Loading...
CR 2004-118 Conditional Use Permit- Former hopkins House C \ T Y OF ~ . July 29, 2004 HOPKINS Council RepOli 04- I 18 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FORMER HOPKINS HOUSE Proposed Action. Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 04-55, approving a conditional use pennit to redevelop the fonner Hopkins House into 47 condo units, and construct six to\Vnhomes. At the ZOlling and Planning meeting, Mr. Kjos moved and Ms. Aristy seconded a motion to adopt Resolution RZ04-22, recommending approval of a conditional use pennit to redevelop the f01l11er Hopkins House into 47 condo units, anu construct six townhomes. The motion was approved unanimously. Overview. Mathwig Development, the applicant, is proposing to convert the fonner tower of the Hopkins House into 47 residential units. The units will be sold as condominiums, The two lower floors will be seven townhome type homes with a first and second floor. The upper floors will be a combination of one and two-bedroom flats. The plan also indicates razing the building 011 the cast side of the tower and constructing six townhomes. The applicant is proposing to add a commercial pad on the south side of the building. The price range for the condos will be approximately $200,000 to $230,000. . The applicant will have to apply for a site plan review for the construction of the building on the retail pad, Thc applicant has also applied for a rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, and a preliminary/final plat. There will be a PUD agreement executed. Primary Issues to Consider. . What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? . What are the specifics of the redevelopment? . What is the timing for the phases? . What arc the results of the traffic study? . What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Supporting Documents. . Analysis of issues . Site plans . Traffic Study . Resolution 04-55 . Ybrn \~~ On:k :V)t~'}"\ Nancy S, Anderson, AICP Planner . Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N Source: - Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _ Notes: -" CR04-118 Page 2 . Primary Issues to Consider. . What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? The zoning of the property is B-3, General Business. In order for this development to occur, the condo and the townhome areas will have to be rezoned residential. The staff is recommending that the site be rezoned to a residential R- 5 PUD zoning. The PUD overlay zoning is site specific and will ensure that what is proposed is what is constructed. The PUD zoning al so allows flexibility on the zoning standards. The commercial pad will not have to be rezoned. The Comprehensive Plan has designated this site as Commercial. The Comprehensive Plan designation will also have to be amended for the residential area. . What are the specifics of the redevelopment? Building The tower will remain and will be converted to condos; the building on the east of the tower will be removed and six townhomes will be constructed, There will be 30 one bedroom, 10 two- bedroom flats, and seven townhome type units on the first floor in the tower. . Parking The parking [or the condos will be underground and surface. It is proposed that 50 spaces will be underground and there will be 57 surface parking spaces. The condos are required to have two parking spaces per unit. The proposed parking will meet the minimum parking requirements. The townhomes will have a single stall garage and a parking space in front of the garage. This will meet the parking requirements for the townhomes, The retail pad will have additional parking. The number ofrequircu spaces for this site will depend on the final lIse. There are parking and access cross easements on the site. The Crossroads business area is allowed six spaces. The site plan has six parking spaces on the west side of the site for the spaces that the Crossroad businesses could use. Access Thc site plan has indicated tlu'ee !lew access points into the site: one from Robinwood Lane and the two new access points from Fifth Street North. The easterly access point from Fifth Street North will access the proposed townhomes. Any new access points will have to be approved by the public works department. Landscaping . The former Hopkins House site is required to have 67 trees of the required size. The site plan indicates 77. In addition to the required tress there are shrubs, perelmials and omamental CR04-118 Page 3 . grasses. The townhouse site is required to have nine trees. This site has more than the required trees. The tower will have a private fenced courtyard on the south side of the bUllding. Setbacks The following are the proposed and required setbacks: Required Proposed Front yard 30 feet Two feet (on north corner by new townhome) Side yard 15 feet or Y2 height Tlu'ee feet (exlstlng Hopkins House) Side yard 15 feet or Y2 height 18 feet (existing Hopkins House) Rear yard 25 feet or Y2 height 121 feet The PUD zoning does allow flexibility in zoning standards. Although the setback will be tight on the n011h side of the proposed townhomes, there is a large boulevard that appears to be a front yard. There is a sidewalk proposed for Robinwood Lane Exterior The exterior of the tower will be removed. The base will be a combination of brick, metal, . stucco and glazing. Aluminum panels and stucco will be replaced on the upper p011ions of the building. The exterior of the Townhomes wil1 be briek around the doors, stucco, and metal panels above and below the windows. Engineering The City Engineer has reviewed the plans. He has been in contact with the applicant's engineer for any changes that will need to be addressed. Fire Marshal The fire marshal has reviewed the site plans and found them acceptable. Surrounding Uses The site is surrounded by multiple residential