1 7 107 1 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 107 1 9 130 1 37 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 108 0 256 108 Stage 1 - - - - 108 - Stage 2 - - - - 148 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1483 - 733 946 Stage 1 - - - - 916 - Stage 2 - - - - 880 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1483 - 728 946 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 728 - Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 880 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 937 - - 1483 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 - - 0.006 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 7 Future Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 37 1 1 1 1 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 9 6 10 0 - 0 Stage 1 6 - - - - - Stage 2 3 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1011 1077 1610 - - - Stage 1 1017 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1010 1077 1610 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1010 - - - - - Stage 1 1016 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1610 - 1012 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.037 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 43 4 34 74 3 45 Future Vol, veh/h 43 4 34 74 3 45 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 52 5 41 90 4 55 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 57 0 227 55 Stage 1 - - - - 55 - Stage 2 - - - - 172 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1547 - 761 1012 Stage 1 - - - - 968 - Stage 2 - - - - 858 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1547 - 740 1012 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 740 - Stage 1 - - - - 941 - Stage 2 - - - - 858 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.3 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 989 - - 1547 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.059 - - 0.027 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 22 9 6 71 9 25 Future Vol, veh/h 22 9 6 71 9 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 27 11 7 87 11 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 38 0 134 33 Stage 1 - - - - 33 - Stage 2 - - - - 101 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1572 - 860 1041 Stage 1 - - - - 989 - Stage 2 - - - - 923 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1572 - 856 1041 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 856 - Stage 1 - - - - 984 - Stage 2 - - - - 923 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.6 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 985 - - 1572 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - 0.005 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 99 1 13 129 1 15 Future Vol, veh/h 99 1 13 129 1 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 160 2 21 208 2 24 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 162 0 411 161 Stage 1 - - - - 161 - Stage 2 - - - - 250 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1417 - 597 884 Stage 1 - - - - 868 - Stage 2 - - - - 792 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1417 - 587 884 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 587 - Stage 1 - - - - 853 - Stage 2 - - - - 792 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9.3 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 857 - - 1417 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 1 1 1 1 12 Future Vol, veh/h 14 1 1 1 1 12 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 2 2 2 19 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 18 12 21 0 - 0 Stage 1 12 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1000 1069 1595 - - - Stage 1 1011 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 999 1069 1595 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 999 - - - - - Stage 1 1010 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1595 - 1003 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.024 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 82 2 58 72 1 17 Future Vol, veh/h 82 2 58 72 1 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 132 3 94 116 2 27 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 135 0 438 134 Stage 1 - - - - 134 - Stage 2 - - - - 304 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 576 915 Stage 1 - - - - 892 - Stage 2 - - - - 748 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 536 915 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 536 - Stage 1 - - - - 830 - Stage 2 - - - - 748 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 3.4 9.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 880 - - 1449 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - 0.065 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 74 7 16 55 7 10 Future Vol, veh/h 74 7 16 55 7 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 119 11 26 89 11 16 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 130 0 266 125 Stage 1 - - - - 125 - Stage 2 - - - - 141 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1455 - 723 926 Stage 1 - - - - 901 - Stage 2 - - - - 886 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1455 - 709 926 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 709 - Stage 1 - - - - 884 - Stage 2 - - - - 886 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.7 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 822 - - 1455 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - 0.018 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 118 1 8 70 2 25 Future Vol, veh/h 118 1 8 70 2 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 184 2 13 109 3 39 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 186 0 320 185 Stage 1 - - - - 185 - Stage 2 - - - - 135 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 673 857 Stage 1 - - - - 847 - Stage 2 - - - - 891 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 666 857 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 666 - Stage 1 - - - - 839 - Stage 2 - - - - 891 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 839 - - 1388 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.05 - - 0.009 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 27 1 1 1 1 8 Future Vol, veh/h 27 1 1 1 1 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 42 2 2 2 2 13 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 15 9 15 0 - 0 Stage 1 9 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1004 1073 1603 - - - Stage 1 1014 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1003 1073 1603 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1003 - - - - - Stage 1 1013 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1603 - 1005 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.044 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 71 1 14 58 8 48 Future Vol, veh/h 71 1 14 58 8 48 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 111 2 22 91 13 75 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 113 0 247 112 Stage 1 - - - - 112 - Stage 2 - - - - 135 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1476 - 741 941 Stage 1 - - - - 913 - Stage 2 - - - - 891 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1476 - 729 941 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 729 - Stage 1 - - - - 898 - Stage 2 - - - - 891 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.5 9.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 903 - - 1476 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.097 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 nb 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 50 2 6 60 4 22 Future Vol, veh/h 50 2 6 60 4 22 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 78 3 9 94 6 34 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 81 0 192 80 Stage 1 - - - - 80 - Stage 2 - - - - 112 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1517 - 797 980 Stage 1 - - - - 943 - Stage 2 - - - - 913 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1517 - 792 980 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 792 - Stage 1 - - - - 937 - Stage 2 - - - - 913 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 945 - - 1517 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - 0.006 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 29 92 1 2 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 29 92 1 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 51 161 2 4 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 287 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 263 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 703 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 781 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 678 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 678 - Stage 1 - - - - 964 - Stage 2 - - - - 781 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.8 9.1 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 889 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.032 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 28 Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 1 1 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 2 2 2 2 49 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 33 27 51 0 - 0 Stage 1 27 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 980 1048 1555 - - - Stage 1 996 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 979 1048 1555 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 979 - - - - - Stage 1 995 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.6 3.7 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1555 - 1001 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.005 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.6 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 1 63 29 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 1 63 29 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 2 111 51 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 25 0 297 24 Stage 1 - - - - 24 - Stage 2 - - - - 273 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 694 1052 Stage 1 - - - - 999 - Stage 2 - - - - 773 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1589 - 644 1052 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 644 - Stage 1 - - - - 927 - Stage 2 - - - - 773 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 5.1 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 799 - - 1589 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.07 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 730 830.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 8 26 3 1 1 Future Vol, veh/h 13 8 26 3 1 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 57 57 57 57 57 57 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 23 14 46 5 2 2 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 37 0 127 30 Stage 1 - - - - 30 - Stage 2 - - - - 97 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1574 - 868 1044 Stage 1 - - - - 993 - Stage 2 - - - - 927 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1574 - 843 1044 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 843 - Stage 1 - - - - 964 - Stage 2 - - - - 927 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 6.6 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 933 - - 1574 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.029 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 96 1 8 111 1 33 Future Vol, veh/h 96 1 8 111 1 33 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 117 1 10 135 1 40 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 118 0 273 118 Stage 1 - - - - 118 - Stage 2 - - - - 155 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1470 - 716 934 Stage 1 - - - - 907 - Stage 2 - - - - 873 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1470 - 711 934 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 711 - Stage 1 - - - - 901 - Stage 2 - - - - 873 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 9.1 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 925 - - 1470 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.045 - - 0.007 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.7 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 1 1 1 1 8 Future Vol, veh/h 33 1 1 1 1 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 40 1 1 1 1 10 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 9 6 11 0 - 0 Stage 1 6 - - - - - Stage 2 3 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1011 1077 1608 - - - Stage 1 1017 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1010 1077 1608 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1010 - - - - - Stage 1 1016 - - - - - Stage 2 1020 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1608 - 1012 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.041 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 46 5 37 75 3 50 Future Vol, veh/h 46 5 37 75 3 50 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 56 6 45 91 4 61 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 62 0 240 59 Stage 1 - - - - 59 - Stage 2 - - - - 181 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1541 - 748 1007 Stage 1 - - - - 964 - Stage 2 - - - - 850 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1541 - 725 1007 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 725 - Stage 1 - - - - 934 - Stage 2 - - - - 850 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.4 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 985 - - 1541 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.066 - - 0.029 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 915 1015.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 10 7 71 10 28 Future Vol, veh/h 23 10 7 71 10 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 28 12 9 87 12 34 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 40 0 139 34 Stage 1 - - - - 34 - Stage 2 - - - - 105 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1570 - 854 1039 Stage 1 - - - - 988 - Stage 2 - - - - 919 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1570 - 849 1039 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 849 - Stage 1 - - - - 982 - Stage 2 - - - - 919 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 981 - - 1570 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.047 - - 0.005 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 102 1 14 137 1 17 Future Vol, veh/h 102 1 14 137 1 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 165 2 23 221 2 27 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 167 0 433 166 Stage 1 - - - - 166 - Stage 2 - - - - 267 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1411 - 580 878 Stage 1 - - - - 863 - Stage 2 - - - - 778 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1411 - 569 878 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 569 - Stage 1 - - - - 847 - Stage 2 - - - - 778 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 852 - - 1411 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.034 - - 0.016 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.7 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 1 1 1 1 13 Future Vol, veh/h 16 1 1 1 1 13 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 26 2 2 2 2 21 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 19 13 23 0 - 0 Stage 1 13 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 998 1067 1592 - - - Stage 1 1010 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 997 1067 1592 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 997 - - - - - Stage 1 1009 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.7 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1592 - 1001 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.027 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 83 2 64 73 1 19 Future Vol, veh/h 83 2 64 73 1 19 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 134 3 103 118 2 31 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 137 0 460 136 Stage 1 - - - - 136 - Stage 2 - - - - 324 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1447 - 559 913 Stage 1 - - - - 890 - Stage 2 - - - - 733 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1447 - 517 913 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 517 - Stage 1 - - - - 822 - Stage 2 - - - - 733 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 3.6 9.3 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 879 - - 1447 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.037 - - 0.071 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.2 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1015 1115.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 74 8 18 55 8 11 Future Vol, veh/h 74 8 18 55 8 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 62 62 62 62 62 62 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 119 13 29 89 13 18 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 132 0 273 126 Stage 1 - - - - 126 - Stage 2 - - - - 147 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 716 924 Stage 1 - - - - 900 - Stage 2 - - - - 880 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 701 924 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 701 - Stage 1 - - - - 881 - Stage 2 - - - - 880 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.9 9.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 815 - - 1453 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.1 - 3: Timber Tr & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 125 1 9 73 2 28 Future Vol, veh/h 125 1 9 73 2 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 195 2 14 114 3 44 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 197 0 338 196 Stage 1 - - - - 196 - Stage 2 - - - - 142 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1376 - 658 845 Stage 1 - - - - 837 - Stage 2 - - - - 885 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1376 - 651 845 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 651 - Stage 1 - - - - 828 - Stage 2 - - - - 885 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 9.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 829 - - 1376 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.01 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - 5: Timber Tr & south access 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.5 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 9 Future Vol, veh/h 30 1 1 1 1 9 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 47 2 2 2 2 14 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 15 9 16 0 - 0 Stage 1 9 - - - - - Stage 2 6 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1004 1073 1602 - - - Stage 1 1014 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1003 1073 1602 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 1003 - - - - - Stage 1 1013 - - - - - Stage 2 1017 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.8 3.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1602 - 1005 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.048 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.2 0 8.8 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 - - 7: east access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 73 1 16 59 9 53 Future Vol, veh/h 73 1 16 59 9 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 - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 114 2 25 92 14 83 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 116 0 257 115 Stage 1 - - - - 115 - Stage 2 - - - - 142 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1473 - 732 937 Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 885 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1473 - 719 937 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 719 - Stage 1 - - - - 894 - Stage 2 - - - - 885 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.6 9.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 897 - - 1473 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.108 - - 0.017 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.1 - 9: west access & McCauley Tr 06/27/2018 T:\3022\10\synchro\2020 b 1145 1245.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 50 2 7 61 5 24 Future Vol, veh/h 50 2 7 61 5 24 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 78 3 11 95 8 38 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 81 0 197 80 Stage 1 - - - - 80 - Stage 2 - - - - 117 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1517 - 792 980 Stage 1 - - - - 943 - Stage 2 - - - - 908 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1517 - 786 980 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 786 - Stage 1 - - - - 935 - Stage 2 - - - - 908 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 940 - - 1517 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.048 - - 0.007 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - - 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI.E. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director Item Activity: Subject:C omprehens ive P lan Amendment - 4100 Wes t 76th S treet Ac tion 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 Comprehensive P lan Amendment. I N TR O D U C TI O N: S ee attached staff report. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Applicant Narrative & Plans Site Location & Zoning Traffic Study State Law - Voting Requirements for Affodable Hous ing October 10, 2018 Honorable Mayor and Council Members Cary Teague, Community Development Director Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Aeon Affordable Housing Project 4100 West 76th Street Information / Background: Aeon is requesting an amendment to the Edina Comprehensive Plan regarding density in the OR, Office Residential District. The specific request is to increase the density from 30 units per acre to 40 units per acre to allow a future four-story 80 unit affordable housing project at 4100 West 76th Street. The applicant would tear down the existing 17,235 square foot recording studio located on the site. All the units within this development would be affordable to those at or below 60% Area Median Income (AMI). The 2018 income limit for a family of four at 60% AMI is currently $56,580 annually. (See the attached property location, applicant narrative and plans.) This request before the Planning Commission and City Council does not include a Rezoning or Site Plan review. If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved by the City Council, the applicant would then come back with Rezoning and Site Plan review applications. It is at that time that the details of the project would be reviewed, and considered. The development plans included in this submission provided should be considered sketch plans. Because this request includes over 20% of the housing units to be for affordable housing, (the entire project would be affordable housing) this would require a 3/5 vote of approval by the City Council. Minnesota State Law mandates that if projects contain 20% of the units for affordable housing to persons with incomes no greater than 60% of the area median income, and with respect to rental units, the rents for affordable units do not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median income, then the approving vote for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment be done by a majority vote. A super majority vote (2/3) is typically required. (See attached state statute.) As this is a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the City has substantial discretion as to approving or denying this request. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment - Density The OR, Office Residential Area allows up to 30 units per acre. This density is low given the density that has been considered as part of the Greater Southdale Area Study. Densities that have been contemplated to date have been 80-100 units per acre over the whole of the district. The thinking behind that density has been to allow greater densities in between France and York (100- 150 units per acre; the CAC, Community Activity Center allows up to 105 units per acre in the existing Comprehensive Plan); and lesser densities 50-75 units per acre west of France and East of York. The City has allowed greater densities on the east side of York. The Aria was approved at 105 units per acre, (built at 96 units per acre); and the Onyx is 52 units per acre. On the west side of France, the Aurora on France project (senior housing) is 80 units per acre. Below is table of existing high density developments in the City. Note that the trend in multi- family development is higher density. This is due to the high cost of land in Edina, the City’s requirement for affordable housing, and the added cost of redeveloping a site with existing buildings. High Density Development in Edina Development Address Units Units Per Acre Yorktown Continental 7151 York 264 45 The Durham 7201 York 264 46 York Plaza Condos 7200-20 York 260 34 7500 York Cooperative 7500 York 416 36 Edinborough Condos 76xx York 392 36 South Haven 3400 Parklawn 100 42 The Waters Colonial Drive 139 22 6500 France – Senior Housing 6500 France 188 80 Lennar - Onyx 6725 York 240 52 Proposed Aeon Project 4101 76th Street 80 40 5000 France 5000 France 23 29 The Collaborative Market Street 131 46 Gateway Point (Aria) 66th & York 188 96 The Millennium 66th & York 372 60 Lincoln Residences 5901 Lincoln Drive 250 30 Red – Indicates recent projects STAFF REPORT Page 3 Example Residential Density Ranges in Surrounding City’s Comprehensive Plans City Range – Per Acre Bloomington Medium Density Residential 5-10 High Density Residential No limit General Business 0-83 Commercial (Community & Regional) 0-83 High Intense mix use 0-60 Airport South mix use 30-131 Richfield Medium Density Residential 7-12 High Density Residential Minimum of 24 High Density Res./Office Minimum of 24 Mixed Use 50+ St. Louis Park Medium Density Residential 6-30 High Density Residential 20-75 (PUD for high end) Mixed Use 20-75 (PUD for high end) Commercial 20-50 Minnetonka Medium Density Residential 4-12 High Density Residential 12+ Mixed Use No range established (density based on site location and site conditions.) Minneapolis Medium Density (mixed use) 20-50 High Density (mixed use) 50-120 Very High Density(mixed use) 120+ The site’s location in close proximity to an arterial roadway (France Avenue) provides a good location for higher density. The Comprehensive Plan currently suggests allowing higher density subject to proximity to utilities capacity, level of transit service available, and impact on adjacent roads. Other desired items to allow greater density would include: Below grade parking, provision of park or open space, affordable housing, sustainable design principles, provision of public art, pedestrian circulation, and podium height. The proposed project would contain most of these elements. There is adequate utility capacity available, parking would be below grade; there is an open space/park to the rear of the building; the project would provide the City with 80 additional affordable housing units; the applicant is willing to provide public art. A traffic study was be done by Spack Consulting and concludes that there would be minimal impact to the roads, and the existing roads could support the development. (See the attached traffic study.) STAFF REPORT Page 4 OR Office-Residential No current examples in City. Potential examples include Pentagon Park area and other I-494 corridor locations Transitional areas along major thoroughfares or between higher-intensity districts and residential districts. Many existing highway- oriented commercial areas are anticipated to transition to this more mixed-use character. Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. Secondary uses: Limited retail and service uses (not including “big box” retail), limited industrial (fully enclosed), institutional uses, parks and open space. Vertical mixed use should be encouraged, and may be required on larger sites. Upgrade existing streetscape and building appearance, improve pedestrian and transit environment. Encourage structured parking and open space linkages where feasible; emphasize the enhancement of the pedestrian environment. 12-30 residential dwelling units/acre. The property at 4100 76th Street may be increased to 40 units per acre provided that the site be developed with affordable housing subject to PUD Rezoning. Sketch Plan The site is currently zoned PID, Planned Industrial District. The site is two acres in size, and contains a 17,235 square foot recording studio. The proposal is to tear the existing building down and build a four story 80 unit affordable housing apartment. The request would require the following if the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved: 1. A Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development. 2. Site Plan Review. Below is a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed new building would comply with the PID Standards on the lot. Compliance Table City Standard (PCD-1) Proposed Lot line Building Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – east Side – west Rear Parking Lot Setbacks Front – 76th Street Side – North Side – South 50 feet 50 feet 50 feet 50 feet 20 feet 5 feet 5 feet 73 feet 30 feet* 15 feet* 40 feet* 90 feet 12 feet 12 feet Building Height 4-stories & 48 feet 4 stories Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 1.2* Parking 1.25 spaces enclosed (100 required) and .75 spaces exposed (60 required) per dwelling unit 72 spaces enclosed* 11 surface (10 proof of parking stalls)* *Variances required STAFF REPORT Page 5 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment density reasonable? Yes. Staff believes the proposed density is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed density range is reasonable for the west side of France Avenue. The density proposed is less than what is allowed on the east side of York, which is considered a similar area, as it also transitions to single-family homes to the east. East of York, south of 66th Street and North of 70th Street allows up to 105 units per acre, nearly double the density considered here. 2. Higher Densities are generally located on arterial roadways. The OR district is generally located on France Avenue, an arterial roadway that connects to both Crosstown 62 and I-494. 3. The densities that have been contemplated as part of the Greater Southdale Area Study have been 80-100 units per acre over the whole of the district. Higher Density is contemplated in between France Avenue and York Avenue (100-150 units per acre…the existing CAC area allows up to 105 units per acre); and lesser densities 50-75 units per acre west of France and East of York. The City has allowed greater densities on the east side of York (Aria is 96 units per acre; and the Onyx is 52 units per acre. On the west side of France, the Aurora on France project (senior housing) is 80 units per acre. 4. Density proposed is similar or less than density for mixed use areas for surrounding communities including Minnetonka, Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. 5. Allowing higher densities allows the City greater opportunity to provide affordable housing units, which would help the city to achieve its affordable housing goals. The current Metropolitan Council goal for Edina is to build 878 new units by 2030. 6. Traffic study done by Spack Consulting concludes that densities contemplated in this project can be supported by the existing roadway system. Conclusion/Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the following Comprehensive Plan Amendment: The density in the OR, Office Residential Area may be increased from 30 units an acre to 40 units per acre at 4100 76th Street for an affordable housing project subject to Rezoning to PUD. Approval is based on the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 6 1. The proposed density range is reasonable for the west side of France Avenue. The density proposed is less than what is allowed on the east side of York, which is considered a similar area, as it also transitions to single-family homes to the east. East of York, south of 66th Street and North of 70th Street allows up to 105 units per acre, nearly double the density considered here. 2. Higher Densities are generally located on arterial roadways. The OR district is generally located on France Avenue, an arterial roadway that connects to both Crosstown 62 and I- 494. 3. The densities are consistent with those contemplated in the Greater Southdale Area Study. 4. Density proposed is similar or less than density for mixed use areas for surrounding communities including Minnetonka, Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. 5. Allowing higher densities allows the City greater opportunity to provide affordable housing units, which would help the city to achieve its affordable housing goals. The current Metropolitan Council goal for Edina is to build 878 new units by 2030. I hereby certify this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: _________________________ Max Moreland, P.E. License No. 52665 Date: __September 28, 2018________ Traffic Impact Study 4100 76TH STREET WEST EDINA, MINNESOTA Traffic Impact Study i 4100 76th Street West Executive Summary Background: An apartment building with affordable housing units is proposed at 4100 76th Street West in Edina, Minnesota. The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development on the study roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated. Results: The principal findings of this study are: • The proposed development is expected to generate 352 new trips during an average weekday, 25 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 34 new trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed development is expected to generate less traffic compared to the potential use of the site. A 26,000 square foot medical-dental office building would be expected to generate 864 daily, 67 a.m. peak hour and 115 p.m. peak hour trips. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable queues and delays based on the capacity analysis. • The amount of vehicle parking to be provided on site is anticipated to accommodate parking demand. • There are no bicycle facilities adjacent to the site and the pedestrian facilities are minimal. Recommendations: The following items are recommended based on the analyses contained in this study: • Include bicycle parking on site in both a secured area for residents as well as in an accessible area for visitors. • Include a bicycle maintenance station near bicycle parking to encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. • Extend the proposed sidewalk leading to building accesses to meet the sidewalk along 76th Street to allow pedestrians direct access to the building without needing to walk along the vehicle access. • The surface parking access to the ramp lane be stop controlled. • The site access be stop controlled at the intersection with 76th Street. • Have at least one of the parking spaces in the surface lot be designated for drop- offs and pick-ups at the building. • Encourage all loading and truck activity to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.). • Include this area of 76th Street in the City’s plans to improve pedestrian facilities. • Work with Metro Transit to upgrade the bus stop facilities near the site. • Consider other non-infrastructure methods to reduce vehicle travel, increase carpooling and non-motorized travel, and reduce travel during the peak hours. • Consider a mid-block pedestrian crossing on 76th Street near transit stops. This study is based upon a concept development plan dated April 23, 2018. Assuming the general characteristics of the proposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study. Traffic Impact Study ii 4100 76th Street West TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 2. Existing Conditions ............................................................................... 2 3. Forecasted Traffic ................................................................................. 4 4. Analyses ................................................................................................ 6 5. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................. 14 6. Appendix .............................................................................................. 15 LIST OF TABLES & CHARTS Table 1 – Study Corridor Characteristics ...................................................................... 2 Table 2 – New Trip Generation ....................................................................................... 4 Table 3 – Maximum Trip Generation Comparison ........................................................ 5 Chart 1 – Study Corridor Volume to Capacity ............................................................... 6 Chart 2 – A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections ............................. 7 Chart 3 – P.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections ............................. 8 Chart 4 – A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections . 9 Chart 5 – P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections .. 9 Traffic Impact Study 1 4100 76th Street West 1. Introduction a. Proposed Development An apartment building with affordable housing units is proposed at 4100 76th Street West in Edina, Minnesota. Following are the proposal’s key attributes: i. Vehicular access to the site will be provided via an existing curb cut on 76th Street per the concept development plan shown in the Appendix. ii. The proposed development will include 80 apartment units spread across four levels. iii. The development is expected to be fully occupied by 2020 for the purposes of this study. iv. 92 vehicle parking stalls are proposed for the site; 80 in a below grade ramp and 12 in a surface parking lot. b. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development. The traffic impacts are studied on the roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated, and improvements are recommended where mitigation is needed. For those not familiar with the general concepts and terms associated with traffic engineering, The Language of Traffic Engineering guide is included in the Appendix. c. Study Objectives The objectives of this study are: i. Document how the study intersections and roadways currently operate. ii. Forecast the amount of traffic expected to/from the proposed development. iii. Determine how the study intersections and roadways will operate in the future with and without the proposed development. iv. Recommend appropriate mitigation measures if poor operations are identified. v. Review multi-modal facilities surrounding the site. vi. Review the proposed parking supply for the site. The roadways corridors studied in this document include those surrounding the proposed site, which are: • France Avenue • 76th Street • Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street For the purposes of this traffic study, the study intersections closest to the proposed development and where the greatest impact is expected were chosen for review and include: • France Avenue & 76th Street • Parklawn Avenue & 77th Street • Site Access & 76th Street This study does not account for the existing roadway conditions such as pavement quality or appropriate drainage. Traffic Impact Study 2 4100 76th Street West 2. Existing Conditions a. Corridor Characteristics The proposed site is located on the north side of 76th Street west of France Avenue. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the key roadway corridors around this site and within the study area. Table 1 – Study Corridor Characteristics Name Designation1 Classification2 Speed Limit Lanes3 Fixed Route Transit4 Peds/ Bicycles3 France Avenue Hennepin CSAH 17 A Minor Reliever 40 mph 6 divided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks both sides 76th Street Edina MSAS 136 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 4 undivided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks both sides Parklawn Avenue Edina MSAS 136 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 4 undivided 1 Route 3 Buses Sidewalks west side 77th Street Edina MSAS 136/171 A Minor Reliever 30 mph 5 undivided 2 Routes 3 Buses Sidewalks south side 1 CSAH = County State Aid Highway, MSAS = Municipal State Aid Street. 2 Metropolitan Council Functional Classification Map. 376th Street west of France Avenue, Parklawn Avenue south of 76th Street, 77th Street west of Parklawn Avenue. 