08-11-03 PC Agenda
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, August 11, 2003
7pm
I. Approval of Minutes - July 14, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting
II. Informal Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 46 -
Amendment No.4
Applicant: Calvary Lutheran Church
Address: 7520 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN
Purpose: The applicant would like to add, expand and reorganize spaces such as
the narthex, offices, a music wing and meeting rooms.
III. Informal Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 66 -
Amendment No.2
Applicant: Jim Lupient
Address: 7000 and 7100 Wayzata Blvd, Golden Valley, MN
Purpose: The applicant would like to expand the Infiniti dealership building to create
an attached service facility on the north end of the building.
IV. Informal Public Hearing - City Code Text Change Amendment
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: To allow for retail sales and service in both the Light Industrial and
Industrial Zoning Districts as conditional uses only.
V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
VI. Third Review of Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R-1)
VII. Adjournment
.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 14, 2003
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall
Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday,
July 14, 2003. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
e
Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Eck, Groger,
Rasmussen and Shaffer. Also present were Director of Planning
Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - June 9, 2003 Planning Com
MOVED by McAleese, seconded by Eck and motion c
the minutes from the June 9, 2003 meeting as su
II.
Reports on Meetings of the Housing a
Council, Board of Zoning Appea
pment Authority, City
gs
McAleese discussed the July 1, 2003
Conditional Use Permit for the Eli
Council asked if the Planning C
of these types of auto uses.
determine if there are wa
Conditional Use Permits.
unless they are attached
auto dealerships a
suggested having a
ting he attended where the
discussed. He said that the
me up with a way to limit the number
he I oing to talk to the City Attorney to
mber of auto dealerships applying for
aybe not allowing dealers to sell used cars
car de lership. McAleese stated that not allowing
se would be the best way to eliminate them. Pentel
used auto dealerships.
ing Commission on recent Sheriff's Site information. He
signated a developer and that there should be more
ugust or September and that there would be at least two more
'ngs.
III.
eview of Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R-1)
Shaffer referred to Subdivision 9 in Grimes' memo dated July 8, 2003 and stated that
he agreed with staff's suggestion of using two ,or three different lot coverage
requirements due to the varying size of lots in Golden Valley.
e
Shaffer asked if there was going to be anything added to the Zoning Code about
houses over 40 feet in length being required to increase the setback one or two feet for
every five or ten feet of increase in length. Grimes expressed concern about
administering that requirement.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 14, 2003
Page 2
e
Eck referred to Subdivision 10 (A)( 1) and expressed concern about the idea of
changing the front yard setback from 35 feet to 30 feet because he feels people would
push the 30 foot front yard setback requirement as well. Grimes suggested that another
option could be to allow only open porches in the front setback area. Groger stated that
he thought a 30-foot front yard setback would be fine if it were only for an open type of
front porch.
e
Groger referred to Subdivision 10 (A)(3) regarding side yard setbacks a
he is concerned about changing the side yard set back requirement
would allow anyone to build anything up to 10 feet to the property . e.
worried about access to rear yards and about intruding on neig
that most of the side yard variance requests are for kitchens,
bathrooms and garages.
ed that
ich
eis
ined
McAleese stated that he liked the idea of having a 15-
requirement and that the City needs to look at the
Grimes asked the Commission if he should put
before a public hearing. Groger suggested
ection of the Zoning Code
ard setback issue out.
Pentel referred to Subdivision 11 and
be considered an accessory buildi
best judgment and look at whet
type storage sheds would
staff would have to use their
size as a shed.
Keyser asked Grimes to de .
accessory building. McA
buildings when they get t
ory building. Grimes read the definition for an
it makes sense to regulate accessory
uare foot level like the definition says.
Groger referred to
accessory buil gs
A)(2) and stated that the required front setback for
eet, not 30 feet as it is written.
Groger re
Buildin
requirem
. ion 12 and asked for clarification on what Pre-1982
xplained that if a house built before 1982 meets the
Ion 12 then it could be added to without requiring a variance.
o ubdivision 12(0) and stated that he is concerned about the setback
ildings being three feet to the side or rear yard property lines. He said
eet would be more appropriate.
e
Shaffer referred to Subdivision 14(C) which requires driveways to be the same width as
garages and asked about single-car garages with a driveway on the side. He suggested
possibly allowing a percentage of driveway space instead. McAleese suggested
keeping the requirement of driveways having to be the same width as the garage and if
a different situation comes up, then it would have to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals
for a variance.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 14, 2003
Page 3
. Groger referred to Subdivision 16(A)(8) and stated he thinks 9 pm is too late for home
occupation business activities. Grimes said that when the home occupation part of
Code was originally written the City wanted to be very restrictive, but now more people
work from their homes. He asked the Commissioners how they felt about allowing
people with home occupations to have one outside employee. They all agreed it would
be okay to allow one outside employee.
Keysser stated that he did not agree to Subdivision 16(A)( 10) regardin
to the home occupation shall be provided only on the driveway of the
the home occupation operates. Grimes explained that parking on
number one complaint the City receives in regard to home occu
IV. Housing Plan Review
discussed areas of the City
ort of higher density housing.
Pentel asked about the maps, traffic information and
recently asked for regarding Area B. Grimes state
looking at what certain types of densities, townh
in that area. He added that the demographics 0
with children.
e
The Planning Commission referred to t
they thought could possibly be red
Grimes referred to the intersect
be a high density, mixed-u
h.l-aureI and stated that there is going to
t at the Olympic Printing site.
Pentel referred to the res
Environmental Edu .on
h of 1-394, east of the Westwood Hills
n Wisconsin Ave. S. as a possible housing site.
Metropolitan Ballroom. Grimes said there are some
o is planning to keep the bank they closed on Douglas.
re holding on to it for now.
he area east of the Spirit of Hope Methodist Church on Highway 55
to Glenwood could also be a potential site. Pentel added that if the City
tries to b e a champion in getting a right turn in, right turn out on Rhode Island it
would help traffic in that area tremendously.
Grimes stated that another possible area could be along the Creek behind where
Central Bank is being built at the intersection of 10th Ave. N. and Winnetka.
e
Pentel stated that she thinks there are a lot of light industrial areas could be looked at
for housing.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 14, 2003
Page 4
.
Rasmussen asked about the northwest side of the General Mills property. Grimes
stated that is the Sheriff's Site.
Pentel suggested looking along the border of Crystal and along Highway 100 in the
Lowry Terrace area.
McAleese referred to the intersection of Douglas and Duluth and stated that the City
has had a number of proposals for that site over the years.
Grimes referred to the northeast corner of Douglas, south of
Circle, behind Oak Grove Church.
Golden Valley
ut said that it would
Grimes suggested the area near Medicine Lake Road, north of Sa
Pentel mentioned the Light Industrial area west of Highway 1
McAleese suggested the gas storage tank site a
Road. Grimes questioned if people would want
be worth looking at.
e
Pentel asked Grimes if the City knows
they would like to own the property
their world headquarters.
s are. Grimes stated that
ay 55 and make Golden Valley
Groger referred to an unde
Island and stated he thin
trial area between Pennsylvania and Rhode
e for some better use.
Shaffer asked abo
understanding that
Pentel stated t
require a PUD
n Laurel Avenue. Grimes stated that it was his
ing about moving, but that he hasn't heard anything.
f these sites they have been discussing would
think again about revising the City's PUD requirements.
y has any vacant institutional properties such as schools,
es ated that District 281 has a vacant building but that they have
ep it as an asset.
d coming up with a list of criteria for consideration in identifying areas
that coul ntially be used for housing redevelopment sites. Shaffer stated that the
areas that have already been discussed have all been on arterials.
Pentel stated that the ones that have been identified are next to Industrial or Light
Industrial zoning districts.
.
Grimes stated that he is also concerned about not losing affordable housing as well.
Pentel asked if the City could look at proposals more positively if the developer could
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
July 14, 2003
Page 5
.
show that a project had a certain percentage of affordable housing in it. Shaffer stated
that the developer should know up front how much of the project needs to be affordable
because it may change the plans. Rasmussen asked if the City could just come up with
an arbitrary percentage. McAleese explained that if the City doesn't come up with a
percentage then the developers will come up with the higher density but not with the
affordability. Pentel said that she thinks as people continue to age there is going to be
another wave of affordable building.
Grimes asked if anyone would be willing to meet with him and come
criteria for developers to follow in redeveloping any of the areas th H
identified. Pentel said she would be willing to meet with him.
meeting to set up some
t up a meeting.
~
Groger said that a concern of his is not the larger developm
asked if criteria of the larger developments could be tied in to
areas that need to be fixed up. ~ ~
\- Pentel said she also wants criteria for connectio
Keysser said he would like to join Pentel a
criteria for developers to follow. Grimes
.
v.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at
.
e
Planning
763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
August 6, 2003
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Design Plan for Amendment No.4, Calvary
Lutheran Church--Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 46
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST BY CALVARY
.
Calvary Lutheran Church has requested a fourth amendment to their existing planned unit
development (PUD) that would allow for several significant improvements to the church to
accommodate their growing programs and congregation. The total occupied space will go from
97,500 sq. ft. to 245,875 sq. ft. with the majority of the new space in a three-story building.
Improvements include the following:
1. A three-story north wing (about 51,000 sq. ft. total) that includes meeting rooms,
classrooms, administration offices and relocated childcare on the main level with an entry
with a drop off canopy at the southeast corner of the north wing and a separate entrance to
the childcare area off the north side of the north wing.
2. The existing administration wing on the east side will be replaced with a new structure that
expands the narthex and gathering space outside the main sanctuary and provides
additional space for the youth in the lower level and kitchen space for this area.
3. Removal of the two houses at the northeast corner of the property along Pennsylvania Ave.
This area will be used for surface parking to replace the parking areas lost to the
construction of the north wing and the construction of a retention pond at the northwest
corner of the site. (These houses have been used for daycare that will be relocated into the
north wing building.)
e
4. Other parking lot and access changes to accommodate the new construction.
e
Calvary Church is also considering future improvements to the site that are not included in this PUD
application. They are, however, indicated on the plans as future options. These future options
include a fourth story on the north wing for additional office and meeting space, a 500 seat chapel
at the corner of Golden Valley Road and Pennsylvania Ave., a music auditorium, a redesigned
parking lot with new drop off canopy at the Golden Valley Rd. entrance, and a parking deck above
the parking space where the two houses on Pennsylvania Ave. are now located. Each of these
items would have to be addressed as a future amendment to the PUD. However, the staff and
church believe it is helpful to indicate all future possibilities for the site so this can be taken into
consideration when considering the current PUD amendment.
Calvary has provided a detailed description of the proposal that is attached. The packet includes a
Traffic Impact Study and Drainage Calculations that were used to determine the type and size of
drainage facilities that will be needed for the revised Calvary campus.
SITE HISTORY
e
According to the book Golden Valley-A History of a Minnesota City 1986-1996 by the Golden
Valley Historical Society, ground was broken for Calvary Church in 1947. Since its construction of
the original church building at the corner of Golden Valley Rd. and Pennsylvania Ave., there have
been several significant improvements made to the 9.2-acre church campus including the new
sanctuary with seating for 1200 persons completed in the early 1980's. When Calvary was built,
there was no such thing as a PUD. The existing zoning at the time permitted the construction of a
church at that location. The Calvary PUD No. 46 was first issued in 1984 because Calvary had
acquired the two homes along Pennsylvania Ave. for a day care building and a counseling center.
Calvary also desired to create more parking at the northwest corner of their site by building a new
parking lot on property that they had purchased in the early 1980's. It was the determination of staff
and Calvary that the best process to incorporate those uses into the Calvary campus was the
creation of a PUD. (The City started using the PUD process in the early 1970's.)
The first amendment to the PUD (1988) allowed for a drop-by childcare center within the Calvary
Church building in addition to the day care provided in the house on Pennsylvania Ave. The second
amendment (1989) allowed both of the buildings on Pennsylvania Ave. to be used for child care
(eliminating the counseling center in the north house) and allowing the future construction of up to
10 parking spaces in from of the two child care houses. The third amendment (1991) allowed
Calvary to make a significant addition to the north side of their church building. This addition is a
two-level structure that has a footprint of about 9,300 sq. ft. with a total of 18,000 sq. ft. on two
levels. The purpose of that addition was to add a new fellowship lounge, library, nursery space and
multi-purpose rooms on the lower level.
PLANNING ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
Because this is an amended PUD, the City does not have to go through the process to determine if
the proposal meets the test to be a PUD. In this case, this determination was made in 1984. Since
that time, three amendments have been made that have permitted expanded uses at the Calvary
campus that are consistent with the overall nature of a large, church campus. However, with each
change or amendment, the City has the right and obligation to review the proposed changes to
e
2
e
insure that they are consistent with good planning principals and that the proposal will have a
positive impact on the community as a whole.
In this case, the staff would like to review several issues regarding this proposal and make
comments and recommendations. These issues are as follows:
Traffic Generation-Calvary is a large church that has many services and programs to serve their
members and the community. Staff asked Calvary and its consultants to provide certain information
to the City in order to determine the impact of the expansion on the City's local street system and
the internal circulation on the Calvary parking lot. The City had the City's consulting traffic engineer,
Glen Van Wormer of Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH) review the Traffic Impact Study. His findings
are attached to the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to me dated August 7, 2003. Mr. Van
Wormer finds that overall, there will be minimal traffic impacts from the expansion and that traffic
can be handled on the existing street system with small amounts of congestion in off-peak hours.
The City Engineer will give a final review to the internal site circulation as part of the General Plan
of Development process.
e
City staff is not in favor of any changes being made to Pennsylvania Ave. as proposed in the
Preliminary Design Plan submittal. Calvary would like to build a loading dock off Pennsylvania Ave.
to serve delivery trucks that come to the church. As indicated in Mr. Oliver's memo, he is not in
favor of the loading dock in this location for a couple of reasons. First, trucks would be maneuvering
in the street in order to back into the dock. Pennsylvania Ave. is only 24 ft. wide at that location.
This could cause a traffic hazard. He would like to see the loading dock at some internal location on
the site. The Planning staff agrees. Second, the loading dock would require that restoration would
have to be done to Pennsylvania Ave. This is a new street and it would have to be completely
restored in a way consistent with the City's Pavement Management Policy. This would be a costly
restoration.
Calvary is also proposing to add two or three parking spaces along Pennsylvania Ave. by
lengthening the parking bay south of the railroad tracks. The staff is not in favor of this change
unless Calvary will restore the pavement in a method approved by the Public Works Department.
This restoration would be costly. This is also mentioned in Mr. Oliver's memo and the Planning staff
agrees the expansion of this parking bay should be discouraged.
Parking-Parking is always a concern with any large development and a church is no exception.
In the case of the proposed amendment to the PUD, Calvary is proposing to add 200 seats to the
capacity of the sanctuary. Therefore, there will be 1400 seats total. The parking requirement for a
church is one space for each three seats. Therefore, Calvary must have 466 spaces available.
After the construction, there will be 301 spaces on the campus (not including Pennsylvania Ave.
parking). Calvary also has a long-term agreement with the office building to the south for the use of
172 spaces on Sunday and Christmas Day. This brings the total spaces available to 473 spaces
after construction. Calvary has also entered an agreement with other office and industrial buildings
in the area for the use of parking on Sunday. Calvary runs a shuttle service to those parking lots.
Overall, staff believes that the parking is more than adequate for the proposed expansion. The
parking on Calvary property (301 spaces) is more than adequate to meet their weekday needs for
e offices, day care and mid-week services.
3
e
The new parking lot that will be located where the two day care houses are now will have a setback
of about 27 ft. from Pennsylvania Ave. or about the same setback as the existing parking lot to the
south of it. (Normal setback for parking lots along streets is 35 ft.) Also, this parking lot will be
constructed to within 20 ft. of the north property line adjacent to the railroad tracks rather than the
required 25 ft. Because the area along the railroad track is wooded, this 5 ft. encroachment into the
normally required setback is acceptable.
If Calvary does decide to go ahead with the addition of the 500-seat chapel shown on the site plan
as future development, the parking need will have to be more closely evaluated at that time. They
have also shown the possibility of a parking deck over the parking lot to be built where the two day
care houses are now located.
Height of Building and Design-The north wing building will be attached to the north side of the
building where it was expanded in 1991. The building is proposed to have a 17,000 sq. ft. footprint
and be three-stories in height. Future plans call for the construction of a fourth story. At the current
time, the Calvary Church campus has no building over two stories. The steeple is the highest
structure on the campus. The north wing will be 42 ft. in height with three stories and 55 ft. at four
stories. Although not a part of the PUD, the Calvary Apartments and Cooperative are much taller.
The Cooperative building is over 10 stories in height and the apartment is 6-7 stories in height.
Because of the height of these buildings on the block, the north wing will blend in well.
e
The building plans call for the use of materials that are similar to the existing structures and will
emphasis the use of brick, stone and glass. Overall, the proposed building plans are well conceived
and should be an enhancement to the community. Because of the extensive trees along the
railroad track to the north and the height elevation difference (lower to the north), the visual impact
of the construction on the neighborhood to the north will be minimal.
Noise from Outdoor Worship Services-Part of the Calvary worship program is to use Calvary
Park for the site of worship services during the warm weather months. Two services on Sunday and
one on Thursday night are held in Calvary Park that is directly west of the two existing day care
houses and just south of the railroad tracks. This outdoor worship has been a popular part of
Calvary for several years. However, this year and last year, the City has received complaints from
several neighbors who live north of the railroad track. These neighbors believe that the noise
coming from the outdoor service is too loud due to the use of electronic amplification for both music
and voice. This past year, the City filed a criminal complaint against Calvary for creating too much
noise at the outdoor service. This was based on complaints from citizens and police verification of
the noise. The criminal complaint remains in the court although the City's prosecuting attorney
believes that a resolution to the complaint is near because certain actions have been taken by
Calvary. First, Calvary has changed the times for the outdoor worship on Sunday morning. The first
service now starts at 10 AM rather than 8 or 8:30 AM. Second, the City has monitored the noise
from the service on three separate occasions. None of the measurements exceeded state noise
standards.
Even though the sound from the outside services does not exceed state noise standards, the City
has consistently been receiving complaints from several people living north of the railroad tracks
about the noise from the service even though the services do not start until 10 AM. I have spoken to
e
4
e
a couple of the neighbors and they believe that the noise is too loud and disturbs their right to quiet
and that the noise constitutes a nuisance.
Based on my discussions with Calvary, they believe that the actions that they have taken to reduce
noise and move the start time back for services should be sufficient. Calvary has stated in the PUD
application material that they want to continue in discussions with the City and neighbors regarding
the noise issue. With the construction of another building on the campus closer to the
neighborhood to the north, there is also some concern about the effect of noise bouncing off the
proposed north wing building and back into the neighborhood.
Staff believes that this will be the main issue of concern that is brought by neighbors regarding this
PUD amendment. How can this issue be resolved so that Calvary can continue there outside
worship without disturbing some of the neighbors to the north? Staff does not know the answer right
now. Staff is suggesting that prior to the General Plan approval by the City Council, Calvary Church
and representatives from the neighborhood to the north meet in a process to determine the
acceptable level of noise that can be heard in the neighborhood to the north during use of Calvary
Park for services and events. Staff is not saying that Calvary cannot worship outside. However,
there may be a need for the amplification to be reduced.
e
Landscaping and Tree Preservation-The preliminary landscape plan for the PUD indicates that
most landscaping will stay in place and new landscaping added around the new buildings. This will
have to be shown in greater detail when the Building Board of Review reviews the plans. There will
have to be some more landscaping detail around the holding pond at the northwest corner of the
site. Also there will have to be landscaping around the new construction areas. Overall, Calvary has
done a good job with landscaping and maintaining the plant material.
In addition, a tree preservation plan will have to be submitted as part of the General Plan of
Development. It appears that the impacts on existing trees will be minimal with the exception of the
areas around the day care houses due to the parking lot construction. All effort should be made to
maintain the existing line of trees south of the railroad tracks along the entire length of the Calvary
property.
Fire Prevention Concerns-Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson has written a memo to me dated
June 25, 2003 that covers the issues of concern to the Fire Prevention Department. The Planning
staff concurs for all comments from Mr. Anderson.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The plans for the expansion of Calvary Church in Golden Valley show a continued commitment by
the church to this community. The plans also show how the expansion will occur and that they will
have a minimal impact on the City's infrastructure. The plans also show an attractive campus that
will blend in well with its surrounding residential, commercial and institutional neighbors. However,
there are some concerns that staff has related to the PUD application. If these areas of concern are
addressed, staff believes that the expanded Calvary campus will operate very successfully.
.
5
.
The City staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Design Plan for Amendment NO.4 to the
Calvary Church PUD No. 46 with the following conditions:
1. The plans submitted with the application and prepared by BWBR Architects shall become a
part of this approval. The plans are dated June 30, 2003.
2. The findings and recommendations found in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, to
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and dated August 7, 2003 shall become
a part of this approval.
3. The memo and comments from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, to Mark Grimes, Director
of Planning and Development and dated June 25, 2003 shall become a part of this approval.
4. Prior to approval of the General Plan of Development by the City Council, Calvary Church
and representatives of the neighborhood to the north of the railroad tracks and west of
Pennsylvania Ave. shall enter into a process to negotiate an acceptable level of sound that
can be generated from services and events at Calvary Park.
Attachments
e
Location Map
Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, dated June 25, 2003
Memo from Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer, dated August 7, 2003
Site Plans prepared by BWBR Architects, dated June 30, 2003
Calvary's PUD Application Submittal
.
6
i'il
DvL 1.'4 2003
....I!:W. B R
. . .. ARCHITECTS
PUD PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
~ds ~ise...
~~l~t;"..,,, .
;--....._ ___Hv__.!':t;: l~~
Calvary Lutheran Church
2002 Expansion
BWBR Commission No. 2002.051.00
--- ------------ ---~~- -- ---
I, Information Index
1. City of Golden Valley Application for Consideration of PUD Ordinance
(preliminary Design Plan) Application
.
2. Tree Preservation Form
3. Project Information
4. Attachment 1: Traffic Impact Study
5. Attachment 2: Drainage Calculation
6. Attachment 3: Drawing Index
7. Attachment 4: Tentative Planning Schedule
8. Check for Application Fee (free Preservation)
Note:
-Soil Boring Report is to follow.
-Copy of Parking Agreement will be provided by Calvary.
e
G:I02051001Admin\AgendasIPUDlndex.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
P.U.D. Number~
.
City of Golden Valley
Application for Consideration of
Planned Unit Developm~nt Ordinance
Preliminary Desion Plan
Date of Application: 07/ 1 ~ 10.3. :
*Fee Paid
($300.00)
Receipt No.. _
Applicant Information
Name:. . Calvary Lutheran Church. of Golden Valley
(Individual, or corporate enti~)
Mailing Address: 7520 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
....-.......
. Daytime Phone:
E-Mail Address:
763-545-5659
Fax: 763-545-6953
-dthatcher@calvary.org
e
Authorized Representative, if other than Applicant:
Name:
BWBR Architects
Mailing Address: .' . 380 St-. Peter St., Suite 600
St. Paul, MN 55102..,1996
Daytime Phone:
E-Mail Address: .
651-222-3701
Fax:. 651-222-8961
rstuerman@bwbr.com
/
Prp:perty Owner:
'/
Mailing Address:
-"
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
e
- /'
Street Location and/or Address of Property in. Question: 7520 --Golden Valley Road.
810-830 Rhode Island Ave No.,. 831 & 855 :P.Emnsylvania Ave No. ,Golden Valley, MN
Legal Description (Attach separ~te sheet if necessary): Parcell: Lots. 1, 2, 3. & 4,
Blo~ 1, Calvary -Lutheran Church PUD No. 46, Files of Registrar of Titles,
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Being registered land as evidenced.by
Certificate of Title No. 747303
Parcel 2: Lot 5, Block 1, Calvary Lutheran Church PUD No. 46, according to the
recorded plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, ~nnesota.Abstract
*fee for PUD Amendment $250.00 Property.
7520 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
__ - - ...._ - ___11__":.......
c
~. '~:e Of Proposal:
Small Area:
. .esid~ntlal: .
Business & ~rofes'sional
Office:
Large or Complex Area:
Commercial: Industrial:
Institu.tional:
Mixed Use:
Redevelopment Area:
Present Zoning of Property: P. u. D.
. .
ProposedUse.of Property (Attach' additional pages if.neoessary): Present use':' Institutional:
church, meetng ~9oms, offices;. preschool, daycare & drop in daycare, gymnasium
'acti vitj,.es ~ meal service. 'Future use:. CC?lumbarium'
I.
.I
/
Structures:
. o'!
. .
Number:.' 1 Type: Existing varies,. Proposed: .
. w./fire sepaz:ations. Type. 'II A & B '. .
. Nurt:lb~~ of Stories:. . 1 tvp: 4 max at propo~ed addition
.rriEmJli$S and/or Recreati!;>nal FacUlties (i.e. Tennis CO~rI,Pool.*.):' ~rk. playground..
. Height: Proposed Max.
Futut::e Max.
~asium .'
. Number of People Intended.to Live or'Work on Premises:
. Adults: . ,'. . Children:
1200 seats:'iri Sanctuary,. 300. in Chapel.
NUmber of Off-Street Parking Spaces' Proposed: 3
. //. . .' . .
I. ..' ..... .'
Enclosed (Garag.e or Parking Ramp):. ._--
:Non-Enclosed:
3.
. .
Total Acres of Land hi P.U.D.: 9.,2 acr~s
400,749' s.L
. Density (No. of Units per As.re): . N/ A
Indicate the Followina. Data bv Percentaaes:
. . .... . ..', 20% Propo'sed' . .
Area COY~red; by Structures: . 25% . Future ..' % Area Covered by Outside Parking:.. S~e . %
. . Excludng parkng . deck eup tGl 50,000 $. L ) Inter~or Street'
Area Covered bylnterior Stteet,&: : 3R % Area Landscaped: 25 . %
.. 2i,336 South, 131,000' North-152,33? S.F... (98,720 s.f.)
-Natural Area and/or Open Space: 13.5 " % Ponding Area: ..... 2.1< %
Calvary Park=54,240 S~F.
~
~
c,
.
Zonina Variances:'
-List below all variances from the standard zoning requirements that will be -requested if this P ;U.D.
, is approved, al!d the justi~cationfor the City Council to grant such variances (attaoh additional
sheets if needed). '
New curb~ut for loading zone.
Future Musi~wing over buildng setback to align ,with exist~gg west ,facade.
,.
Future 4th floor at north wing.'
I hereby declare thafall statements made in this application, arid on additional material, are true to
the best of my imowledge.' .
, "Signature of Applicant
Date
Signature of Property Owner'
Date'
e
I
./i
;/
I,.
/ I
./
. ;
I
./'
, ./'
./'
I' .
e
I.n',"
~
e
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
7520 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, :MN 55427
Phone: 763.545.5659
Fax: 763.545.6953
Legal Description:
Parcell: Lots 1,2, 3, and 4, Block 1, Calvary Lutheran Church PUD No. 46, Files of Registrar of
Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Being registered land as evidenced by Certificate of
Title No. 747303.
Parcel 2: Lot 5, Block 1, Calvary Lutheran Church PUD No. 46, according to the recorded plat
thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property.
e
e
e
BWBR
ARCHITECTS
PUD PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
,
...<p-.
, I
\\ ',k'"
~. \.\.;..()/..~if ~ll" '~.
'It" ' S ISe
I J ^-__:l~".
\; V~ .