on the east and north sides, Highway 7 and Walgreens on the south and a commercial area in Milmetonka to the west. . What is the timing for the phases? . The first phase will be the condo constmction in the tower and the demolition of the building on the east side of the tower. The second phase will be the constmction of the six townhomcs and phase 3 will be thc construction of the retail space. CR04-118 Page 4 . . What are the results of the traffic study? A traffic study was conducted for the redevelopment of the Hopkins House. The primary focus of the study was to detellnine if the redevelopment would cause problems with the intersections of Highway 7 and lih Avenue and CR 73 and Fifth Street. The traffic study concluded the following: . The proposed Hopkins House redevelopment is expected to generate a total of 100 gross trips dming the weekday a.m. peak hour and 132 gross trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour. . The intersection of TH 7 and I ih A venue presently operates at LOS E during the weekday a.m. peak hour, and LOS D during the p.m. peak hour. The intersection ofCR 73 and Fifth Street presently operates at LOS B in both peak hour periods. . The addition queue length due to the proposed development would not create a negative impact on the southbound queue at the TH 7 and lih Avenue intersection, or the operation of the lih Avenue and north service road intersection. . . It can be stated with confidence that the Hopkins House redevelopment will have little impact on either the intersection of TH 7 and I ih A venue or the CR 73 and Fifth Street intersection. . What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting'? Ms, Anderson reviewed the proposed development. Jack Bo alln an, the architect, and Troy Mathwig, the property owner, appeared before the Commission. Mr. BOalman, stated that they will be removing the entire exterior and putting new exterior materials on the building. The Commi ssion discussed the landscaping, size of the units, price range for the units, phasing of the development, and exterior materials. No one appeared at the public hearing regarding this item, Alternatives. 1. Approve the conditional use pemlit. By approving the conditional use permit, the applicant wi 11 be able to redevelop the former Hopkins House as proposed and construct six townhomes. 2. Deny the conditional use pennit. By denying the conditional use pennit, the applicant will not be able to redevelop the fOfmer Hopkins House as proposed and construct six townhomes. If the City Council considers this altemative, findings will have to be identified that support this alternative. . 3. Continue for further infom1ation. If the City Council indicates that further infOlmation is needed, the item should be continued. CITY OF HOPKINS . Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO: 04-55 I RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT THE FORMER HOPKINS HOUSE i INTO 47 CONDOS AND CONSTRUCT SIX TOWNHOMES WHEREAS, an application for Conditional Use Pennit CUP04-8 has been made by Mat]1\vig D~vclop111cnt; WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for a conditional lLse permit was made by Mathwig Development on July 2, 2004; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mai led and published notice, held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on July 27, 2004: all persons present were given an oppOliunity to be heard; 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and . 4. A legal description of the subject property is as follows: Lot 2, Block. 1 Maggies Addition, Hennepin County Minnesota NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Conditional Use Pemlit CUP04-8 hereby approved based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. That the proposed development meets the requirements for a conditional use peml i t. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Conditional Use Pennit CUP04-8 is hereby approved based on the following conditions: 1. That the site is rezoned to R-5 PUD 2, That the preliminary/final plat is approved. 3. That tIle Comprehensive Plan is amended. 4. That the Watershed District approves the development (if needed), 5. That the final drainage, grading and utility plans are approved. 6. That the PUD agreement is approved and executed. Adopted this 4th day of August 2004. . - - Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: - TeITY Obcrmaier, City Clerk .w BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343/ (952) 238-1667 / FAX (952) 238-1671 ~~.._-- :23 July 2004 Refer to File: 04-45 MEMORANDUM TO: Nancx Anderson, City of Hopkins i~F'l FROM: Ed Tel' mar and Erik Seiberlic~.7 RE: Traffic Study for Proposed Hopkins House Redevelopment PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The purpose of this report is to present traffic study results for the proposed redevelopment of the Hopkins House properly in Hopkins, Minnesota. The focus of this study is the impact of the development on the following two intersections: . . TH 7 & till Avenue . CR 73 & sllt Street The site of this proposed redevelopment is north of TH 7, east of CR 73, and southeast of 5th Street and Robinwood Lane, It is east of an existing MGM Liquor Store and immediately northeast of an existing Walgreen's store. The location is shown in Figure l. Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed development, which could be completed as early as the fall of 2005, consists of three buildings. The first building involves renovation of the existing Hopkins House into 50 condominium units with 62 parking spaces as well as sub-grade parking, The next building, just to the east of the condominiums, consists of G townhome units. The third building, on the southeast corner of the site, will be built as a 2,000 sfretai I building with a drive-thru. For the purpose of this report, the third building will be analyzed as a comlllon fast-food restaurant with drive-thm window. The site plan for this project is shown in Figure 2. . Ms. Nancy Anderson 2 . - ~ 23 July 2004 TI17N,R22W IGI .