4 Number of routes around the proposed site followed by the frequency of transit service during the peak hours. b. Traffic Volumes Intersection video was collected at the two existing study intersections under normal weekday conditions in August 2018. Using these videos, 24-hour turning movement counts were obtained at the study intersections. The average weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours were found to be: • 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at France Avenue/76 th Street • 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. at Parklawn Avenue/77 th Street To reflect the standard commuter peak hours for the area, which will also be common with the proposed development, the volumes from the a.m. peak hour of 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 p.m. and the individual p.m. peak hour volumes for each intersection were used for analysis. The turning movement count data from the counts are contained in 15-minute intervals in the Appendix. Based on the turning movement volumes, the current daily traffic volumes on each study corridor are: i. 32,800 vehicles per day on France Avenue north of 76th Street ii. 33,900 vehicles per day on France Avenue south of 76th Street Traffic Impact Study 3 4100 76th Street West iii. 12,300 vehicles per day on 76th Street west of France Avenue iv. 12,800 vehicles per day on 76th Street east of France Avenue v. 9,500 vehicles per day on Parklawn Avenue north of 77th Street vi. 15,900 vehicles per day on 77th Street west of Parklawn Avenue vii. 7,900 vehicles per day on 77th Street east of Parklawn Avenue Traffic Impact Study 4 4100 76th Street West 3. Forecasted Traffic a. Site Traffic Forecasting A trip generation analysis was performed for the development site based on the methods published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Trip generation rates are provided by the ITE manual as well as local data collected by Spack Consulting. The ITE manual compiles studies from across the country to provide a national average traffic for various land uses. Spack Consulting collects current average traffic volumes for various land uses in the Twin Cities regional area for use in our studies. Local data is considered more relevant than the ITE national data as it is generally newer and accounts for our area’s specific characteristics. Per the procedure in the Trip Generation Manual, local trip generation data is used when possible and supplemented with national ITE data when local data is not available. The resultant new trips generated by the proposed development are shown in Table 2 based on both the ITE data and Spack Consulting data. A deta iled trip generation table showing the exact breakdowns is provided in the Appendix. Table 2 – New Trip Generation Land Use Code – Source1 Description & Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out In Out In Out 221 - ITE Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) (80 dwelling units) 218 218 7 21 21 14 Local Apartment (80 dwelling units) 176 176 4 21 23 11 1 Local = Trip generation data collected by Spack Consulting in this regional area. As shown in Table 2, the trip generation forecasts based on both ITE and Spack Consulting data are relatively close. Since it is better to use local data when available, the trip generation based on local rates is used in the analysis. It is noted that the proposed development will include affordable housing units as opposed to market rate units. The trip generation rates used to determine the forecast trip generation from Table 2 are based on market rate housing locations. It is therefore possible that the actual trip generation seen at the development could be lower than forecasted here due to potential differences in vehicle ownership rates. To present a conservative analysis, the locally based trip generation rates from Table 2 are used in this study without any reductions that could account for the differences between the apartment uses. For comparison purposes, Table 3 shows the trip generation for the site assuming a different development for the site. With the PID (Planned Industrial District) zoning of the site, instead of the proposed development, a 26,000 square foot medical- Traffic Impact Study 5 4100 76th Street West dental office building could be developed instead. As shown in Table 3, the proposed development generates well less than half of the daily vehicle traffic than what could be put on the site. Table 3 – Maximum Trip Generation Comparison Land Use Code – Source1 Description & Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out In Out In Out Local Medical-Dental Office Building (26,000 square feet) 432 432 43 24 39 76 Local Proposed Development 176 176 4 21 23 11 1 Local = Trip generation data collected by Spack Consulting in this regional area. A trip distribution pattern was developed for the generated traffic going to and from the proposed development. This pattern is based on the existing traffic volumes, site access and access to the regional transportation system. The general trip distribution pattern for this study is: • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the north on France Avenue • 35% of the generated traffic to/from the south on France Avenue • 15% of the generated traffic to/from the east on 76th Street • 15% of the generated traffic to/from the west on 77th Street Traffic generated by the site development was assigned to the area roadways per this distribution pattern. b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting To forecast future traffic volumes for the future build -out year of 2020 in the study area outside of the proposed development’s traffic, general growth in traffic was added. Using MnDOT’s provided AADT volume history, the past roadway volumes along the study intersection were examined. These volumes show relatively stable volumes with recent increases along France Avenue with some of the side streets showing a mix of increases and decreases. From this information, as well as comparing to the forecasts from the 2016 Southdale Area Transportation Study from WSB, a 1.0% annual growth rate was applied to the existing volumes to generate the forecast year 2020 traffic volumes (2% growth total). This growth was applied to all existing movements in the study network to establish the No-Build forecasts. c. Total Traffic Traffic forecasts were developed for the 2020 Build scenarios by adding the traffic generated by the proposed residential development to the No-Build forecast volumes. Peak hour forecasts are shown in the Appendix. Traffic Impact Study 6 4100 76th Street West 4. Analyses a. Corridor Vehicular Analysis While many factors contribute to a road feeling congested, the two biggest factors are volume, how many vehicles are using the road, and capacity, how many vehicles the road can accommodate a day. Transportation professionals use these pieces of information to create a ratio of volume to capacity. For example, a road with a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0, where the traffic demand is nearly equal to the traffic supply, will feel congested to motorists. Below is a rough guide of the daily traffic volumes different types of roads can accommodate based on Exhibits 16-16 and 12-39 of the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. If the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on a roadway is below the threshold, then it is considered un-congested. If the daily volume falls inside the range, the road is almost congested, and if the daily volume is over the threshold the road is congested. • 2-Lane (one in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), undivided street, are considered congested with a volume between 8,900 to 18,300 vehicles per day. • 4-Lane, undivided street (two in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), – 18,600 to 36,800 vehicles per day. • 6-Lane, divided street (three in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), – 29,100 to 55,300 vehicles per day. To provide an initial planning level screening, Chart 1 provides volume to capacity ratios of the study corridors during each of the study years to determine if any of the roadway corridors are candidates for additional through lanes. As shown, on a planning-level analysis, the study roadways can accommodate the expected increase in traffic. Chart 1 – Study Corridor Volume to Capacity Congested: volume/capacity of 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 France Ave north of 76th St France Ave south of 76th St 76th St east of France Ave Parklawn Ave north of 77th St 77th St west of Parklawn Ave 77th St east of Parklawn AveVolume to Capacity RatioExisting 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 7 4100 76th Street West b. Intersection Vehicular Analysis Individual intersections can perform poorly during peak periods while the overall roadway corridor is operating with an uncongested daily volume to capacity ratio lower than 1.0. Therefore, capacity analyses are performed for the study intersections to determine if they need improvements such as turn lanes or an upgrade in traffic control. The existing and forecasted turning movement volumes along with the existing intersection configurations and traffic control were used to develop the average delay per intersection in each study scenario. The delay calculations were done in accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition using the Vistro software package. The full calculations for each study scenario, including Level of Service (LOS) grades and queue lengths, are included in the Appendix. Also, included in the Appendix is a guide explaining the Level of Service grade concept. Chart 2 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 3 (p.m. peak hour) show the average peak hour delay per traffic signal-controlled intersection for each study scenario. The LOS D/E boundary of 55 seconds of delay per vehicle is considered the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable traffic signal operation in Minnesota. The signal timing was provided by the City of Edina and Hennepin County. Chart 2 – A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections Congested at LOS D/E Boundary (55 seconds) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 France Ave & 76th St Parklawn Ave & 77th StAverage Delay (seconds)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 8 4100 76th Street West Chart 3 – P.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal Controlled Intersections Chart 4 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 5 (p.m. peak hour) show the 95th percentile queue lengths on the busiest stop sign controlled approach at intersections with side street stop sign control. Average delays are not considered a quality metric for intersections with side street stop sign control because the vast majority of vehicles going through the intersection are on the main roadway and have zero delay, which leads to low overall average delays. At side street stop sign controlled approaches to busy roadways, the average delay for all the vehicles on the approach often exceeds 60 seconds. This can be the case for a few vehicles waiting at the stop sign where improvements would not be justified for the low traffic volume. Based on our experience, improvements are not warranted at these types of intersections until the 95th percentile queue at a stop sign is in the five to ten vehicle range. Congested at LOS D/E Boundary (55 seconds) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 France Ave & 76th St Parklawn Ave & 77th StAverage Delay (seconds)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 9 4100 76th Street West Chart 4 – A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections Chart 5 – P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side Street Stop Sign Controlled Intersections Per the above analyses, all the study intersections and corridors will operate acceptably throughout the study scenarios. Traffic from the proposed development is forecast to have little impact to the surrounding intersections. No additional intersection modifications are needed to accommodate traffic from the development. Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue (5 Vehicles) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Site Access at 76th St - SB95th Percentile Queues (vehicles)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Unreasonable 95th Percentile Queue (5 Vehicles) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Site Access at 76th St - SB95th Percentile Queues (vehicles)Existing 2020 No-Build 2020 Build Traffic Impact Study 10 4100 76th Street West c. Automobile Parking Forecasting & Analysis Parking to be Provided On Site A total of 92 automobile parking stalls will be provided on site with 80 stalls being in a below grade ramp and 12 stalls being at grade. Parking Required by Edina Per the City of Edina’s Code of Ordinances, at least two parking spaces are required per residential unit. Using the proposed development’s 80 dwelling units, at least 160 vehicle parking spaces would be needed. The current plan of 92 stalls, a rate of 1.15 spaces per dwelling unit, is short of what is laid out in the City ordinances. Expected Parking Demand The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has put together a doc ument, ITE Parking Generation, 4th Edition, that compiled parking demand data from different land uses. For a low to mid rise apartment building in a suburban area, this ITE manual lists that the average peak parking demand is 1.23 stalls per dwelling unit. That translates to 98 parking stalls at an 80 dwelling unit building. This expected demand is slightly higher than the proposed 92 vehicle stalls to be provided. Similar to ITE, Spack Consulting has also collected parking demand data for various land uses around the Twin Cities. Based on that collected local data, the average peak parking demand for an apartment building is 0.68 vehicle stalls per dwelling unit. This demand translates to 54 parking stalls, which is within the proposed parking supply. This site is located in an area with sufficient transit and non-motorized facilities to allow for travel without the need for a car. These characteristics suggest residents may not have the same parking demand as one completely dependent upon vehicle travel. Encouraging multi-modal travel to and from the proposed site would help ensure these facilities are used and the overall vehicle parking demand is reduced. As previously mentioned, this development is expected to provide affordable housing units. Affordable housing is likely to have a lower number of owned vehicles per dwelling unit than a standard market rate apartment building. While the City code and ITE expected demand is higher than the proposed supply, local data and the characteristics of the proposed development and the surrounding study area suggest a lower parking demand. Based on the lower park ing demand more consistent with the proposed development and site, i t is anticipated the proposed parking supply is sufficient to accommodate the peak parking demand. d. Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking encourages multi-modal transport and helps to accommodate all users to the site. The City of Edina does not have bicycle parking requirements for residential developments. However, it is recommended to have as many spaces on site as possible to allow for bicycle travel. Traffic Impact Study 11 4100 76th Street West Bicycle parking spaces for long-term (overnight) resident use works best either within the parking ramp or in a separate, secure room within the building. Short-term parking, ideally outdoor spots close to the front door and well -lit, is recommended for visitors to the site. A bicycle maintenance station is also recommended near bicycle parking to further encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. e. Concept Site Plan & Multi-Modal Review This property is on the edge of the Greater Southdale District. The following aspirations for the area are taken f rom the September 2018 Draft of the Greater Southdale District Small Area Plan: Aspiration #8: Build (or plan for) a street network encouraging pedestrian movement across and through the district where: • Walkable block lengths are the baseline framework for development. • Enhanced and more frequent street crossings facilitates pedestrian movement. • Wide landscaped boulevards encourage pedestrian activity and create a distinct district signature. • Community corridors within and extending well beyond the district enhance bicycle and pedestrian access while accommodating vehicle traffic on pedestrian terms. Aspiration #9: Imagine transportation in the district where: • Cars are not the focus and streets accommodate more than vehicles. • Major streets balance access and mobility. • Some streets serve as community corridors, linking to other community destinations with features that allow for movement in addition to cars. • Transit is a baseline service, both within the district and to non-Edina locations. • Transportation recognizes trends, including autonomous vehicles and a time when parking structures aren’t needed for public parking Keeping these concepts in mind, the concept site plan contained in the Appendix was reviewed to determine if the plan meets City requirements, provides appropriate circulation, and minimizes conflicts. Following are key transportation elements of the concept site plan: i. Vehicle Circulation: The site uses one external access point on 76th Street, at the location of an existing curb cut. No additional accesses are proposed as a part of this development. The access on 76th Street will allow vehicle travel to both the at-grade surface parking as well as the below-grade ramp parking. No significant or unusual conflicts are anticipated with the access layout. To mitigate any potential conflict between vehicles exiting the surface parking ramp and vehicles entering/exiting the ramp, it is recommended that the surface parking access to the ramp lane be stop controlled. Either Traffic Impact Study 12 4100 76th Street West signage or pavement markings should denote this. The ramp lane (aka the site access) should be stop controlled at the intersection with 76th Street. Per the capacity analyses, the queues for vehicles exiting the development are forecast to be low, suggesting no congestion or issues entering or exiting the proposed parking areas. To facilitate drop-offs and pick-ups at the building, it is recommended that at least one of the parking spaces in the surface lot be designated for this purpose. This will allow vehicles to easily enter, turn around and exit the surface parking lot without needing to reverse out of the lot into the ramp lane. ii. Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure: The site plan shows a sidewalk around the surface parking lot leading to the building. It is recommended this sidewalk be extended to meet the sidewalk along 76th Street to allow pedestrians direct access to the building without needing to walk along the vehicle access. The France Avenue/76th Street intersection has received pedestrian facility upgrades in recent years, however those improvements do not extend much beyond the intersection on the west side. The sidewalks along 76th Street in front of the site are narrow and, other than the curb, do not provide a buffer between pedestrians and vehicles. This can make it challenging for pedestrians with disabilities to access the site. It is recommended the City of Edina include this area in its plans for improving the City’s pedestrian facility network. The only marked pedestrian crossing of 76th Street is at the France Avenue intersection. Having a mid-block crossing across 76th Street would further encourage pedestrian activity in the area. This crossing could be placed near the transit stops adjacent to the site to further encourage transit use in the area as well. With 76th Street being a straight, flat road in this segment, there would not be any anticipated sight distance issues. The mid-block crossing would need to include ADA-compliant curb ramps, pavement markings, signage and potentially may have the need for push-button controlled flashers. There are currently no bicycle facilities adjacent to the proposed development. The City of Edina’s Draft Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan has 76th Street, Parklawn Avenue and 77th Street marked as a segment for a planned on-street bikeway and France Avenue south of 76th Street as a segment for a planned off-street bikeway. Other non-infrastructure methods are available to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel as well as carpooling and travel outside of the peak hours. Traffic Impact Study 13 4100 76th Street West These methods, if implemented, will lower the total number of vehicles accessing the site, reducing peak hour queuing and improving overall operations. These methods can include disseminating information on multi- modal transportation options to residents, setting up a carpool system for residents and aiding residents in obtaining transit passes. iii. Transit: Transit stops exist near the proposed development on 76th Street that serve Metro Transit Route 6. This route gives access from Edina to Downtown Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota. A number of other bus stops in this area of Edina are also available for other routes, many of them express routes. The bus stops on 76th Street near the proposed development currently do not have shelters to provide protection from the weather and only one has a bench. Since this development could have a significant number of its residents using transit, it is recommended that the City of Edina work with Metro Transit to upgrade the bus stop facilities near this site. iv. Loading: Loading zones are not explicitly denoted in the attached site plan. Loading could occur in the ramp lane for larger vehicles or within the surface parking lot for smaller vehicles. Larger vehicles can use the surface parking lot aisle to turn around. To avoid having trash collection vehicles navigate the parking areas, the property manager could coordinate moving the trash containers to be collected to the ramp lane. It is recommended that all loading on site be encouraged to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) to reduce potential conflicts. Traffic Impact Study 14 4100 76th Street West 5. Conclusions and Recommendations The traffic impacts of the proposed development were studied and the principal findings are: • The proposed development is expected to generate 352 new trips during an average weekday, 25 new trips during the a.m. peak hour and 34 new trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed development is expected to generate less traffic compared to the potential use of the site. A 26,000 square foot medical-dental office building would be expected to generate 864 daily, 67 a.m. peak hour and 115 p.m. peak hour trips. • All roadways and intersections have acceptable queues and delays based on the capacity analysis. • The amount of vehicle parking to be provided on site is anticipated to accommodate parking demand. • There are no bicycle facilities adjacent to the site and the pedestrian facilities are minimal. The following recommendations are made based on the above findings: • Include bicycle parking on site in both a secured area for residents as well as in an accessible area for visitors. • Include a bicycle maintenance station near bicycle parking to encourage residents/visitors to use bicycles as a mode of transportation. • Extend the proposed sidewalk leading to building