, ():,n;(,,; F<~:P!'.:~"'>l:l- i:lft,' ",'l .t;r,;n:~_,,-:.~
Calvary Lutheran Church
2002 Expansion
BWBR Commission No. 2002.051.00
e
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Calvary's first building was on this site more than 60 years ago. They have expanded their worship capacity
twice with the chapel that seats 300 (1950) and the Sanctuary that seats 1200 (1981). They added office
facilities (1961), a gymnasium with a preschool (1963) and a family life center (1991) with a gathering Space,
classrooms and a nursery. In the 1970's Calvary purchased the neighboring homes adjacent to their property
to the railroad tracks. A childcare center for approximately 80 children is operated out of the two remaining
homes today.
Each building is constructed with a different construction type. The exterior of each addition is clad in brick
similar to the original building to create a unifying appearance. There is a basement under 80 percent of the
buildings main level. Currendy the only second level spaces are the balcony of the sanctuary and the offices in
the steeple tower of the chapel.
The church holds regular services Thursday evenings at 6:30 PM and Sunday's at 8:00 AM, 8:45 AM, 10:00
AM and 11:15 AM, Services (except 8:00 AM) are held out doors in Calvary Park, weather permitting, May
thru September. Calvary's Preschool has morning (9:00 AM) and early afternoon (12:00 PM) sessions. The
childcare operates from 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM. A separate hourly daycare service operates at 9:00 AM - 3:00
PM M-F, September thru May. All preschool and childcare programs are for children ages 2 - 5 years.
PURPOSE FOR THE PROPOSAL
The proposal is to expand and reorganize the support spaces such as the Narthex, offices and meeting rooms
to facilitate the current demand while providing flexibility to meet future demands.
e
PROPOSED SCOPE
The North Wing is a three-story building with meeting rooms and classrooms, administration offices and the
childcare relocated to the main level. The building is located immediately north of the existing Family Life
Center and each floor is 14,000 sf. A new entry with a drop off canopy will be constructed at the southeast
comer of the new wing. The childcare will have it's own entrance and parking on the north side of the
building.
The existing administration building on the east side will be replaced with a new structure that expands the
narthex and gathering spaces and provides additional space for youth in the basement. This building will also
provide new toilets on both levels and a kitchen to serve the gathering space.
G:I02051001Admin\Agendas\PUDplOjeclinfo.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
Page 2
e
Site work will include removing the houses on the northeast property to replace the parking lost by the
addition of the North Wing and a storm water retention system that utilizes Calvary Park as an infiltration
basin. The shared driveway from Calvary Commons Apartments will have to be realigned to accommodate a
vehicular connection around the North Wing.
There will be interior remodeling and relocation of existing spaces. The fire protection system including
alarms and signals will be expanded to cover all parts of the building.
Although the timeframe and location has not been determined, Calvary proposes to build a columbarium for
members and their families.
FuTURE SCOPE
Calvary foresees a future need to provide an intimate worship setting similar to their existing chapel with new
technology provisions. The addition of the future chapel will allow the current chapel to be restored into a
fellowship hall for gathering and dinners. The future chapel would be located on the lawn south of the
existing chapeFand it would seat approximately 500 people. Choir rehearsal rooms and meeting rooms would
be located in the basement. Calvary also envisions the need for a music auditorium for 100 choir members
direcdy south of the Sanctuary; a new entry and drop off canopy facing Golden Valley Road; a fourth floor
on the North Wing and a 105-125 car parking deck above the northeast parking area.
. DESIGN DESCRIPTION
All new structures will be designed to the mc 2000 code and meet :Minnesota and ADA accessibility
requirements. New structures will be designed to compliment the existing building with similar materials such
as brick, stone and glass. The canopies will be metal. The building perimeter will have plant materials
compliant to Golden Valley City Standards. Other disturbed areas will be sod or ground cover.
The additions will be one story with a basement except the North Wing, which is proposed at four stories in
its final construction. At three stories the height of the North Wing is 42 feet, at four stories the height is 55
feet.
The Proposed project will increase the building footprint from 51,000 sf. to 83,500 sf. and the total occupied
space from 97,500 sf. to 245,875 sf. The future footprint will increase to 102,000 sf. total and 278,375
occupied space.
The childcare will expand from 80 kids to accommodate 120 kids.
NOISE
Calvary has responded to the noise issues in the Park by moving their 8:00 AM service indoors and managing
noise levels to the lowest effective level for their parishioners. Calvary will continue to monitor the situation
and participate in discussions with the city and its neighbors.
PARKING
Existing onsite Parking = 359 spaces, 19 HC included
Proposed on site Parking = 366 spaces, 23 HC included
Future onsite Parking = 450 - 500 spaces depending upon future parking deck design
e
The church has signed agreements with neighboring businesses to park during non business hours to
make an additional 554 spaces available to parishioners. See the traffic study for more detail.
G:\0205100\AdminlAgendasIPUDprojeclinfo.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, J\iN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
.
BWBR
ARCHITECTS
PUD PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
~~ ~mise...
0uP~1~.
()-q-{~ 1~~~~.>;:.~o"'.ll':~~ l"t,~
Calvary Lutheran Church
2002 Expansion
BWBR Commission No. 2002.051.00
~~------~ ~------ --- - ------ - - -
, Attachment 1: Traffic Impact Study
e
e
G:\0205100\Admin\Agendas\PUDtraffic.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
e
Traffic Impact Study
For the Expansion of
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
e
Prepared By
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
July 2003
e
e SUMMARY
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley is planning an expansion of existing day care,
gathering and worship facilities on their existing site located at 7520 Golden Valley Road in the
City of Golden Valley. The multi-phase expansion is expected to include relocation of their
existing day care facilities and expansion ofthe narthex/gathering space in a" first phase, with the
second phase providing additional worship and music capacity.
This report provides data and analysis of traffic conditions and impacts for the project. Data was
collected to determine existing conditions and use them to quantify traffic and parking impacts
from the proposed development. A summary ofthis work follows:
. Currently, Church generated peak hour traffic occurs from 9:30 to 10:30am on Sunday
mornings. The future peak is also anticipated to correspond to this time period.
. The Sunday peak hour traffic in front of the Church on Golden Valley Road totals
approximately 450 cars and is split nearly evenly between west and east bound.
. Sunday peak parking demand also occurs in the 9:30 to 1 0:30am hour. During this peak, on-
site and immediately adjacent contract parking south ofthe Church was approximately 82%
full.
e
. During the peak hour, total lot utilization (including lots served by shuttles) was approximately
64%, leaving over 320 of 892 total parking spaces open for use.
. The weekday peak hour building occupancy for the Church is Wednesday evenings from
6:00pm to 7:00pm when approximately 500 people are typically in the building. This
compares to the nearly 1400 people in the building during the Sunday morning peak hour.
. Calculated weekday peak hour traffic (5pm to 6pm) generated by the current Church facility
totals 185 trips. In the 6pm to 7pm hour the total is 394 trips.
. Wednesday mornings (300 people) and Thursday evenings (300 people) are the third and
fourth highest regular use periods of the Church buildings.
. Funerals and weddings average approximately 150 people per service and are scheduled at
times other than the four peak regular use periods. In 2002 there were 50 weddings and 60
funerals, however, not all the funerals were held at the Church.
The Church is proposing a two phase expansion of its current facilities on the existing site. Phase
1 will relocate an existing day care facility to be contiguous with the main church building and
build additional meeting room space, expand the north parking lot and expand the
narthex/gathering space. Phase 2 will replace an existing chapel with a larger worship space,
reconfigure gathering and social areas, and expand the music area of the main worship space. The
net impact will be to expand the existing daycare area, provide added gathering and meeting space
and add 200 new seats (13% growth) of worship capacity.
e
July 2003
Page 1
e
e
e
The expansion provides added space for existing uses of the building but anticipates no major new
program uses. Because of this we expect overall usage patterns for the expanded facility to remain
similar to that currently observed with growth anticipated to be in proportion to the expansion of
the main worship space. This means that Wednesday night will still be the highest use weekday
period, and Sunday morning will remain the busiest period.
Based on our analysis ofthe data collected and the proposed expansion plans, we draw the
following conclusions about future parking and traffic conditions:
. The portion of the proposed expansion which impact peak traffic periods is the net addition of
200 seats of worship space. Expansion of gathering and music areas are primarily driven by
the added worship capacity and are not expected to impact traffic beyond that from the 200
new seats.
. Expansion of the daycare facility will slightly increase weekday traffic volumes; however; this
increase will occur at times outside of the other peak traffic periods for the Church.
. Based on current trip generation patterns, we expect Sunday peak hour traffic to increase by no
more than 200 trips to a total of approximately 925 trips in and out of the area due to Church
activities. Along Golden Valley Road we expect that this will result in peak hour traffic
increasing from approximately 450 vehicles (both ways) currently to no more than 550 total
vehicles.
. Based on current parishioner parking ratios ranging between 2.0 and 2.5 people per car, we
expect that peak parking demand will increase by less than 100 cars in the peak hour. City
standards (1 spot per 3 seats in the worship area) require only 67 spaces be provided for the
expanSIOn.
. Existing on-site and contracted off-site parking areas provide sufficient parking capacity for
the proposed expansion and exceeds the amount required under the City's parking standards.
After Phase 2 work is complete (not including a possible parking deck at the NE lot) the
Church will have 341 on-site spaces and 554 off-site spaces for a total of 895 spaces available
for Sunday worship. City standards require a total of 567 spaces be provided for the expanded
facility.
. Calculated weekday peak hour traffic (5pm to 6pm) generated by the expanded Church facility
totals 213 trips. In the 6pm to 7pm hour the total is 453 trips.
. The current collector road system surrounding the Church appears to be adequate to support
the proposed Church expansion.
CURRENT. CONDITIONS
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley is located in the heart of the City of Golden Valley on
Golden Valley Road, just east of the intersection with Rhode Island A venue. The current facility
has a total worship space seating of 1500 in two areas, a 1200 seat main worship area and a 300
July 2003
Page 2
. seat chapel. In addition to the worship areas, there are gathering, social and classroom areas
which.serve the congregation and are actively used on Sunday mornings.
The 9.2 acre site is bounded by 3 roads and a railroad right of way. Golden Valley Road to the
south, Rhode Island Avenue to the west, and Pennsylvania Avenue to the east, are all two lane
public roads with access drives to the Calvary site. The railroad to the north is alow use, single
track, slow speed corridor and separates the Calvary site from residential areas to the north. The
Church shares this large block area with one multi-story, multi-family housing complex which
occupies the southwest comer northeast of the intersection of Rhode Island Ave and Golden
Valley Rd.
The site is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the Church is currently seeking an
amendment to its current PUD approval to expand its facilities on the existing site. Land use in
the areas surrounding the site include multi-family residential southwest of the Church, Office
buildings across Golden Valley Rd south of the Church, and a Golf Course on the east side of
Pennsylvania Ave. As noted previously, single family residential lies north of the site with the
railroad right of way providing separation from the Church property. West of the site along Rhode
Island Ave are Public buildings including police and fire facilities and a public library.
e
The Church has several access points to each of the roads surrounding the site and has contracted
with the owners of the office buildings nearby to provide Church parking outside of normal
business hours. The Table 1 summarizes parking facilities and primary access points to the
Church.
e
July 2003
Page 3
e
Table 1
Existing Parking and Access
e
Parking Area On-site? Off Access Road No. No. of Ped Access
Street? Driveways Spaces to Church
North Lot Yes Yes Pennsylvania 3 Note I 157 On-site
NW Lot Yes Yes Rhode Island 2 Note I 125 Note j On-site
South Lot Yes Yes Golden Valley 3 51 On-site
Rd
Pennsylvania Yes I''lote L. No Pennsylvania N/A- 12 Adjacent to
Ave. On-Street site
Golden Valley No No Golden Valley N/A- 15 Adjacent to
Rd On-Street Rd. site
Rhode Island No No Rhode Island N/A- 25 Adjacent to
Ave. On-Street site
Valley No Yes Golden Valley 3 146 Ped Crossing
Commons Rd and Country of Golden
Club Dr. Valley Rd
Dental Lot No Yes Golden Valley 2 60 Ped Crossing
Rd of Golden
Valley Rd
Rhode Island No Yes Rhode Island & 3 286 Shuttle Bus
Ave. & Country Club
Country Club Dr.
Dr.
Notes
I - One driveway on Rhode Island shared between NW and North lots.
2 - Parallel parking located immediately adjacent to Church building. Parking spaces lie within Church property
adjacent to Pennsylvania ROW.
3- Reduced by approximately 20 spaces by new storm water pond.
In order to improve access during the Sunday morning high usage period, the Church has
implemented a shuttle bus services to move people from the farthest ofthese lots (Rhode Island
and Country Club) to the church. Additionally, the Church also provides a policeman during
Sunday services to monitor and protect the pedestrian crossing of Golden Valley Road for people
using the parking lots south of the Church. Finally there are additional parking areas (such as the
library lot), which do not have formal agreements with the Church but can be used on Sunday
mornings with no impact to the owner. These areas have not been included in any of the parking
information presented in this report and are not significantly utilized by parishioners on typical
Sunday mornings.
e
July 2003
Page 4
e DATA COLLECTION
Traffic and parking data was collected on Sunday May 4, 2003 during all the major services. This
date was selected to represent a Sunday with above average attendance with a full group .of
Sunday school classes and other programs which are not run during the summer months. Based
on years of experience at the Church, only Christmas and Easter Holidays would be expected to
generate higher attendance, so this data represents what is believed to be the peak traffic generated
by "typical" Sunday services.
All of the access points to each ofthe Church's parking areas (including off-site lots) were
continuously monitored from 8:30am to 11 :30am. At each driveway, directional entry and exit
data was recorded at 15 minute intervals throughout the morning. Additionally, all traffic passing
through the Pennsylvania Ave/Golden Valley Road intersection was also recorded at the same
intervals. Finally each parking lot was surveyed for total parked cars during the "quiet time" in
the middle of major services to provide quality checks on the entry & exit data. Data for the
parking lots is provided in Appendix A. Data at the Pennsylvania Ave/Golden Valley Road
intersection is in Appendix B.
e
In addition to formal counts, the Church calendar was reviewed to determine what other days and
periods might generate significant attendance and traffic beyond the expected Sunday peak.
Overall Wednesday mornings from 9:00am to noon is the highest weekday period, and
Wednesday nights from approximately 5:30 to approximately 9:00pm is the highest week night
use. Wednesday night with approximately 500 people in the building represents approximately
1/3 of the nearly 1,400 present at the peak of Sunday mornings. The details of the schedule and
normal attendance at regular Churchfunctions, is provided in Appendix C.
To provide a qualitative review of conditions on Wednesday nights, Kimley-Hom engineers
observed traffic along Golden Valley Road between Pennsylvania and Rhode Island Ave. from
5pm to 6:30pm on a typical Wednesday night. Overall impressions confirmed the activity on
Wednesday night, but also confirmed the adequacy of existing road and parking facilities to meet
the demand. At no time throughout our observation, did we see significant traffic operations
problems, long queues or concerns about level of service in this area.
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
Expansion of the Calvary Lutheran Church facility is expected to include the following:
Phase 1
e
. Construction of a new wing to the existing building to provide a day care facility (17,305 SF).
. Demolition of two existing structures (converted single family homes) which currently serve
the day care function (8,400 SF removed).
. Expansion ofthe north on-site parking lot in the area ofthe existing day care facilities.
July 2003
Page 5
e . Renovation and minor expansion of the narthex/gathering portions of the existing building
(4,621 SF)
Phase 2
e
. Construction of a new 500 seat chapel to replace an existing 300 seat chapel (12,025 SF).
. Conversion of the existing chapel to general gathering and social space (5,980 SF Remodeled).
. Expansion of the main vvorship space to provide more room for musicians and instruments
(4,365 SF addition).
. There is some consideration to potentially adding a parking deck on-site. The addition of new
storm drainage facilities in the NW parking lot would probably make the NE lot the most
likely areato expand parking vertically.
Overall the expansion provides added space for existing functions of the church and is anticipated
to result in only modest impacts to traffic related to Church activities. From a trip generation
standpoint, the changes are expected to have the following potential impacts:
. Slightly increased volumes and somewhat revised traffic patterns from the relocation and
expansion of the day care facility.
. A very small increase in weekday traffic from potential new staff personnel working for a
larger congregation. This would not be expected to change peak hour characteristics for the
site.
. Increased Sunday traffic and parking demand from the addition of 200 net new worship space
seats and the associated growth in the gathering and music areas.
. Increases to weekday program attendance are expected to be in proportion to the increase in
worship space provided by the expansion.
ANALYSIS
The data collected on May 4, 2003 was analyzed to determine Sunday peak hour characteristics
for the site. Overall the peak hour was observed to be the 9:30 to W:30am period corresponding
to the most heavily attended of the Sunday services. Figure 1 provides peak hour counts for each
of the key points surrounding the Church during this period.
Overall, Sunday peak hour traffic generated by the Church is approximately 830 total vehicle
movements in and out ofthe Church's parking and access points. This compares fairly closely to
733 total trips predicted by ITE (6th Edition) for a Sunday morning peak. Because ofthe size of
this church, and distance to even the on-site parking, we expect that some number of "drop-off
then park" trips are generated which probably accounts for the slightly higher total traffic
observed. Traffic and parking data collected does fall within the range of that presented in the
data for Churches in the ITE manual.
e
July 2003
Page 6
. ,,12
"t.96 7.# ~58
46" ~56 10"\.
18" [gi.ID IIZI
NW
LOT NORlH
LOT
"t.5
42" ~ih1 ,,1
24" 28.# ~9
~"\.
1IJ
:J
Z
~
<
1IJ <
:J Z
Z <
~ ~
<
0 en
z
z z
~ 1IJ
~ a..
1IJ
0
0
::J: SOUlH
0:: LOT
e
~
5210 DENTAL
~'-
$""16 17 LOT
51 1rS
27 ",t.
614
~
VALLEY COMMONS
LOT
1mI
53 13
....
- 26.#"t.l0
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
e
~-n Kimley-Horn
IIIIII.....J _ LJ and Associates, Inc.
2550 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST. SUITE J45N
ST. PAUL. IrAINNESOTA 55114
TEL NO. (651) 645-4197
FAX. NO. (651) 645-5116
CALVARY LUTHERAN CHURCH
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNT
FIGURE 1
. As measured during our observations, total Sunday peak hour traffic on Golden Valley Road (the
busiest of the streets adjacent to the Church) is approximately 450 vehicles, and well within the
design capacity and acceptable level of service (LOS) of a two lane roadway. Assuming trip
distribution for the Church stays the same in the future, we would expect peak hour traffic on
Golden Valley Road to increase to no more than 550 due to the Church expansion. This compares
to 2001 traffic count data for the same section of road which has a pm peak volume of935 cars.
Weekday Use
While Sunday is clearly the busiest day in terms of traffic at the Church, weekdays have also been
reviewed.as the higher general traffic on the surrounding roadway system potentially results in a
higher peak hour traffic. As Appendix C shows, the next highest use of the Church facility occurs
on Wednesday nights when approximately 500 people are expected to visit the building. To
understand the potential impacts from Wednesday night activities we looked at the various
programs going on in the church and built up anticipated vehicle trips based on the number of
people, time of night and type of program. We also reviewed the data collected for Sundays and
applied appropriate ratios to determine how the calculations compared to those actually observed
on Sunday mornings to evaluate how realistic the calculations are. Finally we looked at how this
information compares to that predicted using ITE data. '
e
Rhode Island Ave and Golden Valley Rd are both Municipal State Aid (MSA) roadways and have
traffic count data collected regularly. A full set of the latest count data for the streets surrounding
the Church is provided in Appendix D. Averages of the data collected on July 18 to 20th, 2001 for
the MSA counts ofthese roads in the pm period is as follows:
Table 2
Weekday Evening Traffic Counts
Golden Valley Road and Rhode Island Avenue
Beginning Hour Golden Valley Rd East of 10tb Ave East of Winnetka
Rhode Island (turns into Rhode Island)
4pm 867 449
5pm 935 515
6pm 556 201
7pm 427 150
8pm 305 107
9pm 248 74
IOpm 127 37
.
It is important to note that these counts were conducted on a Wednesday and Thursday when the
Church has its two busiest weekday periods. While some of the programs are reduced inJuly,
several classes and music practice groups typically continue in summer, meaning some of the cars
counted above reflect trips generated by Church activities.
July 2003
Page 7
e
e
e
From the data above along with a review of the Church's typical calendar of events~it is apparent
that the worst case traffic condition must occur between 5pm and 7pm, when traffic is fairly high
on the adjacent streets (pm peak hour is 5 to 6pm), at the same time parishioners are gathering for
the evening programs at the Church.
Looking at the different events, starting times, and numbers of people involved, we calculated
anticipated Church generated traffic for the 5-6pm and 6-7pm hours. Appendix E provides the
details of these calculations which are summarized in Table 3 below.
Table 3
Church Generated Evening Peak Hour Trips
Existing Conditions
Hour Key Activities Total People Total People Total Vehicle
Arrivin~ in Buildin2 Trips
5pm to 6pm Supper, Bible Study 228 238 185
6pm to 7pm Wed Night Live, Choir 310 500 394
Practices
Of note in these calculations is that nearly all ofthe people who arrive around 5:30pm for supper,
stay for either bible study, choir practice or Wednesday Night Live which effectively spreads out
the arrival patterns for these large groups of people. For the supper and early group events, little if
any drop-off activity occurs and higher vehicle occupancy numbers are observed. For people who
don't make supper, but attend choir practice or Wednesday Night Live, a very high percentage of
people are dropped off (2 trips per drop-off) and lower ratios of people per car are observed.
To compare these calculated values to other estimating methods, we first looked at extrapolating
the Sunday data collected for Calvary, to the number of people using the facility on Wednesday
nights. If overall parking and trip generation characteristics determined from Sunday worship
apply to Wednesday night usage, it is expected that cars coming to the Church from 5:00 to 6:00
p.m. would total from approximately 100 to 134 total car trips. For the 6:00 to 7:00 pm hour
Sunday data would predict 135 to 190 trips. Compared to our use/occupancy calculations we see
that Sunday data would predict lower overall traffic. We believe this is explained by the higher
number of drop-off trips on weekday nights, as non-driving young people are dropped off for
rehearsals and Wednesday Night Live events. As the use/occupancy calculations result in higher
traffic numbers and are therefore more conservative, we used them in looking at impacts as the
Church expands.
Finally to confirm the validity ofthe calculated numbers to actual conditions, we observed
Wednesday night traffic patterns which confirmed that parking demand is easily met with on-site
and immediately adjacent parking, and overall traffic in the areas surrounding the Church seems
similar to that observed during the peak Sunday hour. At all times during the Wednesday night
July 2003
Page 8
e
e
e
observation period, turning queues were minor and overall level of service was essentially free-
flowing on Golden Valley Rd and Rhode Island Ave including the intersection of the two.
Future Weekday Conditions
As discussed above, the Church main worship space seating capacity is increasing by 13 %. In
looking at future weekday use, we used a 15% growth factor in evening program attendance to be
conservative in calculating conditions after Phase 2 of the expansion program is complete. Table
4 shows how the expansion of Church facilities is anticipated to impact traffic volumes:
Table 4
Church Generated Evening Peak Hour Trips
Future (Post Expansion) Conditions
Hour
Key Activities
Sup er, Bible Study
Wed Night Live, Choir
Practices
Total People
Arrivin
262
356
Total People
in Buildin
274
575
To check the reasonableness ofthis we compared these numbers to ITE predictions based on the
final configuration of the Church after the Phase 2 expansion. ITE would predict 99 inbound and
85 outbound trips (184 total) during the adjacent street pm peak hour (5pm to 6pm). For the 7pm
to llpm Church generated peak hour, ITE predicts 231 inbound and 161 outbound (392 total)
trips. This compares reasonably closely (within 15%) to the use/occupancy calculations which
Table 4 shows to be 213 (vs. 184 for ITE) in the pm peak hour, and 453 (vs. 392 for ITE) after
6pm. Once again, using the use/occupancy calculations results in the higher traffic number and is
used to be conservative.
By taking these numbers and distributing them to the various parking areas and patterns observed
during Sunday operations, we calculated traffic volumes at the intersection of Golden Valley Road
and Rhode Island Ave. Figure 2 provides the results of these calculations which are included in
Appendix F. Again, it is important to note that the background traffic used in this analysis is from
Wednesday and Thursday night counts and therefore already includes significant traffic from
Church activities which were occurring during the counting period. As our analysis added the full
calculated traffic volumes from Church activities to this background level, we expect actual traffic
to be notably lower than that shown in Figure 2.
Conclusion
The LOS analysis of the intersection shows that pre and post development LOS at the Golden
Valley Road / Rhode Island Avenue intersection is unchanged at LOS B. From this we conclude
that the planned expansion of Calvary Lutheran Church does not cause any significant traffic
July 2003
Page 9
.
.
.
t
3OlI:
l
NW
lOT
NORTH
lOT
w
::>
z
w
>
<(
Cl
Z
<(
-l
(/)
W
Cl
o
J:
0::
SOUlH
lOT
ExIIIlnt LOS = I
Total TraflIc LOS = I
VAU.EY COMMONS
lOT
~=~ :=:'Irn
CALVARY LUTHERAN CHURCH
WEDNESDAY PM PEAK HOUR
... IIII\IEIIlI1Y ".... -. 1II1E_
ST. PAIA. _" 1IlII14
1B. NO. (1IlII)_17
FAX. NO. (let) _1'
t
SX
l
w
::>
z
w
>
<(
<(
Z
<(
>
~
(/)
Z
Z
w
a..
+-- XX(Y't) ZZ
XX - Existing PM Peak
YY - Traffic Assi9!'ment
ZZ - Total Traffic
-lO(X-
Directional Distribution
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
FIGURE 2
Trip Distribution
Traffic Volumes
e
e
e
issues in the area and should require no changes to surrounding roads, signals. or other
traffic/roadway facilities.
July 2003
Page 10
.
Appendix A
Parking Lot Traffic Volume Data
e
e
350
300
250
S 200 ~_u
j
.5
Ie
III
o 150-m
100 _m
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
North Parking Lots Occupancy
o
50 _m_
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
9:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00
11 :15
11:30
Time
1_ Overall Lot Occupancy - Striped Capacity I
~_... Kimley-Hom.
IIIIIII......I_~ and Associates. Inc,
Page 1
North aing Lots
Time Period
e
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
11:15 Totals
11:30
9:15
9:30
9:30
9:45
9:45
10:00
10:00
10:15
10:15
10:30
10:30
10:45
10:45
11:00
11:00
11 :15
8:45
9:00
Main
___.... ___ ____W.' _'OW"
Enter from North 7 1 2 3 7 2 4 4 2
Enter from South 25 12 1 11 39 7 1 11 9 3
Exit to North 1 1 5 2 1 4
Exit to South 1 4 4 1 2 6 2
Total Vehicle Mbverrtents 32 14 2 2 15 55 13 4 0 18 23 7
Hour Totsls 50 81 48
Net Into Lot 32 12 0 2 13 37 5 -2 0 12 3 3
Net Balance In Lot 32 44 44 46 59 96 101 99 99 111 114 117
Main
..-. .... --.. ---.... .....