~ II 3 ,::---.J ~ 23124 ~ j/ Q,4r: TONJ -- UJ -'] to, R()- r~ .' . .' -- -, PROJECT lOCATION - r,08~jl ,h() SERVICE - :;;E '-.f =---===' :: ~ II o IU - ;r.; @ ~;!,i;) IJr~~~O A) [" --~-I,.. S T. '"iiiil 0 v' DR. --- ::, I . tt Sf.R'.J1f;:.S.___~ ~ ...............--......__...--:-.----~:::..,...-:: ~ ~:=c_-:-. J L=--tl-::jG~~~~-"'I .,.,..-~ __:'::J c:..-::~__ ~-,---:- ~ r:-:~.:=.-~,-~- ~~ ,.------;-~9 ------~- ~ ~ J1!: , "" .....--.-,.....,--~ ...." -----.... '.......,/11'.; ...,,;;: ,-->., '-<;.- "',,, 5-1 '~ER Vlf"E DR. >~Y^'t:",.. w ~':/~<~. . -( '- .... + .....,........;...,r 0/1 .. \.n f ~~:;~~!r~ ~~ 1':=c_A~~~GJ[;J,. CJkG~~1", ~ ~ : ;:~Sf:':I"'l N. I .llr,~I}[ s:!rr].I---.II-~j.G-.. [.....~;~:~ n.l I I l,~tll z ...-c :.z i :z: L, . ~ z J jC"lly,_t<:~~Lj J1Cd LJL_ . $~~I . . ~ ~ ~ [-ll'I~"l r-~JI i:l! j':~lr~, - I-:'~[j' !J,j fj)j rw ~--l <L~.JI I I:> -1- >L" ~.. ,;:.:> i t- :> . 'i I I <3.: tr> o'!; ~ :.t ..... -:t ;i 1 ~ ~ 20:' ~~c ~LJLJ,jLJLJ - , 2nd L~_ "':~.., . 1;'.) [--1 r--' f--:;> r--H r-l~ - t[JO no- ~--'j \.~ I ~ I 21 L! ";::':':/ ~ wi ( ~ I' ~ ~ l~JlJL;IL:ltJ g I I LJ Sf: Ifl ~ rillr~ fl/i1 rR~1 !~::CE I CT~ I ~Lr~~l r1 fl \LJlj~~II>;>]k;J(J1 ~,I." .IllJ[lJ ~ tN ... 1r-:-tr-:7lj ,..;11 .10~nt . L.... I / v ~ I , to: ) I u) APPROXIMATE SCALE f"- a 1000' CITY OF HOPKINS TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGUR PROPOSED E 1 . W BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES INC HOPKINS HOUSE PROJECT LOCATION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERSANOPL~NNER; R EDEVELOPME NT Ms, Nancy Anderson 3- 23 July 2004 . 11TH STltcaT )lORTlt /-r1: Gff41 ,,-~ _~.c_,_I' 0 ~-~-f" -", :r . "'-- ----.,'"-" ~___-L-, .----.~. i -..J . I i'~---';-' , _._~,.. I' : , I , I ~" - , \ j oj f: !:/; i! ill ':--,,011 It., I ! .: ' . : ' I '\ '\ : . I I , i ~ ,. t f t l f \ .,~.-..... ; i L--- i i _" ,----.L.- \ \...... ; i_ :---:;- !I~ ~_I: i ~ ~ : j..CGIOl>O.....a '11- ; , i: : 1__ ,I 8- :': i i____ : I : I I:) - 1 oj i !~,. i i ~ : I I : j ','!I ! : I : \ I 'I!! I . I , ......... : : j i :/:~ ,'~-'! g i=- ~~,"- r J .: ::- I(J! i I I ~ Q ,....--" 3: . !: . ~ : 1 . : ~ ,~ i ; !( rl .1 I, I 1 ; i i ; I '=----------...= , 10J 0 IV'-~:~:~J ": II: L\.~__ -- ._. , -.: , _'_'_'_'___'_'_.~ '- '-" .'----."" f \ f- V' . Wi._ I: . 'I-~J'; \: II, ,,-r~ I .....- d ; "I \..-:, I' j ~ " : . , . , J l J I AIruOl. I r..J ; I ;. bl'TAI\. .~-).i ; I IV:! ) Ir . " N ' ,l i , i l!i I, '~j I 511: t i 'l Ii l!:~: C i . IJ jl , ,.~, ./! ~----..r.. I U ..) ! ~1 \ f .j, -' ~- ._ NTS ,--L., ! ~ I I -'---., . JJ i I : ! ' 1 I 1 i I :,UJj- 1 ! j j i I i II~ l,...,. Wi 1 l I "'._~_ .. ~LU -- ___."""""'. ~ r "" ,... ~ ,... "'" CITY OF HOPKINS TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGURE 2 PROPOSED . W HOPKINS HOUSE SITE PLAN BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. REDEVELOPMENT \. TRANSPORTATlONENGINEEASAND?LANNE~ \.. ~ .... ~ Ms, Nancy Anderson -4- 23 July 2004 . EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed site for redevelopment is cun-ently home to the vacant former Hopkins House Hotel. TH 7 is a 4-lane divided principal arterial roadway with signal controlled intersections at 1ih Avenue and CR 73. CR 73 is a 2 lane A-minor arterial roadway with signalized intersections at TH 7 and 5th Street. The two study intersections are described in detai I as follows: . TH 7 & 12 A venue - This intersection is served by two through lanes, one left turn lane and one right turn lane in the eastbound and westbound directions. A minor variation with the eastbound approach is that the right turn is channelized and yield controlled. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane and olle channelized right turn lane that is yield controlled. The southbound approach has a shared through/left turn lane and an exclusive right turn lane. The traffic signal is split phase fOT the north/south approaches. East and westbound left-turns operate under protected only phasing. The eastbound/westbound through traffic receives the majority of the time. . CR 73 & 5th Street - This intersection is served by one left turn lane, one through lane, and one shared through/right tum lane in the north/southbound direction. The eastbound and westbound approaches are each served by one shared left/through lane and one exclusive right turn lane. The northbound/southbound . len turns operate under protected only phasing. The signal is actuated with the majority of the time provided for the north/south through movements. TRAFFIC FORECASTS Approach Traffic forecasts were completed for one year after the expected completion of the Hopkins House redevelopment (2006). Traffic forecasts were developed for the a,m, and p,m, peak hours on a typical weekday, which are the busiest on the slIlTounding roadways. The following describe the scenarios for which turn movement volumes were developed at the two intersections: . Existing - Turn movement counts for this scenario were established through actual counts taken on a typical weekday from 7:00 - 9:00 a.m, and 4:00 - 6:00 p.m, in January and June of 2004. The counts were taken at the following intersections: 0 TH 7 & lih Avenue (January, 2(04) 0 CR 73 @ 5th Street (June, 2004) Traffic counts taken in January at the TH 7 & 1 ih A venue intersection include trips generated by the Eisenhower Elementary School including any school bus . traffic during the peak hours, Ms. Nancy Ander~on -5- 23 July 2004 . . 