accesses to meet the sidewalk along 76th Street to allow pedestrians direct access to the building without needing to walk along the vehicle access. • The surface parking access to the ramp lane be stop controlled. • The site access be stop controlled at the intersection with 76th Street. • To facilitate drop-offs and pick-ups at the building, it is recommended that at least one of the parking spaces in the surface lot be designated for this purpose. • Encourage all loading and truck activity to occur outside of peak periods (7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.). • Include this area of 76th Street in the City’s plans to improve pedestrian facilities. • Work with Metro Transit to upgrade the bus stop facilities near the site. • Consider other non-infrastructure methods to reduce vehicle travel, increase carpooling and non-motorized travel, and reduce travel during the peak hours. • Consider a mid-block pedestrian crossing on 76th Street near transit stops. This study is based upon a concept development plan dated April 23, 2018. Assuming the general characteristics of the proposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study Traffic Impact Study 15 4100 76th Street West 6. Appendix A. Site Plan B. The Language of Traffic Engineering C. Traffic Counts D. Trip Generation Table E. Level of Service (LOS) F. Capacity Analysis Backup • AM Existing • PM Existing • AM 2020 No-Build • PM 2020 No-Build • AM 2020 Build • PM 2020 Build 194198v1 VOTES REQUIRED TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.355 ADOPT, AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; INTERIM ORDINANCE. Subd. 3. Adoption by governing body. A proposed comprehensive plan or an amendment to it may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation of the planning agency or until 60 days have elapsed from the date an amendment proposed by the governing body has been submitted to the planning agency for its recommendation. Unless otherwise provided by charter, the governing body may by resolution adopt and amend the comprehensive plan or portion thereof as the official municipal plan upon such notice and hearing as m ay be prescribed by ordinance. Except for amendments to permit affordable housing development, a resolution to amend or adopt a comprehensive plan must be approved by a two-thirds vote of all of the members. Amendments to permit an affordable housing development are approved by a simple majority of all of the members. For purposes of this subdivision, "affordable housing development" means a development in which at least 20 percent of the residential units are restricted to occupancy for at least ten years by residents whose household income at the time of initial occupancy does not exceed 60 percent of area median income, adjusted for household size, as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, and with respect to rental units, the rents for affordable units do not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median income, adjusted for household size, as determined annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. FY 2017 Income Limit Area: Hennepin County Median Income: $90,400 Purchase Price: At least 20 percent of the residential units are restricted to occupancy for at least ten years by residents whose household income at the time of initial occupancy does not exceed 60 percent of area median income, adjusted for household size, as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 60% of Average Median Income Persons in Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Yearly Income $37,980 $43,440 $48,840 $54,240 $58,620 $62,940 $67,260 $71,640 Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Affordable Purchase Price $125,000 $145,000 $165,000 $185,000 $201,000 $217,000 $233,000 $249,500 194198v1 Rent: At least 20 percent of the residential units are restricted to occupancy for at least ten years with rents that do not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median income, adjusted for household size, as determined annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 30% of 60% of Average Median Income Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Yearly Rent $11,394 $13,032 $14,652 $16,272 $17,586 $18,882 $20,178 $21,492 Monthly Rent $949.50 $1,086 $1,221 $1,356 $1,465.50 $1,573.50 $1,681.50 $1,791 Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI I I.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager Item Activity: Subject:T I F District - 44th and F rance Ac tion 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: Adopt the attached resolution finding that the proposed development at 4500 France Avenue is consistent with the C omprehensive P lan. I N TR O D U C TI O N: S ee attached background information. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Memo Resolution Development Plans - 4500 France TIF Plan City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Economic Development / HRA Phone 952-826-0407 • Fax 952-826-0390 • www.EdinaMN.gov Date: October 10, 2018 To: Chair and Members of the Edina Planning Commission From: Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager Re: Proposed 44th & France 2 Tax Increment Financing District The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has recommended that the City of Edina consider a new Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District to advance community goals in a 1.05 acre portion of the 5.9 acre 44th and France commercial area. The City Council has scheduled a Public Hearing to consider this proposal on October 16, 2018. Input from the Planning Commission (regarding compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan) is being solicited in advance of the City Council’s Public Hearing. Specifically, the Planning Commission is asked to confirm that the proposed project (4500 France Apartments) anticipated in the TIF Plan is generally in compliance with Edina’s Comprehensive Plan including the recently approved Small Area Plan. Note that Planning Commission’s scope of opinion is established in the MN TIF Statutes 469. Specific details regarding the use, terms and conditions of tax increment financing are evaluated by the Edina City Council and Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (not the Planning Commission). The proposed creation of a new Tax Increment Financing District is done in accordance with Section 469 of the Minnesota Statutes and is based on the following activities and findings: • Parcels are located within the boundaries of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, • 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan (pages 4-30 to 4-33) identifies the site as a ‘potential area of change’ , and • 2018 Small Area Plan designates the area as “Neighborhood Node” (pages x and 40) with several parameters to measure the appropriateness of future land uses • 2018 Small Area Plan identifies three “Economic Vitality Policies” (pages xi and 57-60) including the intention to use redevelopment tools (such as TIF) to create public realm improvements The proposed TIF District includes 5 parcels at the southwest corner of France and Sunnyside that are reasonably anticipated to be redeveloped in the near future. All of the parcels proposed to be included in the TIF District are under the control of a single real estate developer The remaining 22 parcels in the 44th and France Neighborhood Node are excluded from this new TIF District since there is single Housing and Redevelopment Authority Established 1974 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 2 entity with sufficient site control to achieve larger goals of the Small Area Plan. Boundary maps are attached and included in Appendix B of the TIF Plan.. The project identified in the TIF Plan (Appendix A) was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on August 29, 2018. The project generally consists of: 1) Demolition of 4 buildings (vacant Edina Cleaners and two residences) 2) Construction of new mixed-use building consisting of approximately 46 residential units, 7,000 Square Feet of commercial space and structured parking to serve residents, guests and customers 3) Construction of shared public parking on the street level 4) Construction of new outdoor public plaza 5) Construction of street scape improvements along the France and Sunnyside edges of the site and also including burial of overhead utility lines on the site and throughout the majority of the neighborhood node. The land uses, height, density and public realm improvements anticipated in the TIF Plan are summarized below and are consistent with the limits recommended by the Planning Commission on August 29, 2018. Maximum Identified in 2018 Small Area Plan Redevelopment Anticipated in TIF Plan Guided Land Use Neighborhood Node – “…small- to moderate-scale commercial, residential or mixed use buildings serving primarily the adjacent neighborhood(s)… page 42 Moderate-scale Mixed Uses (Residential, Commercial, Public) Building Height 4 stories (not to exceed 60 feet) along France with two stories (not to exceed 30 feet) adjacent to the residential neighborhood … page 43 4 stories along France Ave and 2 stories adjacent to houses on Sunnyside Rd Residential Density 12+ units per acre allowed with 4 story limit 50 units per acre at 4 stories maximum Floor-to-Area Ratio* 1.0 FAR 1.3 FAR * As noted in the August 29, 2018 Staff Report from Director Teague (page 11), in relaxing the standards of height, setbacks and FAR, “…the purpose and intent … would be met.” The residential density is typically used instead of FAR for mixed-use projects in Edina. Additionally, the project referenced in the TIF Plan achieves many of the “required” and “discretionary” goals identified in the Small Area Plan (pages ix and 39). • The project referenced in the TIF Plan contributes toward the implementation of the “area- wide improvements” specifically by: o burying overhead utility lines throughout the majority of the Node, o construction of privately-owned parking that is available to the general public, o providing bicycle parking, and o improving the treatment and management of storm water generated on site. 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 3 • The project referenced in the TIF Plan satisfies each of the “project specific” goals including: o Improving public sidewalks and streetscaping along portions of France Avenue and Sunnyside Road, o Incorporating traffic calming features along France Avenue, o Provides a graceful transition to the adjacent single-family homes, and o Satisfies the affordable housing requirements of the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. • The project referenced in the TIF Planb also satisfies many of the “discretionary” goals including: o Implements shared parking strategies, o Constructs underground parking for residents, o Provides public art in the public plaza, and o Provides high-quality architecture. On September 14, 2018, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, other taxing agencies, such as Hennepin County and Edina School District #273, were notified of the potential creation of this TIF District. To date, no comments have been received regarding this proposal. The Draft TIF Plan for the proposed 44th and France 2 TIF District is attached for your review and consideration. In accordance with Minnesota Statute governing the use of TIF, the Plan Commission is requested to confirm that the proposed TIF Plan conforms with Edina’s plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. The attached Planning Commission Resolution 2018-01 expresses such confirmation and is recommended to be approved. 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 4 44th and France Small Area Plan Boundary Map 5.9 acres with 27 parcels Proposed TIF District 1.05 acres with 5 parcels Proposed TIF District 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 5 Proposed Redevelopment – 4500 France Avenue Apartments Site Plan 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 6 44th & France 2 TIF District – Staff memo October 10, 2018 Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2018-01 FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE 44th AND FRANCE 2 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. WHEREAS, the 4500 France Avenue Apartments are proposed to be developed by Orion Investments and generally consist of 46 new housing units and approximately 7,000 square feet of commercial space along with several improvements to the public realm adjacent to the project; and WHEREAS, the Edina Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary development plan on August 29, 2018 and recommended that the City Council approved the preliminary rezoning and preliminary development plan for 4500 France Avenue, 3903, 3905 and 3907 Sunnyside Road; and WHEREAS, the City Council will be considering the establishment of a new Tax Increment Financing District to enable redevelopment of properties at 4500 France Avenue, 3903, 3905, and 3907 Sunnyside Avenue; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes require notification of and input from several entities as part of the process of establishing a new Tax Increment Financing District; and WHEREAS, the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City of Edina have proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively as the "Plans") and have submitted the Plans to the Edina Planning Commission pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Plans to determine their conformity with the development principles of the 44th & France Small Area Plan and the general plans and guided land use as described in the comprehensive plan for the City of Edina. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Plans conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Dated: October 10, 2018 _______________________________________ Chair ATTEST: ___________________________________ Secretary XXX XX'-X" T.O. XXX EL = XX'- X" SECTION AND ELEVATION REF INTERIOR ELEVATION REF DETAIL REF WALL TYPE WINDOW TYPE ELEVATION REF SPOT ELEVATION REF FLOOR FINISH TRANSITION REF X X X AX.X X X X X X X X X X EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTE REF ROOM NAME AND NUMBER DOOR NUMBER SECTION KEYNOTE REF REVISION NUMBER FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FIRE EXTINGUISHER - WALL MOUNTED ROOM X XXX XX XX Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:53 AMT1.1 TITLE SHEET 217525 ESG ESG France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 PROJECT TEAM SYMBOLS LEGENDPROJECT LOCATION DRAWING INDEX France Ave Apartments OWNER/DEVELOPER:Orion Investments 4530 West 77th Street, Edina, MN 55436 Ph: 612-812-7788 ARCHITECT:Elness Swenson Graham Architects, Inc. 500 Washington Ave. South, Suite 1080 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Ph: 612-339-5508 Fx: 612-339-5382 CONTRACTOR:T.B.D. CIVIL ENGINEER:Sunde Engineering, PLLC. 10830 Nesbit Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55437 Ph: 952-881-3344 Fx: 952-881-1913 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:Damon Faber 401 2nd Ave. N, Suite 410 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Ph: 612-332-7522 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:T.B.D. MECHANICAL ENGINEER:T.B.D. PLUMBING ENGINEER:T.B.D. ELECTRICAL ENGINEER:T.B.D. 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 Vicinity Site Location DRAWING INDEX DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NAME PREL REZONE & SITE PLAN SUB 7/27/18GENERAL INFORMATION T1.1 TITLE SHEET * CIVIL C1.0 DEMOLITION PLAN * C1.1 SITE LAYOUT PLAN * C1.2 GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN * C1.3 NOTES AND DETAILS * C1.4 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN * LANDSCAPE L010 GENERAL NOTES & SCHEDULES * L110 MATERIALS & LAYOUT PLAN * L160 LANDSCAPE PLAN * L410 ENLARGED PLAN - PUBLIC PLAZA * L420 SITE SECTION & RENDERINGS * L500 LANDSCAPE DETAILS * ARCHITECTURAL A0.0 SITE IMAGES * A0.1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN * A0.2 PARKING & FIRST LEVEL PLAN * A0.3 LEVEL 2 & 3 FLOOR PLAN * A0.4 LEVEL 4 & ROOF PLAN * A0.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS * A0.6 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS * A0.7 EXTERIOR MATERIALS * A0.8 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS * A0.9 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS * A0.10 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS SURVEY 1 ALTA/NSPS LANDTITLE SURVEY * SURVEY 2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY * UNIT MIX & SQUARE FOOTAGES No. Description Date France Avenue SouthSunnyside AvenueParking Entry/Exit Outline of Building Above Transformer Public Pocket Park -Refer to Landscape Drawings 4' - 0 3/32"Parking Entry/Exit 2 ' - 6 " 5 ' - 6 " 7' - 6 " 5' - 6"7' - 3"1' - 9"1' - 0" 9' - 2 " 6' - 6"60 ' - 7"Existing House 1 1' - 0 1 / 2 " 1 0' - 7 "26' - 4 1/2"20' - 4 1/2"9 ' - 0 " D N25' - 4"22 ' - 8 "22' - 6"9' - 0" 8 ' - 0"28 ' - 7"1 4 ' - 9 1 / 2 " 2 ' - 0 1 / 2 " 6' - 6 1/2" Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:43 AMA0.1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN 217525 Author Checker 07/24/18 France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.1 1 FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN No. Description Date France Avenue SouthSunnyside Avenue17,496 SF Public Parking 3,587 SF Restaurant Parking Entry/Exit Outline of Building Above 604 SF Trash 1,311 SF Retail 1,649 SF Retail 872 SF 1 BR 1,197 SF 2 BR Transformer 2,566 SF Lobby Public Pocket Park -Refer to Landscape Drawings 627 SF Service 209 SF Storage Service CorridorParking Entry/Exit 29,561 SF Parking Elec Rm W aterRoom Transformer location at grade above 1,250 SF Storage Wall Bicycle Storage Parking Entry/Exit Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:46 AMA0.2 PARKING & FIRST LEVEL PLAN 217525 ESG ESG France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.2 1 FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.2 2 PARKING LEVEL FLOOR PLAN No. Description Date Elec 1,263 SF 2 BR 1,350 SF 2 BR 1,488 SF 2 BR 1,280 SF 2 BR 1,489 SF 2 BR 735 SF 1 BR 1,413 SF 2 BR 806 SF 1 BR 1,040 SF 1 BR DEN Tr 1,428 SF 2 BR Amenity Terrace 919 SF 1 BR 1,168 SF 2 BR 1,197 SF 2 BR 1,425 SF 2 BR 1,432 SF 2 BR 725 SF 1 BR Club Room 930 sf Fitness Women Men PrivateTerraceP riv a t e T e r r a c e P riv a t e T e rr a c e P riv a t e T e rr a c e Storage Yoga Elec 1,263 SF 2 BR 806 SF 1 BR 1,488 SF 2 BR 1,280 SF 2 BR 1,488 SF 2 BR 1,425 SF 2 BR 1,428 SF 2 BR 731 SF 1 BR 737 SF 1 BR 737 SF 1 BR 1,415 SF 2 BR 1,040 SF 1 BR DEN Tr 737 SF 1 BR 1,168 SF 2 BR 919 SF 1 BR 1,197 SF 2 BR 608 SF Storage 725 SF 1 BR 1,432 SF 2 BR 1,350 SF 2 BR Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:47 AMA0.3 LEVEL 2 & 3 FLOOR PLAN 217525 Author Checker 07/24/18 France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.3 1 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.3 2 THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN No. Description Date 2,493 SF 2 BR 1,838 SF 2 BR 1,263 SF 2 BR 1,432 SF 2 BR 1,462 SF 2 BR 1,506 SF 2 BR 1,631 SF 2 BR 1,280 SF 2 BR Elec Roof of Level Below Tr 253 SF Elevator Lobby 749 SF Rooftop Patio Screened Restaurant Mechanical Corral Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:48 AMA0.4 LEVEL 4 & ROOF PLAN 217525 Author Checker 07/24/18 France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.4 1 MP-04 City Submittal 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.4 2 ROOF LEVEL City Submittal No. Description Date 1A 1B6 7 543B 12 3C 6 8B 9 5 3A 3B 3B10 10 10 5 245 11 1C 8A 7 6 7 4 3C 6 8B 3B1B 1A 4 6 3A 5 3B 1A 1B 5 4 8B 3C 7 24 8A 3B 3B 10 7 1C1B 12 451B1C 2A 7 9 2 75 4 612 9 2 4 5 7B4 7 1A 29 3C 12 7B 5 4 EXTERIOR MATERIAL KEY 1A BRICK MASONRY COLOR 1 1B BRICK MASONRY COLOR 2 3A 3B 2 4 7 PREFABRICATED METAL BALCONY SYSTEM METAL PANEL-ZINC FINISH METAL COMPOSITE PANEL -BLACK 3 COAT CEMENTITIOUS STUCCO -NATURAL GREY COLOR FIBER CEMENT PANEL -CHARCOAL COLOR 8A METAL SLATTED PARKING SCREENING 6 STOREFRONT -ANODIZED ALUMINUM BLACK 5 COMPOSITE WINDOW 3C PREFINISHED METAL PANEL -BLACK 8B LOUVERED MECHANICAL SCREEN 9 METAL CAP FLASHING -BLACK 1C BURNISHED BLOCK MASONRY 10 CHANNEL EDGED ENTRY CANOPY 11 ALUMINUM OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR W/ GLASS LITES 12 PREFINISHED ALUMINUM GUARDRAIL SYTEM LEVEL 1 100' - 0" LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0" LOWER LEVEL 90' - 0" T.O. ELEVATOR CORE 160' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"15' - 0"10' - 0"LEVEL 1 100' - 0" LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0" LOWER LEVEL 90' - 0" T.O. ELEVATOR CORE 160' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"15' - 0"10' - 0"LEVEL 1 100' - 0" LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0" T.O. ELEVATOR CORE 160' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"15' - 0"LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0" T.O. ELEVATOR CORE 160' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0" T.O. ELEVATOR CORE 160' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8"10' - 4"10' - 4"LEVEL 2 115' - 0" LEVEL 3 125' - 4" LEVEL 4 135' - 8" ROOF LEVEL 147' - 0"11' - 4"10' - 4"10' - 4"Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/27/2018 10:49:50 AMA0.