Enter from North 1
Enter from South 2 1 3 4 1 1 2 1
Exit to North 2 3 4 19 5 3 3 4
Exit to South 4 1 3 2 8 27 15 6 3 1 39 6
T6talVehiCfe' M6verrtetlts 8 4 3 3 16 50 21 '1 3 6 .42 11
Hoi.rrTotllls 18 794 . . 62
Net Into Lot -4 -4 -3 -1 -8 -42 -19 -5 -3 -2 -42 -9
Net Balance In Lot -4 -8 -11 -12 -20 -62 -81 -86 -89 -91 -133 -142
North
....11;1'..... __. - ""'........ _....J
Enter from North 46 29 1 5 10 26 6 4 4 7 15 1
Enter from South 11 5 4 11 3 7
Exit to North 3 3 37 54 5 6 9 51 13
Exit to South 1 1 2 31 20 3 2 2 20 2
Total Vehicle Movements 58 38 4 5 16 105 83 12 12 18 93 16
Hour Totals 105 216 139
Net Into Lot 56 30 -2 5 12 -31 -65 -4 -4 -4 -49 -14
Net Balance In Lot 56 86 84 89 101 70 5 1 -3 -7 -56 -70
Nort
hE
.._____ _. ___.__ I.,IV
Enter from North 6 3 4 7 26 7 2 2 5 10 2
Enter from South 5 2 2 6 13 1 4 2 10 5 5
Exit to North 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2
Exit to South 2 3 3 1 1 2
TotalVehicle.' M6verrtel'lts 13 5 1 7 17 44 11 7 4 16 20 9
HoU!' Totals 26 19 49
Net Into Lot 9 5 -1 5 9 34 5 5 4 14 10 5
Net Balance In Lot 9 14 13 18 27 61 66 71 75 89 99 104
32
119
14
20
1
15
43
115
154
41
181
84
Total
In
74
55
13
12
e
Out
151
34
16
158
195
265
129
25
Peak
Hour
12
58
1
10
87
1
9
28
56
94
46
18
96
56
216
42
24
5
8
79
Overall North Lots Data
1T6tli\l\1enicle MoVettlerits 111 61 10 17 64 254 128 30 19 i58 178 43 973 416
HOl.lrTotlllli 199 . 4'76 298
Net Lot Change 93 43 -6 11 26 -2 -74 -6 -3 20 -78 .-15
Net Lot Balance 93 136 130 141 161 165 91 85 82 102 24 9
Lot Counts 8:20 8:50 9:15 10:15 11:30
North Main 77 155 146 131 95
Northwest 9 89 123 85 41
Total 86 244 269 216 136
D:lO t ~ 15 1130
Overall Lot Occupancy 219 262 256 267 293 291 217 211 208 228 150 135
Striped Capacity 282
Overall Capacity 309
% of Striped Capacity 78% L \1,1 77% 75% 74% 81% 53% 48%
% of Overall Capacity Used 71% 85% 83% 86% 70% 68% 67% 74% 49% 44%
-
o
-'
.5 30----
f
cu
o
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
South Church Lot Occupancy
60
50
40 ----
20 ----
10 ----
o
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
9:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45 11:00 11 :15 11 :30
I
~ ~ Kimley-I
and Ass
Time
1_ Overall Lot Occupancy - Striped Capacity I
Page 1
8:30. 8:45
8:45 9:0.0.
e e
Peak
9:0.0. 9:15 9:30. 9:45 10.:0.0. 10.:15 10.:30. 10.:45 11:0.0. 11:15 Totals Total Hour
9:15 9:30. 9:45 10.:0.0. 10.:15 10.:30. 10.:45 11:0.0. 11:15 11:30. In Out
South C.rCh Lot
Time Period
South Lot
Enter from West 11 6 9 8 23 13 9 6 2 10. 20. 10.
Enter from East 6 4 4 5 7 6 2 1 13 7
Exit to West 8 8 18 6 19 23 7 3 2 6 33 12
Exit to East 1 6 4 2 2 2 3 14 2
TotaIVehiCle...Movertleht$ 26 18 37 19 53 44 20. 12 A 19 80 31
HOl.lrTotals 100 129 134-
Net Into Lot 8 2 -11 7 7 -6 2 2 0. 1 -14 3
Net Balance In Lot 8 10. -1 6 13 7 9 11 11 12 -2 1
127
55
145
36
182
51
16
52
10
129
181
Lot Counts 8:20. 8:50. 9:15 10.:15 11:30.
South Lot 39 49 39 48 40.
Total 39 49 39 48 40
:00 11:15
Overall Lot Occupancy 47 49 38 45 52 46 48 50. 50. 51 37 40.
Striped Capacity 51
Overall Capacity 54
% of Striped Capacity 92% 94% 98% 98% 10.0.% 73% 78%
% of Overall Capacity Used 87% 89% 93% 93% 94% 69% 74%
-
o
...J
.5
l!!
III
CJ
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
Valley Commons & Dental Lots Occupancy
250
200
150
1 00 ~----
50 ~---
o
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45 11 :00 11 :15 11 :30
I
~ ~ Kimley-I-
and AsSl
9:45
Time
1_ Overall Lot Occupancy - Striped Capacity I
Page 1
Private 85 South of Golden Valley Rd (Valley Commons & De_LotS)
Time Period
e
8:30
8:45
8:45
9:00
9:30
9:45
10:00
10:15
10:45
11 :00
11:00
11 :15
Peak
11:15 Totals Total Hour
11:30 In Out
10:15
10:30
10:30
10:45
9:00
9:15
9:15
9:30
9:45
10:00
Valle
iY Commons Lot (North Entry)
Enter from East 6 1 2 2 9 4 2 3
Enter from West 20 5 2 4 19 4 2 4 1
Exit to East 1 1 5 5 3 5 12 3
Exit to West 3 3 3 15 4
T6talVehicleM6ve01elltS 26 5 2 .. 4 <7 36 16 $ 0 13 ..31 8
Hour-Total 37 64 52
Net Into Lot 26 5 0 4 5 20 0 -1 0 -3 -23 -6
Net Balance In Lot 26 31 31 35 40 60 60 59 59 56 33 27
Valle
,y Commons (South Entry)
Enter from East 10 2 7 1 1
Enter from West 20 6 2 2 3 16 5 2 1 9 1
Exit to East 1 1 7 3 2 4
Exit to West 1 1 2 2 2 31 13 7 2 35 7
Total Vehicle MovernentS 31 7 $ 4 8 61 22 11 1 2 49 8
Hbul" Total 47 102 60
Net Into Lot 29 5 -1 0 2 -15 -10 -7 1 -2 -29 -6
Net Balance In Lot 29 34 33 33 35 20 10 3 4 2 -27 -33
Dental Lot
Enter from East 1 2 2 11 2 1 1 2
Enter from West 7 4 1 6 21 1 1
Exit to East 3 4 3 5 15 5
Exit to West 2 3 2 3 10 3
Total VehiclErMovements 8 4 1 2 8 37 10 6 1 8 26 10
Hbul"Totlill 15 61 45
Net Into Lot 8 4 1 2 8 27 -4 -4 1 -8 -24 -6
Net Balance In Lot 8 12 13 15 23 50 46 42 43 35 11 5
Overall South Off-site Lots Data
Total Vehicle Move01ehts 65 16 8 10 23 134 48 22 2 . 23 106 26
HOI.Il"Tbtal 99 227 157
Net Lot Change 63 14 0 6 15 32 -14 -12 2 -13 -76 -18
Net Lot Balance 63 77 77 83 98 130 116 104 106 93 17 -1
Lot Counts 8:20 8:50 9:15 10:15 11:30
Valley Commons 27 122 123 131 52
Dental 0 11 12 45 5
Total 27 133 135 176 57
1000 1 '1 1115 1130
Overall Lot Occupancy 120 134 134 140 155 187 173 161 163 150 74 56
Striped Capacity 206
Overall Capacity 209
% of Striped Capacity 58%....l!!I.iI!~11 ~lllii 11__ 84% 78% 79% 73% 36% 27%
% of Overall Capacity Used 57% 64% 64% 67% 83% 77% 78% 72% 35% 27%
29
61
35
28
90
21
67
18
103
88
22
41
35
23
63
483
63
17
27
14
6
64
121
10
26
13
53
102
58
16
28
10
7
61
227
e
- 200
o
..J
.5
l!!
cu
(.) 150
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church of Golden Valley
Syngenta Seed Lot
350
300
250
100
50
o
8:20
8:30
9:00
9:30
9:45
10:30
11 :30
11 :00
10:15
8:50
9:15
Time
I_Overall Lot Occupancy -Striped Capacity I
lII"'l-n Kimley-Hom
1lI....I_ U and Associates, Inc.
Page 1
.
Appendix B
Intersection Traffic Volume Data
Golden Valley Road & Pennsylvania Avenue
e
e
e
e
.
Penn & Golden Valley Rd Intersection
9:45 10:00 10:15 10:30 10:45 11:00 11:15 11:30
End Time (15 min count)
\_ Total Movements Thru Intersection I
e
500
450
400
350
fn
; 300
~ 250
ca
0200
I-
150
100
50
o
e
e
Hourly Data
8:30 to 9:30
9:30 to 10:30
10:30 to 11 :30
Avg Hour
Time Period
~ Total GVR East of Intersection
~ Total Turn Crossing Movements
~ Total Intersection Movements
. Total Penn Traffic
o Total GVR West of Intersection
. Total Turning Movements
pennsYllia & Golden Valley Rd Intersection
Time Period
e
.
8:30
8:45
8:45
9:00
9:00
9:15
10:00
10:15
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00
11:00
11:15
Total (3 Avg per Peak
11 :15 Hours) Hour Hour
11:30
10:30
10:45
9:30
9:45
9:45
10:00
9:15
9:30
Pennsylvania & Golden Vallev R,
A
B
C
o
E
F
UilU IIIU:tI.:t~""UII
Penn turn to WB GVR 3 9 10 5 4 27 25 17 6 7 35 10
Penn turn to EB GVR 3 3 5 5 4 11 13 4 4 2 19 10
WB GVR Turn to Penn 13 9 4 1 8 21 12 2 0 7 10 5
WB GVR straight to WB GVR 15 21 18 24 30 40 31 35 17 32 37 35
EB GVR Turn to Penn 5 2 2 2 4 8 6 10 9 13 9 9
EB GVR straiaht to EB GVR 8 15 22 13 16 33 35 43 30 30 52 37
^' ^^ .... .., -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ^'
Total Penn Traffic (A+B+C+E)
Hour Total
Total GVR Traffic East of Intersection
(C+D+F+B)
Hour Total
Total GVR Traffic West of Intersection
(E+F+D+A)
Hour Total
Total Turn Crossing Movements (B+E)
Hour Total
Total Turning Movements (A+B+C+E)
Hour Total
Total Movements Thru Intersection
Hour Total
23
21
20
56
33
176
29
34
155
19
73
13
81
67
24
39 48 49 43 58 105 91 84 51 71 118 87
179 338 327
31 47 52 44 54 108 97 105 62 82 133 91
174 364 368
8 5 7 7 8 19 19 14 13 15 28 19
27 60 75
24 23 21 13 20 67 56 33 19 29 73 34
81 176 155
47 59 61 50 66 140 122 111 66 91 162 106
217 439 425
158 53 73
83 28 32
92 31 43
335 112 136
79 26 28
334 111 127
412 137 176
844 281 338
906 302 364
162 54 60
412 137 176
1081 360 439
e
Appendix C
Weekday Church Occupancy Data
e
e
e
Time
Wednesdavs
9:00-11:30AM
5: 15 PM
5: 15 PM
5:30 PM
6:00 PM
6:15 PM
6:15 PM
6:15 PM
6:15 PM
e 6:30 PM
7:30 PM
8:00 PM
8:00 PM
7:00 PM
Thursdav
5:30 PM
6:30 PM
Calvary Lutheran Church - Calendar Information
Activity - People Count
Bible Study Fellowship - 250-300
Ringing Praise Handbell Rehearsals - 12
Worship Team Rehearsals - 6
Supper - 200 (included in activity counts for the evening)
Search Bible Study - 20
Cherub Choir Rehearsals - 45
Carol Choir Rehearsals - 50
Covenant Choir Rehearsals - 50
Expressions Choir Rehearsals- 50
Wednesday Night Live -300
Traditions Choir Rehearsals - 60
Youth Choir Rehearsals- 30 (included in Wednesay Night Live count)
AA-15
Traditions Choir Fellowship - 40 (included in Traditions Choir count)
Supper - 125
Worship and Church School- 300
Wed dines - Saturdays at 1 :00, 4:00 and 7 :00 p.m. - average size 150
50 weddings in 2002
Funerals - usually late morning or early afternoon - average size 150
60 funerals in 2002, not all held at Calvary
e
e
Appendix D
MSA Traffic Count Data
Golden Valley Road and Rhode Island Ave.
e
e
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN URLLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.06
.
STATE AID COUNT
Site ID:Golden Valley Road
Station Num: 36874
Description: Golden Valley Road E of Rhode Island
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start Datel1'lme:07/1812001
End DatefTime:07120/2001
e
15- Sun 16- Mon 17- Tue 18- Wed 19- Thu 20- Fri 21- Sat Total Oailv- Avo.
0:00 21 26 47 24
1:00 19 19 38 19
2:00 8 11 19 10
3:00 17 14 31 16
4:00 10 20 30 15
5:00 80 73 153 77
6:00 296 289 585 293
7:00 697 718 1415 708
8:00 672 599 1271 636
9:00 515 479 994 497
10:00 519 579 1098 549
11:00 n4 737 1461 731
12:00 804 737 1541 771
13:00 746 721 1467 734
14:00 673 631 1304 652
15:00 819 666 1485 743
16:00 898 836 1734 867
17:00 933 936 1869 935
18:00 600 512 1112 556
19:00 450 404 854 427
20:00 289 320 609 305
21:00 276 219 495 248
22:00 127 126 253 127
23:00 75 44 119 60
Total 7414 9743 2827 19984 9992
Percentages 37.10% 48.75% 14.15% 100.00% 50.00%
.
J UL -ll~h:~IdId..:S Idl:l: 5'1
GOLDEN VRLLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.08
e
STATE AID COUNT
SitelD: 10th Avenue No
Station Num: 36921
Description: 10th Avenue No. E of Winnetka Avenue
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start Datetrlme:07/18/2001
End Datetrime:07120/2001
e
15- Sun 16- Mon 17- Tue 18- Wed 19- Thu 20- Fri 21- Sat Total DaiIY- Ava
0:00 11 6 17 9
1:00 8 3 11 6
2:00 3 5 8 4
3:00 1 2 3 2
4:00 5 4 9 5
5:00 23 20 43 22
6:00 140 137 277 139
7:00 405 380 785 393
8:00 307 257 564 282
9:00 198 178 376 188
10:00 167 219 386 193
11:00 273 233 506 253
12:00 302 311 613 307
13:00 280 266 546 273
14:00 278 271 549 275
15:00 356 396 752 376
16:00 465 433 898 449
17:00 521 508 1029 515
18:00 194 207 401 201
19:00 157 143 300 150
20:00 117 97 214 107
21:00 83 64 147 74
22:00 38 35 73 37
23:00 24 30 54 27
Total .. 3088 4262 1211 8561 4281
Percentaaes 36.07% 49.78% 14.15% 100.00% 50.00%
e
TOTAL P.08
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN UALLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.04
.
STATE AID COUNT
Site ID: Golden Valley Road
Station Num: 36878
Description: Golden Valley Rd (East Bound) E of Winnetka Ave
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start DatefTime:07/18/2001
End Datemme:07/2012001
e
15- Sun 16- Mon 17- Tue 18- Wed 19- Thu 20- Fri 21- Sat Total Daily- Avg.
0:00 8 11 19 10
1:00 7 10 17 9
2:00 1 8 9 5
3:00 6 4 10 5
4:00 8 9 17 9
5:00 54 47 101 51
6:00 160 136 296 148
7:00 336 299 635 318
8:00 355 306 661 331
9:00 298 283 581 291
10:00 316 338 654 327
11:00 419 432 851 426
12:00 522 491 1013 501
13:00 385 426 811 406
14:00 373 373 746 373
15:00 359 335 694 347
16:00 405 396 801 401
17:00 479 479 958 479
18:00 259 289 548 274
19:00 258 199 457 229
20:00 148 162 310 155
21:00 132 115 247 124
22:00 58 58 116 58
23:00 34 28 62 31
Total 3831 5332 1451 10614 5301
Percentaaes 36.09% 50.24% 13.67% 100.00% 50.00%
.
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN URLLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.05
e
STATE AID COUNT
Site ID:Golden Valley Road
Station Num:36877
Description: Golden Valley Rd (East Bound) W of Rhode Island
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start DatelTime:07118/2001
End DatelTime:07120/2001
e
15- Sun 16- Mon 17- Tue 18- Wed 19. Thu 20- Fri 21- Sat Total Daily- Avg
0:00 9 10 19 10
1:00 5 10 15 8
2:00 2 7 9 5
3:00 6 3 9 5
4:00 . 8 7 15 8
5:00 41 31 72 38
6:00 107 86 193 97
7:00 256 247 503 252
8:00 261 207 468 234
9:00 190 185 375 188
10:00 193 211 404 202
11:00 270 296 566 283
12:00 384 355 739 370
13:00 301 315 616 308
14:00 279 252 531 286
15:00 286 237 523 262
16:00 312 309 621 311
17:00 393 383 776 388
18:00 223 233 456 228
19:00 205 161 366 183
20:00 115 137 252 128
21:00 123 92 215 108
22:00 53 63 116 58
23:00 40 22 82 31
Total 2984 3933 1004 7921 3961
Percentages 37.67% 49.65% 12.68% 100.00% 50.00%
e
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN UALLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.03
.
STATE AID COUNT
Site ID: Rhode Island Avenue
Station Num: 36876
Description: Rhode Island Avenue S of Golden Valley Rd
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start Datemme:0712312001
End Dat.".ime:0712512001
e
22-Sun 23- Mon 24- Tue 2S. Wed 26-Thu 27- Fri 28- Sat Total Daily- Avg;
0:00 16 19 35 18
1:00 14 17 31 18
2:00 5 8 13 7
3:00 3 10 13 7
4:00 9 13 22 11
5:00 57 . 58 115 58
6:00 161 151 312 156
7:00 529 511 1040 520
8:00 486 535 1021 511
9:00 361 384 745 373
10:00 437 429 866 433
11:00 614 584 1198 599
12:00 717 620 1337 669
13:00 564 599 1163 582
14:00 551 550 1101 551
15:00 612 641 1253 627
16:00 827 898 1725 863
17:00 878 919 1797 899
18:00 445 418 883 432
19:00 316 273 589 295
20:00 180 174 354 177
21 :00 161 138 299 150
22:00 60 67 127 64
23:00 40 48 88 44
Total 6402 7999 1706 16107 8054
Percentages 39.75% 49.66% 10.59% 100.00% 50.00%
e
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN UALLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.07
.
STATE AID COUNT
Site ID: Rhode Island Avenue
Station Num: 36875
Description: Rhode Island Avenue S of Country Club Drive
City: Golden Valley
County: Hennepin
Start Date/Tlme:07/2312001
End Daterrime:0712512001
.
22- Sun 23- Mon 24- Tue 25-Wed 26- Thu 27- Fri 28- Sat Total DailY- Ava.
0:00 18 26 44 22
1:00 8 17 25 13
2:00 4 3 7 4
3:00 7 12 19 10
4:00 11 12 23 12
5:00 53 52 105 53
6:00 143 154 297 149
7:00 436 441 877 439
8:00 390 424 814 407
9:00 344 326 670 335
10:00 324 338 662 331
11:00 500 507 1007 504
12:00 598 600 1198 599
13:00 457 469 926 463
14:00 446 433 879 440
15:00 501 500 1001 501
16:00 576 654 1230 615
17:00 573 612 1185 593
18:00 345 356 701 351
19:00 303 259 562 281
20:00 170 192 362 181
21:00 165 148 313 157
22:00 68 86 174 87
23:00 38 49 87 44
Total 5084 6617 1467 13168 6584
Percentages 38.61% 50.25% 11.14% 100.00% 50.00%
e
JUL-10-2003 08:56
GOLDEN UALLEY PUB WKS
7635933988
P.02
3'r~
. ;
i
I
I
-t -l
PARK
a; ("III N ;;;;
EG'l<J1Z
::.0 -z:,'1 "l::l ;:tI
N-ON
N -
::E =E
~
PL"
VI
-I
.
c::::
:;:J
e
Appendix E
Weekday Traffic Calculations
Based on Use and Occupancy
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church
Wednesday Night Trip Calculations
e
.
I mal t'eople In New t'eople Venicle uccupancy Venicles urop-olt Total
Arrival Time Activity this Activity Arriving by Car (1) Occupancy Rate IN OUT Misc. OUT OUT Total Trips Calculation Notes
5:00-5:15pm Rehearsals 18 18 1.2 0.833 15 2 2 4 19 1.2 per car - 10% drop-off
5:15-5:30pm Supper 200 200 1.5 0.667 133 13 5 18 152 Family Event - 1.5 per car, 10% drop-ofts
5:30-5:45pm
5:45-6:00om Bible Study (2) 20 10 1 0.5 10 2 3 5 15 1 oer car - 20% droo-offs
238 228 158 17 10 27 185 Total Trips 5pm-6pm hour
86% 14%
6:00-6:15pm Choir Rehearsals (3) 200 100 1.2 0.833 83 17 5 22 105 1.2 per car- 20% drop-off
6: 15-6:30pm Wed Night Live (4) 300 210 1 1.000 210 63 10 73 283 1 per car - 30% drop-off
6:30-6:45pm 0 2 2 2
6:45-7:00pm 0 4 4 4
500 310 293 80 21 101 394 Total Trips 6pm-7pm hour
74% 26%
Notes
1. The 200 people at supper typically stay to participate in one of the other activities on Wed night; therefore, few will attend the Supper and leave the bldg.
2. Half of the Bible Study participants are assumed to arrive in the Supper group.
3. Half of the Choir Rehearsal participants are assumed to arrive in the Supper group.
4. 90 of the 300 Wed Night Live participants are assumed to arrive in the Supper group.
Total Facility count peaks at 500 at 7pm.
e
Appendix F
Level of Service (LOS) Worksheets
Weekday PM Peak Hour
e
e
e
Total PM
HCS2000: signalized Intersections Release 4.1c
Analyst: dkf
Agency: KHA
Date: 7/10/2003
peri od: Total PM peak - weekday
project ID: calvary Lutheran church
E/W St: Golden valley Road
Inter.: Golden valley/Rhode Island
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Golden valley
Year 2003
N/S St: Rhode Island Avenue
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I westbound I Northbound I southbound
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R
I I I I
I 0 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
I LT R I L T R I L TR I L TR
198 360 131 1125 260 44 191 174 186 126 162 47
I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112 . 0 12. 0 112.0 12.0
I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0
NO. Lanes
LGconfig
volume
Lane Width
RTOR vol
Duration
0.25
Area Type: All other areas
signal operations
3 4
e
phase combination 1
EB Left A
Thru A
Right A
peds X
WB Left A
Th ru A
Right A
Peds X
NB Right
SB Right
Green
yellow
A 11 Red
Appr/ Lane
Lane Group
Grp capaci ty
Eastbound
LT 879
R 855
westbound
L 387
T 1010
R 855
Northbound
L 363
TR 585
southbound
L 228
TR 614
2
6 7
8
5
NB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds X
SB Left A
Thru A
Right A
peds X
EB Right
WB Right
20.1
3.5
0.5
cycle
Intersection performance summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group
Flow Rate
(s)
31.9
3.5
0.5
Length: 60.0
Approach
Delay LOS
sees
v/c
g/c
Delay LOS
9.4 A
7.9 A
18.5 B
Intersection Delay = 12.3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
15.3 B
1654 0.55 0.53 10.0+ B
1608 0.16 0.53 7.3 A
728 0.34 0.53 8.6 A
1900 0.27 0.53 7.8 A
1608 0.05 0.53 6.8 A
1083 0.26 0.34 14.9 B
1746 0.65 0.34 19.5 B
680 0.12 0.34 14.0 B
1834 0.36 0.34 15.4 B
e
HCS2000: signalized Intersections Release 4.1c
page 1
Total PM
.
phone:
E-Mail:
Fax:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Analyst: dkf
Agency/co. : KHA
Date Performed: 7/10/2003
Analysis Time period: Total PM peak - weekday
Intersection: Golden valley/Rhode Island
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisdiction: Golden valley
Analysis Year: 2003
project ID: calvary Lutheran church
East/west Street North/south Street
Golden valley Road Rhode Island Avenue
VOLUME DATA
e
I Eastbound
I L T R
I
volume 198 360 131
% Heavy vehlO 0 0
PHF 10.95 0.95 0.95
PK 15 vol 126 95 34
Hi Ln vol I
% Grade I
Ideal Sat I
parkExist I
Numpark I
No. Lanes I 0
LGconfig I
Lane width I
RTOR vol I
Adj Flow I
%InsharedLnl
Prop LTs I
prop RTs I
Peds Bikesl
Buses I
%Inprotphase
Duration 0.25
I Northbound
1 L T R
I
191 174 186
10 0 0
10.95 0.95 0.95
124 46 49
I
o 0 I 0
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 11900 1900
1
I
I 110
I L TR
112.0 12.0
1 0
196 379
I
11.000 0.000
1 0.517
1 5 0
10 0
I
other areas
111
L T R
/12.0 12.0 12.0
I 0
1132 274 46
1
11. 000 O. 000
I 0 . 000 1. 000
150
10 0 0
I
Area Type: All
1 1
LT R
12.0 12.0
o
482 138
0.214
0.000 1.000
5 0
o 0
I southbound
I L T R
I
126 162 47
10 0 0
10.95 0.95 0.95
17 43 12
I
I 0
11900 1900
1
I
I 110
1 L TR
/12.0 12.0
I 0
127 220
I
11. 000 O. 000
I 0.223
1 5 0
10 0
I
OPERATING PARAMETERS
Eastbound westbound I Northbound I southbound
L T R L T R I L T R 1 L T R
1 I
Init unmet 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0
Arriv. Type 3 3 3 3 3 13 3 13 3
unit Ext. 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 13.0 3.0 13.0 3.0
I Factor 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1 1.000
Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0
Ext of g 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0
ped Min g 13.2 13.2 I 13.2 I 13.2
PHASE DATA
e
5
8
phase combination 1
4 I
page 2
2
3
6
7
Total PM
. EB Left A NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right "A
Peds X Peds x
WB Left A SB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
peds X peds x
NB Right EB Right
SB Right WB Right
Green
yellow
All Red
31.9
3.5
0.5
20.1
3.5
0.5
VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION
volume Adjustment
I Eastbound
I L T R
I
198 360 131
10.95 0.95 0.95
1103379 138
I 011
I LT R
1 482 138
I 0.214
I 0.000 1.000
cycle Length: 60.0 secs
FLOW WORKSHEET
1 southbound
I L T R
I
126 162 47
10.95 0.95 0.95
127 171 49
1 110
I L TR
127 220
11.000 0.000
I 0.223
.
volume, v
PHF
Adjflow
No. Lanes
Lane group
Adj flow
prop LTs
Prop RTS
I westbound
1 L T
I
1125 260 44
10.95 0.95 0.95
1132 274 46
111 1
1 L T R
1132 274 46
11.000 0.000
I 0.000 1. 000
R
I Northbound
1 L T R
I
191 174 186
10.95 0.95 0.95
196 183 196
1 1 1 0
I L TR
196 379
11.000 0.000
I 0.517
Saturation Flow Rate (see Exhibit 16-7 to determine the adjustment factors)_
Eastbound westbound Northbound southbound
LG LT R L T R L TR L TR
So 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0
fw 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000
fHV 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
fG 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
fP 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
fBB 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
fA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
fLU 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
fRT 1.000 0.850 1.000 0.850 0.922 0.967
fLT 0.871 0.384 1.000 0.573 1.000 0.359 1.000
Sec.
fLpb
fRpb
s
See.
0.999 0.998 1.000 0.995 1.000
1.000 0.996 1.000 0.996 0.996
1654 1608 728 1900 1608 1083 1746
CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET
and Lane Group capacity
Adj Adj Sat Flow
Flow Rate Flow Rate Ratio
(v) (s) (vis)
capacity Analysis
Apprl Lane
Mvmt Group
Eastbound
prot
.