2006 No-Build - Although historical traffic trends show no growth on TH 7 and CR 73, a 1 % per year factor was applied to traffic on these roadways. Added to the 2006 base level turning movements were new trips anticipated from the already approved Oak Ridge Place Condominiums which will be located farther to the east on the frontage road north of TH7. These trips were identified in a traff1c study produced by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. dated 17 February 2004, The total of the background growth and the trips identified above make up the 2006 no-build volumes. . 2006 Build - Based on the size and type of the proposed redevelopment, new volumes were generated, These new trips were then disseminated through the two intersections based on historical traffic volumes and the location of the population that will support the retail property. The total sum of the 2006 no- build turning movements and the newly generated and distributed trips are shown by the 2006 build scenario. Trip Generation Trip generation estimates were developed for the three buildings using data presented in the Institute for Transportation Engineers' CITE) Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, 2003. The resulting trips for the a.m, peak hour are shown in Table 1 and the p.m. peak hOllr in . Table 2, Table 1: Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Estimates AM Peak Hour Gross Trios Pass-By New land Use Size Rate In Out In lOut In I Out oro 101% GondolT ownhOme 60 OA4 4 22 0 0 4 22 50% 50% Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Throunh 2,000 53:\1 54 52 27 I 26 27 I 26 TOTAL 58 74 27 I 26 31 T 48 Table 2: Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Estimates PM Peak Hour Gross Trios Pass-By New Land Use Size Rate In Out In I Out In I Out 0% 1 01"10 CondolTownhome 60 0,52 21 10 0 I 0 21 10 50% 50% Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Throunh 2.000 34,64 36 33 181 17 181 16 TOTAL 57 43 18 I 17 39 T 26 The trips generated by the restaurant can be classified as one of the following: . New Trips - Trips solely to and from the subject development . Ms. Nancy Anderson -6- 23 July 2004 . . Pass-By Trips - Existing "through" trips on TH 7 that will include a stop at the restaurant in the future Based on data published by the ITE, the existing traffic patterns and similar past traffic studies, the proportion of pass-by and new trips were determined. These percentages are shown in Tables I and 2. Trip Distribution The next step in the traffic forecasting process is to establish trip distribution percentages. The origin and destination of the trips were detennined based on existing traffic volumes, the roadway, and the location of supporting residential, office and service land uses, The following are trip distribution percentages for the two types of trips: . New Trips 0 Residential . 20% north on CR 73 . 10% south on CR 73 . 10% west on 5Lh Street . 20% west on TH 7 . 35% east on TH 7 . . 5% south on 1 ill Avenue 0 Commercial . 20% north on CR 73 . 15% south on CR 73 . 10% west on 5th Street . 20% west on TH 7 . 20% east on TH 7 . 10% south on lih Avenue . 5% from local residences . Pass By Trips 0 A,M. . 65% from west and then continuing east on TH 7 . 35% from east and then continuing west on TH 7 0 P.M. . 35% from west and then continuing east on TH 7 . 65% from east and then continuing west on TH 7 Traffic Volumes Trip generation estimates for the proposed redevelopment were assigned to the two intersections based on the above trip distribution types and percentages. Using the trip assignment and resulting change in roadway volume, comparisons can be made to dctcnnine the traffic impact of the proposed development. Traffic volumes for all scenarios during a typical weekday a.m, peak hour arc shown in Figure 3. Traffic . volumes for all scenarios during a typical weekday p.m, peak hour are shown in Figure 4. -.".-- Ms. Nancy Anderson -7- . 23 July 2004 , """ I (I) (I) ...... ...... C\I a: "<t(i>j(l) () ~......"<t 1Ot::!r:::: __OO~ "<tW...... 1OC\lC') J1L 5TH ST. 77 f17 f17 ---.1 L 59/59/68 -<--- 24124/29 42/42/45 --7 r 45/45f18 89/89/89 ~ lir \ON...... Oo:o"<t '-(')(;'5 <aNT- O<O(i>j ~ 2004 EXISTING ~~,- ~ 2006 NO-BUILD ~~ I 2006 BUILD XX/XX.!XX . ui ~ 0 (0 J: ~"<tm f- :!:::t::: C\I .!:::oJ::::: ,- LO~(,) ,-m...... J1L TH7 24/24/24 ---.1 L 17/17121 -<--- 640/653/650 1685/1719/1713 ---;> r 70/70f10 37/37/37 ~ lir N LOLO,- ~t::!J::::: t ~IO'- __~t: IOLO..- '<TC\I...... NOT TO SCALE \.. ~ - CITY OF HOPKINS TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGURE 3 PROPOSED . W BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. HOPKINS HOUSE WEEKDAY A.M PEAK REDEVELOPMENT HOUR TURNING TRANS PORTA T ION ENGIN EERS AND PLANNER S MOVEMENT VOLUMES ----.- Ms. Nancy Anderson -8- 23 July 2004 . ,. "'" M ;;::: r-- (';J 0: to--",," U ~;;:::(') tOMt:;:: ~~~ 1l)(')C\l Jtl 5TH ST. 88/88/88 ---.t L 39/39/44 ~ 34/34/37 30/30/34 --->- r 69/69/89 108/108/1 08 ~ lir Ol (') to O~I.O N -. -.(;)..- ~"<t::t NtO"- -.-."<t ~ 2004 EXISTING 010 Ir= 2006 NO-BUILD ~~ I 2006 BUILD 'XXlXXlXX . W ~ NOlIl) ::c C").-Ol ~-.-. I- N~gs N j=;::U5co ..- N..-tO Jtl TH 7 12113/13 --1' L 47/47/54 ~ 1327/1354/1349 879/897/896 --->- r 81/81/81 52152152 ~ lir N o to (OJ t::~~ t 01l)(OJ t::~~ 01() r--NIl) NOT TO SCALE ""- ~ - CITY OF HOPKINS TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGURE 4 . PROPOSED WEEKDAY P.M PEAK W BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. HOPKINS HOUSE REDEVELOPMENT HOUR TURNING TRA~SPORTATIOll E~GI~EEAS A~D PLAHNEfl9 MOVEMENT VOLUMES --.- Ms, Nancy Anderson -9- 23 July 2004 . THAFFIC ANALYSES Capacity Analyses Capacity analyses were performed for the two subject intersections for the three traffic scenarios presented earlier. Existing geometries and traffic control presented earlier were used in all analyses, For the TH 7/1ih Avenue intersection, signal timing was obtained from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. For the CR 73/5\11 Street intersection, observations were made to detennine the actuated controL These signal parameters were used throughout the analyses. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of Level of Service (LOS) which ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. Most agencies in Minnesota consider that LOS D represents the minimal acceptable LOS for normal peak traffic conditions. Results of the capacity analyses for a typical weekday a.m. peak hour are presented in Table 3. Results of the capacity analyses for a typical p.m, peak hour are presented in Table 4. Table 3: Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service NB SB EB WB INTERSECTION SCENARIO IT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT INTERSECTION . TH 7 & 12th Existing D D B D D B D F A F B A E 2006 No-Build D D B D D B D F A F B A E Avenue 2006 Build 0 D B D D B D F A F B A E CR 73 & 5th Existing C A A C B B C C A B 8 A B 2006 N 0-8 uild C A A C B B C C A B B A B Street 2006 Build C A A C B B C C A C C A B Table 4: Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service NB SB EB WB INTERSECTION SCENARIO IT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT INTERSECTION TH 7 & 12th Ex isting C C B D D B D C A E D A D Avenue 2006 No-Build C C B D D B D C A E D A 0 2006 Build C C B D D B D C A E D A D ICR 73 & 5th Existing C A A C B B C C A C C A B 2006 No-Build C A A C B B C C A C C A B I Street 2006 Build C A A C B B C C A C C A B Because of the high volumes presently using TH 7 and CR 73, and the low volumes added to each intersection due to the redevelopment, there is little change to delay and LOS for any particular movement or the intersection as a whole. The largest increase in delay between 2006 no-build and 2006 build at any approach during either peak hour is less than three seconds. During the a.m, peak hour at the CR 73 & 51h Street intersection, LOS decreases from B to C, although delay only increases by two seconds, just over the threshold to LOS C. Although the TH 7 & lih Avenue intersection operates at LOS E in the n.m, 200G build scenario, there is little discernable change from the 2006 no-build or existing scenarios. The volumes generated by this redevelopment have very little impact on either subject intersection. I I 1 . Ms. Nancy Anderson -10- 23 July 2004 . Queuing at TH 7 and rih Avenue The southbound rih A venue approach to TH 7 is a very short segment (60 - 70') that begins at a T-intersection at the north service road. Queues that extend beyond 60 feet hJ.vc the potential to block the intersection for other movements. Observation of the cuncnt operJ.tion of this intersection found that if the queue extended beyond 60" vchicles would wait either in the eastbound right turn lane or the westbound left turn lane of the north service road. Analyses of the intersection indicate that the cun'ent 95th percentile queue for the southbound approach is 98' in the a.m. peak hour and 108' in the p,m, peak hour. A queue of about 100' means that two vehicles would be waiting in the turn lanes of the north service road. Analyses of the intersection in the 2006 build scenario indicate 951h percentile queues of 125' during the a.m. peak hour and 116' during the p.m. peak hour. The analyses show that about one vehicle would be added to the queue in the a.m. peak hour and less than one vehicle would be added in the p.m, peak hour. The queuing process is expected to operate in the same manner in the future as it does today. If that is the case, the additional queue length due to the proposed development would not create a negative impact on the southbound queue at the TH 7 and Lih Avenue intersection. Internal Circulation . The site plan as shown will adequately accommodate the expected vehicle circulation patterns, . Ms. Nancy Anderson -11- 23 July 2004 . CONCLUSIONS Based on the information and analyses presented in this report, the following conclusions were made: . The proposed Hopkins House redevelopment is expected to generate a total of 100 gross trips during the weekday a.m. peak hour, and 132 gross trips during the weekday p,m. peak hour. . The intersection of TH 7 and I ill Street presently operates at LOS E during the weekday a.m. peak hour, and LOS D during the p.m. peak hour. The intersection of CR 73 and 5th Street presently operates at LOS B in both peak hour periods. . The additional queue length due to the proposed development would not create a negative impact on the southbound queue at the TH 7 and lih Avenue intersection, or the operation of the 12th A venue and north service road intersection. . Internal site circulation will be satisfactory as shown in the site plan. . It can be stated with confidence that the Hopkins House redevelopment will have . little impact on either the intersection ofTH7 & 1 ill Avenue or CR 73 & 5th Street. . -, ---- 5TH STREET NORTH /' ~ "\ - - - - - - I - II -= "...- n'" 5'_c- 24'-D"" .N- -, I ~ - -----.'- .- J e. I 7 TOWN I4CX'1E BfTAANCES 9 ~ SEE SHEET U.I FOR - iO ~! ...OOITlONAL NOTES AND I ~ ll. PAVEMENT TREATMENT +- "1= I ......." "'-"" l PHASE i. -, l BUILDING TIP , TIP COMFACT e. , PJd ~ RENOVATION I ;, """'" 47 CONDO UNITS '=, I ;;, COMPACT '" ti 66,866 GSF COMPACT t ~ ~ Il t~ '" j~~ I "-... COMFACT ~ -l ~ ---- ~'t ,-., ~ VI. "'-, . t; P~:fi6i- I ~~IVACT . 7-4-o.a- FENCE :. 1 9 1'-- bll. 0 QF "1= u ~ I b UNE ~J ~ .r-rj ,,::. BUILDING: -' '-"DIE I e. I I I - '= I. " '- ; ;!!'_r "'-"" 15'.r ,,-"" '\. I I - " I I 57 SPACES - L_-J-r ,'-,," iT?- ' I II ~ ~ PRIVATE COURrrARD ~CEL1: r HI'" FENCE , . 54,040 sf -----------r ----- - - - -- ~-:...== - ~ , IIIIIIIII~ IN rn..JJ,,! ~~I? - " rf- ~ rf- 'r I +- I i I WALGREENS +- I -IL \ I -t- I -1- ~ " , 7' "". J>- I' '~ , , " I L___ - I I__~_+-- - ~~ -~ ,I I I I I I I,~ r-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ( I I I - '" 3N~ll aODf\NI ~ i Zz W~ ~ ~s <!: OCLj::l1- u.. <!: 0 >- D C/) t3 w.