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 217525 ESG ESG France Ave Apartments France Ave Apartments 4500 France Ave S, Edina MN 55410 PRELIMINARY REZONING & SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 7/27/2018 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 1 East Elevation 1 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 2 East Elevation 2 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 3 West Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 4 South Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 5 Internal Elevation 3 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 6 Internal Elevation 2 1/16" = 1'-0"A0.5 7 Internal Elevation 1 No. Description Date This document is in draft form for distribution to the County and the School District. The TIF Plan contains the estimated fiscal and economic implications of the proposed TIF District. The City and the HRA may make minor changes to this draft document prior to the public hearing. As of October 1, 2018 Draft for Planning Commission Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District (a renewal and renovation district) within the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority City of Edina Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: October 16, 2018 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area ........................... 1-4 Foreword ............................................................. 1-4 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District ....................... 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Foreword............................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority........................................ 2-1 Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 2-2 Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District................................. 2-2 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District........... 2-4 Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 2-4 Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6 Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election.................................. 2-6 Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8 Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-8 Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-11 Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District................................ 2-11 Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-12 Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-14 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-14 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-15 Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-15 Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-15 Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment . ................ 2-15 Subsection 2-28. Summary.............................................. 2-16 Appendix A Project Description ...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the 44th and France 2 TIF District ..................................................................... B-1 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications..................................... G-1 Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. Municipal Action Taken Based upon the statutory authority described in the Redevelopment Plan, the public purpose findings by the City Council and for the purpose of fulfilling the City’s development objects as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan, the City Council has created, established and designated the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan pursuant to and in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047. The original and amended Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan documents and amendments have designated the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan as a redevelopment project and also a tax increment financing plan for tax increment districts created prior to 1988. The Centennial Lakes Tax Increment Financing District was created in 1988 pursuant to Tax Increment Financing Plan 88-1, which was subsequently renamed the Centennial Lakes Tax Increment District and referred to by Hennepin County as District #1203 and #1249. For purposes of clarification, this modification will refer to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.002. The following municipal action has been taken with regard to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan: September 29, 1977: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina (the “HRA”) approved the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan. October 5, 1981: The Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan was amended to identify project costs and bonded indebtedness incurred to finance those costs. May 6, 1985: The HRA and the City approved an amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan which includes the establishment of an interest reduction program and enlarges the project area to include the “1985 Project Area.” August 19, 1985: The HRA and the City approve d the First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan to enlarge the 1985 Project Area and to authorize the issuance of additional bonds to acquire land within the enlarged 1985 Project Area. 1987: The HRA and City approved the 1987 Amendments to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan to enlarge the project area to include the 1987 Project Area. 1988: The HRA and City approved the 1988 Amendments to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan that provide an Interest Reduction Program in the amount of $2,500,000 to assist in the financing and construction of housing units, and authorize the HRA and City to incur bonded indebtedness. February 21, 2012: The HRA and City expand the Southeast Edina Project Area. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan forthe Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area 1-4 April 17, 2012: The HRA and City establish the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District. February 18, 2014: The HRA and City establish the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District. March 2, 2016: The HRA and City establish the Grandview 2 Tax Increment Financing District. April 5, 2016: The HRA and City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District and establish the 66 West Tax Increment Financing District. June 20, 2017: The HRA and City establish the 50th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. (AS MODIFIED OCTOBER 16, 2018) October 16, 2018: The HRA and City are establishing the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area is recommended. It is available from the HRA Executive Director at the City of Edina. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan forthe Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area 1-5 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District Subsection 2-1. Foreword The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Edina (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to establish the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a renewal and renovation tax increment financing district, located in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur or to promote a greater degree of development that allows City objectives to be fulfilled. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, originally adopted September 29, 1977, and modified from time to time. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of five parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. As a part of the City’s vision for the 44th and France Commercial Area, the District is being created to facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized, vacant, and obsolete structures to facilitate construction of approximately 46 new housing units and 7,000 square feet of street level commercial space in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The HRA is considering an agreement with Orion Investments as the developer at the time of preparation of the TIF Plan. Redevelopment activities are proposed to begin in 2018 with substantial completion by 2020. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the District. Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview Pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan and authorizing state statutes, the HRA or City is authorized to undertake the following activities within the District: 1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District may be acquired by the HRA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-1 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. The City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a renewal and renovation district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10a as defined below: (a) "Renewal and renovation district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that: (1) (i) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures; (ii) 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard; and (iii)30 percent of the other buildings require substantial renovation or clearance to remove existing conditions such as: inadequate street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land, excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or otheridentified hazards to the health, safety, and general well-being of the community; and (2) The conditions described in clause (1) are reasonably distributed throughout the geographic area of the district. (b) For purposes of determining whether a building is structurally substandard, whether parcels are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures, or whether noncontiguous areas qualify, the provisions of subdivision 10, paragraphs (b) through (f) apply. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-2 M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(b) through (f): (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. (d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements of paragraph (e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor; (2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority; (3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement of paragraph (e) and that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and (4) upon filing the request for certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part of a district, the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph (f). M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) continued: (e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-3 (f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a). In meeting the statutory criteria the HRA and City rely on the following facts and findings: • The District is a renewal and renovation district consisting of five parcels. • An inventory shows that parcels consisting of more than 70 percent of the area in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. • An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F). • An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 30 percent of the buildings require substantial renovation or clearance to remove existing conditions such as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F) Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b., the duration of the District will be 15 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a total of 16 years of tax increment collection). The HRA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2035, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2018 for taxes payable 2019. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2020) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. Change in tax exempt status of property; 2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4. Change in the use of the property and classification; 5. Change in state law governing class rates; or 6. Change in previously issued building permits. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-4 In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2019, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2019. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2020. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $299,297 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $28,800 Fiscal Disparities Contribution $22,301 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $248,196 Original Local Tax Rate 1.12296 Pay 2018 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $278,714 Percent Retained by the HRA 100% Tax capacity includes a 1% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in thischart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 16. The tax capacity of the District in year one isestimated to be $56,875. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and determined no building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the City. Subsection 2-9. Budgeted Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are calculated in Appendix D and are shown in the table below: Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-5 SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $3,890,260 Interest $194,513 TOTAL $4,084,773 The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness to help achieve the objectives of the TIF Plan. As currently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note issued to reimburse the Developer for the funding of qualified redevelopment costs. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The HRA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $2,884,407. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as-you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. Further information can be found in Appendix D. Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the redevelopment and construction of approximately 46 housing units and 7,000 square feet of commercial space. The HRA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The HRA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the table below. These estimates establish the maximum amount permitted to be expended, but the City/HRA is not obligated to expend this full amount. USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Site Improvements/Preparation $959,000 Utilities $723,000 Construction of Affordable Housing $194,513 Other Qualifying Improvements $813,381 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$194,513 PROJECT COST TOTAL $2,884,407 Interest $1,200,366 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $4,084,773 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-6 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan as permitted by M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 4. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 20 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2(d), the HRA and City may elect to increase by up to ten percentage points the permitted amount of expenditures for activities located outside the geographic area of the District. The HRA and City intend to pool $194,513 from the project costs of the District to be used to assist housing that meets the requirements contained in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2(d). Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (within the District) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: (1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. (2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. The city chooses to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b. According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3: (c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-7 method in paragraph (b). Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies M.S. Section 116J.993 to 116J.995 defines a business subsidy as a “grant, contribution of personal property, real property, infrastructure, the principal amount of a loan at rates below those commercially available to the recipient, any reduction or deferral of any tax or any fee, any guarantee of any payment under any loan, lease or other obligation, or any preferential use of government facilities given to a business.” Also included in the definition are many forms of economic assistance. Some forms of assistance, such as tax increment for redevelopment and housing, are specifically excluded from business subsidy requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7) Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature; (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-8 Development Administration; and (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions. Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1a, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. The county roads in the vicinity of the District include France Avenue (County Road 17). The HRA and the City are aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty-five days of receipt of the TIF Plan submitted September 14, 2018. In the opinion of the HRA, City and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads. Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE IF “BUT FOR” NOT MET 2017/Pay 2018 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Upon Completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 1,685,924,784 248,196 0.0147% City of Edina 125,242,169 248,196 0.1982% Edina Independent School District ISD No. 273 103,546,097 248,196 0.2397% IMPACT ON TAX RATES IF “BUT FOR” NOT MET Pay 2018 Extension Rates Percent of Total Rate CTC Potential Annual Taxes Hennepin County 0.428080 38.12% 248,196 106,248 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-9 City of Edina 0.278490 24.80% 248,196 69,120 Edina Independent School District ISD No. 273 0.309720 27.58% 248,196 76,871 Other 0.106670 9.50%248,196 26,475 Total 1.122960 100.00%278,714 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity (CTC) when all construction anticipated in Appendix A is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the actual Pay 2018 rate as obtained from Hennepin County. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2018 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2019 rates, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared, assuming the request for certification is made prior to June 30, 2019. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $3,890,260; (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. Based upon input from the Edina Police Department, an impact of the District on police protection is not expected. The City Police Department does track all calls for service including property-type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. Based upon input from the Edina Fire Department, the probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. The City expects some increased costs of inspections and that the development will generate a minor increase in EMS calls, depending on the occupancy mix of the residential units. Typically new buildings compliant with building and fire codes generate few fire calls, if any, and are of superior construction beneficial to the mission of the Fire Department. Based upon input from the Edina Engineering Department, the impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The redevelopment is not expected to require additional public infrastructure to address its impact to traffic movement in the area. The current infrastructure for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks are expected to be neutral. The redevelopment in the District is expected to contribute an estimated $323,516 in sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees. It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this District, therefore there will be no impact on the City’s ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2 (b) requires the TIF Plan to calculate “the estimated amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district’s share of the total local tax rate for a taxing jurisdictions remained the same.” The amount of tax increments over the life of the district that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district’s share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $1,072,934. The amount is calculated by multiplying the total estimated increment of $3,890,260 by the percent Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-10 of the total tax rate attributable to the school district based on its Pay 2018 tax rate of 27.58% (4)Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) requires the TIF Plan to calculate “the estimated amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county’s share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same.” The amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $1,482,967. The amount is calculated by multiplying the total estimated increment of $3,890,260 by the percent of the total tax rate attributable to the county based on its Pay 2018 tax rate of 38.12%; (5)Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. At this time, no requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed redevelopment for the District have been received Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings that are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the HRA and City's findings: • Traffic Impact Study: 4500 France Apartments. Sprack Consulting. June, 2018. •Stantec Report Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-11 requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); 2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; 4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City; 5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or 6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a renewal and renovation district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10a, must be documented in writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District. The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the HRA or City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). Administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-12 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits of M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently 0.36 percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The HRA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately June 2023 and report such actions to the County Auditor. Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-13 2. To finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047; 3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; 4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; 5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the HRA or City or for the benefit of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area by a developer; 6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and 7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, other qualifying improvements, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, “The authority shall annually determine the amount of excess increments for a district, if any. This determination must be based on the tax increment financing plan in effect on December 31 of the year and the increment and other revenues received as of December 31 of the year. The authority must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year.” In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area or the District. Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-14 issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the project area as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the HRA or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the HRA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the HRA Executive Director. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA and City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-15 District and the use of tax increments. Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment 1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Pooling Limitations. At least 80 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 20 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of the District. 3. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Revenues derived from tax increments paid by properties in the District shall be deemed to have satisfied the 80 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of the District, 80 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5. 4. Renewal and Rennovation District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a renewal and renovation district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the HRA or City, including the cost of preparation of the development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-28. Summary The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone (651) 697-8500. Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District 2-16 Appendix A Project Description In 2018, the HRA received application from Orion Investments seeking to acquire and redevelop a vacant and underutilized area within the 44th and France Commercial Area consisting of approximately 1-acre of vacant commercial property (former Edina Cleaners site) and adjacent rental housing. The proposed $29 million mixed-use redevelopment project will consist of 46-units of primarily market-rate rental housing, 7,000 square feet of first floor commercial space, and supporting parking infrastructure. It is anticipated that three of the housing units will be designated for occupancy and rent restricted to residents earning 50% of Area Median Income. The redevelopment is expected to start as early as the close of 2018 and occur over the next 18-months reaching occupancy in 2020. Tax increment from the District will be utilized in conjunction with potential funding from the Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), and Hennepin County to provide financing for the estimated $29 million private redevelopment project. The HRA proposes to issue a pay-as-you-go TIF Note to the developer to reimburse qualifying costs necessary to facilitate the redevelopment. Appendix A-1 Appendix B Map of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the 44th and France 2 TIF District Appendix B-1 æ ¹» ¹» æ æ æ æ æ¹»æ æ ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ñ ¹»æ æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ ¹º æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ æ ñ æ ¹º ñ æ ñTRACY AVEVERNON AVEWOODDALE AVEHANSEN RDVALLEY VIEW RD70TH ST W FRANCE AVE S44th & France 2 Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake Minnehaha Creek N i n e M i l e C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters L utheran Church & School FireStation Public Works &Park Maintenance GraceChurch Pub licLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool Co lo nialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran Co untrysideSchool St Albans Episco pal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran ColonyParkBaptist St PatricksCatholic CreekValley Baptist NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessor CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVECAHILL RD66T H ST W YORK AVE SINT ER LACHE N BLVD MALO NEY AVE 44T H S T W 50T H ST W 54T H ST W 58TH ST W GLEASON RD70T H ST W 76T H ST W DEWE Y HIL L RD VALLEY VIEW RD VALL EY VIE W RD M I N N E S O T A D R78TH ST W I-494 I-494 HWY 100HWY 169HWY 169HWY 100HWY 62 HWY 62 / Engineer in g De pt.Septem ber 2018 44th and France 2 TIF D istrict Southeast Edina Redevel opment Proj ect Area 44th and France 2 TIF D istrict Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcel(s) listed below. Parcel Numbers Address Owner 0702824440066 4500 France Private Owner 0702824440067 4500 France Private Owner 0702824440068 3903 Sunnyside Rd Private Owner 0702824440069 3905 Sunnyside Rd Private Owner 0702824440070 3907 Sunnyside Rd Private Owner Appendix C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 9/14/2018Base Value Assumptions - Page 144th and France 2 TIF Projection- 1% InflationCity of Edina, MNMixed Use - 46-unit Apartment; 7,000 rsf Retail RedevelopmentASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType: Renewal and RenovationDistrict Name/Number:ISD 273 / WD 3County District #:Exempt Class Rate (Exempt) 0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value 2018Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,000 1.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:1.00%Over $150,000 2.00%Interest Rate:4.75%Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/I) 2.00%Present Value Date:1-Aug-19Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) 1.25%First Period Ending 1-Feb-20Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2019First $121,000 0.75%Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: 2020 Over $121,000 0.25%Years of Tax Increment 16 Non-Homestead Residential (Non-H Res. 1 Unit)Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment 2035 First $500,000 1.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,000 1.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio 32.2123% Pay 2018 First $500,000 1.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate 145.0950% Pay 2018 Over $500,000 1.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 112.296% Pay 2018Agricultural Non-Homestead 1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.) 112.296%Pay 2018State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes) 43.8650% Pay 2018Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) 0.22182% Pay 2018Building Total Percentage Tax Year Property Current Class AfterLand Market Market Of Value Used Original Original Tax Original After ConversionMap ID PID Owner Address Market Value Value Value for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.0702824440066 4500 France 64,100 0 64,100 100% 64,100 Pay 2019 C/I 1,282 Rental 801 0702824440067 4500 France 310,100 1,000 311,100 100% 311,100 Pay 2019 C/I 6,222 C/I Pref. 5,472 0702824440068 4500 France 945,000 1,000 946,000 100% 946,000 Pay 2019 C/I Pref. 18,170 Rental 11,825 0702824440069 Res 280,000 126,100 406,100 100% 406,100 Pay 2019 Non-H Res. 1 Unit 4,061 Rental 5,076 0702824440070 Res 294,000 156,000 450,000 100% 450,000 Pay 2019 Non-H Res. 1 Unit 4,500 Rental 5,625 1,893,200 284,100 2,177,3002,177,300 34,235 28,800Note:1. Base values are for pay 2019 based upon review of County website on 9.10.2018.Area/ PhaseTax Rates BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\EDINA\Housing Economic Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\44th & France 2018\TIF Runs\4500 France TIF Run for FI 9.11.2018 9/14/2018Base Value Assumptions - Page 244th and France 2 TIF Projection- 1% InflationCity of Edina, MNMixed Use - 46-unit Apartment; 7,000 rsf Retail RedevelopmentEstimated Taxable Total Taxable PropertyPercentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value Total Market Tax Project Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValue Class Tax CapacityCapacity/Unit 2018 2019 2020 2021 PayableApartments 339,804 339,804 46 15,631,000 Rental 195,388 4,248 29% 100% 100% 100% 2021Retail 471 471 6,972 3,287,000 C/I Pref. 64,990 9 0% 100% 100% 100% 2021TOTAL18,918,000 260,378 Note:1. Market values are based upon the Assessor's preliminary estimate provided 7.27.2018. TIF Projections are based on existing Pay 2018 local tax rates.Total Fiscal Local Local Fiscal State-wide MarketTax Disparities Tax PropertyDisparities PropertyValue Total Taxes PerNew UseCapacityTax CapacityCapacityTaxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 195,388 0 195,388 219,412 0 0 34,673 254,085 5,523.59Retail 64,990 20,935 44,055 49,472 30,375 27,850 7,291 114,989 16.49TOTAL 260,378 20,935 239,443 268,885 30,375 27,850 41,964 369,074Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors which cannot be predicted.Total Property Taxes 369,074Current Market Value - Est. 2,177,300less State-wide Taxes (27,850)New Market Value - Est. 18,918,000less Fiscal Disp. Adj. (30,375) Difference 16,740,700less Market Value Taxes (41,964)Present Value of Tax Increment 2,565,757less Base Value Taxes (30,361) Difference 14,174,943Annual Gross TIF 238,523Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:14,174,943 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF? MARKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSISTAX CALCULATIONSPROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\EDINA\Housing Economic Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\44th & France 2018\TIF Runs\4500 France TIF Run for FI 9.11.2018 9/14/2018Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 344th and France 2 TIF Projection- 1% InflationCity of Edina, MNMixed Use - 46-unit Apartment; 7,000 rsf Retail RedevelopmentTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal Captured Local Annual Semi-Annual State Admin. Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% ofTax Tax Disparities Tax Tax Gross Tax Gross Tax Auditorat Net Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC CapacityCapacityIncremental CapacityRate Increment Increment 0.36% 10% IncrementValueYrs.YearDate- - - - 02/01/20100% 56,875 (28,800) - 28,076 112.296% 31,528 15,764 (57) (1,571) 14,136 13,488 0.52020 08/01/20100% 56,875 (28,800) - 28,076 112.296% 31,528 15,764 (57) (1,571) 14,136 26,663 12020 02/01/21100% 260,378 (28,800) (19,172) 212,406 112.296% 238,523 119,262 (429) (11,883) 106,949 124,028 1.52021 08/01/21100% 260,378 (28,800) (19,172) 212,406 112.296% 238,523 119,262 (429) (11,883) 106,949 219,134 22021 02/01/22100% 262,981 (28,800) (19,381) 214,800 112.296% 241,212 120,606 (434) (12,017) 108,155 313,081 2.52022 08/01/22100% 262,981 (28,800) (19,381) 214,800 112.296% 241,212 120,606 (434) (12,017) 108,155 404,848 32022 02/01/23100% 265,611 (28,800) (19,593) 217,219 112.296% 243,928 121,964 (439) (12,152) 109,372 495,496 3.52023 08/01/23100% 265,611 (28,800) (19,593) 217,219 112.296% 243,928 121,964 (439) (12,152) 109,372 584,040 42023 02/01/24100% 268,267 (28,800) (19,806) 219,661 112.296% 246,671 123,335 (444) (12,289) 110,602 671,503 4.52024 08/01/24100% 268,267 (28,800) (19,806) 219,661 112.296% 246,671 123,335 (444) (12,289) 110,602 756,937 52024 02/01/25100% 270,950 (28,800) (20,022) 222,128 112.296% 249,441 124,721 (449) (12,427) 111,844 841,327 5.52025 08/01/25100% 270,950 (28,800) (20,022) 222,128 112.296% 249,441 124,721 (449) (12,427) 111,844 923,758 62025 02/01/26100% 273,659 (28,800) (20,240) 224,620 112.296% 252,239 126,120 (454) (12,567) 113,099 1,005,181 6.52026 08/01/26100% 273,659 (28,800) (20,240) 224,620 112.296% 252,239 126,120 (454) (12,567) 113,099 1,084,714 72026 02/01/27100% 276,396 (28,800) (20,460) 227,136 112.296% 255,065 127,533 (459) (12,707) 114,366 1,163,273 7.52027 08/01/27100% 276,396 (28,800) (20,460) 227,136 112.296% 255,065 127,533 (459) (12,707) 114,366 1,240,009 82027 02/01/28100% 279,160 (28,800) (20,682) 229,678 112.296% 257,919 128,960 (464) (12,850) 115,646 1,315,804 8.52028 08/01/28100% 279,160 (28,800) (20,682) 229,678 112.296% 257,919 128,960 (464) (12,850) 115,646 1,389,840 92028 02/01/29100% 281,952 (28,800) (20,907) 232,245 112.296% 260,802 130,401 (469) (12,993) 116,938 1,462,968 9.52029 08/01/29100% 281,952 (28,800) (20,907) 232,245 112.296% 260,802 130,401 (469) (12,993) 116,938 1,534,398 102029 02/01/30100% 284,771 (28,800) (21,133) 234,838 112.296% 263,714 131,857 (475) (13,138) 118,244 1,604,951 10.52030 08/01/30100% 284,771 (28,800) (21,133) 234,838 112.296% 263,714 131,857 (475) (13,138) 118,244 1,673,867 112030 02/01/31100% 287,619 (28,800) (21,362) 237,457 112.296% 266,655 133,327 (480) (13,285) 119,563 1,741,935 11.52031 08/01/31100% 287,619 (28,800) (21,362) 237,457 112.296% 266,655 133,327 (480) (13,285) 119,563 1,808,423 122031 02/01/32100% 290,495 (28,800) (21,594) 240,102 112.296% 269,625 134,812 (485) (13,433) 120,894 1,874,093 12.52032 08/01/32100% 290,495 (28,800) (21,594) 240,102 112.296% 269,625 134,812 (485) (13,433) 120,894 1,938,239 132032 02/01/33100% 293,400 (28,800) (21,827) 242,773 112.296% 272,625 136,312 (491) (13,582) 122,239 2,001,594 13.52033 08/01/33100% 293,400 (28,800) (21,827) 242,773 112.296% 272,625 136,312 (491) (13,582) 122,239 2,063,479 142033 02/01/34100% 296,334 (28,800) (22,063) 245,471 112.296% 275,654 137,827 (496) (13,733) 123,598 2,124,601 14.52034 08/01/34100% 296,334 (28,800) (22,063) 245,471 112.296% 275,654 137,827 (496) (13,733) 123,598 2,184,304 152034 02/01/35100% 299,297 (28,800) (22,301) 248,196 112.296% 278,715 139,357 (502) (13,886) 124,970 2,243,270 15.52035 08/01/35100% 299,297 (28,800) (22,301) 248,196 112.296% 278,715 139,357 (502) (13,886) 124,970 2,300,868 162035 02/01/36 Total3,904,316 (14,056) (389,026) 3,501,234 Present Value From 08/01/2019 Present Value Rate 4.75% 2,565,757 (9,237) (255,652) 2,300,868 Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\EDINA\Housing Economic Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\44th & France 2018\TIF Runs\4500 France TIF Run for FI 9.11.2018 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development) A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's activity by April 1 of the following year. Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFForm.htm for information and forms. Appendix E-1 Appendix F Renewal and Renovation Qualifications for the District To be added to prior to the public hearing Appendix F-1 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 2335 Highway 36 West, St. Paul MN 55113-3819 September 28, 2018 Mr. Bill Neuendorf Economic Development Manager City of Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Edina HRA TIF Study at Sunnyside Road and France Avenue Business District Dear Mr. Neuendorf: Based on our site visit of Wednesday, September 26, 2018, we have determined the proposed TIF District comprised of five (5) parcels and three (3) addresses does meet the coverage test as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a)(1)(i) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a)(4)(e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures. Parcel ID and address: 0702824440066, 0702824440067 and 0702824440068 (4500 France Avenue South) 0702824440069 (3905 Sunnyside Road) 0702824440070 (3907) Sunnyside Road) If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me directly at (651) 604- 4849. Respectfully, STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. Bruce Paulson, AIA Senior Project Manager Phone: (651) 604-4849 Fax: (651) 636-1311 Bruce.paulson@stantec.com Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications To be added to prior to the public hearing Draft But-For Analysis Current Market Value $2,177,300 New Market Value - Estimate $18,918,000 Difference $16,740,700 Present Value of Tax Increment $2,565,757 Difference $14,174,943 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: $14,174,943 Appendix G-1 Date: O c tober 10, 2018 Agenda Item #: VI I I.B. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director Item Activity: Subject:S ketch P lan R eview - New Horizon Day C are Disc ussion 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: No Action R equested. I N TR O D U C TI O N: P rovide the applicant non-binding comments on a potential future development project. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Memo Applicant Narrative Proposed Plans Building Renderings Building Renderings Valley View Wooddale - Small Area Plan Pages City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861 Fax 952-826-0389 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: October 10, 2018 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Sketch Plan Review – 4412 Valley View Road The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan request to remodel/redevelop the site at 4412 Valley View Road. The applicant would significantly remodel the existing retail and office building into a day care facility. The existing building is 9,047 square feet in size and has been used for a variety of retail and offices uses over the years. The proposed remodeled building would be 9,600 square feet in size. The remodeling includes changing the hip roof into a flat roof, and locating a play area on to the roof. An elevator would be required to get staff and the kids to the roof. A height variance would be required for this elevator that would also include a lobby, stairs and storage area. There are 25 parking stalls on the site; the proposal would reduce parking to 22 stalls. Green space and boulevard style sidewalks would be added to the front of the building on Valley View to meet some goals in the Valley View/Wooddale small area plan. (See attached applicant plans and narrative and pages from the small area plan.) The site is currently zoned PCD-1, Planned Commercial District. Day Cares are a permitted use. The request would require the following: 1. A Parking stall variance from 27 spaces to 22 stalls. 2. A building height variance from 24 feet to 41 feet. The following page provides a compliance table that demonstrates how the proposal would comply with the existing PCD-1 Standards on the lot. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Compliance Table City Standard (PCD-1) Proposed Lot line Building Setbacks Front – Valley View Front – Kellogg Side – North Side – East Parking Lot Setbacks Front – Valley View & Kellogg Side – North Side – East 35 feet 35 feet 27-41 feet 25-41 feet 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet 35 feet (existing) 38 feet (existing) 5 feet (existing & proposed)* 22 feet (existing & proposed)* 2-10 feet proposed (existing is 0) 5 feet (existing) 0-5 feet (existing) Building Height 2-stories & 24 feet 2 stories & 41 feet* (To the top of the elevator/stair/lobby) Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 .7 Parking 1 space per teacher/staff (20) 1 space per 20 individuals (7) 27 required 22 spaces proposed* *Variances required Highlights/Issues: While the building is considered to be two stories, consistent with the small area plan, the elevator, stair and lobby portion is 41 feet tall and could be considered a third story. The small area plan would allow three stories for this site. (See attached pages from the Valley View/Wooddale small area plan.) There would be improved sidewalks and an increase in greenspace from what exists on the site today. A parking and traffic study would be required. Sustainability. The applicant will be required to respond to the city’s Sustainability Questionnaire within their submitted plans. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 - 1 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 October 4, 2018 SUMMARY REPORT TO: Planning Commission, City of Edina FROM: A. Peter Hilger, AIA philger@rylaur.com RE: New Horizon Academy Childcare Center Relocation Across Street – 4412 Valley View Rd. Please find attached a summary of our proposed relocation to the above referenced site across the street from our present location. We are asking for sketch plan review necessary to achieve our visions for the site, that if generally agreeable with the Planning Commission, we would proceed to a full application. ABOUT NEW HORIZON ACADEMY New Horizon Academy is a high-quality early learning provider that is 4-Star Parent Aware rated and accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (“NAEYC”), the gold standard in the early childhood industry. As you know, New Horizon Academy has been serving Edina families since 1988 at its school located at 4425 Valley View Road. The early childhood industry has evolved since 1988 making the current physical structure of this school more difficult to operate a high quality early learning program. However, New Horizon still wanted to continue serving the Edina community and as a result, New Horizon acquired 4412 Valley View Road in 2017. BACKGROUND New Horizon acquired the site in 2017, after first confirming that the zoning was consistent for childcare use “as is”. To be clear, the current zoning permits us to remodel the interior of the structure, with no additions, and utilize the site in its present, non-conforming condition, including the existing parking. This was confirmed by you, which enabled the acquisition to proceed. ABOUT THE SITE Located at 4412 Valley View Rd with its intersection with Kellogg Avenue, this 0.4 acre site is diagonally across the street from the existing New Horizon Academy. There is a two story building consisting of office over retail space constructed in1956, and two one-story annexes: one substantially in-ground concrete structure to the east abutting Lot 9 (Steiner residence), and a one story glass and masonry retail structure to the south facing Valley - 2 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 View Rd, constructed in 1957. There is an existing 15’ access easement to the benefit of Lot 10 (Knight Trust) located on the east property line. But for a 4.5’ strip of land adjoining the residential property to the north, the entire site is hard surface, mostly of asphalt and structures. There is a grade challenge in that the second floor of the office structure is only a few feet above the existing grade of the north and east neighbors, so in effect, the lower level of the two story section, and the one story section to the east, serves as a retaining wall to the adjacent properties, with no window exposure at this lower level on these frontages to the neighbors. Existing parking is irregularly laid out upon the site, with head-in perpendicular parking directly from Kellogg Avenue, and a single curb cut in the southeast corner from Valley View that also serves the existing neighbor’s access easement. The shape of the lot and the setbacks to the existing buildings thereon make for a challenge in meeting any standards of parking in its existing condition. There is no boulevard nor a city sidewalk along Valley View. From a Building Code perspective, there are also challenges in that the second means of egress from the second floor office goes over the one story roof to the east, and exits via a small, poorly maintained stair to Lot 9, a residential property, with no apparent easement. This is not a proper nor safe means of egress. The structure has partial fire protection on the lower level where a former childcare center existed (now the boutique). We have also reviewed the Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan report, and one of the goals – street edges – is achieved with this plan by returning asphalt to a landscaped boulevard with sidewalk along Valley View Road. Further, improvements to an aging infrastructure and retention of a quality neighborhood service provider is essential to the neighborhood qualities sought in the report. And the very size, topography and awkward shape of the lot make it difficult to re-purpose to other uses than those that exist. The building is classified as Type III-B construction, I-2 occupancy, proposed to be fully sprinklered. OUR PROPOSAL SUMMARIZED We are proposing to reduce the parking from 25 current, non-conforming stalls with 22 substantially conforming stalls, and replacement of a significant portion of asphalt that is currently the “front yard” with a boulevard, sidewalk and landscaped front yard hosting a small stormwater infiltration basin. As you can see form the calculated site statistics in the following table, this plan increases green space by nearly 10% of the site, and a reduction of impervious site treatment by 8%. On such a small site, this is not insignificant while still preserving a substantial portion of existing parking, albeit in a revised configuration. - 3 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 Further, we are proposing to add a new emergency stairwell outside the existing building limits that will bring the building up to code compliance. The existing south one-story annex will have its roof re-built to support a rooftop toddler playspace, with the remaining east roof top returned for HVAC equipment, and the non-conforming exit removed. The two- story portion would have its existing hip roof removed and replaced with a rooftop playground for pre-schoolers, including an elevator and stairwell penthouse whose height would exceed the current 24’ high zoning standards, thus requiring a variance (see below). The building investment would include a full exterior upgrade, full fire protection for the entire structure, new mechanical equipment, and an elevator for handicap access compliance. And finally, the entire interior would be remodeled to New Horizon standards. BUILDING AND OCCUPANCY At just over 9,600 SF of useable building area, we propose the following space allocation:: Infant 2 classrooms at 12 each 24 + 6 staff Toddler 2 classrooms at 14 each 28 + 4 staff Young Pre 1 classroom at 20 each 20 + 2 staff PreSchool 3 classroom at 20 each 60 + 6 staff Support Staff + 2 staff TOTAL Planned Population Density 132 + 20 staff maximum HOURS OF OPERATION New Horizon Academy’s hours of operation are Monday thru Friday from 6:15 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. New Horizon Academy is open year round with the exception of seven (7) legal holidays: New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day (Professional Development Day), Thanksgiving and Christmas Day. On Christmas Eve, it closes at 3:00 p.m. If a holiday falls on a weekend, it will be observed on the nearest business day. - 4 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 HEIGHT VARIANCE The ordinance standard stipulates 24’, two story height limits for this zoning district. However, the Small Area Plan indicates 36’ height immediately north of this site across Wooddale, and 24’- 2 story for our site. However, our site is not a flat site, with a 5’ to 6’ height variance from the prime street frontage and the north and east residential sides of the lot. Our proposal, as indicated by the elevations shown below, is intended to be within the 36’ height limit from the Valley View Road frontage that is consistent with the commercial objectives of the small area plan (but above the 24’ height limit proposed for this site), but where the railing of the upper playspace, which comprises the largest frontage on the north elevation, is an average of 24’ along the north frontage, and is roughly equal to the ridge of the existing hip roof. Only the emergency exit stairwell, that must be fully enclosed, is higher than the ordinance standard at roughly 30’ above the existing grade. VIEW OF STRUCTURE FROM NORTH SIDE – note existing roof plane. We are therefore requesting a height variance for the small section of roof/building mass that houses the emergency exit stairway for the playspace (in light blue above), and for the penetration of the elevator penthouse beyond. PARKING MANAGEMENT – PARKING VARIANCE The ordinance standard is 1 stall per 20 children plus one stall for the maximum number of staff (twenty). At 132 children, this would result in 27 required parking spaces, based on a fully occupied facility. We are proposing the installation of 22 parking stalls. Since we are already grandfathered in with 25 stalls, we are only seeking a variance to decrease the parking by 3 stalls. The number of parking stalls required by families and staff will vary depending on the occupancy level of the school and the schedules of the families with a maximum number at one time to not exceed 132 children (our licensed capacity). However, it should be noted - 5 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 that it is extremely rare for a child center to be 100% occupied. In fact, the average occupancy levels of a child care center is 63%. Under this scenario, this school will average about 84 children a day which would require at most 13 full-time staff at any one- time. Staff schedules stagger throughout the day with staff arriving between 7:00 and 10:00 a.m. and leaving between 3:00 and 6:30 p.m. Drop off and pick up times also stagger throughout the day depending on the schedules of the families with peak times typically between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. for drop off and between 3:30 and 6:00 p.m. for pickup. Most of the families are only parked for a few minutes during each of these times. In the extremely rare and virtually implausible case that we would reach 100% capacity, the absolute highest number of staff on-site at any one-time would be 20 staff (which would occur between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. when few parents are dropping off or picking up). Assuming that each staff would drive their own car and would not ride share, use mass transit, bike, walk or other means to get to and from work, staff would need 20 parking stalls. However, this would also be extremely rare. Many staff use alternate transportation methods and we anticipate that this trend will only continue. In fact, 23% of our current staff already seek alternate transportation methods and we believe this percentage will only continue to increase as the area redevelops. However, under the worst-case scenario that we were 100% full and 100% of our staff drove their vehicles, we would still have 3 parking stalls for parents to use for non-peak drop off and pick up times which is more than adequate. Currently, 15% of the families at our Edina school have 2 or more children enrolled and 2 staff have their children enrolled at the center. As a result, we have less parking needs and as such, respectfully request a variance. PRECEDENCE Though located on the edge of Edina, the Casa de Corazon, at 5101 France Ave. South, is licensed for 110 children with 13 stalls on site, in a two story structure with a third level rooftop playspace. - 6 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 SUMMARY We respectfully request your approval of the proposed plan, as we believe this to be a good fit for the neighborhood and the Edina community, is well integrated into the immediate neighborhood, and certainly meets with the principles and objectives of the Wooddale Valley View Small Area Plan. Thank you for your consideration. If you have questions, or need additional information, please advise. Aerial view from Southwest Aerial view from Northwest - 7 - Rylaur, LLC 14 Pheasant Lane North Oaks, MN 55127-2512 612-868-3636 Appendix - Images of Playground Features Rooftop Pre-School Playspace – Des Moines, Iowa Rooftop Pre-School Playspace – Des Moines, view toward access penthouse RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comSheet No.:SHEET TITLE:COVER SHEET& CODE ANALYSISDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCG000Drawing History/Revisions:Drawing Date:SHEET INDEXG000A101dCOVERSHEET & CODE SUMMARYDEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN - MAIN LEVELArchitecturalCONSULTANT INDEXSurveyEGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC.BRENT R. PERTERS7415 WAYZATA BLVD.MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426P: (952) 546-6837Project ArchitectRYLAUR, LLCA. PETER HILGER, AIA14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612-868-3636Email: philger@rylaur.comA101PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - MAIN LEVELProjectPLANNINGCOMMISSIONREVIEW SET 9.20.18NEW HORIZON ACADEMY | 4412 VALLEY VIEW ROAD EDINA, MN 55424VICINITY MAPA. PETER HILGER #15862I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulylicensed Architect under the laws of theState of MinnesotaPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MN 55447OwnerNEW HORIZON COMPANIESALAN RUTH3405 ANNANPOLIS LANE N., STE 100PLYMOUTH, MN 55447P: (763) 557-1111NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424A102dDEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN - UPPER LEVELA102PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - UPPER LEVELA202dEXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA201PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSNEW PROPOSEDNEW HORIZON LOCATIONEXISTING NEWHORIZON LOCATIONWELCOVHEALTHCARECODE SUMMARYTHIS SUMMARY BASED ON:2015 MN STATE BUILDING CODEUSE GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS:GROUP I-4 (MSBC 308.6)PER MN RULES 1305.0308 (308.5)WHEN GREATER THAN 5 CHILDREN (I-4)CONSTRUCTION TYPE (SECTION 602.5):TYPE III - B SPRINKLEREDALLOWABLE NUMBER OF STORIES2 + 1 per MSBC 504.2ACTUAL NUMBER OF STORIES:3LOCATION OF THIS SPACEMain Level + (2) Stories above grade planeACTUAL BUILDING AREA: 10,009 SFOCCUPANCY SEPARATION REQUIRED:NONEFIRE RESISTANCE RATING (TABLE 601):BUILDING ELEMENTS =1 hour Exterior East WallTRASH RECYCLING AREA:PER MN STATE CODE 1303.1500 SUBP. 5, TABLE 1-A:DAYCARE - .002/S.F. BUILDING; KITCHENS - .003/S.F. KITCHENS.DAYCARE: 10,099 S.F. X .002 = 20 S.F. REQUIREDKITCHEN: 278 S.F. X .003 = 1 S.F. REQUIREDTOTAL REQUIRED: = 21 S.F.TRASH ENCLOSURE PROVIDED ON SITE BY BUILDING OWNERPLUMBING FIXTURE ANALYSIS(IBC TABLE 2902.1 DAY NURSERIES, GROUP I-4 = 1:15 RATIO;EDUCATIONAL, GROUP E = 1:50 RATIO - STAFF)BASED ON LICENSED ENROLLMENT PER MN RULES, AND RATIO OF 1:15 PERMN RULE 9503.0155 SUBP. 18 TODDLER AND OLDER.LICENSINGCAPACITYRATIOREQUIREDPROVIDEDCHANGINGTABLESTOILETSINKTOILETSINKINFANT 112-----1INFANT 2121/15----1TODDLER 2141/1511111201/1522221STAFF241/501111-TOTAL--111111145OTHER REQUIREMENTS:DRINKING FOUNTAINS (IBC 2902.1) 1 PER 100 QUALIFIED OCCUPANTS. WATER & OTHER HYDRATION PROVIDE132 QUALIFIED OCCUPANTS = 2 REQUIRED. 2 FOUNTAINS PROVIED WITH HI/LO FIXTUREBY STAFF AS PART OF CAREGIVING, THEREFORE OCCUPANCY OF YOUNGEST AGE GROUP EXEMPTED (24 Infants)ADA "HIGH LOW" FOUNTAIN IN BUILDING COMMON AREA. ADA LOW AT CHILD HEIGHT PROVIDED.PER MN RULES 9503.0155, SUBP. 18(D): CHILDREN HAND SINK HOT WATER TEMPERATURESHALL NOT EXCEED 120 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT.TOTAL BUILDINGOCCUPANT LOAD BASED ON IBCROOM NAME & NUMBER (1)NET AREA(2)(5)(SQ. FT.)FACTOR(3)CHILDRENTOTALSTAFFTOTAL(4)4301/35123154231/35123154931/35142167021/35202227121/35202227181/35202222781/200-222541/100-33(1) PER MN RULES 9503.0005 DEFINITIONS AND 9503.0040 SUBP. 4(A): - INFANT: 6 WEEKS TO 18 MONTHS - TODDLER: 16 MONTHS TO 35 MONTHS - PRESCHOOL: 31 MONTHS TO KINDERGARTENTOTAL OCCUPANT LOAD5,345 SF132241567041/3520222YOUNG PRESCHOOL141/1511121(2) EXCLUDES CRIB ROOMS, TOILET ROOMS, STORAGE ROOMS & STAFF LOUNGE BASED ON SAME OCCUPANCY USING THESE SUPPORTING SPACES AS CLASSROOM OCCUPANCY, AND NET OF CABINETS AND FIXTURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULE 9503.0155 SUBP. 9.(3) LOAD FACTOR PER IBC TABLE 1004.1.2 IS BASED ON NET AREA OF INDOOR SPACE PER CHILD IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULE 9503.0155 SUBP. 9, PLUS REQUIRED STAFF PER AGE GROUP.(4) PER MN RULES 9503.0040, SUBP. 1: - STAFF/CHILD RATIOS ARE AS FOLLOWS: - INFANT: 1:4 PER 8 CHILDREN GROUP SIZE - TODDLER: 1:7 PER 14 CHILDREN GROUP SIZE - PRESCHOOL: 1:10 PER 20 CHILDREN GROUP SIZE(5) RECEPTION, OFFICE & KITCHEN GROSS AREA PER IBC TABLE 1004.1.1.OTHER REQUIREMENTS:PER IBC TABLE 803.9 IN SPRINKLERED BUILDINGS EXIT WAYS & CHILDREN'S ROOM TO HAVE CLASS B FINISHES. (I-4)CARPET WAINSCOT TO BE CLASS A PER 803.1.4. ALL OTHER FINISHES ARE ALLOWED TO BE CLASS BPER TABLE 803.9.PER IBC TABLE 1016.2 IN SPRINKLERED BUILDINGS, TRAVEL DISTANCE FROM ANY ROOM LOCATIONSHALL BE MAXIMUM 200 FEET FOR OCCUPANCY TYPE I-4.PER MSBC 907.3 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM REQUIRED AND PROVIDED.PRESCHOOL 2PRESCHOOL 3201/152222-201/152223-INFANT 1 ROOM 102INFANT 2 ROOM 105TODDLER 1 ROOM 118PRESCHOOL 2 ROOM 201TODDLER 2 ROOM 121PRESCHOOL 3 ROOM 204PRESCHOOL 4 ROOM 208KITCHEN (5)ROOM 111RECEPTION (5) ROOM 117ALLOWABLE AREA (TBL 503 & 506.3 Increase)PRESCHOOL 4201/152223-TODDLER 14931/35142161381/100-11OFFICE (5)ROOM 11626,000 SF (13,000 x 200% = 26,000)OCCUPANT LOAD ANALYSISYOUNG PRESCHOOL ROOM 108OCCUPANT LOAD & CODE ANALYSIS FOOTNOTES:PLAY YARD AREA:TODDLER PLAY YARD ON ROOFTOP = 1228 sf @ 75 sf / Child = 16 CHILDRENPRESCHOOL PLAY YARD ON ROOFTOP = 2409 sf @ 75 sf / Child = 32 CHILDRENA203EXISTING & PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATION VIEWSSP1SITE PLAN1 of 1ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEYA103PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - ROOF TOP LEVELA202PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA301BUILDING SECTION9.6.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.181515162222220 (not FTE)1 (Assistant)15222161 (Director )OPERATIONALOCC. LOAD(5974 sf Main Lvl + 3405 sf Upper Lvl + 720 sf Roof Lobby)MSBC EXITINGOCC. LOADEDINA WOODDALEVALLEY VIEW SMALLAREA PLAN3 STORIES / 36'-0" high3 STORIES / 36'-0" highPLUS 41'-0" Elev.Tower SRYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:SITE PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCSP1(Employee)8'-0" Sidewalk H.C. RAMP5 StallsC1SITE PLAN - PROPOSEDSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"V A L L E Y V I E W R O A DK E L L O G G A V E N U E EXISTING BUILDING59'-6" = (7) Stalls @ 8'-6" w x 18'-0" d Each EXISTING HYDRANTTO REMAIN AS ISSITE PLAN KEYNOTESNEW ± 47'-9" ONE STORY STRUCTURE plus ROOFTOP PLAY YARD+/- 75'-8" TWO STORY STRUCTURE plus ROOFTOP PLAY YARD± 22'-0" EXIST SINGLE STORY BLDG(Mechanical Area on Flat Roof)X1DEMOLISH EXISTING SIDEWALK & CURB PER PLANSITE PLAN DEMO NOTESD1XPARAPET WALL AROUND NEW ROOF TOP PLAY YARD SURFACE.w/ METAL FENCE ABOVE - EXIST FLAT ROOF STRUCTURE TO BERE-INFORCEDEXISTING LIGHT POLE2NEW METAL EGRESS STAIRWAY FROM TODDLER ROOFTOPPLAY YARD TO GRADE LEVEL. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS13EXISTING POWER POLE w/OVERHEAD POWER LINES3NEW CONC. SIDEWALKSEE CIVIL14INSTALL NEW 8'-0" wide PUBLIC SIDEWALKPER CITY REQMNT'S4NEW HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE CURB RAMPSEE CIVIL15EXISTING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONTO REMAIN AS IS5NEW WHEEL STOP BUMPER. INSTALL SO AS TO MAINTAIN16'-6" long CLEAR PARKING STALL LENGTH. (# Locations T.B.D.)162-STORY STRUCTUREw/NEW PRESCHOOL ROOFTOP PLAY YARD6PLAY YARD GATE w/PANIC HARDWARE & ALARM(Qnty. = 3)17EXISTING EAST SINGLE STORY STRUCTUREROOFTOP TO REMAIN AS IS & USED FOR MECHANICAL7EXISTING ELECTRICAL METER18EXISTING SOUTH SIDE SINGLE STORY STRUCTUREw/NEW ROOFTOP PLAY YARD - SEE FLOOR PLAN8NEW SOD, INCLUDE TOPSOIL BASE(INSTALL SOD UP TO PUBLIC SIDEWALK)19NEW ELEVATOR SHAFT ADDITIONAPPROXIMATE HEIGHT = 41'-0" +/-948"high METAL PICKET STYLE FENCING AT BOTTOMOF EXIT STAIRWELL20NEW TODDLER PLAY YARD ENTRY w/ROOFAPPROXIMATE HEIGHT = 24'-0" +/-10EXISTING 'NO PARKING' SIGN IN RIGHT-OF-WAYTO REMAIN AS IS21NEW SIGN WALL - RUN ELECTRIC & LIGHTING TO SIGNAREA. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS11REMOVE WALL MOUNTED MAILBOX(s) @ SIDEWALK LEVELD2ELECTRICAL METER AT SIDEWALK LEVEL TO BE RELOCATEDAS NEEDEDD3REMOVE EXISTING ROOF EDGE FENCE ON EASTMECHANICAL ROOFTOPD41.REMOVE, RELOCATE & REPLACE ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING & CHANGEFIXTURES TO LED FORMAT2.REMOVE, RELOCATE & REPLACE ALL GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS PERPLAN. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS3.REMOVE & REPLACE ALL EXISTING STOREFRONTS & WOOD WINDOWSw/NEW ALUMINUM STOREFRONTS. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSGENERAL SITE NOTESEXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN AS ISPLAY YARD AREA w/FALL ZONE MATERIALSOD / GREEN SPACELEGENDPAVEMENT ACCESS ALISE STRIPINGFENCE LINESITE ITEMS TO BE REMOVED / DEMOLISHED& OR RELOCATED AS NOTED123285N 89° 57' 01"E 134.07' (meas)S 0° 02' 41" E 162.48' (meas)N 63° 14' 16" W 150.3'67811121214141916PRIMARY BUILDING ENTRANCEBUILDING EXIT DOOREXITENTERENTEREXIT Int. StairBelowEXIT 181919192021D1D2D3D4D4NEIGHBORSWOOD RETAININGWALLPROPERTY LINE = 94.69'15'-0" ACCESSEASEMENTREMOVE EXISTING CONC. STOOP & STEPS(ON NIEGHBORS PROPERTY)D53'-0"ACCESSEASEMENTTRASH ENCLOSURE - INSIDE BUILDING w/ROLL UPEXTERIOR DOOR224412 VALLEY VIEW DRIVE - EDINA, MN 55424 - FAIRFAX ADDITION, BLOCK 22, LOTS 13 & 14 - ZONED PCD-1SITE STATISTICSFAIRFAX ADDITIONBLOCK 22, LOT 13 & LOT 14EDINA, MN / HENNEPIN COUNTY31'-5"45'-0"PARKING STALLSEXISTING SITE CONDITIONSPROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS25PARKING STALLS22PAVEMENT9361 sfPAVEMENT7121 sfSIDEWALK1150 sfSIDEWALK1871 sfGREEN SPACEOnly pervious surface is along north property line678 sfGREEN SPACESOD = fgfgfdgfdg((2) ROOFTOP PLAY YARDS = 3637 sf, not included)2191 sfTREES2TREES2 Existing, 7 New9TRASH ENCLOSUREExisting Dumpsters Consume Diagonal Parking on East Property Ln.NONETRASH ENCLOSUREEnclosure inside existing building footprintPROVIDEDD5BUILDING AREASMAIN LEVELUPPER LEVEL1260 sfSTAIR C STRUCTURE270 sf3019 sf3135 sf1695 sfTODDLER ROOFTOP PLAY YARD1228 sfGROSS FLOOR AREA5974 sf Main LevelEAST FLAT ROOF990 sfTRASH ENCLOSURE50 sf Trash Encl.