0.997 1. 000
0.998
680 1834
Green
Ratio
(g/c)
page 3
--Lane Group--
capacity vlc
(c) Ratio
.
e
.
perm
Left
prot
perm
Thru LT
Right R
westbound
prot
perm
Left L
prot
perm
Thru T
Right R
Northbound
prot
perm
Left L
prot
perm
Thru TR
Right
southbound
prot
Perm
Left L
prot
Perm
Thru TR
Right
Sum of flow ratios for critical lane groups, YC = Sum (vis) = 0.51
Total lost time per cycle, L = 8.00 sec
critical flow rate to capacity ratio, Xc = (Yc)(C)/(C-L) = 0.59
Total PM
482
138
# 0.29
0.09
0.53
0.53
879
855
1654
1608
132
0.18
0.53
387
728
274
46
0.14
0.03
0.53
0.53
1010
855
1900
1608
96
0.09
0.34
363
1083
379
# 0.22
0.34
585
1746
27
0.04
0.34
228
680
220
0.12
0.34
614
1834
0.55
0.16
0.34
0.27
0.05
0.26
0.65
0.12
0.36
control Delay and LOS Determination
Apprl Ratios unf prog Lane Incremental Res Lane Group Approach
Lane Del Adj Grp Factor Del Del
Grp v/c g/C dl Fact Cap k d2 d3 Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 0.55 0.53 9.3 1.000 879 0.15 0.7 0.0
R 0.16 0.53 7.2 1.000 855 0.11 0.1 0.0
westbound
L 0.34 0.53 8.0 1.000 387 0.11 0.5 0.0
T 0.27 0.53 7.7 1.000 1010 0.11 0.1 0.0
R 0.05 0.53 6.8 1.000 855 0.11 0.0 0.0
Northbound
L 0.26 0.34 14.6 1.000 363 0.11 0.4 0.0
TR 0.65 0.34 16.9 1.000 585 0.23 2.5 0.0
10.0+ B
7.3 A
8.6 A
7.8 A
6.8 A
14.9 B
19.5 B
southbound
L 0.12 0.34 13.8 1.000 228 0.11 0.2 0.0 14.0 B
TR 0.36 0.34 15.1 1.000 614 0.11 0.4 0.0 15.4 B
9.4 A
7.9 A
18.5 B
15.3 B
Intersection delay = 12.3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
SUPPLEMENTAL PERMITTED LT WORKSHEET
for exclusive lefts
page 4
.
-.
.
Total PM
Input
EB
WB
NB
SB
cycle length, C 60.0
Total actual green time for LT lane group, G (s)
Effective permitted green time for LT lane group, g(s)
opposing effective green time, go (s)
Number of lanes in LT lane group, N
Number of lanes in opposing approach, NO
Adjusted LT flow rate, VLT (veh/h)
proportion of LT in LT lane group, PLT
proportion of LT in opposing flow, PLTo
Adjusted opposing flow rate, Vo (veh/h)
Lost time for LT lane group, tL
computation
LT volume per cycle, LTC=VLTC/3600 2.20 1.60 0.45
opposing lane util. factor, fLUO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Opposing flow, volc=voc/[3600(No)fLUO] (veh/ln/cyc) 8.03 3.67 6.32
gf=G[exp(- a * (LTC ** b))]-tl,gf<=g 0.0 0.0 0.0
opposing platoon ratio, RpO (refer Exhibit 16'"11). 1.00 1.00 1.00
opposing Queue Ratio, qro=Max[l-Rpo(gO/C),O] 0.47 0.67 0.67
gq,(see Exhibit C16-4,5,6,7,8) 6.81 1.56 6.64
gu=g-gq if gq>=gf, or = g-gf if gq<gf 25.09 18.54 13.46
n=Max(gq-gf)/2,0) 3.41 0.78 3.32
PTHO=l-PLTo 0.79 1.00 1.00
PL*=PLT[1+(N-1)g/(gf+gU/EL1+4.24)] 1.00 1.00 1.00
ELl (refer to Exhibit C16-3) 2.05 1.61 1.86
EL2=Max((1-Ptho**n)/plto, 1.0) 2.62
fmin=2(1+PL)/g or fmin=2(1+pl)/g 0.13 0.20 0.20
gdiff=max(gq-gf,0) 6.81 0.00 0.00
fm=[gf/g]+[gu/g]/[1+PL(EL1-1)], (min=fmin;max=1.00) 0.38 0.57 0.36
flt=fm=[gf/g]+lgu/9]/[1+PL(EL1-1)]+[gdiff/g]/[1+PL(EL2-1)],(fmin<=fm<=1.00)
or flt=[fm+0.91(N-1)]/N**
Left-turn adjustment, fLT 0.384 0.573 0.359
sec
31.9 20.1 20.1
31.9 20.1 20.1
31.9 20.1 20.1
1 1 1
1 1 1
132 96 27
1.000 1.000 1.000
0.21 0.00 0.00
482 220 379
4.00 4.00 4.00
For special case of single-lane approach opposed by multilane approach,
see text.
* If pl>=l for shared left-turn lanes with N>l, then assume de-facto
left-turn lane and redo calculations.
** For permitted left-turns with multiple exclusive left-turn lanes, flt=fm.
For special case of multilane approach opposed by single-lane approach
or when gf>gq, see text.
SUPPLEMENTAL PERMITTED LT WORKSHEET
for shared lefts
Input
EB
WB
SB
NB
cycle l~ngth, C .
Total actual green time for LT lane group,
Effective permitted green time for LT lane
opposing effective green time, go (s)
Number of lanes in LT lane group, N
Number of lanes in opposing approach, No
Adjusted LT flow rate, VLT (veh/h)
proportion of LT in LT lane group, PLT
proportion of LT in opposing flow, PLTO
Adjusted opposing flow rate, Vo (veh/h)
Lost time for LT lane group, tL
computation
LT volume per cycle,. LTC=VLTC/3600
opposing lane util. factor, fLUO
opposing flow, volc=voC/[3600(NO)fLUO] (veh/ln/cyc)
gf=G[exp(- a * (LTC ** b))]-tl, gf<=g
opposing platoon ratio, Rpo (refer Exhibit 16-11)
Page 5
60.0
G (s)
group, g(s)
sec
31.9
31.9
31.9
1
1
103
0.214 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.00
274
4.00
1.72
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
4.57
4.7
1.00
.
.
i
Total PM
opposing Queue Ratio, qro=Max[l-RpO(gO/C),O]
gq, (see Exhibit C16-4,5,6,7,8)
gu=g-gq if gq>=gf, or = g-gf if gq<gf
n=Max(gq-gf)/2,O)
PTHO=l-PLTo
PL*=PLT[1+(N-1)g/(gf+gU/EL1+4.24)]
ELI (refer to Exhibit C16-3)
EL2=Max((1-Ptho**n)/plto, 1.0)
fmin=2(1+PL)/g or fmin=2(1+pl)/g 0.08
gdiff=max(gq-gf,O) 0.00
fm=[gf/g]+[gu/g]/[1+PL(EL1-1)], (min=fmin;max=1.00) 0.87
flt=fm=lgf/g]+[gu/g]/[1+PL(EL1-1)]+[gdiff/g]/[1+PL(EL2-1)],(fmin<=fm<=1.00)
or flt=[fm+0.91(N-1)]/N**
Left-turn adjustment, fLT 0.871
0.47
1.05
27.20
0.00
1.00
0.21
1.83
For special case of single-lane approach opposed by multilane approach,
see text.
* If ph=l for shared left-turn lanes with N>l, then assume de-facto
left-turn lane and redo calculations.
** For permitted left-turns with multiple exclusive left-turn lanes, flt=fm.
For special case of multilane approach opposed by single-lane approach
or when gf>gq, see text.
SUPPLEMENTAL PEDESTRIAN-BICYCLE EFFECTS WORKSHEET
Permitted Left Turns
Effective pedestrian green time, gp (s)
conflicting pedestrian volume, vped (p/h)
pedestrian flow rate, vpedg (p/h)
occpedg
opposing queue clearing green, gq (s)
Eff. ped. green consumed by opp. veh. queue, gq/gp
occpedu
opposing flow rate, Vo (veh/h)
Occr
Number of cross-street receiving lanes, Nrec
Number of turning lanes, Nturn
ApbT
proportion of left turns, PLT
proportion of left turns using protected phase, PLTA
Left-turn adjustment, fLpb
permitted Right Turns
Effective pedestrian green time, gp (s)
conflicting pedestrian volume, vped (p/h)
conflicting bicycle volume, vbic (bicycles/h)
vpedg
occped~
Effectlve green, 9 (s)
vbic~
OCCblcg
OCCr
Number of cross-street receiving lanes, Nrec
Number of turning lanes, Nturn
ApbT
proportion right-turns, PRT
proportion ri~ht-turns using protected phase, PRTA
Right turn adJustment, fRpb
EB WB NB SB
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
5 5 5 5
9 9 14 14
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
1.05 6.81 1.56 6.64
0.033 0.214 0.077 0.330
0.004 0.004 0.007 0.006
274 482 220 379
0.003 0.002 0.005 0.003
1 III
1 III
0.997 0.998 0.995 0.997
0.214 1.000 1.000 1.000
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.999 0.998 0.995 0.997
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
5 555
o 000
9 9 14 14
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
o 000
0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
0.996 0.996 0.993 0.993
1.000 1.000 0.517 0.223
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1.000 0.996 0.998
SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM DELAY WORKSHEET
EBLT WBLT NBlT SBlT
cycle length, c 60.0
Adj. LT vol from vol Adjustment worksheet, v
page 6
see
.
.
'~,
e
Total PM
v/c ratio from capacity worksheet, x
protected phase effective green interval, g (s)
opposing queue effective green interval, gq
unopposed green interval, gu
Red time r=(c-g-gq-gu)
Arrival rate, qa=v/(3600(max[x,l.0]))
protected ph. departure rate, sp=s/3600
permitted ph. departure rate, ss=s(gq+gu)/(gu*3600)
xPerm
xprot
Case
Queue at beginning of green arrow, Qa
Queue at beginning of unsaturated green, Qu
Residual queue, Qr
uniform Delay, d1
DELAY/LOS WORKSHEET WITH INITIAL QUEUE
Initial our. Uniform Delay Initial Fi na 1 Ini ti al Lane
APpr/ Unmet Unmet Queue Unmet Queue Group
Lane Demand Demand unadj. Adj. paramo Demand Delay Delay
Group Q veh t hrs. ds d1 sec u Q veh d3 sec d sec
Eastbound
westbound
Northbound
Southbound
Intersection LOS B
. Intersection Delay 12.3 sec/veh
BACK OF QUEUE WORKSHEET
westbound Northbound
IL T R IL TR
10.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0
1132 274 46 196 "379
11900 1900 1900 11900 1900
11 1 1 11 1 0
1728 1900 1608 11083 1746
1387 1010 855 1363 585
10.18 0.14 0.03 10.09 0.22
10.34 0.27 0.05 10.26 0.65
10.53 0.53 0.53 10.34 0.34
1 1.000 1 1.000
13 3 3 13 3
11.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00
11.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00
11.3 2.5 0.4 11.2 5.4
Page 7
LaneGroup I
Init Queue 1
Flow Rate I
So 1
NO. Lanes 0
SL
Lncapaci ty
Flow Ratio
v/c Ratio
Grn Ratio
I Factor
AT or PVG
pltn Ratio
PF2
Q1
Eastbound
LT R
0.0 0.0
482 138
1900 1900
1 1
1654 1608
879 855
0.29 0.09
0.55 0.16
0.53 0.53
1. 000
3 3
1. 00 1. 00
1.00 1. 00
5.3 1.2
Southbound
IL TR
10.0 0.0
127 220
11900 1900
11 1 0
1680 1834
1228 614
10.04 0.12
10.12 0.36
10.34 0.34
I 1. 000
13 3
11. 00 1. 00
11.00 1.00
10.3 2.8
Total PM
. kB 1 0.5 0.5 10.3 0.5 0.5 10.3 0.4 10.2 0.4
Q2 1 0.6 0.1 10.2 0.2 0.0 10.1 0.7 10.0 0.2
Q Average 1 5.9 1.3 11.4 2.7 0.4 11. 3 6.1 10.3 3.0
Q spaci ng I 25.0 25.0 125.0 25.0 25.0 125.0 25.0 125.0 25.0
Q Storage I 0 100 1100 0 100 1100 0 1100 0
Q S Ratlo 1 0.3 10.4 0.1 10.3 10.1
70th Percentile output:
fB% 1 1. 2 1. 2 11.2 1.2 1.2 11.2 1.2 11.2 1.2
BOQ I 7.0 1.5 11. 7 3.2 0.5 11. 5 7.2 10.4 3.6
QSRatio 1 0.4 10.4 0.1 10.4 10.1
85th percentile output:
fB% I 1.5 1.6 11.6 1.6 1.6 11.6 1.5 11.6 1.6
BOQ I 9.1 2.0 12.2 4.3 0.6 12.0 9.4 10.5 4.7
QSRatio I 0.5 10.6 0.2 10.5 10.1
90th Percentile output: 11.8
fB% I 1.7 1.8 11.8 1.7 1.8 11.8 1.7 1.7
BOQ I 10.0 2.3 12.5 4.7 0.7 12.3 10.3 10.6 5.2
QSRatio I 0.6 10.6 0.2 10.6 10.2
95th percentile output:
fB% 1 1.9 2.1 12.1 2.0 2.1 12.1 1.9 12.1 2.0
BOQ 1 11. 4 2. 6 12.9 5.4 0.8 12.6 11.7 10.7 6.0
QSRatio I 0.7 10.7 0.2 10.7 10.2
98th percentile output: 12.7
fB% I 2 . 3 2 . 6 12.6 2.5 2.7 12.6 2.3 2.5
BOQ 1 13.8 3.3 13.7 6.8 1.1 13.3 14.1 10.9 7.5
QSRatio I 0.8 10.9 0.3 10.8 10.2
ERROR MESSAGES
No errors to report.
.
.
page 8
e
Existin~PM
HCs2000: signalized Intersectlons Release 4.1c
Analyst: dkf
Agency: KHA
Date: 7/10/2003
period: Exist PM peak - weekday
projec:t ID: calvary Lutheran Church
E/w.st:Golden valley Road
Inter.: Golden valley/Rhode Island
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Golden valley
Year 2003
N/S 5t: Rhode ISland Avenue
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound I westbound I Northbound I southbound
I L T R / L T R I L T R I L T R
I I I I
I 0 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
I LT R I L T R I L TR I L TR
189 329 131 1120 256 42 191 155 165 123 159 45
I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
1 0 1 0 I 0 I 0
No. Lanes
LGconfig
volume
Lane width
RTOR vol
Duration 0.25
phase combination 1
EB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds X
WB Left A
Thru A
Right A
peds x
NB Right
SB Right
Green 31.9 20.1
yellow 3.5 3.5
All Red 0.5 0.5
cycle Length: 60.0
Intersection Performance summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp capacity (s) v/c g/c Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
e
Area Type: All other areas
signal operations
2 341 5 6 7 8
1 NB Left A
I Thru A
I Right A
1 Peds X
I SB Left A
I Thru A
1 Right A
I peds x
I EB Right
I WB Right
secs
LT 884
R 855
westbound
L 414
T 1010
R 855
Northbound
L 368
TR 585
Southbound
L 262
TR 615
1663 0.50 0.53 9.4 A
1608 0.16 0.53 7.3 A
778 0.30 0.53 8.3 A
1900 0.27 0.53 7.8 A
1608 0.05 0.53 6.8 A
1099 0.26 0.34 14.9 B
1747 0.58 0.34 17.8 B
783 0.09 0.34 13.8 B
1835 0.35 0.34 15.4 B
8.9 A
7.8 A
17.2 B
Intersection Delay = 11.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
15.2 B
.
HCS2000: signalized Intersections Release 4.1c
page 1
e
phone:
E-Mail:
ExistingPM
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Fax:
dkf
KHA
7/10/2003
Exist PM Peak - weekday
Golden valley/Rhode Island
All other areas
Golden valley
2003
Lutheran church
East/west Street
Golden valley Road
Analyst:
Agency/co. :
Date performed:
Analysis Time period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
project ID: calvary
e
VOLUME DATA
westbound
L T R
North/south Street
Rhode Island Avenue
Northbound
L T R
120 256 42 91 155 165
000 000
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
32 67 11 24 41 43
000
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
111
L T R
12.0 12.0 12.0
o
1126 269 44
1
11. 000 O. 000
1 O. 000 1. 000
150
10 0 0
1
Area Type: All
o
1 1
LT R
12.0 12.0
o
440 13 8
1 1
L TR
12.0 12.0
o
96
337
I Eastbound
1 L T R
1
volume 189 329 131
% Heavy vehlO 0 0
PHF 10.95 0.95 0.95
PK 15 vol 123 87 34
Hi Ln vol 1
% Grade I
Ideal Sat I
parkExist 1
Numpark I
NO. Lanes I
LGconfig
Lane width
RTOR vol
Adj Flow
%InsharedLn
prop LTs
prop RTS
Peds Bikes
Buses
%Inprotphase
Duration 0.25
0.214
0.000 1.000
5 0
o 0
1.000 0.000
0.516
5 0
o
o
I
other areas
OPERATING PARAMETERS
o
1 southbound
1 L T R
1
123 159 45
10 0 0
10.95 0.95 .0.95
16 42 12
1
1 0
/1900 1900
1
I
1 110
1 L TR
112 .0 12. 0
1 0
124 214
I
11.000 0.000
1 0.220
150
10 0
1
Eastbound 1 westbound I Northbound 1 southbound
L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R
I I 1
Init Unmet 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0
Arriv. Type 3 3 13 3 3 13 3 13 3
unit Ext. 3.0 3.0 13.0 3.0 3.0 13.0 3.0 13.0 3.0
I Factor 1. 000 I 1.000 1 1.000 1 1.000
Lost Time 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0
Ext of g 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0
ped Min g 13.2 1 13.2 1 13.2 1 13.2
PHASE DATA
. phase combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Page 2
e ExistingPM
EB Left A NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
peds x peds x
WB Left A SB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
Peds X Peds X
NB Right EB Right
SB Right WB Right
20.1
3.5
0.5
cycle Length: 60.0 secs
FLOW WORKSHEET
1 southbound
I L T R
1
123 159 45
10.95 0.95 0.95
124 167 47
I 1 1 0
1 L TR
124 214
11.000 0.000
1 0.220
31.9
3.5
0.5
Green
yellow
All Red
VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION
volume Adjustment
I Eastbound
I L T R
1
189 329 131
10.95 0.95 0.95
194 346 138
I 011
I LT R
1 440 138
I 0.214
I 0.000 1.000
1 Northbound
I L T R
1
191 155 165
10.95 0.95 0.95
196 163 174
I 110
I L TR
196 337
11.000 0.000
1 0.516
1 westbound
IL T
1
1120 256 42
10.95 0.95 0.95
1126 269 44
I 111
1 L T R
1126 269 44
11. 000 O. 000
1 o. 000 1. 000
R
volume, v
PHF
Adj flow
NO. Lanes
Lane group
Adj flow
prop LTS
prop RTs
e
saturation Flow Rate (see Exhibit 16-7 to determine the adjustment factors)____
Eastbound Westbound Northbound southbound
L TR
1900 1900
1 1 0
1. 000 1. 000
1. 000 1. 000
1. 000 1. 000
1. 000 1. 000
1. 000 1. 000
1. 00 1. 00
1.00 1.00
0.967
0.414 1.000
o . 996 1. 000
0.998
783 1835
LT R L T R L TR
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
11111 110
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1. 000
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.000 0.850 1.000 0.850 0.923
0.876 0.411 1.000 0.581 1.000
LG
So
Lanes 0
fw
fHV
fG
fp
fBB
fA
fLU
fRT
fLT
See.
fLpb
fRpb
S
See.
Capacity Analysis
0.999 0.998 1.000 0.995 1.000
1.000 0.996 1.000 0.996 0.996
1663 1608 778 1900 1608 1099 1747
CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET
and Lane Group capacity
Adj Adj Sat Flow
Flow Rate Flow Rate Ratio
(v) (s) (vis)
--Lane Group--
capacity vlc
(c) Ratio
Green
Ratio
(g/c)
Apprl Lane
Mvmt Group
Eastbound
prot
.
page 3
.
e
e
perm
Left
prot
perm
Thru LT
Right R
Westbound
prot
perm
Left L
prot
Perm
Thru T
Right R
Northbound
prot
perm
Left L
prot
perm
Thru TR
Right
Southbound
prot
Perm
Left L
prot
perm
Thru TR
Right
Sum of flow ratios for critical lane groups, Yc = Sum (vis) = 0.46
Total lost time per cycle, L = 8.00 sec
critical flow rate to capacity ratio, xc = (Yc)(C)/(C-L) = 0.53
ExistingPM
440
138
0.53
0.53
884
855
1663 # 0.26
1608 0.09
126
0.53
414
778 0.16
269
44
0.53
0.53
1010
855
1900 0.14
1608 0.03
96
0.34
368
1099 0.09
337
0.34
585
1747 # 0.19
24
0.34
262
783 0.03
214
0.34
615
1835 0.12
0.50
0.16
0.30
0.27
0.05
0.26
0.58
0.09
0.35
control Delay and LOS Determination
Apprl Ratios Unf prog Lane Incremental Res Lane Group Approach
Lane Del Adj Grp Factor Del Del
Grp v/c g/c dl Fact cap k d2 d3 Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 0.50 0.53 8.9 1.000 884 0.11 0.4 0.0
R 0.16 0.53 7.2 1.000 855 0.11 0.1 0.0
westbound
L 0.30 0.53 7.9 1.000 414 0.11 0.4 0.0
T 0.27 0.53 7.7 1.000 1010 0.11 0.1 0.0
R 0.05 0.53 6.8 1.000 855 0.11 0.0 0.0
Northbound
L 0.26 0.34 14.5 1.000 368 0.11 0.4 0.0
TR 0.58 0.34 16.4 1.000 585 0.17 1.4 0.0
9.4 A
7.3 A
8.3 A
7.8 A
6.8 A
14.9 B
17.8 B
Southbound
L 0.09 0.34 13.7 1.000 262 0.11 0.2 0.0 13.8 B
TR 0.35 0.34 15.0 1.000 615 0.11 0.3 0.0 15.4 B
8.9 A
7.8 A
17.2 B
15.2 B
Intersection delay = 11.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
SUPPLEMENTAL PERMITTED LT WORKSHEET
for exclusive lefts
page 4
e
e
e
ExistingPM
Input
EB
SB
WB
NB
cycle length, C 60.0
Total actual green time for LT lane group, G (s)
Effective permitted green time for LT lane group, g(s)
opposing effective green time, go (s)
Number of lanes in LT lane group, N
Number of lanes in opposing approach, NO
Adjusted LT flow rate, VLT (veh/h)
proportion of LT in LT lane group, PLT
proportion of LT in opposing flow, PLTo
Adjusted opposing flow rate, vo (veh/h)
Lost time for LT lane group, tL
Computation
LT volume per cycle, LTC=VLTC/3600 2.10 1.60 0.40
opposing lane util. factor, fLUO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
opposing flow, volc=voC/[3600(NO)fLUO] (veh/ln/cyc) 7.33 3.57 5..62
gf=G[exp(- a * (LTC ** b))]-tl, gf<=g 0.0 0.0 0.0
opposing platoon ratio, Rpo (refer Exhibit 16-11) 1.00 1.00 1..00
opposing Queue Ratio, qro=Max[l-RpO(gO/C),O] 0.47 0.67 0.67
gq, (see Exhibit C16-4,5,6,7,8) 6.09 1.38 5.19
gu=g-gq if gq>=gf, or = g-gf if gq<gf 25.81 18.72 14.91
n=Max(gq-gf)/2,0) 3.04 0.69 2.60
PTHo=l-PLTO 0.79 1.00 1.00
PL*=PLT[l+(N-1)g/(gf+gU/EL1+4.24)] 1.00 1.00 1.00
ELl (refer to Exhibit C16-3) 1.97 1.60 1.79
EL2=Max((1-Ptho**n)/plto, 1.0) 2.43'
fmin=2(1+PL)/g or fmi n=2 (l+Pl)/g 0.13 0.20 0.20
gdiff=max(gq-gf,O) 6.09 0.00 0.00
fm=[gf/g]+[gu/g]/[l+PL(EL1-1)], (min=fmin;max=1.00) 0.41 0.58 0.41
flt=fm=[gf/g]+[gu/g]/[l+PL(EL1-1)]+[gdiff/g]/[l+PL(EL2-1)],(fmin<=fm<=1.00)
or flt=[fm+0.91(N-1)]/N**
Left-turn adjustment, fLT 0.411 0.581 0.414
sec
31.9 20.1 20.1
31.9 20.1 20.1
31.9 20.1 20.1
1 1 1
111
126 96 24
1.000 1.000 1.000
0.21 0.00 0.00
440 214 337
4.00 4.00 4.00
For special case of single-lane approach opposed by multilane approach,
see text.
* If pl>=l for shared left-turn lanes with N>l, then assume de-facto
left-turn lane and redo calculations.
** For permitted left-turns with multiple exclusive left-turn lanes, flt=fm.
For special case of multilane approach opposed by single-lane approach
or when gf>gq, see text.
SUPPLEMENTAL PERMITTED LT WORKSHEET
for shared lefts
Input
cycle length, C 60.0 sec
Total actual green time for LT lane group, G (s)
Effective permitted green time for LT lane group, g(s)
opposing effective green time, go (s)
Number of lanes in LT lane group, N
Number of lanes in opposing approach, NO
Adjusted LT flow rate, VLT (veh/h)
proportion of LT in LT lane group, PLT
proportion of LT in opposing flow, PLTo
Adjusted opposing flow rate, Vo (veh/h)
Lost time for LT lane group, tL
computation
LT volume per cycle, LTC=VLTC/3600
opposing lane util. factor, fLUO
opposing flow, volc=voC/[3600(NO)fLUO] (veh/ln/cyc)
gf=G[exp(- a * (LTC ** b))]-tl, gf<=g
opposing platoon ratio, Rpo (refer Exhibit 16-11)
page 5
EB
SB
WB
NB
31.9
31.9
31.9
1
1
94
0.214 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.00
269
4.00
1. 57
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
4.48
5.4
1.00
e
e
e
ExistingPM
opposing Queue Ratio, qro=Max[l-RpO(gO/c),O]
gq, (see Exhibit C16-4,5,6,7,8)
gu=g-gq if gq>=gf, or = g-gf if gq<gf
n=Max(gq-gf)/2,0)
PTHo=l-PLTO
PL*=PLT[1+(N-1)g/(gf+gU/EL1+4.24)]
ELl (refer to Exhibit C16-3)
EL2=Max((1-Ptho**n)/plto, 1.0)
fmi n=2 (l+PL)/g or fmin=2(1+pl)/g 0.08
gdiff=max(gq-gf,O) 0.00
fm=[gf/g]+Lgu/9]/[1+PL(EL1-1)], (min=fmin;max=1.00) 0.88
flt=fm=[gf/g]+[gu/g]/[1+PL(EL1-1)]+[gdiff/g]/[1+PL(EL2-1)],(fmin<=fm<=1.00)
or flt=[fm+0.91(N-1)]/N**
Left-turn adjustment, fLT 0.876
0.47
0.94
26.45
0.00
1.00
0.21
1.82
4'J.
For special case of single-lane approach opposed by multilane approach,
see text.
* If pl>=l for shared left-turn lanes with N>l, then assume de-facto
left-turn lane and redo calculations.
** For permitted left-turns with multiple exclusive left-turn lanes, flt=fm.
For special case of multilane approach opposed by single-lane approach
or when gf>gq, see text.