--Jwz > ....... Z l:J....... ~ W l:J :<: ::J <!: C/) >:<: ~ u.. ~ I- Ow Z ~::J .lHCl:I1W< wHuo .,. I- 0 U <l: -lz U lXl....... l-< u.. LJ ,CL ~ ... l-< C\J W Z ci I- f----l Z z ~ I- Z 1--1 ~ W:3DW l:J q ~ U ...J I Z -.J s '" Iu.. 1-1 1--1 w I- :J ~ ~D ... (/.I ~ .. S <[ 1-1 In X ;: ~ W Q~ fl. ~... """"""'" '" ... '" 0; N ~ N . M " '" Co co z i ~ R ~i o~1 I ?- m ~ 9S'9S1 3 .G2,22.m N 'V 10 -- - ~ ---=--~--~-._= iO~---- ----~--- I I I I I I I 6 . I I I I I I I 14 I I I I I 50 :: I I I I I I I I I IUJ I > I I~ I u..~ r I Cl llJ-l I zls I :Jeo I I I I :~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - L _______ ------ -------------- ~ ~ r- - 1 PARKING PLAN 1"22-01-AFPOO I. 5CALE,I"~IO'-O" NORTH - Q" ,;,'0 TWHM1D5 J' I TWHM104 900 Sf;>H e- 900 sf , 7 UP - t=f I:::: - diUp \: . . . .. ~ f-- .," I;, - . . " f- ., ..,. . ~ >- ~ >- )~. - ~.:. 0 ~ ,^-~;J 0 /,"e; [DO -c.. D [JO!= I ~I , V ~ III , HoD [J " "::'~"' ~ '--:J~ 0 ~I,;\:: .' ~ ~ ". ., c- -.-: '... ' .... - i7 ~ '" a c ',::. . " (3l IhD ( "" ~ ~ r,t;cO o r::t1 ~ TWHM1D3 o 1020 sf r. go ~ ~ b l' Do, rc -'cj) ~ ~ 0 ~~ - ~ TWHM1D2 !::...-< 0 1020 sf UPC L~ - ~ OD<~C' . -; b 01 C> ~IJ:', " . ) 00 . ,-,' . E3L ~ .' · " :;1 UP' . .' R' '. - TWHM107 ~ H- 0 ~~.,[tJ \Wl 1020 sf 0 ?=- I- I r. !J I D[J ~ ql' 1100 I 3, -"""","' 0-- -11=1= 0 ~ ,;.,' I n ~,\;I .-- .~.:,' ;.....' I I ;r= - " .,.,.. ~ oE) (' .~'.t.- liD ' :F' ~g~ r;:'rLJ:u r S ~ "::'~"' J ~ 1: J" /1 : ~E""-RY)( I LOBBY : / " I l // '-.,j \ 1 LAJ I \ I l 1_____________ [ I ~ (\\ FIRST FLOOR PLAN ~ 5CALEd/Bu~I'-Ou 1c;22-01-AFPOI NORTH 1 BDRM 815 sf = III [ dif iii 1:1 IlL iL III ~ I:p, !I!l ~ ili[ I:p, III- r IlL Ir- l!l 4lL IE 1il ilil m::, _ 1"11( It' Iii I I 1 BDRM 850 sf I """'" I I TYPICAL UPPER FLOO~ r I. 5CALE,1I8"~I'-O" ir=- T 0 ROOF :w--$- _ I . aEY, 171'-10 [1 ,- --- SEYENTH FLO~_ T_ ELEV, lGJ1-0 ~]l-=- L ~ SIXTJ-l FL~~ _ t ELEY, 150'-0' Li, FIFTH FL~~_ r ELEY, 1::iGj'-o' -~- .cr .- FOURTH FLO~ _ LJ ELEV, 126'-0 ',- THIRD FL~ _ ~ ELEV, lIG;-B" t] r y b- SECOND FLOOR ~ _ ~...1~ ELEY, 1OC\'--4" , r-II GROUND FLOOR ~TOWN HOME ELEY, 100'-0" !AlEST ELEVATION I IG22-01-AEL ENTRANCE .3, 5CALE,I/B"=I'-O" SEVENTH FLOOR $ - ~LEY, IGI'-O" SIXTH FLOOR $ - -ELEv, 150'-0" FIFTH FLOOR $ ~LEv, 139'-0" FACE BRIC~ FOURTH FLOOR $ rn ~LEv, 1210'-0" FACE BRIC~ THIRD FLOOR _~ _ - ~LEv' lIB'-B" SECOND FLOOR $ - - ~LEY, 109'--4" GROUND FLOOR ELEY, 100'-0" 2 SOUTH ELEVATION IG22-01-AEL 3, SCALE,I/B"=I'-O" ~ 9 1 EAST ELEVATION 3, 5CALEd/8"~I'-O" IG22-01-AEL - 5EVENT{ '0NC;?~ $ -- ----2LX1!:/; ~LNc;?~ $ - -ELFT{ 'i~~ $ -- -- ---EQlLR~ ~'Nc;?~ $ -- -----illP~ ~'Nc;?~ $ -- ---"""-" -. - - 0 ~rP-3 i ~OUJjD FLOOR $ III ./ ~~~-- - 7 TOI^INHOME5 I 50 P~~~~,g5~:S $ - Pl-1ASE 1: 47 COI\!DOMINIUM UNITS 50 UNDERGROUND PARKING SPACES 57 SURFACE PARKING SPACES I BUILDING SECTIOI\! 4, 5CALE,I"~IO'-O" li022-01-AB501 ------- GRADING NOTES: ,. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT 'GOPHER STATE ONE CALL' WITHIN TWO WORKING DAyS PRIOR TO EXCAVATlON/ CONSTRUCTION. FOR UTIurr LOCAlIONS. TWIN . CmES METRO A!tEA: 65145~02 OR TOLL-fREE: '-B~O-252-11S6. - - - - - - ~ 2. C~:O~~~~~O~ci~~~~~~SP~gR~~;;g:SITE <~~>~ . ---- r~~:- '2- GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHAU.. IMMEOIATaY NanFY THE PROJECT - ENGINEER OF IN( DISCREPANCIES OR VAfUIl.T10NS. 3. SUITA8~ GRADI~G MA~IA.L 's~ CONSI~ . ~F ALL SOil ENCOUNTERED ON x-u"~5 T H S T R THE SITE WITH EXCEPTION OF TOPSOIL. DEBRIS, ORGANIC MATERIAL AND . OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIAL STOCKPILE TOPSOIL .AND GRANUl.AR FlU. AT LOCATIONS DIRECTED EN' CDNTRACTOR. 4. SUBGAADE EXCAVAllON SHAlL BE BACKFlLLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXCAVATION TO HELP OFFSET 1#Y STAS1UTY PROBLEMS DUE TO WATER SEEPAGE OR ----r- - - STEEP SI.DPES. WHEN PLACING NE.W SURFACE MATERIAL ADJACENT TO I EXlSTlNG PAVEMENT. THE EXCAVATiON SHALL BE aA.CKFlLLED PROMPTLY To I AVOID UNDERMINING oF' THE ,EXl5TJNG PAVEMENT. I S. CONTRACTOR sHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AI..L HORIZONTAL AND VERTlCAL : CONlllOL I .s.. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE DRAINAGE TRENCHES TO FOLlOW PROPOSED I srgRM SEWER ~G.N~~.' I 7. GRADES SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADES. CONlRACTOR SHAll. ROUGH GRADE TO II SUBGRADE ELEVAlION, LEAVE 5TREEJ' READY FOR SUBBASE.. I B- ALl. EXCESS IolATERw.., BiTUMINOUS SURFACING, CONCROE ITEMS, ANY I ABANDONED UTIU1Y ITEMS, AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIALS SHAll. BECOME I THE PROPERTY OF 1liE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL. BE DISPOSED OFF THE I CONS!RUc:nON SITE. I I 9. REFER TO THE ARCHITEcrS SITE PLAN FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAl I ..~;;; DIMENSIONS AND sm: LAyOUT. I I 10. REFER TO UTIUlY PlAN FOR SANfTAR'l' SEWER !.lAIN. WATER MAIN SERVICE I LAyOUT AND ELEVAlIONS AND CASTING AND STRUCTURE SCHEDULE. I I 11. THE MINIMUM GRADED SI.CPE FROM EDGE OF BUIWING SHAlL BE 6 INCHES I IN 10 FEU. I I 12. FINISHED GROUND AND SOD ElEVAlION ADJACENT'TO BUILDING SHALL BE 5" I BELOW MOR EUYAlION. Sl..oPE GROUND AWAY FROId BUILDING A MINIMUM I OF 6" IN 10 FEEi BEYOND 10 FEEr REFER TO PLAN GRADES. I I 13. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR GRADING AND SLOPING THE ANlSHED I GROUND SURFACE 10 PROVIDE SMOOTH &. UNIFORM SLOPES, "''HICH PROVIDE I POStTNE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND PREVENT PONDING IN LOWER I AREAS. CONTACT ARCHITECT IF FIElD AOJU5ThlEHTS TO GRADING PLANS ARE I REQUIRED. I 1-4. CONTRACrOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONS1RucnON, PAVEMENTS AND CURB I ~~N~ c~~~~~~FO:MFl~P:J~~M:~E~~~~. I 15. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES C1.ASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE UNDER CURB I ""0 CUTTER. rt::. I I I EROSION CONTROL NOTES: <I : I rl"'ir... 1. All. PERIMETER SILT FENCE" AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES I ~ SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR 10 CONSTRUCTION. r-- I 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BASINS PRIOR TO SITE D I ~. GRACING. -.l : ......._. ~ .3. -11iE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE SITE AND INSTAll. Um.lTlES. , r- I -I "'- 4. 11iE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL CATCH BASIN EROSION CONTROL : ~ I ~~ 0 I 5. wmtlN TWO WEEKS OF SITE GRADING, AlL DISTURBED AREAS SlW.L BE : STABlUZED WITH SEED, SOD OR ROCK BASE. SEEDING sHAU. BE IN J ACCORDANCE WITli ""NDeT SPEC. 2575. -SEED MIXTURE SHALL BE MNDOT I ~~:~.OO.~Z~LC~~ ~~-'7&':1~ ~~M~~~i I MEETING THE RECU1REMENrS FOR UNDOT ~ae1 AND SHAU. aE APPUED J AT A RATE OF 200/LBS. PER ACRE. SOD SHAU. MID THE REOUIRO.lEHTS : :=w~~7~INI~ ~FFO~~ ~~~~JDo~ T~~~~ED SHALl BE t 6. AlL EROSION CONTROL. MEASURES SHNJ.. BE INSTAlLED AND MAINTAiNED IN I ACCORDANCE WITH CITY. WArcl5HED DISTRICT .AND MINNESOTA POLLUTION I CONlllOL (NPOES) PERMITS. I I 7. lHE CONTRACTOR SHAlL MAINTAIN AlL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES, ....... I INCL.UDING THE REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT IN FRONT OF SIL.T -l... __ I' FENCES. DURING THE DURAlION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. -....- I 8. Atff EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS SHALl. BE REMOVED BY THE ....--..1 CONlRACTOR.. . 9. REMOVE ALl EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION 15 ESTABUSHED. 10. ~O=gR~~ R:~~A~ ~~.1-ND SEDIMENT TRACKED "' '- 11. IF BLOWINC OUST BECOMES A NUISANCE. THE CONlRACTllR SHALL ~- hi" 1.- APPLY WATER FROM A lANK TRUCK TO AlL CONSTRUCTION AREAS. ~ _ I i 12. SWEEP ADJ~ S'TREEr IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS LEGEND -9QS- DENorr;.S EXISTING CONTOUR -998- DENOtES PROPOSED CONTOUR DENOTES eOUNDARY UNE ----------- DENOTES DRAlNAGE/UTIurr EASEMENT -<<- DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER -<:<- DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER -G00I3I3G00I300EJ- DENOTES EROSION CONTROL SILT Pc.NCE . .:. . . . :. . . :.. . :?' DENDTES PROPOSED RETAINING WALL ~ DENOTES PROPOSED ROCK CO~STRUCTlON ENTRANCE ~ DENOTES PERCENT OF GRADE ....- DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE FLOW II 1110.5 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT aEVATlON ~ DENOTES EXISTING eUILDING c:::::J DENOTES PROPOSED BUILDING q DENOTES PROPOSED EXISTING F"ES .... DENOTES PROPOSED FES/FES WITH RIPRAP 'Ii Cl DENOTES EXISTING stORM MANHoLE/CB ~ . OENOTES PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE/ce CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1. REFER TO AACHITECT"S SITE PLAN FDR BUII.DING AND PARKING LAYOUT DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS. . 2. PRIOR iO CDNSlRucnON, THE CONlRACllJR SHALL FIELD VERIFY AlL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS AND IN\IERTS. SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN.. Mf'( ~ - - ==- ~ -1......-1_~~sn.t 5WP. DISCREPANCY BE1'WEEN PLANS AND AElD CONOmONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO lH~ CJ'M'.IER IYMEDIATaY. ,~, -- L-= _ ~~-~. J. THE unurv CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY 1HE: LCCATJONS AND E1-~ATlON5 OF THE BUILDING PIPE SYSTEM PRIOR TO CDNSTRUCTING SERVICE 5TH CONNECllDNS. STREET N, .... All. \1T]L1TY WaRI< SHALL BE PERFDRMm IN ACCORDANCE WnH THE CITY OF HOPKINS SPECIFICATIONS AND BU1LDING PERMIT RECUIREMENTS. r___.._.._~I_ -I I -. -. S. 6- WATERMAlN SHALL Elf: CI.AS5 S2. DIP CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF M>l.S1/AWNA ClS1/A21.51 AND C104j.u1.4. FJ1iINGS SH.\l.L BE ClASS 250 CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF NlSl/AWWA --r- - - C110/A21.10 OR ~51/AWWA C15J/A21..5J. HYDRANTS SHAU.. BE THE I PACER I<S MANUFACTURED BY WATERDUS CO. OR APPROVEC EQUAL I COMPLYING WITH lHE THE CITY Of HOPKINS. - GATE VALVES SHALL BE I SINGLE DlSe 'TYPE WITH RESIUENT SEAT MEETING THE REOUIREMENTS Of I AWWA CS09.Al.J.. PLUGS, lEES, BENDS AND OlHER 1HRUST POlms I SHALl BE PRD'VlDED . WITH CONCRETE RE'ACTlON SACKING OR MEGA LUG. I Al.L WATERMAlN SHAU..BE lNSTALUD WITH A MINIMUM OF 7.s' COVER AND 1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA C600 AND CONOUc:nvny PROVISIONS I CONFORMING TO ANSI/AWWA C11l/A2.1.11. . BEfORE BaNG PLACED IN I SERVICE:, 1HE COMPLETED WATERMAlN SH....u. BE DISlNFECrED AND I FLUSHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.WWA CB51 AND niE REQUIREMENTS OF' ,I iHE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. I 3 I B. SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE a'" AND 6'" PVC-SDR-3S UNlESS NOTED I DIFFtRENTI..'f. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHAlL BE 6*' SCHEDUL.E 40 I PvC. MANHOLES SHALL BE 48- DIAMETER PRECAST RElNFDRCED I CONI:RETE IN Al:COROANCE WITH ASTM C47B. CASTING SHAll. BE J ---t~ NEENAH R-1B42 WITH lYPE -s" COYER. MANHOlES SHALl. HAVE A I NINIMUId OF iWO AND A MAXIMUM OF' FOUR ADJUSTMENT RINGS. AU. Pl~ I CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTIUlY ,STRUCTURES SHALL BE '"KOR-N- J SEAL'" OR CIlY APPROVED EOUAl...FDR CONCRE.TE BLOCK OR BRICK I. ---Iii: STRUCTURES. CONSTRUCT AN OPENING EQUAL. TO THE PIFE SIZE. GROUT J AROUND PIPE TO CLOSE OPENING, AND REPAIR smuCTURE TO cnv I --im REQUIREMENTS. lHE CONTRACTOR SHAlL VERIFY TYPE OF' CONNEC:nON I wtni CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTt.lENT AND COORDINATE Atf'( REQUIRED CJlY ,I ~; INSPECTIONS NEEDED FOR CrTY ACCEP1.'ANCE. .. I 1 7. STORM SEWER SHALl. BE RaNFORCED CONCRE1'E PIPE OR APPROVED I EQUAL CATCH BASINS SHAU. BE PRECAST R8NfORCED CONCRETE. I CASTING SHAlL BE NEENAH R-32S0 a WITH CURa BOX OR APPROVED I EQUAL MANHOLES SHALL BE FOUR FT. DlAMElER PRECAST REINFORCED I CONCRETE IN ACCORDANCE: WI1l1 ~ C478. CASTING SHAlL BE I NEENAH R-1733. ~HOLES SHAll. ttt.VE A MI~IMUM OF 2 AND A I t.lAXIMUM OF" ... AOJU5'ThlENT RINGS. 