(Outdoor Mechanical Area)GROSS FLOOR AREA3405 sf Upper LevelEXISTING NORTH WINGUPPER LVL of 2-STORY(Classroom Floor Area on this Level)EXISTING NORTH WINGMAIN LVL of 2-STORYEXISTING EAST WING(Young Preschoolers)(Infants)(Preschool)EXISTING SOUTH WING(Toddlers)TOTAL GROSS BUILDING AREA = 10,099 sf(Main Lvl 5974 sf + Upper Lvl 3405 sf + Rooftop Stair C 720 sf)TOTAL SITE AREA = 17,157 sfF.A.R. = .58(Requied F.A.R. = 1.0 or Less.)1223TODDLERROOFTOP PLAY YARDFLAT ROOF(MECHANICAL's ONLY)(ONE CLASSROOM STORY BELOW)7 STALLSEASEMENTLINENEWTREENEWTREE35'-11 3/4" +/-Property Line to Upper LevelExterior CantileveredWall Plane5'-5"14D134'-2 3/4" +/-Property Line to Signband AboveSIGNBAND ACROSS WEST ELEVATION OF BLDG @ UPPERLEVEL FLOOR LINE24D124INFILTRATION BASIN2526TRASH ENCLOSURE ACCESS DRIVE, OMIT CURB18'-0"D6REMOVE EXISTING SIGNBAND FRAMING & RE-BUILD PER PLANEXACT PROJECTION DEPTH T.B.D.D654 %41%6%11%4%13%BUILDING FOOTPRINT5974 sfBUILDING FOOTPRINT5974 sf35 %35%50 sfLOT AREA = 17,157 SFBUMPEROVERHANG333D127NEW METAL STAIR & LANDING FROM UPPER LEVEL DOWN TOMECHANICAL ROOFTOP AREA (DEMO EXISTING STAIR)276'-0"8'-0"428INSTALL NEW 6'-0" PUBLIC BOULEVARD - SODDED28BLVD PUBLICSIDEWALK PRESCHOOLROOFTOP PLAY YARD(TWO CLASSROOM STORIES BELOW)6'-8"EXIT PlayYardEXIT PlayYard929EXIT10NEW STAIRWELL C ADDITION ONTOP OF EXIST BLDGAPPROXIMATE HEIGHT = 36'-10" +/-NEW EXTERIOR BLDG SIGNS - RUN ELECTRIC & LIGHTINGTO SIGN AREAS. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS12131414141415161717172019NEWTREENEWTREENEWTREENEWTREENEWTREENEWTREE2223232610'-4"7'-2"22'-0"29251616D116'-0"+/- 10'-0" Stall8'-6"8'-6"9'-0"4 Stalls+/- 36'-0"8'-5" H.C. Aisle9'-0"(3) Stalls @ 8'-6" wide = 25'-6"18'-0" Stall Depth16'-6" Curb Bumperto End of Stall(5) Stalls @ 9'-0" wide = 45'-0"17'-158" = (2) Stalls 18'-0" Stall Depth2 STALLS11'-8"18"UPPER LEVELROOFTOP PLAY YARD2409 sfGROSS FLOOR AREA720 sf Roof LevelSTAIR C STRUCTURE720 sf(Stairwell on this Level)(Playground Area)(Playground Area)(Inside Bldg Footprint)1 HC Stall3 Stalls30OUTDOOR PLANTER AREA309.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 Cabinet E1D1H1Food Cntrx30d48" TchrCab24" WrdbCab38" InfantChng Tbl38" InfantChng TblFood Cntrx30dTot Clssrm Cntr48" TchrCab24" WrdbCabTot Clssrm Cntr 48" Tchr Cab 24" WrdbCab S6'w ROLL UP COILING DR 48" Tchr Cab 24" Wrdb Cab RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA1011LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"WALL TYPE LEGENDEXISTING WALL STRUCTURENEW CONSTRUCTIONNEW CONSTRUCTION HALF WALLDEMO EXISTING BEARINGWALL ABOVECANTILEVERED SIGNBAND WALL w/VERTICAL METALPANEL FACADE & METAL CAP FLASHING1PLAN NOTESX2TODDLER PLAY YARD ABOVEREWORK / HEADER IN FLOOR AS / IF NEEDED FOR POINTLOAD ABOVE. FIEL VERIFYBUILDING WALL LINE ABOVE FOR NEW STAIR C345INDOOR EXIT A STAIRWAY FROM UPPER LEVEL TO GRADE6NEW WOOD COLUMNS AS NEEDED DUE TO DEMOLITIONOF EXISTING BEARING WALL ABOVE.EXACT NUMBER & LOCATION OF COLUMNS T.B.D. PER STRUCT.78NEW COLUMNS AS NEEDED FOR REPLACEMENT OF ROOFSTRUCTURE. EXACT NUMBER & LOCATION T.B.D. PER STRUCT.9EXISTING STEEL COLUMN & BEAMLINE TO REMAIN(NEW COLUMNS ABOVE TO STACK OVER EXISTING COLUMN) STAIR BRM #115 TODDLERTOILETRM #120 TODDLER #1RM #118493 SF14 Children + 2 Staff TODDLER #2RM #121493 SF14 Children + 2 Staff ADULTTOILETRM #115LAUNDRYRM #114TRASHENCLOSURERM #11350 50 sf VESTIBULERM #100 RECEPTIONRM #117254 SF3 Staff OFFICERM #116138 SF1 STAFF KITCHENRM #111278 SF2 STAFF HALLRM #112381 SF UTILITYRM #110 INFANT 1RM #102430 SF12 Children + 3 Staff INFANT 2RM #105423 SF12 Children + 3 Staff CRIBSRM #10612 Cribs CRIBSRM #10412 Cribs SPRINKLER RMRM #103UPExistingFLOOR LINEABOVE STAFFRM #107 YOUNGPRE'sRM #109 YOUNGPRE'sRM #108702 SF20 Children + 2 Staff COT CLSTRM #119 STAIR ARM #101Existing5 COT CLSTRM #12268877777899EXISTING BUILDING WALL LINE ABOVE342ELEVATOR145'-0"2'-11"46'-9"7'-8"6'-0"11'-6"68'-10"28'-0"345'-0" 31'-5"9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 MODELNUMBERPRODUCTTRADENAMEMATERIAL VESTIBULE 85 SFCOT CLOSET13 SFSIGN IN DESKlockersToddler 1493 SF14 Children(14 + 2 staff)Toddler 2493 SF14 Children(14 + 2 staff)lockers 3'-6" TeacherCab.lockerslockers lockersCOTCLOSET13 SFTODDLERTOILET136 SFRECEPTION254 SF(xx/100 = 3 staff)ADULT TOILET48 SF3'-0" Cab.COTCLOSET20 SFlockersLaundry56 SFMODELNUMBERPRODUCTTRADENAMEMATERIAL Cabinet MODELNUMBERPRODUCTTRADENAMEMATERIAL 14'-1" x 3'-0" CAR SEAT ALCOVEE1D1H1Food Cntrx30d48" TchrCab24" WrdbCab38" InfantChng Tbl38" InfantChng TblFood Cntrx30dlockersTot Clssrm Cntr48" TchrCab24" WrdbCabTot Clssrm Cntr 48" Tchr Cab 24" WrdbCab lockersS6'w ROLL UP COILING DR lockers 48" Tchr Cab 24" Wrdb Cab RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANDEMO OVERLAY PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA101d STAIR BRM #115 TODDLERTOILETRM #120 TODDLER #1RM #118493 SF14 Children + 2 Staff TODDLER #2RM #121493 SF14 Children + 2 Staff ADULTTOILETRM #115LAUNDRYRM #114TRASHENCLOSURERM #11350 50 sf VESTIBULERM #100 RECEPTIONRM #117254 SF3 Staff OFFICERM #116138 SF1 STAFF KITCHENRM #111278 SF2 STAFF HALLRM #112381 SF UTILITYRM #110 INFANT 1RM #102430 SF12 Children + 3 Staff INFANT 2RM #105423 SF12 Children + 3 Staff CRIBSRM #10612 Cribs CRIBSRM #10412 Cribs SPRINKLER RMRM #103UPExisting STAFFRM #107 YOUNGPRE'sRM #109 YOUNGPRE'sRM #108702 SF20 Children + 2 Staff COT CLSTRM #119 STAIR ARM #101Existing COT CLSTRM #122ELEVATOR1LOWER LEVEL DEMO OVERLAY PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"D2D1D1D1WALL TYPE LEGENDEXISTING WALL STRUCTURENEW CONSTRUCTIONNEW CONSTRUCTION HALF WALLEXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVEDDEMO EXISTING BEARNG WALLNOT USEDPLAN DEMO NOTESD1XREMOVE & REBUILD CANTILEVERED SIGNBANDD2NOT USEDD3REMOVE EXISTING BEARING WALLS & MAINTAIN/PROVIDECOLUMN AS NEEDED. EXACT NUMBER & LOCATION OF COLUMNST.B.D. PER STRUCTURALD49.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 4'-625 32" 4'-41132" lockerslockers lockers48" x 72" h Tchr Cab 48" TchrCab 24" Wrdb Cab Clssrm CntrClssrm CntrClssrm Cntrlockers Slockerslockers48" TchrCablockers24" x 72" Wrdb Cab 2 4 " W r d b C a b RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA1021UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PRESCHOOL 4RM #208704 SF20 Children + 2 Staff STAIR ARM #101Existing PRESCHOOL 2RM #201712 SF20 Children + 2 Staff PRESCHOOL 3RM #204718 SF20 Children + 2 Staff COTCLSTRM #203 PRE 2 TOILETRM #202 PRE 4 TOILETRM #209 PRE 4 TOILETRM #210ELEVATORTODDLERROOFTOP PLAY YARD1228 SF16 CHILDRENMECHANICAL AREAROOFTOP880 sf HALLWAYRM #212383 SF MECHANICALRM #214 STAIR BRM #215 PRE3 TOILETRM #206WALL TYPE LEGENDEXISTING WALL STRUCTURENEW CONSTRUCTIONNEW CONSTRUCTION HALF WALLDEMO EXISTING BEARING WALL PRE3 TOILETRM #207 COTCLSTRM #205 COTCLSTRM #211 MECHANICALRM #213 STAIR CRM #301CANTILEVERED SIGNBAND WALL w/VERTICAL METALPANEL FACADE & METAL CAP FLASHINGMETAL GUARDRAIL FENCE BEHIND PARAPET WALLAROUND PERMIETER OF ROOFTOP PLAY YARD1PLAN NOTESX2METAL EXIT STAIR/ROOF STRUCTURE w/ 1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL. FROM PRESCHOOL PLAY YARDTO TODDLER PLAY YARDMETAL EXIT STAIR w'OPEN GRATE TREADS, CLOSED RISER,1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL & 42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL.FROM GRADE TO TODDLER PLAY YARD48"high METAL FENCE ENCLOSING STAIRWELL LANDING AREA345INDOOR EXIT A STAIRWAY FROM UPPER LEVEL TO GRADE61634523445'-0"69'-8"28'-0"6'-0"11'-6"54'-5"3'-9"31'-5"MAINTAIN EXISTNG WOOD COLUMNS &/OR ADD NEW AS REQ'DDUE TO DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BEARING WALL.EXACT NUMBER & LOCATION OF COLUMNS T.B.D. PER STRUCT.78NEW COLUMNS AS REQUIRED ON EACH SIDE OF STAIRSFOR NEW HEADER PER STRUCTURAL988NEW STEEL COLUMN & BEAMLINE FOR NEW FLAT ROOF(STACK OVER EXISTING COLUMN BELOW)977777941'-10 1/2"5"32'-1 1/2"9'-4"10'-3 1/8"5"48'-7 7/8"18'-3 1/4"5"25'-3 3/4" 13'-4"5"30'-3"9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 K-3544HIGHLINEC_TOILETSVITREOUS CHINA Ov e r h e a d P ow e r L i n e lockerslockers lockers48" x 72" h Tchr Cab 48" TchrCab 24" Wrdb Cab Clssrm CntrClssrm CntrClssrm Cntrlockers Slockerslockers48" TchrCablockers24" x 72" Wrdb Cab 2 4 " W r d b C a b RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANDEMO OVERLAY PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA102dWALL TYPE LEGENDEXISTING WALL STRUCTURENEW CONSTRUCTIONNEW CONSTRUCTION HALF WALLEXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVEDDEMO EXISTING BEARNG WALLD4D2D3D1D1D11UPPER LEVEL DEMO OVERLAY PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"REMOVE EXISTING AWNINGSPLAN DEMO NOTESD1XREMOVE & REBUILD CANTILEVERED SIGNBANDD2REMOVE EXISTING HIP ROOF STRUCTURE IN IT'S ENTIRETY& REPLACE WITH NEW FLAT ROOF & ROOF TOP PLAY YARDD3REMOVE EXISTING BEARING WALLS & MAINTAIN/PROVIDECOLUMN AS NEEDED. EXACT NUMBER & LOCATION OF COLUMNST.B.D. PER STRUCTURALD49.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 SRYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:ROOFTOP LEVEL FLOOR PLANDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA103CANTILEVERED SIGNBAND WALL w/VERTICAL METALPANEL FACADE & METAL CAP FLASHINGMETAL GUARDRAIL FENCE BEHIND PARAPET WALLAROUND PERMIETER OF ROOFTOP PLAY YARD69'-8"6'-0"45'-0"1ROOFTOP LEVEL FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PLAN NOTESX2 STAIR CRM #301 ELEVATOR LOBBYRM #302353 sfELEVATORTODDLER ROOFTOPPLAY YARD BELOW1228 SF16 CHILDRENMECHANICAL ROOFTOPBELOWPRESCHOOL ROOFTOPPLAY YARD2409 SF32 CHILDREN STORAGERM #30394 sfMETAL EXIT STAIR/ROOF STRUCTURE w/ 1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL. FROM PRESCHOOL PLAY YARDTO TODDLER PLAY YARDMETAL EXIT STAIR w'OPEN GRATE TREADS, CLOSED RISER,1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL & 42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL.FROM GRADE TO TODDLER PLAY YARD1248"high METAL FENCE ENCLOSING STAIRWELL LANDING AREA345333645AREA OF REFUGE6616'-0"59'-8"9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:PROPOSEDEXTERIOR ELEVATONSDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA2019.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.183SOUTH ELEVATION - PROPOSEDSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"47361571721D1951617129D57D6D8D91614163D413+/- 76" AbovePlay Yard16 19Parapet Railing D4D381292WEST ELEVATION - PROPOSEDSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"124465777573D1D2D177788614161416129125D5HANDICAP PARKING AISLE AGAINSTBUILDING - SLOPE RAMP / SIDEWALKACCORDINGLY - SEE CIVIL19EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTESXREMOVE EXISTING AWNINGEXTEIOR DEMO NOTESD1XBOULDER RETAINING WALL1FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION2VERTICAL METAL PANEL FACADE3CANTILEVERED SIGNBAND WALL w/VERTICAL METALPANEL FACADE & METAL CAP FLASHING4JAMES HARDIE FLAT PANEL5JAMES HARDIE BATTENS6ALUMINUM STOREFRONT7JAMES HARIDE 1x4 WINDOW WRAP8METAL CAP FLASHING9EXISTING CANTILEVERED AWINING STRUCTURE TO BERE-BUILT FOR NEW SIGNBAND WALLD2REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWD3REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW OR DOORAND INFILL OPENINGD4REMOVE EXISTING ROOF EDGE & CONSTUCT NEWROOF TOP PLAY YARD ONTOP OF EXISTING STRUCTURED51048"high METAL FENCE ENCLOSING STAIRWELL LANDING AREA11METAL HORIZONTAL FRIEZE BOARD12STEEL BOLLARD @ TRASH ENCLOSURE1314CAPSTONEREMOVE EXISTING ROOFTOP RAILINGD615NEW HOLLOW METAL DOOR IN ENLARGE EXISING R.O.16CULTURE STONE VENEER17METAL EXIT STAIR w'OPEN GRATE TREADS, CLOSED RISER,1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL & 42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL.FROM GRADE TO TODDLER PLAY YARD18TRASH ENCLOSURE ROLL UP DOOR19METAL GUARDRAIL FENCE BEHIND PARAPET WALLAROUND PERMIETER OF ROOFTOP PLAY YARD20ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT21NEIGHBORS FENCE & RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN AS ISREMOVE & REPLACE METAL STAIRSD7NEIGHBORS STEPS ONTO NEW HORIZON PROPERTYAT FLAT ROOF TOP TO BE REMOVED BY NEIGHBORINGPROPERTY OWNERD8REMOVE EXISTING HIP ROOF STRUCTURE IN ITS ENTIRETY &REPLACE w/NEW FLAT TRUSSES w/ROOFTOP PLAY YARD ABOVED9METAL EXIT STAIR/ROOF STRUCTURE w/ 1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL. FROM PRESCHOOL PLAY YARDTO TODDLER PLAY YARDD911510Toddler Play Yard Entrance Roof 1419312D7CONC. SLAB FLOOR IN THIS STAIRWELLTO BE +/- 4" HIGHER THAN MAIN LEVELSO AS NOT TO EXCEED 12'-0" FLOOR TO FLOORTAPPER CURB EDGEALONG PARKINGSTALLS9UPPER PANESTO BE SPANDRELGLASS WHERESHOWN TINTEDUPPER PANESTO BE SPANDRELGLASS WHERESHOWN TINTED1017119Angled12337777919991939WalkwayUnder StairLandingTODDLER PLAY YARD ENTRANCE ROOF24'-0" AFFT/ELEVATOR TOWER41'-0" AFFT/SIGNBAND15'-3 1/2" +/- 9'-71 2"EXISTING HIP ROOF STRUCTURE(SHOWN DASHED) TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING HIP ROOF STRUCTURE(SHOWN DASHED)TO BE REMOVEDPRESCHOOL PLAY YARD GUARD RAIL FENCE30'-0" AFFEXISTING HIP RIDGE+/- 28'-10" AFF(Approximate)4'-10"T/PLAY YARD PARAPET27'-4" AFFTODDLER PLAY YARD ENTRANCE ROOF24'-0" AFFPRESCHOOL PLAY YARD GUARD RAIL FENCE30'-0" AFFT/PRESCHOOL PLAY YARD PARAPET27'-4" AFFT/ELEVATOR TOWER41'-0" AFFT/ROOFTOPELEVATOR LOBBY36'-0" AFF12'-2"(Approximate) EXIST. HIP RIDGE+/- 28'-10" AFF4'-10"12'-2"9T/ROOFTOPELEVATOR LOBBY36'-0" AFFNEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS SHOWN AS AN APPROXIMATION7'-21 2" 5'-3"ROOF TOP GUARD RAIL = 24'-9" ABOVE RETAINING WALL GRADE P R O T E R T Y L I N E P R O T E R T Y L I N ET/RETAINING WALL5'-3" AFFPRESCHOOL PLAY YARDGUARD RAIL FENCE30'-0" AFFMAIN GRADELEVEL FLOORT/TODDLER PLAY YARD PARAPET15'-7 1/2" ± AFFSIGN BAND15'-3 1/2"± AFFMAIN GRADELEVEL FLOOR30'-9" = FRONT RETAINING WALL GRADE TO TOP OF ROOF TOP ELEVATOR LOBBY - BEYOND PRESCHOOL PLAY YARDGUARD RAIL FENCE30'-0" AFF RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:PROPOSEDEXTERIOR ELEVATONSDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA2022NORTH ELEVATION - PROPOSEDSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTESXREMOVE EXISTING AWNINGEXTEIOR DEMO NOTESD1XBOULDER RETAINING WALL1FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION2VERTICAL METAL PANEL FACADE3CANTILEVERED SIGNBAND WALL w/VERTICAL METALPANEL FACADE & METAL CAP FLASHING4JAMES HARDIE FLAT PANEL5JAMES HARDIE BATTENS6ALUMINUM STOREFRONT7JAMES HARIDE 1x4 WINDOW WRAP8METAL CAP FLASHING9EXISTING CANTILEVERED AWINING STRUCTURE TO BERE-BUILT FOR NEW SIGNBAND WALLD2REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWD3REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW OR DOORAND INFILL OPENINGD4REMOVE EXISTING ROOF EDGE & CONSTUCT NEWROOF TOP PLAY YARD ONTOP OF EXISTING STRUCTURED51048"high METAL FENCE ENCLOSING STAIRWELL LANDING AREA11METAL HORIZONTAL FRIEZE BOARD12STEEL BOLLARD @ TRASH ENCLOSURE1314CAPSTONEREMOVE EXISTING ROOFTOP RAILINGD615NEW HOLLOW METAL DOOR IN ENLARGE EXISING R.O.16CULTURE STONE VENEER17METAL EXIT STAIR w'OPEN GRATE TREADS, CLOSED RISER,1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL & 42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL.FROM GRADE TO TODDLER PLAY YARD18TRASH ENCLOSURE ROLL UP DOOR19METAL GUARDRAIL FENCE BEHIND PARAPET WALLAROUND PERMIETER OF ROOFTOP PLAY YARD20ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT21NEIGHBORS FENCE & RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN AS ISREMOVE & REPLACE METAL STAIRSD7NEIGHBORS STEPS ONTO NEW HORIZON PROPERTYAT FLAT ROOF TOP TO BE REMOVED BY NEIGHBORINGPROPERTY OWNERD8REMOVE EXISTING HIP ROOF STRUCTURE IN ITS ENTIRETY &REPLACE w/NEW FLAT TRUSSES w/ROOFTOP PLAY YARD ABOVED91EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1EAST ELEVATION - PROPOSEDSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"7203D4D4D415658612D3209314161721D5D6D71819D9NEW TRASHENCLOSURE1113WalkwayUnder StairLandingOUTDOORSEATNG UNDERSTAIRWELLHANDICAPPARKING SIGNOPEN UNDERSTAIR w/METAL PANELON KELLOGG FACADE& OPEN TO PARKINGLOT SIDED3D37777391217METAL EXIT STAIR/ROOF STRUCTURE w/ 1 1/2" dia. HANDRAIL42" high FENCE TYPE GUARD RAIL. FROM PRESCHOOL PLAY YARDTO TODDLER PLAY YARD1110EXISTING HIP ROOFSTRUCTURE(SHOWN DASHED)TO BE REMOVEDT/TODDLER PLAY YARD PARAPETPRESCHOOL PLAY YARD GUARD RAIL FENCE30'-0" AFFT/PRESCHOOL PLAY YARD PARAPET27'-4" AFFT/ELEVATOR TOWER41'-0" AFFT/ROOFTOPELEVATOR LOBBY36'-0" AFFEXIST. HIP RIDGE(Approximate)+/- 28'-10" AFF4'-10"12'-2"15'-7 1/2" AFF9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 7'-21 2" P R O T E R T Y L I N E REAR GRADE6'-0" AFF30'-0" = REAR GRADE TO TOP OF ROOF TOP ELEVATOR LOBBYPRESCHOOL PLAY YARDGUARD RAIL FENCEUTILITY POLE(Height Unknown)T/ELEVATOR TOWER41'-0" AFFT/ROOFTOPELEVATOR LOBBY36'-0" AFFFRONT GRADE5'-3" AFF5'-3"30'-0" AFFMAIN GRADELVL FLRROOF TOP GUARD RAIL = 24'-9" ABOVE RETAINING WALL GRADEPLAY YARD PARAPET27'-3 1/2"AFFP R O T E R T Y L I N E21BeyondD617D8REAR GRADE6'-0" AFFMAIN GRADELEVEL FLOORSIGN BAND15'-3 1/2"AFF6'-0"MAIN GRADELEVEL FLOOR30'-0"5'-0"MECH ROOF9'-3" AFF3'-3" 6'-0"56578201299Beyond33Beyond77D3EXISTING HIP ROOFSTRUCTURE (SHOWNDASHED TO BE REMOVED)193 30'-0" = REAR GRADE TO TOP OF ROOF TOP ELEVATOR LOBBY RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:EXISTINGEXTERIOR ELEVATIONSDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA202d4SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTINGSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTESXBOULDER RETAINING WALL1FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION2AWNING3CANTILEVERED AWNING STRUCTURE4SIDING PANEL w/VERTICAL GROOVE5WOOD FRAMED WINDOWS & DOOR6ALUMINUM STOREFRONT7BRICK PATTERN FACADE8METAL CAP FLASHING9ASPHALT SHINGLES10ALUMINUM FASCIA & SOFFIT11WALL MOUNTED MAIL BOX12HORIZONTAL FRIEZE BOARD1314PAINTED PLYWOOD INFILL PANEL15HOLLOW METAL DOOR2WEST ELEVATION - EXISTINGSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3EAST ELEVATION - EXISTINGSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1233465777879109113411127666513108141414141581616PAINTED CONC. BLOCK WALL17METAL STAIRS18ROOFTOP RAILING19NEIGHBORS STEPS ONTO FLAT ROOF1616151576171818181766666513191020ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT2020202021NEIGHBORS FENCE & RETAINING WALL21199.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 1NORTH ELEVATION - EXISTINGSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"51310517111863414'-2"5'-3" 13'-4"6'-0"FRONT GRADE5'-3" AFFMAIN GRADELVL FLRREAR GRADE6'-0" AFFMAIN GRADELEVEL FLOOR3'-3"2119EXISTIG HIP RIDGE+/- 28'-10" AFF (Approximate)28'-10" +/- RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:EXISTING & PROPOSEDEXTERIOR ELEVATION VIEWSDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA2031aKELLOGG STREET VEIW - EXISTING1bKELLOGG STREET VEIW - PROPOSED2aVALLEY VIEW @ KELLOGG- EXISTING2bVALLEY VIEW @ KELLOGG - PROPOSED3aVALLEY VIEW ELEVATION - EXISTING3bVALLEY VIEW ELEVATION - PROPOSED4aPARKING FROM VALLEY VIEW- EXISTING4bPARKING FROM VALLEY VIEW - PROPOSED5aVALLEY VIEW APPROACH - EXISTING5bVALLEY VIEW APPROACH - PROPOSED6aKELLOGG APPROACH - EXISTING6bKELLOGG APPROACH - PROPOSED7aARIEL VIEW - EXISTING7bARIEL VIEW - PROPOSEDEXISTINGROOFTOP TO REMAINFOR MECHANICALNEWPRESCHOOLROOFTOPPLAYGRNDNEWTODDLERROOFTOPPLAYGRNDNEW TRASHENCLOSURE INSIDEBUILDING w/EXTERIORROLL UP DOOR ACCESS9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.188NORTH NEIGHBOR'S VIEW9EAST NEIGHBOR'S VIEW TOP PLAYLEVEL FLOORelevatorrooftop stair lobbyCCCCCstorageLEVEL FLOORMAIN / GRADEUPPERT/ELEVATOR TOWERSTAIR LOBBYROOF TOP41'-0"36'-0"NEW ROOF T/GUARD RAIL30'-0" AFFREAR GRADE6'-0" AFF72"39"MECH ROOF3'-3" Above Rear GradeSOFFIT13'-4" Above Rear Grade160" (13'-4")25'-9 1/2" AFF12'-3 1/2"YARD PARAPETTODDLER PLAY15'-7 1/2"STAIR LOBBYROOF TOP36'-0"RYLAUR, LLC14 PHEASANT LANENORTH OAKS, MN 55127P: 612.868.3636philger@rylaur.comPROJECT INFORMATION:CLIENT INFORMATION:Sheet No.:NEW HORIZON ACADEMY4412 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDINA, MN 55424NEW HORIZON COMPANIES3405 ANNAPOLIS LANE, STE. 100PLYMOUTH, MNSHEET TITLE:PROPOSEDBUILDING SECTIONDrawn By:VJHProject Architect:Checked By:APHA. PETER HILGER, AIA2018 RYLAUR, LLCCA3011BUILDING SECTIONSCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"40" deep 65 8"FALL ZONEISO &SHEATHINGNEW ROOF STRUCTURE 41'-0" 36'-0" GUARD RAIL FENCE +- 4'-3" Above Play Yard 2'-8" +/-1'-6" +/- 13'-6" Floor to Floor 12'-31 2" 25'-9 1 2" +/- = T/PRESCHOOL PLAY YARD SURFACE REMOVE EXISTNGHIP ROOFSTRUCTUREIN IT'S ENTIRETY4"11'-11 1/2" = Raised Slab Floorto Upper Level Floor+/- 7'-0" Stairwell Headroom INSULATED STAIRSTRUCTURE/ROOF6"New 26"dBar Joist+/- 8'-934" Ceiling Height New 4'-0" deep Pit 4'-1"15'-7 1/2" Floor to T/Parapet 27'-3 1/2" Grade to T/Rooftop Parapet +/ 28'-91 2" Grade to Existing Ridge New 9'-11 8" Raised Ceiling Height1'-33 8" Exist Flr +/- 11'-0" Existing Ceiling New 3'-4" Roof Structure New 11'-3 1 2" Roof Top Lobby 24'-0" Toddler Play Yard Entrance Roof - See Exterior Elevations EXISTING HIP ROOFSTRUCTURE(SHOWN DASHED)TO BE REMOVED9.20.2018PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW SET 9.20.18 1'-1" 8'-6" Ceiling 1'-8 1 2" 3'-0"SHADED AREA ISABOVE 36'-0" AFF