SUPPLEMENTAL PEDESTRIAN-BICYCLE EFFECTS WORKSHEET
Permitted Left Turns
Effective pedestrian green time, gp (s)
conflicting pedestrian volume, vped (p/h)
pedestrian flow rate, vpedg (p/h)
occpedg
opposing queue clearing green, gq (s)
Eff. ped. green consumed by opp. veh. queue, gq/gp
occpedu
opposing flow rate, Vo (veh/h)
OCCr
Number of cross-street receiving lanes, Nrec
Number of turning lanes, Nturn
ApbT
proportion of left turns, PLT
proportion of left turns using protected phase, PLTA
Left-turn adjustment, fLpb
Permitted Right Turns
Effective pedestrian green time, gp (s)
conflicting pedestrian volume, vped (p/h)
conflicting bicycle volume, vbic (bicycles/h)
vpedg
occpedl;l
Effectlve green, 9 (s)
vbicl;l
OCCblCg
OCCr
Number of cross-street receiving lanes, Nrec
Number of turning lanes, Nturn
ApbT
proportion right-turns, PRT
proportion ril;lht-turns using protected phase, PRTA
Right turn adJustment, fRpb
EB WB NB S8
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
5 5 5 5
9 9 14 14
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
0.94 6.09 1.38 5.19
0.029 0.191 0.069 0.258
0.004 0.004 0.007 0.006
269 440 214 337
0.003 0.002 0.005 0.004
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
0.997 0.998 0.995 0.996
0.214 1.000 1.000 1.000
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.999 0.998 0.995 0.996
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
5 5 5 5
o 0 0 0
9 9 14 14
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
31.9 31.9 20.1 20.1
o 0 0 0
0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
0.005 0.005 0.007 0.007
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
0.996 0.996 0.993 0.993
1.000 1.000 0.516 0.220
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1.000 0.996 0.998
SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM DELAY WORKSHEET
EBLT WBLT NBLT SBLT
cycle length, C 60.0 sec
Adj. LT vol from vol Adjustment worksheet, v
page 6
e
e
.
ExistingPM
v/c ratio from capacity worksheet, x
protected phase effective green interval, g (s)
opposing queue effective green interval, gq
unopposed green interval, gu
Red time r=(c-g-gq-gu)
Arrival rate, qa=v/(3600(max[x,l.0]))
protected ph. departure rate, sp=s/3600
Permitted ph. departure rate, ss=s(gq+gu)/(gu*3600)
xperm
Xprot
Case
Queue at beginning of green arrow, Qa
Queue at beginning of unsaturated green, Qu
Residual queue, Qr
uniform Delay, d1
DELAY/LOS WORKSHEET WITH INITIAL QUEUE
Ini ti al Dur. uniform Delay Initial Fi na 1 Initial Lane
Appr/ unmet Unmet Queue unmet Queue Group
Lane Demand Demand unadj. Adj. Paramo Demand Delay Delay
Group Q veh t hrs. ds d1 sec u Q veh d3 sec d sec
Eastbound
westbound
Northbound
southbound
Intersection Delay 11.6 sec/veh
Intersection LOS B
BACK OF QUEUE WORKSHEET
westbound Northbound
IL T R L TR
\0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1126 269 44 96 337
11900 1900 1900 1900 1900
11 1 1 1 1 0
1778 1900 1608 1099 1747
1414 1010 855 368 585
10.16 0.14 0.03 0.09 0.19
10.30 0.27 0.05 0.26 0.58
10.53 0.53 0.53 10.34 0.34
I 1.000 1 1.000
13 3 3 13 3
11.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00
11.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00
11.2 2.4 0.4 11.2 4.6
page 7
LaneGrOup 1
Init Queue I
Flow Rate I
So 1
NO. Lanes 0
SL
Lncapacity
Flow Ratio
v/c Ratio
Grn Ratio
I Factor
AT or PVG
Phn Ratio
PF2
Q1
Eastbound
LT R
0.0 0.0
440 13 8
1900 1900
1 1
1663 1608
884 855
0.26 0.09
O. 50 0.16
0.53 0.53
1.000
3 3
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
4.7 1.2
southbound
IL TR
10.0 0.0
124 214
11900 1900
11 1 0
1783 1835
1262 615
10.03 0.12
10.09 0.35
10.34 0.34
I 1. 000
13 3
11. 00 1. 00
11. 00 1. 00
10.3 2.7
1 10.3 ExistingPM 10.2
e kB 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 10.3 0.4 0.4
Q2 1 0.5 0.1 10.1 0.2 0.0 10.1 0.5 10.0 0.2
Q Average 1 5.2 1.3 11. 3 2.6 0.4 11.3 5.2 10.3 2.9
Q spaci ng 1 25.0 25.0 125.0 25.0 25.0 125.0 25.0 125.0 25.0
Q Stora~e 1 0 100 1100 0 100 1100 0 1100 0
Q S Ratlo 1 0.3 10.3 0.1 10.3 10.1
70th percentile output:
fB% I 1.2 1.2 11.2 1.2 1.2 11.2 1.2 11.2 1.2
BOQ I 6.1 1.5 11.6 3.2 0.5 11. 5 6.1 10.4 3.5
QSRatio I 0.4 10.4 0.1 10.4 10.1
85th percentile output:
fB% I 1.6 1.6 11.6 1.6 1.6 11.6 1.6 11.6 1.6
BOQ I 8.0 2.0 12.1 4.2 0.6 12.0 8.0 10.5 4.6
QSRatio I 0.5 10.5 0.2 10.5 10.1
90th Percentile output:
fB% I 1.7 1.8 11.8 1.8 1.8 11.8 1.7 11.8 1.7
BOQ I 8.8 2.3 12.3 4.6 0.7 12.3 8.8 10.5 5.1
QSRatio I 0.6 10.6 0.2 10.6 10.1
95th percentile output:
fB% I 2.0 2.1 12.1 2.0 2.1 12.1 2.0 12.1 2.0
BOQ 1 10.1 2.6 12.7 5.3 0.8 12.6 10.1 10.6 5.8
QSRatio I 0.7 10.7 0.2 10.7 10.2
98th percentile output:
fB% I 2.4 2.6 12.6 2.5 2.7 12.6 2.4 12.7 2.5
BOQ I 12.2 3.3 13.4 6.7 1.0 13.3 12.2 10.8 7.2
QSRatio I 0.8 10.9 0.3 10.8 10.2
ERROR MESSAGES
e No errors to report.
e
page 8
.
BWBR
ARCHITECTS
PUD PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
-I-
~.;~ f
:~a..R. ~, ~.
r 7Y ~~S lri ~A'A1:Se...
\ J. 0uF~1~.
Ch:H~P{~:P::<j:(),:o.I'":):;: l~~
Calvary Lutheran Church
2002 Expansion
BWBR Commission No. 2002.051.00
-- --- - ------- --- -- ----- ------
---
Attachment 2: Drainage Calculation
I
l~___~ _~ ~
e
.
G:\0205100.AdminlAgendas\PUDdrBinage.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
e
Drainage Calculations
e
e
M~
/i~
e
e
e
A~
~~
A
~~
Drainage Diagram for Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. .07/08/2003
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 1
07/08/2003
e
Time span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2396 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1: South Parking Lot
Runoff Area=36,371 sf Runoff Depth=2.49"
Length=180' Tc=2.8 min CN=90 Runoff= 3.97 cfs 0.173 af
Subcatchment 2: Church Buildings
Runoff Area=60,069 sf Runoff Depth=3.31"
Length=280' Tc=3.9 min CN=98 Runoff= 7.41 cfs 0.381 af
Subcatchment3: Lawn SE Corner of Site
Runoff Area=21 ,245 sf Runoff Depth=0.59"
Length=160' Tc=12.0 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.33 cfs 0.024 af
Subcatchment 4: Grass west of Church Bldg Runoff Area=1 0,940 sf Runoff Depth=0.59"
Length=280' Tc=31.8 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.09 cfs 0.012 af
Subcatchment 5: Grass and Walk Along Pennsylvania Runoff Area=18,923 sf Runoff Depth=1.90"
Length=40' Tc=2.1 min CN=83 Runoff=1.69 cfs 0.069 af
Subcatchment6: South side of North Parking Lot Runoff Area=47,671 sf Runoff Depth=2.88"
Length=240' Tc=3.5 min CN=94 Runoff= 5.60 cfs 0.263 af
e Subcatchment A: NW Parking Lot
Runoff Area=77,263 sf Runoff Depth=2.14"
Length=260' Tc=3.7min CN=86 Runoff= 7.24 cfs 0.316 af
Subcatchment B: North Parking North Side Runoff Area=35,376 sf Runoff Depth=3.09"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=96 Runoff= 4.22 cfs 0.209 af
Subcatchment C: Lawn and Play Areas Runoff Area=69,522 sf Runoff Depth=0.68"
Length=130' Tc=12.7 min CN=63 Runoff= 1.29 cfs 0.090 af
Subcatchment 0: Front of Exist Daycare Bldgs Runoff Area=22,916 sf Runoff Depth=1.15"
Length=100' Tc=10.6 min CN=72 Runoff= 0.89 cfs 0.050 af
Pond.1P:.Pre Dev South Outlet
Inflow= 11.45 cfs 0.591 af
Primary= 11.45 cfs 0.591 af
Pond 2P:1st Infiltration Area Peak Storage= 3,269 cf @ 905.34' Inflow= 1.29 cfs 0.090 af
Discarded= 0.02 cfs 0.015 af Primary= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=0.02 cfs 0.015 af
Pond 3P: 2nd Infiltration Area Peak Storage= 0 cf @ 903.00' Inflow= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af Primary= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Pond 4P: Outlet atNW Corner
Inflow= 11.45 cfs 0.526 af
Primary= 11.45 cfs 0.526 af
e Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Inflow= 30.66 cfs 1.498 af
Primary= 30.66 cfs 1.498 af
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 2
07/08/2003
Total Runoff Area = 9.190 ac Runoff Volume = 1.589 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.07"
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 3
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 1: South Parking Lot
Runoff
3.97 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
0.173 af, Depth= 2.49"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
7,500
28,871
36,371
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
90 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
2.8 180 0.0100 1.1 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 2: Church Buildings
Runoff
7.41 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.381 af, Depth= 3.31"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
60,069
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.9 280 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Buildings
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 3: Lawn SE Corner of Site
Runoff
0.33 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume=
0.024 af, Depth= 0.59"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
21,245
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
12.0 160 0.0375 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
e HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 4
07/0812003
Subcatchment 4: Grass west of Church Bldg
0.09 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume=
0.012 af, Depth= 0.59"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
10,940
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
31.8 280 0.0100 0.1 Sheet Flow, Grass west side
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 5: Grass and Walk Along Pennsylvania
1.69 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
0.069 af, Depth= 1.90"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
e
Area (sf)
7,569
11 ,354
18,923
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
83 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
2.1 40 0.0300 0.3 Sheet Flow,
Cultivated: Residue<=20% n= 0.060 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 6: South side of North Parking Lot
5.60 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.263 af, Depth= 2.88"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
4,890
42,781
47,671
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved roads wlcurbs & sewers
94 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.5 240 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
e
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 5
07/08/2003
Subcatchment A: NW Parking Lot
7.24 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
0.316 af, Depth= 2.14"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
24,163
53,100
77,263
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
86 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.7 260 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment B: North Parking North Side
4.22 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
0.209 af, Depth= 3.09"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
33,376
2,000
35,376
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
96 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment C: Lawn and Play Areas
1.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
0.090 af, Depth= 0.68"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
65,522
4,000
69,522
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
63 Weighted Average
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 . sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
.
Type 1/24-hr Rainfa//=3.55"
Page 6
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
12.7 130 0.0550 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 0: Front of Exist Daycare Bldgs
0.89 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume=
0.050 af, Depth= 1.15"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
15,886
7,030
22,916
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
72 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftlft) (ftlsec ) (ds)
10.6 100 0.0200 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
e
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 1 P: Pre Dev South Outlet
2.953 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.40"
11.45 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
11.45 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.591 af
0.591 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
Pond 2P: 1st Infiltration Area
1.596 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.68"
1.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.090 af
0.015 af, Atten= 99%, Lag= 715.9 min
0.015 af
0.000 af
Routing byStor-lnd method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 905.34' Surf.Area= 9,344 sf Storage= 3,269 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 358.5 min calculated for 0.015 af (17% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) ( cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
905.00 9,000 0 0
. 906.00 10,000 9,500 9,500
907.00 11,000 10,500 20,000
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HYdroCAD@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 7
07/08/2003
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs HW=905.34' (Free Discharge)
L1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.02 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=905.00' (Free Discharge)
L2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# RoutinQ
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 40.0'long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64
Pond 3P: 2nd Infiltration Area
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
1.596ac,lnflow Depth = 0.00"
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.000 af
0.000 af, Atten= 0%, Lag;:: 0.0 min
0.000 af
0.000 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span;:: 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 903.00' Surf.Area= 950 sf Storage= 0 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf. Area Inc. Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
903.00 950 0 0
904.00 2,400 1,675 1,675
905.00 5,850 4,125 5,800
906.00 9,000 7,425 13,225
907.00 12,000 10,500 23,725
Discarded OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
L1=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.00 cfs capacity)
Primary OutFlow Max;::O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
L2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 20.0' long x 20.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Page 8
07/08/2003
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
4.182 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.51"
11.45 cts @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
11.45 cts @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
0.526 at
0.526 at, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
9.190 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.96"
30.66 cts @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
30.66 cts @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
1.498 at
1.498 at, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Page 1
07/08/2003
e
Time span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2396 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1: South Parking Lot
Runoff Area=36,371 sf Runoff Depth=4.72"
Length=180' Tc=2.8 min CN=90 Runoff= 7.18 cfs 0.328 af
Subcatchment 2: Church Buildings
Runoff Area=60,069 sf Runoff Depth=5.63"
Length=280' Tc=3.9 min CN=98 Runoff= 12.32 cfs 0.647 af
Subcatchment 3: Lawn SE Corner of Site
Runoff Area=21 ,245 sf Runoff Depth=1.91"
Length=160' Tc=12.0 min CN=61 Runoff= 1.31 cfs 0.078 af
Subcatchment 4: Grass west of Church Bldg Runoff Area=1 0,940 sf Runoff Depth=1.90"
Length=280' Tc=31.8 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.37 cfs 0.040 af
Subcatchment 5: Grass and Walk Along Pennsylvania Runoff Area=18,923 sf Runoff Depth=3.97"
Length=40' Tc=2.1 min CN=83 Runoff= 3.39 cfs 0.144 af
Subcatchment 6: South side of North Parking Lot Runoff Area=47,671sf Runoff Depth=5.16"
Length=240' Tc=3.5 min CN=94 Runoff= 9.65 cfs 0.471 af
e Subcatchment A: NW Parking Lot
Runoff Area=77,263 sf Runoff Depth=4.28"
Length=260' Tc=3.7 min CN=86 Runoff= 13.91 cfs 0.633af
Subcatchment B: North Parking North Side Runoff Area=35,376 sf Runoff Depth=5.39"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=96 Runoff=7.12 cfs 0.365af
Subcatchment C: Lawn and Play Areas Runoff Area=69,522 sf Runoff Depth=2.08"
Length=130' Tc=12.7 min CN=63 Runoff= 4.57 cfs 0.276 af
Subcatchment D: Front of Exist Daycare Bldgs Runoff Area=22,916 sf Runoff Depth=2.88"
Length=100' Tc=10.6 min CN=72 Runoff= 2.29 cfs 0.126 af
Pond 1 P: Pre Dev South Outlet
Inflow= 20.24 cfs 1.092 af
Primary= 20.24 cfs 1.092 af
Pond 2P: 1st Infiltration Area Peak Storage= 9,574 cf @ 906.01' Inflow= 4.57c(s 0.276af
Discarded= 0.02 cfs 0.017 af Primary= 0.10 cfs 0.040 af Outflow= 0.12 cfs 0.057 af
Pond 3P: 2nd Infiltration Area Peak Storage= 1,675 cf @ 904.00' Inflow= 0.10 cfs 0.040 af
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 0.002 af Primary= 0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow= 0.00 cfs 0.002 af
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
Inflow= 21.02 cfs O.998af
Primary= 21.02 cfs 0.998 af
e Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Inflow= 55.71cfs 2.831af
Primary= 55.71 cfs 2.831af
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Hornand Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 2
07/08/2003
Total Runoff Area = 9.190 ac Runoff Volume = 3.108 af Average Runoff Depth = 4.06"
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 3
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 1: South Parking Lot
Runoff
7.18 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
0.328 af, Depth= 4.72"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
7,500
28,871
36,371
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parkinQ & roofs
90 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
2.8 180 0.0100 1.1 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 2: Church Buildings
Runoff
12.32 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.647 af, Depth= 5.63"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
60,069
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.9 280 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Buildings
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 3: Lawn SE Corner of Site
Runoff
1.31 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume=
0.078 af, Depth= 1.91"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
21,245
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
12.0 160 0.0375 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type 1/24-hr Rainfa//=5.87"
Page 4
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 4: Grass west of Church Bldg
0.37 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume=
0.040 af, Depth= 1.90"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
10,940
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
31.8 280 0.0100 0.1 Sheet Flow, Grass west side
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 5: Grass and Walk Along Pennsylvania
3.39 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
0.144 af, Depth= 3.97"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
7,569
11 ,354
18,923
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
83 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
2.1 40 0.0300 0.3 Sheet Flow,
Cultivated: Residue<=20% n= 0.060 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 6: South side of North Parking Lot
9.65 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.471 af, Depth= 5.16"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
4,890
42,781
47,671
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers
94 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.5 240 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
e
e
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 5
07/08/2003
Subcatchment A: NW Parking Lot
13.91 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.633 af, Depth= 4.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
24,163
53,100
77,263
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
86 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.7 260 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment B: North Parking North Side
7.12 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
0.365 af, Depth= 5.39"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
33,376
2,000
35,376
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
96 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment C: Lawn and Play Areas
4.57 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume=
0.276 af, Depth= 2.08"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
65,522
4,000
69,522
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
63 Weighted Average
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 6
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
12.7 130 0.0550 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment D: Front of Exist Daycare Bldgs
Runoff
2.29 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume=
0.126 af, Depth= 2.88"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type 1I.24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
15,886
7,030
22,916
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parkin~ & roofs
72 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs )
10.6 100 0.0200 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
Pond 1 P: Pre Dev South Outlet
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
2.953 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.44"
20.24 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
20.24 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
1.092 af
1.092 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by $tor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Pond 2P: 1st Infiltration Area
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
1.596 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.08"
4.57 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume=
0.12 cfs @ 17.96 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 17.96 hrs, Volume=
0.10 cfs @ 17.96 hrs, Volume=
0.276 af
0.057 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 354.6 min
0.017 af
0.040 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 906.01' Surf.Area= 10,007 sf Storage=9,574 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 459.6 min calculated for 0.057 af (21 % of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) ( cubic-feet)
905.00 9,000 0 0
. 906.00 10,000 9,500 9,500
907.00 11,000 10,500 20,000
.
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 7
07/08/2003
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 17.96 hrs HW=906.01' (Free Discharge)
't-1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.02 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=0.06 cfs @ 17.96 hrs HW=906.01' (Free Discharge)
't-2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.06 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 40.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64
Pond 3P: 2nd Infiltration Area
I nflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
1.596 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.30"
0.10 cfs @ 17.96 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.040 af
0.002 af, Atten= 96%, Lag=362.2 min
0.002 af
0.000 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 904.00' Surf.Area= 2,400 sf Storage= 1,675 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 223.1 min calculated for 0.002 af (4% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
903.00 950 0 0
904.00 2,400 1,675 1,675
905.00 5,850 4,125 5,800
906.00 9,000 7,425 13,225
907.00 12,000 10,500 23,725
Discarded OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 24.00 hrs HW=904.00' (Free Discharge)
't-1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.00 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO efs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
't-2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 20.0' long x 20.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Existing-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 8
07/08/2003
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
4.182 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.86"
21.02 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
21.02 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.998 af
0.998 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
I nflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
9.190 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.70"
55.71 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
55.71 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
2.831 af
2.831 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
e
e
A
@
~^~
~ <1-----
r
Drainage Diagram for Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 07/08/2003
HydroCAD@6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
e
~
~~
/\ ~
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAOO 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 1
07/08/2003
Time span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2396 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff Area=80,340 sf Runoff Depth=3.31"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 9.82 cfs 22,187 cf
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff Area=30,871 sf Runoff Depth=2.68"
Length=200' Tc=3.0 min CN=92 Runoff= 3.52 cfs 6,902 cf
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line Runoff Area=14,111 sf Runoff Depth=0.59"
Length=300' Tc=21.6 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.15 cfs 693 cf
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street Runoff Area=10,146 sf Runoff Depth=2.59"
Length=120' Tc=2.0 min CN=91 Runoff= 1.17 cfs 2,188 cf
Subcatchment 5: North Lot Drains to Street Runoff Area=14,995 sf Runoff Depth=2.68"
Length=150' Tc=2.4 min CN=92 Runoff= 1.75cfs 3,353 cf
Subcatchment 6: SE Corner Grass Swale Runoff Area=15,808 sf Runoff Depth=0.15"
Length=300' Tc=48.9 min CN=48 Runoff:::: 0.01 cfs 198 cf
Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff Area=34,601 sf Runoff Depth=3.31"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 4.23 cfs 9,556 cf
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas Runoff Area=54,416 sf Runoff Depth=0.59"
Length=130' Tc=12.7 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.83 cfs 2,684 cf
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond Runoff Area=76,514 sf Runoff Depth=1.60"
Length=260' Tc=3.7 min CN=79 Runoff= 5.51 cfs 10,223 cf
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side Runoff Area=57,131 sf Runoff Depth=3.09"
Length=250' Tc=3.1 min CN=96 Runoff= 7.05 cfs 14,726 cf
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk Runoff Area=11,673 sf Runoff Depth=2.99"
Length=300' T c=3.1 min CN=95 Runoff= 1.42 cfs 2,905 cf
Pond 1 P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
Inflow= 13.30 cfs 29,981 cf
Primary= 13.30 cfs29,981 cf
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
Peak Storage= 2,022 cf @ 905.21' Inflow= 0.83 cfs 2,684 cf
Discarded= 0.02 cfs 662 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.02 cfs 662 cf
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
Peak Storage= 0 cf @ 903.00' Inflow= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
. Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
Peak Storage= 18,211 cf @ 896.28' Inflow= 16.70 cfs 34,504 cf
Primary= 5.37 cfs 20,167 cf Outflow= 5.37 cfs 20,167 cf
.
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 2
07/08/2003
Inflow= 18.73 cfs 58,593 cf
Primary= 18.73 cfs 58,593 cf
Total Runoff Area = 400,606 sf Runoff Volume = 75,616 cf Average Runoff Depth = 2.27"
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 3
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff
9.82 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
22,187 ct, Depth= 3.31"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
80,340
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Buildings
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff
3.52 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
6,902 cf, Depth= 2.68"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
4,600
26,271
30,871
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parkinQ & roofs
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.0 200 0.0100 1.1 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line
Runoff
0.15 cfs @ 12.19 hrs, Volume=
693 cf, Depth= 0.59"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
14,111
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftIft) (ftIsec ) (cfs)
21.6 300 0.0300 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
.
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfa//=3.55"
Page 4
07/08/2003
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street
1.17 cfs @ 11.92 hrs, Volume=
2,188 ct, Depth= 2.59"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
1,875
8,271
10,146
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
91 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
2.0 120 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 5: North Lot Drains to Street
1.75 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
3,353 ct, Depth= 2.68"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
12,685
2,310
14,995
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
2.4 150 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 6: SE Corner Grass Swale
0.01 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume=
198 cf, Depth= 0.15"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
13,408
2,400
15,808
CN Description
39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
98 Paved parking & roofs
48 Weighted Average
.
.
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-Syr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 5
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
48.9 300 0.0100 0.1 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff =
4.23 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
9,556 cf, Depth= 3.31"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
34,601
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftIft) (ftIsec ) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas
Runoff =
0.83 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
2,684 cf, Depth= 0.59"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
54,416
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
12.7 130 0.0550 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240. P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond
Runoff =
10,223 cf, Depth= 1.60"
5.51 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
24,012
43,402
9,100
76,514
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
39 Pond Area
79 Weighted Average
.
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Page 6
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.7 260 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side
7.05 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
14,726 cf, Depth= 3.09"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
54,601
2,530
57,131
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
96 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.1 250 0.0150 1.4 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk
1.42 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
2,905 cf, Depth= 2.99"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Area (sf)
11 ,673
CN Description
95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.1 300 0.0200 1.6 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 1 P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
141,130 sf, Inflow Depth = 2.55"
13.30 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
13.30 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
29,981 cf
29,981 cf, Atten=O%, Lag= O.amin
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
e
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 7
07/08/2003
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
54,416 sf, Inflow Depth = 0.59"
0.83 cts @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
2,684 ct
662 cf, Atten= 98%, Lag= 715.7 min
662 cf
o cf
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 905.21' Surf.Area= 9,213 sf Storage= 2,022 cf
Plug-Flow detentiontime= 355.8 min calculated for 662 cf (25% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) ( cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
905.00 9,000 0 0
906.00 10,000 9,500 9,500
907.00 11 ,000 10,500 20,000
DiscardedOutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs HW=905.21, (Free Discharge)
t-1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.02 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=905.00' (Free Discharge)
t-2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 40.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69. 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
54,416 sf,
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
O.OOcfs @
Inflow Depth = 0.00"
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
oct
o cf, Atten= 0%,
o cf
o cf
Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev=903.00' Surf.Area= 950 sf Storage= 0 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
. HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344. @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=3.55"
Page 8
07/08/2003
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) ( cubic-feet) ( cubic-feet)
903.00 950 0 0
904.00 2,400 1,675 1,675
905.00 5,850 4,125 5,800
906.00 9,000 7,425 13,225
907.00 12,000 10,500 23,725
Discarded OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
t-1=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.00 cfs capacity)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
t-2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
e
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 20.0' long x 20.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
222,662 sf, Inflow Depth = 1.86"
16.70 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
5.37 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume=
5.31 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume=
34,504 cf
20,167 cf, Atten= 68%, Lag= 6.0 min
20,167 cf
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 896.28' Surf.Area= 5,137 sf Storage= 18,211 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 222.2 min calculated for 20,167 cf (58% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc. Store Cum.Store
(feet) (Sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
889.50 671 0 0
890.50 1,122 897 897
891.50 1,641 1,382 2,278
892.50 2,227 1,934 4,212
894.50 3,600 5,827 10,039
895.50 4,416 4,008 14,047
897.50 6,264 10,680 24,727
899.50 8,400 14,664 39,391
Primary OutFJow Max=5.36 cfs @ 12.04 hrs HW=896.28' (Free Discharge)
t1=orifiCe/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs)
2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 5.36 cfs)
.
# Routing
1 Primary
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
897.00' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600
895.50' 2.5' long x 6.0' high Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-5yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
e HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
.
.