1 B. UTlUTY TRENCHES SHA.l.L BE COUPAI:TED 10 95:; STANDARD PROc:roR I I MA.XlMUM DRY DEN5JTY (ASllJ. 059B.78 OR MSHfO T-99) FROM THE: PIPE 1 I 1 I ZONE 10 WITHIN THREE FEET OF 1HE GROUND SURFACE AND 100:; I I STANDARD PROCTOR IN lHE UPPER THREE FEET. 1 \~ 9. CONNECTION TO iHE EXISTING SNIIrrARY SE.WER AND WAlER REQUIRES 1 - INSPECTION BY niE CITY OF HOPKINS. I " ~ I ~' ~ JIi(~ I ~ 1 , O. FIElD ADJUST AU. CASTINGS TO t.lATCH ANAL GRADES. 1 I U~ 11. CONTRAl:TOR SHALL CONTACT 'GOPHER STAlE ONE CALl' WITHIN lWO I 1 -~ I I WORKING DAYS PRIOR 10 EXCAVATlON/CONSTRUc:nON FOR UTIUlY 1 <L J LOCATIONS. lWIN CIT1ES METRO AREA: 651-~S4-000:! OR TOLL-FREE: I I ~ 1-800-252.-1166. J I 12. COmRACTClR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF HOPKINS ~ HOURS IN ADVANCE I i- f OF' WORKING WITHIN THE RIGHT OF' WAY. CITY INSPECTORS MUST I 0 I OBSERVE All WORK COMPLErED ON TOWN CENTRE DRIVE INCWDlNG 1 J REMOVAL OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. EXCAVATION OF TRENCHES, I ~ I PlACEMENT OF WAlER MAIN AND SANITARY SEWER, UTILm' CONNECTlOI'lS 1 1 TO EX1STlNG UNES, BAQ(F1LUNG AND PLAl:EMEN'r OF BllUM1NOUS f i- I PAVEMENT. I ::l I I I 13. CONlRACTOR SHAll. INSTAU,. INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REMOVE THE I 0 I NECESSARY S1GNAGE. FOR lANE CLOSURES. All. lRAF'FIC CONTROL I I D~CES AND SIGNING SI-W.l CONFORM TO lHE MN-MlJTCD, INI:U1DING I I FIELD MANUAL FOR T'EMPOR.4RY TRAFFlI: 1:0NiROL ZONE LAYOUTS, LATEST 1 I EDmoN. ONE ELI:\IEN FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH LANE IN EACH DIRECTION f I SHA1.L BE FROVlDED AT AU.. l1MES. I I J 1 1<4. THE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT IN ACCORDANCE 1 J WITH Mn/DOT SPECIFlCAnoNS. I 1 1 I 15. CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSl5LE FOR OBTAINING nit APPROPRIA"TE I I SEWER. WATER AND PLUMBING PERMITS FROM Tl-IE ClT\""S E1UIl.DING I I DEPARTMENT. 1 I f I 16. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHAlL COORDlNAlE WORK WITH AlL UTILITY I I COMPANIES. - I I "I.. I " I ...._-....J J_LI I I I I I ni LEGEND I I I j DENOTES BOUNDARY UNE I ----------- DENOTES DRAlNAGE/ unlm' EASEMENt" -<<- DENOTES EX1S11NG STORM SEWER -<<- DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER -1- DENOTES EXISTING WAri;RMAlN -1- DENOTES PROPOSED WA'TERMAlN J 1 W I IJ I I U_ I -<- DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER - <- DENOTES PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER ~ DENOTES EXISTING BUILDING c::::::J DENOTES PROPOSED BUlLOING 0 DENOTES EXISTING FES .. .. DENOTES PROPOSED FESjFES WITH RIPRAP (j) 0 DENOTES EJ(ISTING STORM MANHOlE/eB e " DENOTES PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE/CB (> DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE . DENOTES PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE .0- DENOTES EXISTING HYDRANT .... CENOTES PROPOSED HYDRANT .. DENOTES PROPOSED GATE VALVE ~ 5th Street North ~ ~ ~ ....... .r-5TEELED6EF<: ~ HI-! l..~iEEL E~ ~ ~ ~ - "1.... ~ ~ """,,",'NT" :I" f V~ V~~" NN ./ """ -,:y",J~)",,~~J;;b-k:.=~"'~b"Ji:",N--=-X;: ~_L~L~V.i,-:;::;;C)\: 7n~~~RE-tJ: /'1 ~~ \ :- n .r h J ""- /J ' . . '. ' ~,o i' I'U:! J.. '" "'- I7l . J / ~ ~'. 17l,.., " ... .. '== K '-..'><" .... . 1"'1-1 I-l C --- 1:;1;:. I loiN 1 V. - v...... ... ~ SNO' ,.,;../ ~ fcI)"''''' ~ - , " ," 0, r -~ ,ri:Y;Y:,(,f:rr:-r.~J{ "'. tI=' FlXTUr''''' " J,-/ I-d ,..'. . , 1; ~p," dd . '1'".... l!> ":'1" . r::b:L . .. 0 ....., '\ ~, .. ' 00- so J01 /' "'~"...Ii} f!"':- refrl '"'" ao tC' "'" ~ _~'waoP ~ ii' IMJ ~..LiOJ iOl ~ l./ <l PRlvACT FENCE ~ A~ I'T.i1 .:. "'. . -bE ..... r L.UJ ( ~ . / ~ :/"-0 ~ '. ~ ~ - :,. ~ ~OPklnSll'.'.: W. ~ [j&. n f~/ F;;'-. ' ' Ii lillr.=> , 14 House ~ ~ffiiJ' I' t " ~ ~ ,;... 111111 I( .'" do """"'"' ~~ 'i u ;;r\~m . , ~.~ ~ "ii" ~. .. ~ 00 ~ Ht . .. # . _ r.n . j"" I ' >-,,-,..,j "U!.. '"' "oUJnhome5 ~ '~ =- . ," ~"'- ""-' ""',rJ """ ~.. ~[$;T ,,:,,~~. ' ..' ~ _ oa ....._~ ~.l>.<l w- ~.:...; sao . . .--10' I..UGI-l ROtJ'olO ISU " ... . NN dd tmJ ...IE]' . ~ ~ I 51-lOi::60X LIG..T ...... '....l-llCsl-l PEO"5TF<!IAN . lli!U ~ ,uw A ' , _ - ~r"-- ~. FIXTURE (T'rPJ \ . . , L1GIoIT FI)(TURE ~ NN -' W , _L!C;U . '~~ ~ ", "'''':. /.,.-, ~ . ~ I, I .: ....,: ~~ f1<.: ~ :"-r;y' ~ .~; ~ "': ~ Ii. _ ' =-I~~) m , , " . n.", I;:' , """ ')'NI' ~ '"" -~ U ' '. l'l V ~+:b IIIII 1 Itj '-'\.-.J \.f13' " ,.. ~ ' i'-H .1 "' ~ r; ..': l..hb.J .' t:O: I 0' ~''''CE'''''R ~ """'''''',,.., ao J,'-:-;- 'p ).....;::::ty'-." I~' V ....j:;lQ P4. ~. 'Dr r..," -} , . . , . I ~ ~ \ ~~. ' - , ",'\1000 , '1-1- -f, -; , ~ ""'VACT'ENe, c;:;; lA'A:" ", , ' I., ,J, 00--, "'" I-[ill IJ ~ ~ ", ",.. _"L::::Ii'J>:~_:'C" -=' ,~iJ' .--.., 1 ~'~ ,7', ,II<ii' ':Ji1' , I~ r ~::;'~:'~"''''.' . iW"i' :: ". .. A ~,," .!.8, : I ~ :~,r""""J h, ~ /...". i" FlXriJ~ (TTPJ! I:C 'Of 'J'., . V L!:!:!...l I ~ 1.' .o..:.l.-: --r.:..::..)~X;J..:.~C '~ -' - I' ',\ :.k... ~ - " == ~ : ION ~ - - - ~ \ 1M-" ,,:f--! ILf\E \ EB-" ~i, \~ "". \f'IDlI I ,., / L.., waoa t.p;q \ I..m '1;;!;j ""A tEEt-' PRI....,AC,.. FENCE u:!2.J L I..dd.J - , . , ~~.t~ ~~~ I 11111I I I 'r.r\ ~l:~"' '" (_ . .: 1~...lr" ~ t-- 111111 ~ "'" c~. n VY'klIAlft'~I~/)"~ d "y,y., "",.,,: 1~l;I/ j '" II ~ ~ "f\Vjk. ~ ~ lit 1 ~- n ~- ~ 1/ ~Z Ex15tlng Walgreen. - I ;))1\ (" '~ I-+- 1 1'\ :. j I-L \ ,,* i I~I~,,;'- -t- ~ 1(1,: ~ :~ 'i - e Cc ; ~L I- 1 - 1= I , 7' "". f-- I I.......,......, 1-+ - " I ....i l( "-I') H~--,' '" " , l'~, I 1\ k:':' / @ ,I I -L .L- -L ____LJ_Lil I I I I I I I ( '''' r t' I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I ,~C:~ " 'j '-----"I l' ,) '- ~ \ \L ,j~ ) , I- I II II II I I I ~, _ 'Q~, I - ,----- ___ @ ,,"w 1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L 1.1 SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" ~__ SCALE: 1" = 20'.{)" ------