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=3.55"
Page 9
07/08/2003
400,606 sf, Inflow Depth = 1.76"
18.73 efs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
18.73 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
58,593 cf
58,593 ef, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAOO 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfa//==5.87"
Page 1
07/08/2003
Time span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2396 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH==SCS, Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff Area=80,340 sf Runoff Depth=5.63"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 16.33 cfs37,680 cf
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff Area=30,871 sf Runoff Depth=4.94"
Length=200' Tc=3.0 min CN=92 Runoff= 6.21 cfs 12,706 cf
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line Runoff Area=14,111 sf Runoff Depth=1.90"
Length=300' Tc=21.6 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.63 cfs 2,240 cf
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street Runoff Area=10,146 sf Runoff Depth=4.83"
Length=120' Tc=2.0 min CN=91 Runoff= 2.08 cfs 4,082 cf
Subcatchment 5: North Lot Drains to Street Runoff Area=14,995 sf Runoff Depth=4.94"
Length=150' Tc=2.4 min CN=92 Runoff=3.07 cfs 6,173 cf
Subcatchment 6: SE Corner Grass Swale Runoff Area=15,808 sf Runoff Depth=0.92"
Length=300' Tc=48.9 min CN=48 Runoff= 0.15 cfs 1,214 cf
e Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff Area=34,601 sf Runoff Depth=5.63"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 7.03 cfs 16,228 cf
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas Runoff Area=54,416 sf Runoff Depth=1.91"
Length=130' Tc=12.7 min CN=61 Runoff= 3.26 cfs 8,665cf
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond Runoff Area=76,514 sf Runoff Depth=3.56"
Length=260' Tc=3.7 min CN=79 Runoff= 11.92cfs 22,704 cf
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side Runoff Area=57, 131 sf Runoff Depth=5.40"
Length=250' Tc=3.1 min CN=96 Runoff= 11.89 cfs 25,686 cf
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk Runoff Area=11 ,673 sf. Runoff Depth=5.28"
Length=300' Tc=3.1 min CN=95 Runoff= 2.41 cfs 5,136 cf
Pond 1 P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
Inflow= 22.65cfs 53,840 cf
Primary= 22.65cfs 53,840 cf
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
Peak Storage= 7,945 cf @ 905.84' Inflow=3.26 cfs 8,665 cf
Discarded= 0.02 cfs 720 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.02 cfs 720 cf
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
Peak Storage= 0 cf@903.00' Inflow= 0.00 cfs Ocf
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.00 cfsO cf
e Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
Peak Storage= 23,810 cf @ 897.33' Inflow= 30.72 cfs64,619cf
Primary= 27.62 cfs 50,063 cf Outflow=27.62 cfs 50,063 cf
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran. Church-Proposed-1 OOyr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Type II 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 2
07/08/2003
Inflow= 55.62 cfs 119,294 cf
Primary= 55.62 cfs 119,294 cf
Total Runoff Area = 400,606 sf Runoff Volume = 142,515 cf Average Runoff Depth = 4.27"
e
e
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Page 3
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff
16.33 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
37,680 cf, Depth= 5.63"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
80,340
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Buildings
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff
6.21 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
12,706 cf, Depth= 4.94"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
4,600
26,271
30,871
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parkinQ & roofs
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
3.0 200 0.0100 1.1 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line
Runoff
0.63 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume=
2,240 cf, Depth= 1.90"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
14,111
CN Description
61 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
21.6 300 0.0300 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 4
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street
2.08 cfs @ 11.92 hrs, Volume=
4,082 cf, Depth= 4.83"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
1,875
8,271
10,146
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
91 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (ds)
2.0 120 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 5: North Lot Drains to Street
3.07 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
6,173 cf, Depth= 4.94"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
12,685
2,310
14,995
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
2.4 150 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 6: SE Corner Grass Swale
0.15 cfs @ 12.60 hrs, Volume=
1,214 cf, Depth= 0.92"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hrRainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
13,408
2,400
15,808
CN Description
39 > 75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
98 Paved parking & roofs
48 Weighted Average
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type 1/24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 5
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
48.9 300 0.0100 0.1 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff
7.03 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
16,228 cf, Depth= 5.63"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
34,601
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas
Runoff
3.26 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume=
8,665 ct, Depth= 1.91"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
54,416
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
12.7 130 0.0550 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond
Runoff
=
11.92 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
22,704 cf, Depth= 3.56"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
24,012
43,402
9,100
76,514
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
39 Pond Area
79 Weighted Average
e
e
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfa//=5.87"
Page 6
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
3.7 260 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Parking lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side
11.89 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
25,686 cf, Depth= 5.40"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
54,601
2,530
57,131
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
96 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
3.1 250 0.0150 1.4 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk
2.41 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
5,136 cf, Depth= 5.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=5.87"
Area (sf)
11 ,673
CN Description
95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
3.1 300 0.0200 1.6 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
I nflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 1 P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
141,130 sf, Inflow Depth = 4.58"
22.65 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
22.65 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
53,840 cf
53,840 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAOO 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfa//=5.87"
Page 7
07/08/2003
e
I nflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
54,416 sf, Inflow Depth = 1.91"
3.26 efs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume=
0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.02 efs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 efs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
8,665 ef
720 ef, Atten= 99%, Lag= 716.6 min
720 cf
o cf
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 905.84' Surf.Area= 9,836 sf Storage= 7,945 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 363.4 min calculated for 720 cf (8% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc. Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
905.00 9,000 0 0
906.00 10,000 9,500 9,500
907.00 11,000 10,500 20,000
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs HW=905.84' (Free Discharge)
L1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.02 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=905.00' (Free Discharge)
L2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
e
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 40.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coof. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
54,416 sf,
0.00 cfs @
0.00 efs @
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
Inflow Depth = 0.00"
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
o cf
o cf, Atten= 0%,
o cf
Oef
Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 903.00' Surf.Area= 950 sf Storage= 0 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
.
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 8
07/08/2003
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
903.00 950 0 0
904.00 2,400 1,675 1,675
905.00 5,850 4,125 5,800
906.00 9,000 7,425 13,225
907.00 12,000 10,500 23,725
Discarded OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
't.-1=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.00 cfs capacity)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
't.-2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# RoutinQ
1 Discarded
2 Primary
e
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfrltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 20.0' long x 20.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coet. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
222,662 sf, Inflow Depth = 3.48"
30.72 cfs@ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
27.62 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume=
27.62 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume=
64,619 cf
50,063 cf, Atten= 10%, Lag= 1.8 min
50,063 cf
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 897.33' Surf.Area= 6,105 sf Storage= 23,810 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 154.2 min calculated for 50,042 cf (77% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas. determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf. Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
889.50 671 0 0
890.50 1,122 897 897
891.50 1,641 1,382 2,278
892.50 2,227 1,934 4,212
894.50 3,600 5,827 10,039
895.50 4,416 4,008 14,047
897.50 6,264 10,680 24,727
899.50 8,400 14,664 39,391
Primary OutFlow Max=27.54 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=897.33' (Free Discharge)
t1=Orifice/Grate (Controls 9.65 cfs)
2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 17.89 cfs)
e
# Routing
1 Primary
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
897.00' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600
895.50' 2.5' long x 6.0' high Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
.
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-100yr
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=5.87"
Page 9
07/08/2003
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
400,606 sf, Inflow Depth = 3.57"
55.62 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
55.62 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
119,294 cf
119,294 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 1
07/0812003
Time span=0.05-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2396 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff Area=80,340 sf Runoff Depth=1.28"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 4.00 cfs 8.564 cf
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff Area=30,871 sf Runoff Depth=0.80"
Length=200' Tc=3.0 min CN=92 Runoff= 1.13 cfs 2,059 cf
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line Runoff Area=14,111 sf Runoff Depth=0.01 II
Length=300' Tc=21.6 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.00 cfs 8 cf
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street Runoff Area=10,146 sf Runoff Depth=0.74"
Length=120' Tc=2.0 min CN=91 Runoff= 0.36 cfs 625 cf
Subcatchment5: North Lot Drains to Street Runoff Area=14,995 sf Runoff Depth=0.80"
Length=150' Tc=2.4 min CN=92 Runoff= 0.56 cfs 1,000 cf
Subcatchment 6: $E Corner Grass Swale Runoff Area=15,808 sf Runoff Depth=O.OO"
Length=300' Tc=48.9 min CN=48 Runoff= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
. Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff Area=34,601 sf Runoff Depth=1.28"
Length=300' Tc=4.2 min CN=98 Runoff= 1.72 cfs 3,688 cf
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas
Runoff Area=54,416 sf Runoff Depth=0.01"
Length=130' Tc=12.7 min CN=61 Runoff= 0.00 cfs 33 cf
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond
Runoff h.rea=76,514 sf Runoff Depth=0.26"
Length=260' Tc=3.7 min CN=79 Runoff= 0.79 cfs 1,646 cf
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side Runoff Area=57, 131 sf Runoff Depth=1.09"
Length=250' Tc=3.1 min CN=96 Runoff= 2.68 cfs 5,209 cf
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk Runoff Area=11,673 sf Runoff Depth=1.01 II
Length=300' Tc=3.1 min CN=95 Runoff= 0.52 cfs 984 cf
Pond 1 P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
Inflow= 5.12 cfs 10,631 cf
Primary= 5.12 cfs10,631 cf
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
PeakStorage= 14 cf @ 905.00' Inflow= 0.00 cfs 33 cf
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 19 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.00 cfs 19 cf
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
Peak Storage= 0 cf @ 903.00' Inflow= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
Discarded= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
e Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
Peak Storage= 10,542 cf @ 894.63' Inflow= 5.14 cfs 10,543 cf
Primary= 0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow= 0.00 cfs 0 cf
e
.
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 2
07/08/2003
Inflow= 6.51 cfs 13,241 cf
Primary= 6.51 cfs 13,241 cf
Total Runoff Area = 400,606 sf Runoff Volume = 23,817 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.71"
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 3
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 1: Church Buildings
Runoff =
4.00 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
8,564 cf, Depth= 1.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
80,340
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Buildings
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 2: South Parking
Runoff =
1.13cfs@ 11.94hrs, Volume=
2,059 cf, Depth= 0.80"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
4,600
26,271
30,871
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
3.0 200 0.0100 1.1 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment 3: West Lawn along Property Line
Runoff =
0.00 cfs @ 23.98 hrs, Volume=
8 cf, Depth= 0.01"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
14,111
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
21.6 300 0.0300 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.75"
e
-
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Runoff
=
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 4
07/08/2003
Subcatchment 4: East of Bldg Draining to Street
0.36 cts @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
625 ct, Depth= 0.74"
Runoff. by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
1,875
8,271
10,146
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
91 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlfl) (ftlsec) (cts)
2.0 120 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 5: North Lot Drains to Street
0.56 cfs @ 11.93 hrs, Volume=
1,000 cf, Depth= 0.80"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Raintall=1.50"
Area (sf)
12,685
2,310
14,995
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
92 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftlfl) (ftlsec) (cfs)
2.4 150 0.0100 1.0 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Runoff
=
Subcatchment 6: SE Corner Grass Swale
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
o ct, Depth= 0.00"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
13,408
2,400
15,808
CN Description
39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
98 Paved parking & roofs
48 Weighted Average
e
e
e
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 5
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftIft) (ftIsec) (efs)
48.9 300 0.0100 0.1 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment A: New NE Parking Lot
Runoff
1.72 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
3,688 ef, Depth= 1.28"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
34,601
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftIft) (ftIsec) (cfs)
4.2 300 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment B: Lawn and Play Areas
Runoff
0.00 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
33 cf, Depth= 0.01"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
54,416
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftIft) (ftIsec) (efs)
12.7 130 0.0550 0.2 Sheet Flow,
Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment C: NW Parking Lot & Pond
Runoff
0.79 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
1,646 cf, Depth= 0.26"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hrRainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
24,012
43,402
9,100
76,514
CN Description
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
98 Paved parking & roofs
39 Pond Area
79 Weighted Average
.
e
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfa//=1.50"
Page 6
07/08/2003
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
3.7 260 0.0100 1.2 Sheet Flow, Parking Lot
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment D: New Bldg & Prk Drains to North Side
Runoff =
2.68 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
5,209 cf, Depth= 1.09"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
54,601
2,530
57,131
CN Description
98 Paved parking & roofs
61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
96 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) ( ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
3.1 250 0.0150 1.4 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Subcatchment E: Public ROW Easement Prkng & Walk
Runoff
0.52 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
984 cf, Depth= 1.01"
=
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Type II 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Area (sf)
11 ,673
CN Description
95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
3.1 300 0.0200 1.6 Sheet Flow,
Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 2.75"
Pond 1P: South Outlet to Storm Drain
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
141,130 sf, Inflow Depth = 0.90"
5.12 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
5.12 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
10,631 cf
10,631 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag=O.Omin
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
.
e
.
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfal/=1.50"
Page 7
07/08/2003
Pond 2P: Infiltration Area 1
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
54,416 sf, Inflow Depth = 0.01"
0.00 efs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ -24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 24.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
33 cf
19 ef, Atten= 20%, Lag= 0.0 min
19 cf
Oef
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 905.00' Surf.Area= 9,001 sf Storage= 14 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 146.5 min calculated for 19 cf (58% of inflow)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) ( sQ-ft) ( cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
905.00 9,000 0 0
906.00 10,000 9,500 9,500
907.00 11,000 10,500 20,000
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 24.00 hrs HW=905.00' (Free Discharge)
L1=Exfiltration (Controls 0.02 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO efs @ 0.05 hrs HW=905.00' (Free Discharge)
L2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary -
Invert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 40.0'long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64
Pond 3P: Infiltration Area 2
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Discarded =
Primary =
54,416 sf,
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
0.00 cfs @
Inflow Depth = 0.00"
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.05 hrs, Volume=
o cf
o cf, Atten= 0%,
o cf
o cf
Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 903.00' Surf.Area= 950 sf Storage= 0 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sIn 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfall=1.50"
Page 8
07/08/2003
e
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) ( cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
903.00 950 0 0
904.00 2,400 1,675 1,675
905.00 5,850 4,125 5,800
906.00 9,000 7,425 13,225
907.00 12,000 10,500 23,725
Discarded OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
~1=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.00 cfs capacity)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=903.00' (Free Discharge)
~2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
# Routing
1 Discarded
2 Primary
.
Inflow Area:::
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
I nvert Outlet Devices
0.00' 0.000100 fpm Exfiltration over entire Surface area
906.00' 20.0' long x 20.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63
Pond 4P: Outlet at NW Corner
222,662 sf, Inflow Depth = 0.57"
5.14 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.05 hrs, Volume=
10,543 cf
o cf, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min
Ocf
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 894.63' Surf.Area= 3,702 sf Storage= 10,542 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum. Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
889.50 671 0 0
890.50 1,122 897 897
891.50 1,641 1,382 2,278
892.50 2,227 1,934 4,212
894.50 3,600 5,827 10,039
895.50 4,416 4,008 14,047
897.50 6,264 10,680 24,727
899.50 8,400 14,664 39,391
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.05 hrs HW=889.50' (Free Discharge)
t1=orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs)
2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir (Controls 0.00 cfs)
.
# Routing
1 Primary
2 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
897.00' 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600
895.50' 2.5' long x 6.0' high Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
e
.
-
Calvary Lutheran Church-Proposed-1.5 Inch Storm
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 6.10 sin 002344 @ 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Type /I 24-hr Rainfa//=1.50"
Page 9
07/08/2003
Pond 5P: Combined Site Flow
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
400,606 sf, Inflow Depth = 0.40"
6.51 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
6.51 cfs @ 11.94 hrs, Volume=
13,241 cf
13,241 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.05-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
.
BWBR
ARCHITECTS
PUD PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLAN
~~ ~ise...
0uP tl..nmn.~.
()"""<".>""".Jl':~;: l~:;::::;'"'
I
Calvary Lutheran Church
2002 Expansion
BWBR Commission No. 2002.051.00
- - - -- - --- - -- --- --- ----
----- ---- - - - --
Attachment 3: Drawing Index
.
Sheet 200: Site Plan Demolition
Sheet 201: Architectural Site Plan and Preliminary Landscape Plan
Sheet 150: Basement Level Overall Plan
Sheet 151: Ground Level Overall Plan
Sheet 152: Second Level Overall Plan
Sheet 153: Third/Fourth Level Overall Plan
Sheet 215: Exiting Condition (Survey)
Sheet 216: Grading, Erosion Control and Storm Sewer
Sheet 217: Storm Sewer, Pavement and Erosion Control Details
Sheet 218: Utility Plan
Sheet 219: Existing Drainage Areas
Sheet 220: Proposed Drainage Areas
Sheet 460: Exterior Perspective and Partial Building Section/Elevation
.
G:\02051llO\AdminlAgondaslPUOdwglndex.doc
Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 fax 651.222.8961 www.bwbr.com
';.
.
r;
e
.
--
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
August 5, 2003
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing on Preliminary Design Plan for Amendment NO.2 to JLO
Addition Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 66-7000 and 7100 Wayzata Blvd-
Jim Lupient, Applicant
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile is requesting a second amendment to the JLO Addition Planned Unit
Development (PUD) No. 66 that would allow for the expansion of the Infiniti dealership building.
This 15,500 sq. ft. expansion would create a service facility attached to the north end of the
building as shown on the attached site plans. An amended PUD is required whenever the
approved site plan is changed. In the case of Lupient, the original PUD was required in 1995
because of the plans to add the Infiniti dealership building and expand the Isuzu building. It was
the decision of the City Council at that time that the PUD was required because there were
multiple dealerships in three buildings on the one lot owned by Jim Lupient. The first amendment
to the PUD was approved in 1996 that removed the Isuzu expansion but reduced some of the site
improvements that were part of the original PUD approved in 1995.
Jim Lupient has presented plans and a project narrative to describe the proposed second
amendment. As stated in the narrative, the 15,500 sq. ft. expansion to the existing 5,700 sq. ft.
Infiniti store is required in order to provide a service department within the Infiniti building. At the
current time, the service for the Infiniti cars is done in the main Oldsmobile service facility.
General Motors recently told Lupient that the servicing of Infiniti cars in the Oldsmobile/GMC
service facility is no longer acceptable. (Lupient will soon change the dealership from
Oldsmobile/GMC to Buick/GMC.) Therefore, a new service facility must be added for the Infiniti
cars. The logical location was attached to the north end of the Infiniti building.
The result of the15, 500 sq. ft. addition is the loss of 50 parking spaces at the northwest corner of
the site where the Infiniti expansion will be located. This will result in the loss of 15 employee
parking spaces, 6 customer spaces and 29 inventory spaces. The employee spaces will be
replaced on the property owned by Lupient behind the Benihana Restaurant. Lupient has owned
that lot for years and uses it for excess inventory and employee parking. Staff has been to that lot
and has counted 30-35 excess spaces on a consistent basis. Many employees of Lupient
currently parkin this parking lot. The remaining losses of 6 customer spaces and 29 inventory
spaces are relatively small. Staff has noticed a number of vacant customer spaces on several
visits to the three dealerships.
';.
J
.
e
.
It should be noted that the overall employment base with the lnfiniti expansion would not
increase. Employees that service Infiniti vehicles would move from the existing service area in the.
Oldsmobile/GMC building to the new Infiniti service area.
I am enclosing a copy of my memo to the Planning Commission dated February 7, 1996 that
describes the first amendment to PUD No. 66. As part of that PUD amendment, some of the
requirements of the original PUD approved in 1995 were reduced. These reductions were in the
area of paving of the parking lot and some landscaping. A copy of the approved site plan for
Amendment No. 1 is a part of the attachments.
A copy of the PUD Permit for Amendment No.1 is attached. Lupient has complied with the
requirements found in this permit with the exception of signs. The City staff is currently working
with Lupient to bring the site into conformity with the City's sign ordinance. The staff will
recommend that no building permits for the Infiniti building be issued until the site is in conformity
with the City's sign regulations.
The Planning Commission and staff have been recommending to the City Council that cars for
sale in cars lots be free from signs and writing on windows or car surfaces except for the required
tag in the window behind the driver. Also, no balloons or other flags shall be attached to cars or
vehicles for sale. This would become part of the second amendment PUD permit.
The staff is also concerned about the potential parking of display or inventory vehicles in the
limited greenspace on the site. (Note that 89% of the site will be either paved or covered with
buildings after the Infiniti addition.) Staff has spoken to Lupient representatives and told them that
the PUD amendment will include a specific condition that cars be parked only in designated
parking spaces as shown on the site plan. This has always been an issue with car dealers due
to the nature of their business. The inventory goes up during certain times of the year and space
must be found for the vehicles. The main concern of the City is that there is adequate access
maintained to the buildings in the case of emergencies. There is also a concern about the overall
look of the dealership because it does reflect on Golden Valley.
Lupient has stated that therewiHbea majorfaceliftto the large Oldsmobile/SuicklGMC building in
the near future. This improvement will not increase the footprint of the building but will be to bring
the building up to General Motor requirements for dealerships. At the present time, they have no
plans to improve the surface of the parking lot other than where there will be disturbances around
the new Infiniti addition. As stated in my report to the Planning Commission in 1996, the parking
lot is in poor condition in several places but it is functional. Improving the parking lot would help
the overall appearance and make it more pleasant for customers and employees. However, it is
not necessary for the overall function of the dealerships. Hopefully, it will be done some time in
the near future.
The proposed Infiniti addition will have a 20 ft. setback along the west property line adjacent to
the Cadillac dealership. This area must be landscaped and a revised landscape plan should be
submitted as part of the General Plan of Development.
The preliminary plans for the lnfiniti addition are attached. They include 14 service stalls and a
service write-up area. The addition will be constructed of materials that will match the existing
building.
2
~
,
.
.
.
Memos are attached from City Engineer Jeff Oliver, PE, and Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal.
The memos indicate that the plans are acceptable as long as certain conditions are met. In terms
of traffic, the City Engineer does not anticipate any issues related to on-site or off-site traffic or
circulation issues.
Recommended Action
The staff recommends approval of the preliminary design plan for the second amendment to the
JLO Addition, PUD No. 66. The proposed addition to the Infiniti building will provide needed
service bays for the dealership with limited impact on the remainder of the site. The staff is
recommending the following conditions:
1. The Preliminary PUD Plans for Lupient Infiniti Addition prepared by RLK and dated 7/11/03
shall become a part of this approval.
2. If the property north of the Benihana Restaurant is no longer available for employee parking,
the number of display or inventory parking shall be reduced to provide for adequate employee
parking on-site. All parking (display, customer, inventory and employee) shall be in designated
spaces as shown on the attached site plan.
3. All signage shall meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code. The signage shall be in
conformity prior to the issuance of any building permits for the Infiniti addition.
4. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to approval of the General Plan of
Development. The landscape plan shall show all landscaping around the Infiniti building.
5. There shall be no signs on any vehicle on display other than the sign required by state law.
No signs shall be painted on the window or surface of any vehicle. No balloons or other
inflatable shall be attached to vehicles or buildings.
6. The conditions found in the PUD Permit for the First Amendment will be included in these
recommended conditions when it is appropriate.
Attachments
Location Map
Applicant's Narrative
Memo from Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer, dated July 31,2003
Memo from Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal, dated July 22,2003
Memo from Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Development., dated February 7, 1996
PUD Permit for Amendment No. 1
Six photos of the site
Site Plans prepared by RLK, dated 7/11/03
3
f"
.
,
e
II r-l----1j r-i--~iii
II I III I r:n!
Ilrt1~ T--II
< r:n
~ <..'l f;/l
~ ~ !
'I"
LAUREL AVE
!
17100 WayzataBlvd.
I
I
r~----- - ---
,
LAUREL AVE
~T~---r
I '
i I
i -I
l_~~
1
I
,
)~C__________j
- . I
~
;z
I
I
I
5l
, I
l
?).: ''---
~~
we 1394 TO LOUIS
MARKET ST
I,
>__/ I
~L\lD I
WAYZATABLVO
U ANA AvE S TO we 139
~TE 394
. -- -wAYZ~ A rrvo
~E S TO
.
.
.
e
e
e
.~,
Project Narrative
Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Addition
7100 Wayzata Boulevard - Golden Valley, MN
Prepared By:
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd.
July 11, 2003
For:
PUD Amendment Application
Introduction
On behalf of Jim Lupient Infiniti and Phoenix Midwest, NAI Architects, Inc. and RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. are
submitting the enclosed plans and supplemental information for review, discussion and approval by the
City of Golden Valley. The applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment for Jim Lupient Oldsmobile
Addition PUD No. 66 for the proposed building expansion and related improvements at Jim Lupient
Infiniti. The PUD Amendment proposes construction of a 15,500 square foot maintenance and drive-
through estimating addition to the existing Infiniti building. The application is consistent with the Jim
Lupient Oldsmobile Addition PUD No. 66 as approved by the City in 1996 and is an approved land use
within the Planned Unit Development and 1-394 Overlay Districts.
A more in-depth discussion of the architectural treatment and compatibility with the Planned Unit
Development and 1-394 Overlay Districts follows in this project narrative; the plan sheets also provide
further detail. This application package, submitted on July 11,2003, is anticipated to be heard at the
August 11,2003 Planning Commission meeting and August 19,2003 City Council meeting.
Project Request
· Approval ofPUD Amendment Application
Submittal Package
· Completed Preliminary Design Plan Application and $250.00 Application Fee
· Project Narrative
. Preliminary PUD and Architectural Plans (including site plan and building elevation and plan)
IS-Full-Size Sets
1-11 x 17 Sets
Project Narrative Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Expansion
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. Project No. 2003-445-M
July 11, 2003
Page 1 of 5
.
Project Background
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile PUD No. 66 is an existing planned development, which received approval from
the City of Golden Valley in 1996. The development received all necessary approvals to address the site,
utilities and parking (for employees, inventory and customers). The site currently houses three car
dealerships: Jim Lupient Oldsmobile/GMC, Jim Lupient Isuzu/Suzuki and Jim Lupient Infiniti. All
dealerships presently share the Oldsmobile/GMC service facility; however, recent changes by General
Motors will require the Infiniti dealership to have its own service facility, which necessitates this request
for a PUD Amendment to expand the Infiniti building.
Project Descri ption
The proposed building expansion will add approximately 15,500 square feet to the existing Infiniti
building to accommodate the new service facility. Although parking and landscaping requirements will
not changed as a result of the proposed building expansion, some employee parking spaces will be moved
off-site to the lot owned by Lupient Enterprises.located north of the Benihana Restaurant to compensate
for the spaces lost due to the expansion. A number of employees currently park at this off-site lot to
preserve the convenient spaces for customers and inventory. The proposed service facility expansion
does not anticipate the addition any employees, only a transfer of staff from the Oldsmobile/GMC service
facility to the new Infiniti facility.
e
The site plan identifies the new maintenance facility, which is being added to the rear (north) ofthe
Infiniti dealership. The building addition will be cut into the grade of the parking lot to minimize the area
of disruption, less than one-half acre will be disturbed with the proposed addition. Construction of the
addition will reduce the number of inventory car stalls on the Lupient property by approximately 49 stalls.
It should be noted that the property owner also presently owns the off-site employee parking lot, thus
enabling the spaces that will remain with the addition to be considered inventory and customer parking
stalls. Please refer to the Revised PUD Overall Plan, which identifies the revised location of the
inventory, service and display designation of the stalls on the Infiniti and Oldsmobile lots.
The existing building's south (front) and southeastern facades will not change. The proposed addition
will add the service facility at the north end of the existing building, extending toward the Liberty Carton
property. The addition's west facade will be flush with the existing west wall, while the new eastern
facade will extend approximately 40 feet beyond the existing east facade to provide a new drive-through
estimating facility. The service entrance is planned on the east side of the building. The building addition
is in conformity with all required setbacks. The addition will be constructed of compatible materials to
match the existing building; finished floor elevations will also coincide with present elevations.
Because the proposed addition will disturb less than one-half acre of the site, a storrnwater pond is not
required. Impervious ratios will remain relatively unchanged, as the addition will be constructed over the
existing parking lot. However, it should be noted that an additional 1 O:!: foot green/landscape area will be
added along the west side of the building, this area is currently shown as pavement.
Sanitary sewer, watermain and storrn sewer presently serve the Jim Lupient Infiniti building and will be
modified from their existing locations to serve the building addition.
e
Project Narrative Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Expansion
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. Project No. 2003-445-M
July 11, 2003
Page 2 of 5
..
.
e
.
PUD Amendment
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Addition PUD No. 66 was designed consistent with amendments proposed by
City staff for the District. The proposed addition will require an Amendment to the PUD, consistent with
the Planned Unit Development regulations to maintain orderly development of property. The proposed
Jim Lupient Infiniti building addition has been designed to integrate with the overall site by maintaining
design continuity using a compatible architectural design and consistency in signage, landscaping and
overall site appearance.
In February 2001, the Planning Department produced a document listing items of concern for discussion
with the Planning Commission and City Council. These document items (in italicized text) are shown
below and responses have been provided to address City concerns:
.
Has a neighborhood meeting been held?
A neighborhood meeting has not been held nor is required, as this project proposes a PUD
amendment to construct an addition to an existing building. The site is not being changed and all
adjacent property owners are auto-related or warehouse/industrial. The City of Golden Valley will
provide notification of the Planning Commission meeting to area property owners, the Planning
Commission meeting does provide a public forum should any property choose to comment.
.
Describe landscaping.
Although the building addition will not require additional landscaping, several plantings will be
added along the west side ofthe addition.
.
Describe buffering.
The project does not require any buffering as adjacent properties are all commercial-oriented.
.
Describe snow storage.
Current snow storage/removal methods will continue with the proposed addition. A decrease in snow
storage/removal quantities is anticipated, as the building addition will be constructed on the existing
parking lot.
.
Describe garbage removal.
Garbage and waste removal practices presently in place at the Oldsmobile/GMC facility will be
utilized and coordinated with the proposed Infiniti service/maintenance facility.
· Describe street maintenance.
No public streets currently exist or are proposed as part of this project. The frontage road (Wayzata
Boulevard) along Interstate 394 will to function in its present state.
.
Describeyard maintenance.
Present yard maintenance practices will continue with the addition of the service facility.
Project Narrative Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Expansion
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. Project No. 2003-445-M
July 11, 2003
Page 3 of 5
:.
.
.
.
· Setbacks-what are they and why?
As shown in the existing PUD, the existing building is setback 148 feet from the southern property
edge and 20 feet from the western property edge. The north and east sides of the building are setback
substantially from the respective property lines. The proposed building addition will be constructed
along the north side of the existing building and will extend 150 feet northward and 40 feet to the east
toward Jim Lupient Oldsmobile/GMC. Upon construction of the addition, the north edge ofthe
building will be setback 92 feet from the north property line, while the east edge of the addition will
be 170 feet from the Oldsmobile/GMC building. The building addition is in conformity with all
required setbacks
.
Street width-is it adequate for emergency vehicles and parkingfor the homes?
No change to the existing street is proposed as part of this project. The southern access drive is 30
feet wide, allowing ample space for emergency vehicle access.
.
Ponds-how are ponds buffered?
No ponds are located on the site.
.
Describe pedestrian access, if applicable.
Although the majority of customers accessing the site arrive by vehicle, pedestrian access is provided
via a sidewalk from the building entrance extending southward to Wayzata Boulevard.
.
Describe public space, if applicable.
Public space requirements do not apply to this project.
· How is the site accessed by traffic?
Customer traffic will access the site from Wayzata Boulevard. The site may also be accessed frOIll
Market Street via the Jim Lupient Oldsmobile/GMC parking lot.
.
Is this life-cycle or affordable housing?
No housing is proposed as part ofthis project.
.
What is the lot coverage of hard surfaces?
Impervious surfaces presently cover 89 percent of the site. Because the building addition will be
constructed over the existing parking lot, no change in hard surface coverage is indicated.
.
What is the density per acre?
This project is located within a commercial district, density requirements are not applicable.
.
What are traffic counts?
The addition of the service facility will not create a noticeable change to the existing traffic
conditions.
.
Architectural elements for the homes, including computer generated photos if possible, should be
supplied.
No homes are proposed as part of this project.
The proposed addition will be constructed of compatible materials to match the existing building;
building elevations have been included with this submittal. An additional wall sign is proposed along
the east facade to indicate the entrance to the service facility; wall signage is shown on the building
elevations.
Project Narrative Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Expansion
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. Project No. 2003-445-M
July 11, 2003
Page 4 of 5
-
.
.
e
'.
Conclusion
The proposed building addition is necessary in order for the Jim Lupient Infiniti dealership to remain a
viable operation and provide a service facility. The proposed Jim Lupient Infiniti building addition is
consistent with the Jim Lupient OldsmobilePUD No. 66 design and specified land use as approved by the
City of Golden Valley; approval of the PUD Amendment application is requested. It is anticipated that
this application package will be heard at the August 11,2003 Planning Commission meeting and August
19,2003 City Council meeting.
Applicant and Development Team
Applicant/Property Owner
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile
7100 Wayzata Boulevard
Golden Valley, MN 55426
Jim Lupient
Construction Manager
Phoenix Midwest
750 Pennsylvania Avenue South, Suite 200
Golden Valley, MN 55426
Paul Lyver
Site PlanILandscape Architect/Surveyor
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd.
6110 Blue Circle Drive, Suite 100
Minnetonka, MN 55343
John Dietrich, ASLA, Project Manager/
Principal Landscape Architect
Kurt Kisch, Professional Land Surveyor
Architect
NAI Architects, Inc.
245 East Roselawn Avenue, Suite 30
St. Paul, MN 55117
Ken Nordby, Architect
Telephone
Fax
Email
Telephone
Fax
Cell
Telephone
Fax
Email
Email
Telephone
Fax
Email
763-546-2222
763-513-5517
kimberlyfr@lupient.com (Mr. Lupient's Assistant)
763-593-9999
763-513-5517
612-708-2020
952-933-0972
952-933-1153
i dietri ch@rlk-kuusisto.com
kkisch@rlk-kuusisto.com
651-487-3281
651-487-3283
\\RLKO I\DA T A\GROUPS\MINNET -I \Phoenix Midwest\2003-445-M\_ Correspondence\City Sub 7-II-03\Narrative 07-II-03.doc
Project Narrative Jim Lupient Infiniti Building Expansion
RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. Project No. 2003-445-M
July 11, 2003
Page 5 of 5
e
e
e
Memorandum
Public Works
763.593.8030 I 763.593.3988 (fax)
alley
Date: July 31,2003
To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
From: Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer $
Subject: Preliminary Design Plan Review, PUD No. 66A, Jim Lupient Infiniti Addition
Public Works staff has reviewed the plans that were submitted for the proposed
amendment to Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 66, Jim Lupient Infiniti Addition.
The proposed PUD amendment is located within the main Lupient site, which is located
immediately north of Interstate 394, west of Louisiana Avenue South and east of
Pennsylvania Avenue South.
Site Plan:
The proposed PUDamendment consists of an expansion to the existing Infiniti sales
building, located in the southwest corner of the site, to include vehicle service space.
The proposed revisions will not significantly change the traffic circulation on site, or
change the traffic generated.
._,.
Gradina, Drainaae and Erosion Control:
This site is within the Sweeney Lake sub-district of the Bassett Creek Watershed.
Because the proposed improvements will disturb less than one-half acre, the
development of the site will not require installation of a water quality pond.
The development will be subject to the City of Golden Valley Grading, Drainage and
Erosion Control Ordinance. Therefore, a final grading plan, prepared to City
specifications, must be included in the General Plan submittal for this PUD amendment.
This final plan must also be submitted to the Bassett Creek Water Management
Commission for its review and comment.
G:\Developments-Private\Lupient Infinity PUD-A\Pre Design Memo.doc
'"
.
.
e
Recommendation:
Public Works staff recommends approval of the preliminary design plan for proposed
PUD No. 66A, Jim Lupient Infiniti, based upon thefollowing conditions:
1) A final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan will be included in the
General Plan submittal for the development. The final plan will be subject to the
review and comment of the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission.
2) Subject to the review and comments of other City staff.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter.
C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI. Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire and Inspections
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal
Gary Johnson, Building Official
G:\Developments-Private\Lupient Infinity PUD-A\Pre Design Memo.doc
.:
.
C"
,~iji; , ,,' ,ii'
oGolden Valley
~ Public Safety
.r- <;OLO.."
~ -lp.L1.~" 1'"
IF ~= 0\
(I _ E \
\ R P :
\ E T.
Memorandum
Fire Department
763.593.8055/763.512.2497 (fax)
From:
Mark Grimes, Director of Planning ~ng
Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marsha~
Jim Lupient Infinity Proposed Addition, PUD 66A
To:
Subject:
Date:
July 22, 2003
cc:
Mark Kuhnly
Listed below are the Golden Valley Fire Department's plan review comments for the Jim Lupient
Infinity Proposed Addition, PUD 66A:
1. The turning radius for the fire department apparatus should be a minimum of 45 feet inside
turning radius.
e
2. The fire department access road (fire lane) shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty feet. The fire department access road shall be posted "No Parking Fire Lane." The
stationary post and signs shall be installed in accordance with the City of Golden Valley's City
Code and the fire department standard.
3. The storage use and operation of flammable and combustible liquids in the proposed building
shall be in accordance with Chapter 22, 27 and 34 of the Minnesota State Fire Code.
4. The fire automatic sprinkler system in the current building shall be evaluated and re-calculated
for the proposed addition to the building.
5. The requirement for the operation of repair garage shall be in accordance with the Minnesota
State Fire Code, Chapter 22.
If you have any questions. please contact me at 763-593-8065.
e
-
'"
e
MEMORANDUM
Date:
February 7, 1996
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing - Amendment No. 1 to the Preliminary
Design Plan (PUD) of JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 -7000 and 7100
Wayzata Boulevard - Jim Lupient, Applicant
At the April 18, 1995 City Council meeting, the Council approved JLO Addition P.U.D.
No. 66 that permitted the expansion of the Lupient campus at the northwest corner of
Louisiana Avenue and 1-394. The expansion permitted by the PUD included the
construction of a new lnfiniti dealership west of the Oldsmobile building, the expansion
of the lsuzu building, remodeling of the Oldsmobile building, landscaping, utility and
other site improvements. According to the PUD permit, the parking lot improvements,
which include new lighting, new curb and gutter, and paving over the entire'site, would
e be completed by November 15,1995.
The November date for the completion of the site improvements has past without any of
the improvements being made. Lupient informed staff, in the fall of 1995, that the
Infiniti building was either on hold or would not be constructed. Therefore, they said
that they would not be doing the site improvements as outlined in the PUD permit at this
time. Lupientrequested both a delay and a reduction in the site improvements. After
discussion with the City Attorney, staff suggested that the time could be extended for
the site improvements by the posting of a letter of credit and personal guaranty by Mr.
Lupient stating that the improvements outlined in the permit would be completed by
some date in 1996. A request was made by Lupient that he could not afford to
construct all the public improvements as outlined in the permit and wanted to scale
back. The improvements he no longer wants to complete relate to some utility work,
landscaping, lighting, curb and gutter, and paving. On December 5, 1995, Lupient
appeared before the City Council and requested that the amount of the letter of credit
be reduced to $250,000 because he no longer intended to complete some of the site
improvements. The Council agreed to the reduction if he also submitted a personal
guaranty that certain utility and landscaping work would be completed by July 1, 1996
and that he begin the process to amend P.U.D. No. 66 to reflect the reduced site
improvements.
e
In early December, Lupient also informed the City that he was going to go ahead with
the Infiniti building and start construction in February, 1996. These revised site plans
are submitted to the Planning Commission for review as the amended PUD.
e
Amendment NO.1 - JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66
Page Two
The amendment to the JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 does show a scaled down version
of the plans approved by the City Council in April, 1995. In the following paragraphs I
will outline and comment on the changes.
1. Reduction Qf area to be repaved and placement of curb and gutte{ - The PUD
permit indicates that the entire Lupient lot will be repaved and curb and gutter .
placed around the perimeter of the lot and around landscaped islands. Lupient has
told us that he cannot afford to do these improvements at this time and would delay
them for an unspecified period. There would be some repaving and curb and gutter
placed around the new Infiniti site and near the entrance to the site on Market
Street. Their plan is to patch the bituminous parking area where needed when
utilities are put in and to seal coat the lot as needed. Striping of the lot will also be
done as needed.
e
Staff believes that it would be ideal to get a new parking lot with curb and gutter over
the entire site. However, other than for appearance and to improve the driveability
of the lot for customers, the new parking lot is not needed. If Mr. Lupient chooses
to have a parking lot that breaks up and is deteriorating, this is his choice. If he seal
coats the lot, it will give the temporary appearance of a new parking lot. As for the
curb and gutter, it would improve the appearance and help drainage. However, the
drainage will work without it.
2. Reduction in landscaping - Lupient has submitted a substantially scaled back
version of the landscaping plan. The revised plan emphasizes the entrance area
along Market Street and the area around the new Intiniti building. Staff has insisted
that Mr. Lupient include landscaping at the Market Street entrance at a minimum.
The landscaping proposed at the entrance is essentially the same as. the previous
plan. The landscaping aroung the Infiniti building is somewhat less than proposed in
the first plan. I would suggest that Lupient include the same landscaping along the
west property line as proposed in the original plan.
3. Utility changes - Lupient is proposing several changes to the utility plan. I have
reviewed this matter with both the Director of Public Works and the Director of
Inspections. It is their opinion that the system proposed by Lupient will work. Ttlis
includes connecting the Intiniti building with water and sanitary sewer service from
the rear ofthe Oldsmobile building. In ideal conditions, it would be best to have a
looped watermain system. This appears to be impossible to provide in a cost
effective manner.
e
In terms of the storm sewer, Lupient has proposed a system that would connect the
parking lot drains to an existing pipe in Market Street. The City Engineer has
reviewed this plan and reluctantly approved it. The City has provided a new storm
sewer connection near Market Street and Louisiana Avenue that would provide
.
-
e
Amendment No.1 -- JLO Addition P .U.D. NO. 66
Page Three.
better service to the site. Lupient has chosen this other, less costly method.that
may cause some on-site flooding and standing water in the line. The City will note
in the revised PUD permit, that it is not responsible for any damage caused by the
temporary flooding in the parking lot.
It should be noted that the City Engineer/Director of Public Works is still in the
process of reviewing the utility plans. There may be some changes that he will
require as part of the final approval of this PUD amendment.
4. Lighting - A lighting plan was submitted as part of the original PUD to indicate new
lighting on the site. Because the parking lot is not gohig to be improved, Lupient
has chosen to keep the existing lighting system with the exception of removing
some lights for the Infiniti building. The proposed lights would have been lower and
better directed onto the site and be less intrusive to the neighborhood. Lupient has
said that when and if the parking lot is rebuilt, the new lighting will be installed.
There is no "timetable for this improvement.
5. Expansion of the Isuzu dealership- These plans have been scraped.
e
Both the original plan and revised plans are submitted for review to the Planning
Commission. With these two plans, each member may review the proposed changes.
am also enclosing a copy of the PUD permit with proposed changes. Many of the
conditions of the permit remain, such as the hours of operation, elimination of the
exterior public address system, access to the site, elimination of the display of vehicles
in required setback areas, meeting the City's sign ordinance and the requirement to file
the plat prior to any building permits being issued.
Recommended Action
Staff has struggled with this amendment to JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 over the past
several months. Ideally, all the improvements shown on the original PUD permit would
improve the site. Mr. Lupient, however, has told the City Council and staff that these
improvements are too costly. He has said that if he were required to make all the site
improvements, the new Infiniti dealership would not be added to the site. With the
minimal improvements that have been proposed by Lupient, the site will be better in
appearance than it is now. There will be a landscaped area at the entrance on Market
Street and a new dealership at the west end of the site. Over time, some of the other
site improvements may be made, but Lupient has not given staff a timetable.
e
At this time, the City holds a $250,000 letter of credit and a personal guaranty from Jim
Lupient stating that the improvements shown on the revised plans will be completed by
.
e
e
Amendment No.1 -- JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66
Page Four
July 1, 1996. (The Infiniti building will be completed by Spring, 1996.) If the work is not
completed, the City has the right to go onto the site and make the improvements with
the funds from the letter of credit. Staff is recommending that as a part of the
landscape plan, additional landscaping along the west side of the Infiniti building be
done as per the landscape plan submitted to the City Council as part of the original
PU D permit.
With the financial guarantees submitted by Lupient, staff is recommending the approval
of an amendment to the Preliminary Design Plan for JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66.
MWG:mkd
Attachments: Location Map
Amended PUD Permit
Letter of Credit and Personal Guaranty
Original Plans dated 2/27/95
Plans dated 1/22/96 enclosed separately
;.
'\ 2 . -> :
~
"~. -
... .
, 2:
.0
-.:::l
'x"!
--
- ~
"
'"
. o.~ ~
.. ,,~>'} \' ': ::' ,'to'
... ... .:~ .
c. _
J .. , ':
...
"', - !~': \..
..., '<: I . ~r..l-" :. ~,.~
" '" :-/2 ::' ",
" .,. v
,'-... .' ~ I ~! f'1""
\ : ",:'.; . .~
o;~. ."::~'I" "'.'OJ.
'~ ;.:..:",-~
...."..,.. ...
.. '
,,..
~. '"': .'
...29 r-
.: 0:
:..
. ; I-
-. !..
"
';
~ ...
~
.
~.t. j~
E 3
, .
..../,,). .}
.~
6
.1" );.
" <::> "
.. . ....
d :7 C"......
.: ~S C ~ ~ . ~ .
/..::.:0"... ~ ~.~ 7
.: .. I ~ ~.. ,. ~
... .,. .. t
1:5 ....:,,) ',_ I.I':'.JJ
<0(
<t'
Z.
<:f!
;:.'
::
,.
7:'--'~~~-')'l
I
I
I
I
~
,.
~
'Ill ":'
; ".,'" ~- -.!:.~
; .'"
S~...';.."T!<J ..
..,.
.
- '~..::, : ,
.,' :... 2 ~. "'a .. ;:. ..) . ...... :-~~
. . -.; '::>~: " ........
-. ..... ' '.. .
\)-_. . ,.": Z35 .. .:'
- 5': 2~ , - i
~ - " ..
"
.rl-... ,.I. a." .
~. ~
.
,
- ...,
;:
"
I
I
!
!
c: ~ -. ..0': ./. . ... I '!'J 5 tJ
I
4Ul;-~~
~ U~R--E" - ~:~I.-
-'-=- -=- - ~~':J.
..
to<
-- --.-
I
""i !IS
;c-
.. _:!..., ~";' ...t_
.
.'
'oJ~'C
...'-': c.," ".
....y-.!.:._ r
-!f: 1 J
""~.J'" I,"''' ~.
'.~'J~' ..~-...... v
'"
.i'.J~ ~
^
~. ...".. - .t
: _ ..:J ., ...
1 AVE. I ;.,. '.
...
......
., .
-." "r ,-,7;~~ :,\~;;"-
',_ ,-" -" .....::.;.: ;W' 5 l~"''':'::"
-1. .._ ~:. ,... --".
/' - l ~ ..-~' ...1-'
- ;,. ..'~. ."),.
",. '."'0'. ~~.
I. ~,~o~:1
, ';'~.J 0
.. -- ...=
:l
LAUREL
1 ,,'.Ir:~'?'
I _
1....0
r-
~
~~
...,
::' .'f': 5:0 ~~:
~
.
.
j
~
~
~
~
~
~
"
, -...J
03-'. ." ~
. ..-. '#;.""".~
z~T:; -~ --
/-.:. .
~.
Z 1 ';G
-8 J S'
e'
"';:'J.'
-. .'....:'1
. ;.C .;'~'..'.!J-'.I :~"
I";..~'!':~ J...; -~\";: :-
-: .'f::c 5.,. S-,
.';;': :':.; .;,;.... ::;
.:; ,"_r'..; ):"!.: ~.':
. I
-~
i~.p
I~
('
;:.
:"~'f. .
'"',
~_.., ~
-1:\
10::> ...',
.. '\ ~
I.... _'.l
-. .:..L
. -"\ v.
0; :
(J') ..... .....
,. :"
,.
...
't.
. ..;
. .
'., .-
~
" ()
~ -..0
_ "I .;c:.~
~
'W
~
. ~ "
'Z
~
en
::>
o
....J .,
..;<')
.,..,
- -
.
7(
.~
. Q
r.. sL -
1-
1.'./ ./
." ...Qfe
.' ':)
...;. -
,~
1)."1. ~
:_"
-.
, '0
.:: ,~'O
C(
:;",,'1' '.., '",
=
It;'-rr 'Ie-E
:t
s
. ,......
...
'.,
- ,...J':
PART c.c::
i...AiJ: c::
'P.
..,
.
"r
.'.
'"
...
",
<
.
STR E E T
f~
R
.;
i
I
i
7S- J
. I
598'.: I 6.
I
.; : C:. .::
,p.
.,
.
.
.
Project Name:
Address:
Legal Description:
Amendment No.1
JLOAddition P.U.D. No. 66
City Council Approval: April 18. 1995
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
Use Permit
for
Planned Unit Development
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66
7000 and 7100 Wayzata Boulevard, Golden Valley, Minnesota
Parcel 1 : Lot 1, Block 2, Baker's Industrial Park, according to the plat
thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and
for said County.
Parcel 2: All of the following described tract:
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 lying West of the
East 10 acres thereof and Southerly of a line drawn from a point in
the Westerly line of said Tract, distant 588 feet Southerly from the
Northwest comer thereof as measured along said Westerly line from
the Northwest comer of said Tract to a point on the Easterly line of
said Tract, distant 585 feet:Southerly as measured along said
Easterly line from the Northeast comer of said Tract except the
Westerly 500 feet front and rear of the above described property,
Section 5, Township 117, Range 21, except that part lying Westerly
of a li.ne drawn from a point in the Southerly line of said property,
distant 42.57 feet East of the Southwest comer thereoUo a point in
the West line of said property, distant 204.87 feet South of the
Northwest comer thereof.
Parcel 3: That part of the following described property lying Easterly
of a line drawn from a point in the North line of said property, distant
16.5 feet West of the Northeast comer thereof to a point in the East
line of said property, distant 204.87 feet south of the Northeast comer
thereof; the Westerly 500 feet, front and rear of the following
described Tract of property to-wit:
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 lying West of the
East 10 acres thereof, and Southerly of a line drawn from a point on
the Westerly line of said Tract, distant 588 feet southerly from the
Northwest comer thereof, as measured along said Westerly line from
the. Northwest comer of said Tract, to a point on the Easterly line of
said Tract, distant 585 feet Southerly, as measured along said
Easterly line from the Northeast comer of said Tract, Section 5,
Township 117, Range 21.
.
.
.
JLO Addition P.U.D. NO. 66 - Amendment No.1
Page Two
Parcel 4: Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Baker's Industrial Park, according to
the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of
Titles in and for said County.
Applicant:
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company
Address:
7100 Wayzata Blvd., Minneapolis, Minnesota
Owner:
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company
Address:
7100 Wayzata Blvd., Minneapolis, Minnesota
Zoning District:
Industrial
Permitted Uses:
The P.U.D. Permit three auto dealership buildings with auto service
and outside display of vehicles on one lot.
Components:
A. Land Use Component:
1. Land uses permitted within P.U.D. No. 66 stlall be as indicated on the approved site
plan prepared by RLK Associates and dated 2127!95 1122/96 and will be attached to
the permit.
2. The three buildings shall be for auto sales and auto service. Uses other than these
specified above would require an amendment to P .U.D. No. 66.
3. Landscaping shall be completed as shown on the attached landscape plan prepared
for Opl:.l& ~y Emct ^&&ociatos by RLK and dated 3/16.'-95 1/22/96. .The landscape
plan shall be reviewed by the Building Board of Review prior to issuance of a building
permit.
4. The buildings shall be constructed as per the floor and elevation plans attached. The
plan for the Oldsmobile building was prepared by Opus and dated 10/3/94. The plan
for the Infiniti building was prepared by Opus and dated 10/3/94. Tho plan for the
Izuzu addition 'Nas preparod by Jay ~Jelson ^rchitect and dated 9/26!Q4. The building
plans shall be reviewed by the Building Board of Review prior to issuance of any
building permits.
5. The lighting plan prep:ued by Opus and OSM, datod a/17!Q5, shall beoome a partof
the plan. The C,hief of Firo and Inspections shall ha'..e the right to modify this plsR.
The main parking lot lighting shall be turned off between the hours of 10 PM and 6
AM. Security lighting, approved by the Chief of Fire and Inspections, shall be
permitted.
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 - Amendm~nt No.1
Page Three
e
6. All signs must meet the requirements of the City's sign ordinance prior to the construc-
tion of the Infiniti building. There shall be only three pylon signs on the site as noted
on the site plan. These signs may be built to the height necessary to be seen from
1-394 traffic lanes. A sign study must be submitted to the Inspections Department
indicating the sign height needed to be seen from the 1-394 traffic lanes.
7. There shall be no hardEC::lpO vehicle display areas within the front, side and rear
yard setback areas.
B. Circulation Component:
1. Access drives and parking shall be constructed as per the site plan.
C. Subdivision
1. The final plat of JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 shall be filed by the applicant with
Hennepin County prior to the issuance of any building permits. The applicant shall
give the City proof of such filing.
D. Service~ and Facilities
. 1. The grading, drainage, and utility plans dated 2122/95 1122196 and prepared by RLK
Associates shall become part of this permit~, All required storm sewer improvements
shall be m~de only with approval of the City Engineer.
2. The drainage plan shall be approved by the Bassett Creek Water Management
Organization prior to i~suance of any building permits.
3. Sewer and water service connections shall conform to the City's utility standards.
4. The parking lot improvements (including curb and gutter) ERall be iRstallee R9 later
thaR No':emeer 15, 1995. and land~cape improvements indicated on the Site
Plan and Landscape Plan shall be completed by July 1. 1996.
5. JLO agrees.to pay its share of assessments for the proposed traffic signal at
Louisiana Avenue and Market Street. It is scheduled to be constructed in 1995.
6. There shall be no exterior public address system for any of the uses on the site.
7. The hours of operation shall be 7 AM to 10 PM, Monday through Thursday, 7 AM to 6
PM, Friday and 8 AM to 6 PM on Saturday.
e ~ The attached letter of credit and personal guaranty maybe used by the" City to
to complete the improvements outlined on the letter of credit.
.
.
.
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 - Amendment No.1
Page Four
~ The City will not be held responsible for any damage caused by temporary
flooding in the parking lot due to Mr. Lupient choosing to connect the parking
lot drains to an exisitng pipe in Market Street.
It is hereby understood and agreed that this Use Permit is a part of the City Council approval
granted on April 18, 1995. Any changes to the P.U.D. Permit for the JLO Addition P.U.D. No.
66 shall require an amendment.
JIM LUPIENT OLDSMOBILE COMPANY
Witness:
By:
Title:
Date:
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Witness:
By:
Mary E. Anderson, Mayor
Date:
Witness:
By:
William S. Joynes, City Manager
Date:
Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other City Code provisions,
regulations and ordinances.
.
AGREE1\fENT
This Agreement is entered into this 4 day of January, 1996, by and betwee~ the City of
Golden Valley, Minnesota (hereinafter the "City") and Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company, a
Minnesota corporation (hereinafter "Lupient").
For consideration of One Dollar and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the panies, it is hereby agreed as follows:
WHEREAS, the City has granted Lupient a PUD Permit for Planned Unit Development,
approved by the Golden Valley City Council on April 18, 1995 (hereinafter "P'L'"D No. 66"); and
WHEREAS, PUD No. 66 provides for certain landscaping, grading, drainage and utility
improvements, including storm sewer improvements, and requires Lupient to construct parking lot
improvements (including curb and gutter) to be installed no later than ~ovember 15, 1995
(hereinafter all of which are the "Improvements");
WHEREAS, Lupient has failed to complete the Improvements by such date and wishes to
extend the time for completion; and
.
WHEREAS, Lupient has agreed to immediately commence and promptly complete an
Amendment to PUD No. 66 following the procedure established by City Code, which Amendment
shall provide a new timetable for completion of the hnprovements and cenain other items in PUD No.
66 (hereinafter the "Amendment").
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of One Dollar and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, it is hereby
agreed as follows:
1 Lupient agrees to immediately conunence and promptly complete (by no later than
April 30, 1996) the Amendment to provide, at a minimum,'a new timetable for completion of certain
items of the Improvements, including but not limited to, completion of the storm water drainage
system as set forth in PUD No. 66, (unless such system as set forth in PUD No. 66 is amended to
provide additional drainage by the Minnesota Depanment of Transponation before April 1, 1996)'
(the "Storm Drainage Work"), and installation of certain landscaping at the main entrance on Market
Street and immediately surrounding the "Infinity" building as set fonh in PIJD No. 66 (the
"Landscape Work") by July 1, 1996.
.
2. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Agreement, Lupient shall provide the
City with a Letter of Credit in the form attached in the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand
Dollars ($250,000.00) (hereinafter the "Letter of Credit"), which Letter of Credit is given to secure
the completion of the Storm Drainage Work and Landscaping Work by July 1, 1996, and to
guarantee prompt completion of the Amendment. Said Letter of Credit shall be issued by a bank
reasonably satisfactory to the City and shall be terminated upon completion of said items.
e
e
.
3. If Lupient fails to complete construction of the Storm Drainage ,Work and
Landscaping Work by July I, 1996, the City shall have the right to complete such work at "Lupient's
cost, using the funds from the Letter of Credit. In the event that the City incurs cost in constructing
such greater than the amount of the Letter of Credit, Lupient shall promptly reimburse the City for
said costs upon proof of said expenditures.
4. If the City is required to complete the Storm Drainage Work and Landscaping Work,
Lupient hereby grants to the City access to the property upon which such work is to be constructed
and agrees to remove all vehicles and other hindrances to construction and agrees to cooperate with
t~e City in completing such work.
5. At such time when Lupient has applied for the Amendment and has submitted the
Letter of Credit to the City, then after review and approval of all required building plans in
accordance with the City's Building Code, the City shall issue all necessary building permits to
Lupient for construction of the "Infinity" building, and upon satisfactory completion of such
construction shall issue a certificate of occupancy to Lupient subject to the requisites of the Citis
Building Code, aU of which may occur prior to July I, 1996.
Tun Lupient Oldsmobile Company,
a Minnesota corporation
49302-5
y
. Joynes
Its
<~ CENTURY BANK
e
UNCONDITIONAL AND IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 155 ..
Date:
January 23, 1996
To:
The City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55428
Attention:
City Manager
Amount:
$250,000
RE:
Jim Lupient
Expiry:
7/31/96
Dear City Manager:
e
We hereby establish our irrevocable Letter of Credit number 155 in your favor and authorize you
to draw at sight on Century Bank National Association, 11455 Viking Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
up to an aggregate amount of $250,000.00 (Two Hundred Fifty Thousand and No/lOO U.S. Dollars) for
the account of Jim Lupient, 7100 Wayzata Boulevard, ~inneapolis, Minnesota.
This Letter of Credit guarante~s the construction of the storm water drainage improvements and
certain landscaping as set out in Amended PUD No. 66 by no later than July 1, 1996 as required by that
Agreement between the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota and Jim Lupient dated the :l ,'.\. day of
3'... n......:.'. , 19~ (the "Agreement"). The storm water drainage improvements and landscaping shall be
constructed in compliance with the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, PUD Permit fora Planned Unit
Development, JLO Addition, P.U.D. No. 66, as amended hereafter as provided in the Agreement.
Funds under this Letter of Credit are available against one or more of your sight drafts,
accompanied by a statement, signed by the City Manager of the City of Golden Valley , stating as
follows:
.
The City of Golden Valley is entitled to draw on Letter of Credit No. 155 dated the 23rd
day of January, 1996, issued by Century Bank National Association, pursuant to that
Agreement between the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota and Jim Lupient dated the_
OJ ~..1 day of ~h"""'''''l ' 19 G.&. (the "Agreement"). The City of Golden Valley
hereby certifies: (1) Jim Lupient failed to complete the improvements specified in the
Agreement by July 1, 1996; (2) the amount drawn is required by the City of Golden
V.alley to complete the improvements which were to have been completed by Jim Lupient
under the Agreement, and (3) the amount drawn will be used by the City of Golden
Valley for completion of the improvements required of Jim Lupient under the Agreement.
11455 Viking Drive '. Eden Prairie. Minnesota 55.344-7247' 612/94.3-2.300 . FAX 612/94.3-2020
.3500 129lh Avenue N.W. . Coon Rapids. Minnesota 55448' 612/421-2044' FAX 612/421.2601
.
e
.
Presentation of such drafts and certification shall be made at Century Bank National Association,
11455. Viking Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on or before.~ p.m. on or before the expiration date
hereof. This Letter of credit expires the 31st day of July, 1996, unless sooner released by the City of
Golden Valley in its sole discretion, the Letter of Credit shall be released.
..
Each drawing honored by the bank hereunder shall further reduce the amount available under this
Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full the terms
of our undertaking and such undertaking shall not in any way be modified, amended or amplified except
by agreement executed by the bank, Jim Lupient and the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota. This Letter
of Credit shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and supplements (to the extent
consistent with this Letter of Credit) by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs Practice of
Documentary Credit, 1983 Revision, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 400.
We hereby agree that each draft drawn in compliance with this Letter of Credit will be duly
honored upon presentation.
CENTURY BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
By:
~~
K.~~~
Its: A "s.,s ~.....+ "',,-Co ?.re:.', d.-...rr
..
e
e
e
PERSONAL GUARANTY
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, and to induce THE CITY OF GOLDEN
V ALLEY (the "CITY") to extend certain performance deadlines in Planned Unit
Development, JLO Addition, PUD No. 66 (hereinafter "PUD 66") and other
accommodations to nM LUPIENT OLDSMOBILE COMPANY ("Developer"), JIM
LUPIENT ("Guarantor") hereby personally guarantees to the City the full and prompt.
performance, when due, of all covenants, agreements, and obligations of Developer under
the Agreement between the City and Developer dated December _, 1995 (the
"Agreement ").
This Guaranty is absolute, unconditional, continuing and irrevocable. This Guaranty
is effective upon delivery to the City and without any further act or condition.
Guarantor waives notice of any default by Developer, and any and all defenses,
claims and setoffs of Developer. The liability of Guarantor hereunder shall not be affected
by any extensions, renewals, modifications, waivers, or releases granted to Developer, or by
any other act or thing other than performance in full by Developer under the Agreement.
Guarantor shall payor reimburse the City for all costs and expenses (including
reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses) incurred by. the City in the successful enforcement
of this Guaranty. Guarantor shall not exercise or enforce any right of payment,
reimbursement or subrogation available to it agaipst Developer during any period in which
there is a default under the Agreement. --
This Guaranty shall be binding upon Guarantor and his heirs, successors and assigns
and shall inure to the benefit of the City and its successors and assigns. This guaranty may
not be waived, modified, terminated or otherwise changed except by a writing signed by the
City. This Guatantyshall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota.
This Guaranty shall terminate when the terms. of the Agreement have been full
performed.
IN WITN
a day of
S WHEREOF, Guarantor has caused the execution of this Guaranty this
, 1995.
./
.
e
.
STATE OF 1tfINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
:
On this ~ day of , 1996, before me, a Notary Public
within and for said County, rsonally appe d JIM LUPIENT personally to me known to
be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that
he executed the same as his free act and deed.
(j~~'.tt~~JEA"''''E A F'!I.'"
'!-"" l4\ .. l'-rlll~ -. ,.;'41~
l"'~.'f';Ji,-;~. N:.~~;v P .".:.r: . t\1.t-.....::SOTA
< ~\~~;;y HE.:-'N:;;lIN CClIJ~TY
t :...::::;!...'.:V y, c,--... ,. ~ '...., !.- ;' 2C':O
, ,-Cr.:I,..
Q.e~ /l. ~N
j'. Notary Public
adb\26938.mem
j
::"':;.'ii~\."~ ~~''''..:'-'''~'''':.''''':-'''" :;~... ',":"
!-~"'1~
.
I
"
I
-
I
I
I
I
I .'
I ,::
I
I
I
~
.,
I ~.
.''''
..'
I',
. .....;-
II!!
::i:::=:i
~.
# ~
~ 1:1111 .
: i;JJ i: 1,.1..
ii ;u; ~ iI!!
I :1 :6 :a ..!is
~ S!!U
r.~1!
! !J.~
I ~!
-II
/
-~
;,,'
hi": ,
.-!:. ;'..
,
."'.
.
. . 0" ,_.
...!'
j
~
!I
J;n
~ ilL;
~ 1:'111
I ,.~., .
I
I
\
"
'~_:::::::::::::::::._---_.-
'-___ 1LLflOS :mNii----::-..--.:
_______ ___________!___ ."liYrsm07
----- -------------- ---------.
I ::::.;;;---- ~-.--. -------...
_. ___. Ilot ----_.J
11111111111111' 1:;-------:iiJ1
~. '.II Ti":";j. ---
., ",. .t,
-n~i ' l~~ ,. .": ~
""~""i-:~
Ii-----
111111'1----
h "'1 "I,jjjj;
= p .-...'
- . '" .---......... . . . .
U I- . ..,.----- ' ~....; , , ~
,"jij"j'"j"j"j-~~ .----: -~-- -~.
I . I , , "i"j"":": c::::i I I,~i-,
, .~,;~~---.-:r
!"'::-:i--~-- . .,..-------
'l'l,i~~'iii;~~---
I~~-~~~
III"I:I~II ".,~-
1111"~
:~" .
.". ...
~
....
;:1:' ; .
~., i
~t : I
::: I .' 'T I.
~ :. j'T
: ~I 11'1 \
~, , \ \ \
.\.i
,
::':'
.~
r:
'I
I,
II
'w
- --'
":." .
....:-.....)
~ "":-- .'~ "- ~:...~ ....-"':"'\.."l. .,.~
.e rn~'"
o
;:
i
..
i a
o
.
o
..
..
i
-
---.-------..-.-
c::::::-----
----.
\
I;!
..,"
o I
i I.
..I.,
..1
Iii
HIll';
., ~
.
.
I,
f---------
, ------
, t I
\ ' t
\ t I
I I I
I t I
\ I I
I ' I
\ ' '
I '
nl I '
II · I ....'
III I 0\:
III I ~.
II ~ : I
II, I I
1"1 I ..
III I I...... ~ t
II I 1 ell ...,
II I I Q: I
III I:"I:~'
I~: I ~~:
III .,~ =::'
::: ::::)~:
I II I s= ::::: I
'1 I I ~ ...,
II' I I
III 1;ocE"l,
III I......'
'" I~ ~I
::: : >; ~:
:: I : ~ f:i :
II I ,...... Eo; ·
II I I :t I
111 I ... t
I' I I I
lJ: I I
:: Cti:
I I . I
" :::) I
" I
I I
I I '
II :
. ' I
, : :
I,
II
, I
I I
I'
I I
I I
t ·
,I
,I
I'
,I
II
II
II
"
II
II
,I
'I
~
I
,
;;
.
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I ;
1. .
(.. .
r. '
z
s I
u
III
..
c:I
~
c
..
~ f
h~
IRI
Iii
.. z.
r O'
! c j:;
~ · V ~:
ie Ii ~1
-l! II WI
S. ~ 1 :I;
~. ~:
~i n .:
, Aol
8 m!
~ g:
i z:
5i
::II
.-,
jjj
I ~!Ia ~ I :f~:' : 02 Ii ~
111I!~ 5 '5 .~~!li~"A' ei II Ci II i
.. ..;all . 6 ~'lll~e. IS -5 \I i I
= ~-ll: ~ ~ la dJI~ I Q. i~ :
o ..I.. ...a . . $I I w
z lid 3, ~ i~!lgi~;t!! !~ i
i loll! I 2 E~i -II i-I~I ~e 1 !
~ ~!IU! i rli:!~1 ;;; ;i~;' i !
z !Iiill ! ;!: ~i, ";1 i~i r! I Ii
!i i lite - i r. !' "I: if ~ B
i . 11& ;, 8 I' ~IS IIi ~I~! I
III el il Ii. i I ~I. ;~; ~
: j" .1 I! ~ Ii Illl I~! ill t, I
3 I!II". i 'S "I I 0 :III
i181:11 Ii :1 i!lili! II: ~!. III! ;~ i
I SIXI Ai it !i !I!~ ~I; ;~I 21 il I
I
/
.
;
-----------------
c.----------
-----------
,
,
I
I
I
.....
Q.
.,.
I
1
-I
.....S.
Q""
IQ:).,:
I~ :"l:;
I foG ~ I
I~~l
'::::l ~,
I....... '
I;;:: ,...
I ... ..... t
I P.. '
1:"l:~1
I~""
I~~'
IN !II'
:;11:;
I~ ~'
'-;t :
...
fIi
::i
;..-
~
z~ rn~
o
;:
u
:>
..
..
..
z
o
u
..
o
..
..
o
z
~i~
:cE
3".
!I~
uciE
"'..c
"0.
o
Q
..~I
z"~
lI!.-
!.~
-3-
:11:111
:;91
o
..!;
z.i
~I.
! {i.
~ -I
:III"
:: -I
13"
Iii
. Ii
! , iIII
!H!iH;~lih.h
!il:,!lIll" :u=!~
..,110. w ~ 3 ...
~!! II: 1
~i i I P ;
! fi 111 )~ Iff
I
I '9
ui3
! -I , ,
II .'-
h: :.
.,
::u .., ::.:;;::.-:
'U5l/! . ,~
5~I!iu ......~.,;.:.-
i!lh~ { "......,.
Q it
'" !lilll .Coj
.. ! ,~
0
... !hxd
0
..
... !lId~ ~~
I
.._'W~" ~ Q:
,::S
~
Hru'
11 I 0'
il .
II, ·
It.
..J
u~
fll
rl'
. t
Jli Ii
JlI , .
Ii
: ..
. ii
.
I
I
,
i
u
..
c: ".
U
~I
-:..:.. '." :
!, '~IA ~
!::!!i! Ili;~i.!I:!,I!
~111!Jil;wl;;9~;~l~lwl
ii lc.. 3~ ~ iH!SU
~ f!: r I I: ~I ! ' I
. I, '. ~ ! I.... I: -! II
il!l r" 'i:i-I
Q 1, I
! ~ : 11111~ '11
1,lli:1j
I fi~I' ~ II
i liI~ ! ~ ~
,i- ~ .I~'I i, 9
. . Illil r 5
= III ! I~I .1 I
i lit "II. 'f.
p~t ~ .rlll.
i is, ql:&! I;U
I lit ! !;b j !~ I
u 1.1 · 11'1 I iii
5 4il"II&II' nil _.1
; n I aii. i ::1 i
I "
.. .. ... ,.
I
I r
r t.
- I
!I;I ~
I. t I
j! !! I
011:111
..,tI, ,
i lulll
I .; .. III ~
"
0"
.
'I
\ .
I ~ . I
.',. ''::- .......---...............-- .#
'" : ------iiiiios---3nNiii:::~~~;n_;;
-~~~~: I ~::::::____--------:---------------.~
1 ~~-o -__________4 .....
,&I.::~:::._:_:; ,: : ~__ T ---------------_.J
I ""- - - .: ---......--.....
rf;"~~,~":=--:"":'_": -:--=-~ '-=-~i ______ ~ ----un___
, ,,-;:-- . .,1, , ~- -- ~ I f---------
. , ;' "-' I i - ;;' ~.' - ~'\., ~ . ------
Ii I li~; :I~! un ~ '.:. '~~".\'~~" \ :
i I f.;~ :,':- ~ · ,..:.. :
,Lac,,' ,. ,'" I \
.~ :; :" ft ill .. I , . 2 \ ~ '. :
. II "l"'~; U 'ij , I; L · 'I
J. t. ~II ",of ':- J I . 1 I. \ I ,
IC' a. ' L .,.... ' 'I n I · ,
Jil;::::: 11:':': :"'.: -~ii 7-~-4-~~--...i. .;" I : ::
.ci~~ ,II nu.. ',) r..: ~ -~ II I : "'.
~ i~l,u \ U II ~JUi 'C:U'I II" :
~I ~ ~ \ ~~ ~ :0;
, _.:. . I , ii "I 1 ;::. :t I
,,'f : "I 'Qi ·
,7. ~{. ~ ,Ie Ii \ i~; ~:
'ViI: ~ II I 1 GII I
.' .'4"11 \ II'. I~ '
,~ ! \, : I: I Q ~ ;
: \ :: I I ~ :z:: ;
, . ~ . ", I p_ I
... ' _____ II I I ~ i: I
3= . '" I,... .
"I t~ ~ I
I' 'I': ~ fn:
I ~' : : I 1:"1: Pi: ;
;~\: .,, I iIl:. [oj I
Ii \1 : ~ll 1 I..... ~ 1
.~' ~;~ ~ ~ ~ ; ... :,
\. . II; I :
I 1~;lJ:: fIi:
. j o' I ,I 1
~ :~!: ~: ::i I
o:t :' :
:+-:'I~'Y i
,1 , \, ~ \:
ii' I ~.:.;. I
J" I' I i'\; i\l
I II ~ : ;
I I :'! ~ :
~ II ':
I . \ . '0
'm' . i : \:
: ,i.. i ~ .~. ~:
" . I' 11
.. " ,,;.-: "U
, , '; y'
;
-._'---~-"--.-.-.
I
I i
'I':
I-II
.
I
,
I
I:
I;
!
~I:'i.
, ~'
Iii
e':
til_
l."
--~
-.."1':1<-
,
~
.
;,)
Ie,. -,
..,
,,:
'I
:1
"
~.
I" .
-. \
I ~I: Ii
! alr~ J
2i l!:, it
C ., 3
I; " ;, "
'!":
".
l:if
~:i
I~
-~,.
V
\ i
I !
;
I
s
I
Or, '.
Wi" ;1 g
" ifls -
" · ~v ~
~ ~i"
III .'
~:
--
o~
o.~
.~-
_iIi
lin
"
"
z~rn0
o
;:
g
.
..
-
Z
o
U
.
Q
...
..
o
z
..z
.c
C"
26.
i:
...-
....
...
6.=
Q
..=it
Z".,:
!!Iu~
!U
"0
:I~"
Ii-!
9.
o
I Ii
i;
.....
Z".
II.
"'t"
a I
i.1
:lIe
=:1
J~"
9. "I
:ili
m
I
J
~J
b
IIJ
'"
'oJ
'!I
II. I
f"
III
.U I
J. i i=
jt: . ~
I ..
: ;::
ii
I
I
~r
.
"I
,-:
1 /
I
I
I
I
I
.
i --
I !
,
I --I I
e
) (
'\Ii
.., .
<- #. ........
I .... I
g I!,U;
II .112'
Ii .
III ~I I.
Il! J' Ii
,I 'i ii'
il i h Ii
~ .. .
I U!!!I
lI!aa!l
~! n I
ri~'
I
I
I
.~!
lei
f l!!
.. , \ 01.
I \ \ r
.~ \
, .,
~ I
:.J
.. . . ......,... .
W-llHlt -I_Mil
IIm::'E,E 'sndO 9
...~,-~
NY1d lLIS .....
:.. JU1 " ,.... .: ::...-c
w. &1Ia ...... ..,. u.-c...
-- .... ......
.... --. .......
...t.t..,
-..
..,....",
_1
" ...,.
-
-,.. "1.1"
-...
. . "'
...
.. ...."
. III
.. "...."
'NNI'" 'J.Jm^ NJQ'1Oll
ana'o "r .......
L...:...-
HJ.nos 3nN3I\1f '1NlfISln01
I'
,j
1
~
...
'"
a.:
~
(~
(
-..
-I
=i
-.
-i
.... . :,
I
'., ,.,~
:";~'" - - ~ ~..~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~. . T~ -
~
..
.'
..
- "
-----_._~-------------
~ .
--------;--~-----;-----
_ ... _ .':: _ .'.'. - - ....-:- - - ...
---------------.------
....i'
\ -
.
'--
._-------~._--------------
;...~ ..:
a.~':.;
.... ,. :...t.
LS'cf d
.. ,....
...
f10
M
I
~
a
~
:~
I
.
.
I
.
--
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..~.
I
.
..,---
__CllI
.......,. --
.sndO 9
~~.~
..,
It ....."',
..
" .....
allUl
. ...
.....1lI
... ......
....... ... .....
-..t.,.. ,e
4~.. .......
... .......
'/
.I
!
LJ j
. .--..J
. ~~~.:, :;.
-' V _~I~~
-----_.. -- .
.....1J11rAllJII'm L - 351
and '0 " 'r
,.
e~
i;
~
:0
;
~
1\
,\
! ~
,
\
~
,
1
io
.
.
~.
lS .
.n Iii
:'-15&
~
d
Rldii
~=
.. .J
iiS:
f. ~.:I
a 11:'1=-"
. ie;ali!
I...... ...
.. ;!..~I=!l
· !CJm-
Ie ..
i
i
\.
: \
I
\
.
!
J
Ii
....1;
Iii
T=I
i~
W.,!
ril
!if
SB
:=!
..
iI.
II
I
.
.
...
. :
. l-t
: c:.
. ~
I
I
..
I'
I
1.1
I
I
I.
I
IIh,
I
II
.~ ~,~,..-' .
. '--C""__CIt ;;;r;- ~v~_
1,",== .SndO 9 =.=::~-=, _
~"""tll< '===-======._.::::.._
..-.-...,.......... .... .. .........
A"~ 3dVOSCNV1 t 1
,..- . ...~
., "
........., -.
..~;It ........
......~. ':I"'~'
'NNI" . .I.3'TTfA NJ01011
<Jt'\d .0 "r. ....... .. .....
'--
,.unoe; 3nNJ,\ If IfN"'I~lno,
) K--::
, Ii
~
(f
. ...,
I
. '/
/
,
,,;~R~.- . .... "
"
, .
.
>4
I"
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
1.-
I
I
I
I
I
,
.........., ...._".
'~...-i"-- --~~ -
-~_o ....-;:..:.....-
'sndO 9 =::'.=.:~7=.5
==.:.:..-=--=-.: ~----
---.= -~..~
........."
.....~.
...~~
NY1cI :IdVOSONYI " .'
,,,-1,,\ ~ .......
.....--~)..
~... '.
'MM'" 'l31'''A N30'O~
<l"Id'O' 'r .....,
n
... ,..." , -.-. ..-0
..1' L
lr-', --
r~ h
~ t
h h
a;. f
'-
.' '". .... .0'_
..::-::- '~~~::re_'--~.- -.;- _
. \.\
.\\
. ,~
. I
f'.'" \
~~
il?
,.CI
l'~~
I.'
I
t -
I.
"',
r
I
r
, .
\
\
,
\
\
\
r \
\ \
\ \
\\ \
\\\
\ \ \
i I \
i I \
" I
I ~
it. II
Hhl.
I u~ t!:
~!;~:;
'-=--~.=-:-_,'=~
,.
. .'
~J
. ,
'1,
.
, r'
.n
I :.
-
~.
.'
11
~
~
.
.
.
.
..
II
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
..
-:
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66-Amendment No.1
City Council Approval: April 2. 1996
.
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
Use Permit for
Planned Unit Development
Project Name:
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66
Address:
7000 and 7100 Wayzata Boulevard, Golden Valley, Minnesota
Legal Description:
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66
Applicant:
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company
Address:
7100 WayzataBlvd., Minneapolis, Minnesota
Owner:
Jim Lupient Oldsmobile Company
Address:
7100 Wayzata Blvd., Minneapolis, Minnesota
Zoning District:
e Permitted Uses:
Industrial
The P.U.D. Permit three auto dealership buildings with auto service
and outside display of vehicles on one lot.
Components:
A. Land Use Component:
1. Land uses permitted within P.U.D. No. 66 shall be as indicated on the approved site
plan prepared by RLK Associates and dated 2/27/95 with revisions dated 1/22/96 and
3/13/96, and will be attached to the permit.
2. The three buildings shall be for auto sales and auto service. Uses other than these
specified above would require an amendment to P.U.D. No. 66.
3. Landscaping shall be completed as shown on the attached landscape plan prepared
by RLK and dated 1/22/96, with a revision date of 3/13/96.
.
4. The buildings shall appear as per the floor and elevation plans attached. The plan for
the Oldsmobile building was prepared by Opus and dated 10/3/94. The plan for the
Infiniti building was prepared by Opus and dated 10/3/94.
.
.
JLO Addition No. 66 ~ Amendment NO.1
Page Two
.
5. The main parking lot lighting shall be turned off between the hours of1 0 PM and 6
AM. Security lighting, approved by the Chief of Fire and Inspections, shall be
permitted.
6. All signs must meet the requirements of the City's sign ordinance prior to the occu-
pancy of the Infiniti building. There shall be only three pylon signs on the site as noted
on the site plan. These signs may be built to the height necessary to be seen from
1-394 traffic lanes. A sign study must be submitted to the Inspections Department
indicating the sign height needed to be seen from the 1-394 traffic lanes.
7. There shall be no vehicle display areas within the front, side and rear yard setback
areas.
B. Circulation Component:
1. Access drives and parking shall be constructed as per the site plan.
C.
1.
e
D.
1.
Subdivision
The final plat of JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 shall be filed by the applicant with
Hennepin County. The applicant shall give the City proof of such filing.
Services and Facilities
The grading, drainage, and utility plans dated 1/22/96 and prepared by RLK
Associates shall become part of this permit. All required storm sewer improvements
shall be made only with approval of the City Engineer.
2. The drainage plan shall be approved by the Bassett Creek Water Management
Organization prior to issuance of any building permits.
3. Sewer and water service connections shall conform to the City's utility standards.
4. The parking lot improvements (including curb and gutter) and landscape
improvements indicated on the Site Plan and Landscape Plan shall be completed by
July 1, 1996.
5. JLO agrees to pay its share of assessments for the proposed traffic signal at
Louisiana Avenue and Market Street.
6. There shall be no exterior public address system for any of the uses on the site.
. 7. The hours of operation shall be 7 AM to10 PM, Monday through Thursday, 7 AM to 6
PM, Friday and 8 AM to 6 PM on Saturday.
,
"
e
e
e
JLO Addition P.U.D. No. 66 - Amendment NO.1
Page Three
8. The attached letter of credit and personal guaranty may be used by the City to
complete the improvements outlined on the letter of credit.
9. The City will not be held responsible for any damage caused by temporary flooding in
the parking lot due to Mr. Lupient choosing to connect the parking lot drains to an
exisitng pipe in Market Street.
It is hereby understood and agreed that this amended Use Permit is a part of the City Council
approval granted on April 2, 1996. Any changes to the P.U.D. Permit for the JLO Addition
P.U.D. No. 66 shall require an amendment.
JIM LUPIENT OLDSMOBILE COMPANY
Witness:
By:
Title:
Date:
Witness: . 11tL1H A~( t
'/ "
I .. \..- .,'
By:
Date:
Witness:
By:
Date:
-
L.t" "'"./'
'l'i1 ',J2
Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other City Code provisions,
regulations and ordinances. "
..
~
.
e
e
Memorandum
Planning
763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
August4,2003
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Informal Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the Zoning Code to Allow
Retail Sales and/or Services by Conditional Use in the Light Industrial and Industrial
Zoning Districts
At the June 9,2003 Planning Commission meeting, staff brought to the Commission a request
from Gary Gandrud, attorney for Hope for the City. The request was to amend the City's Zoning
Code to permit general retail sales and services in the Industrial zoning district. A copy of the
memo from me to the Planning Commission dated June 5, 2003 is attached along with a letter
from Mr. Gandrud that gives background on this matter. As you may recall, this request was
made in order to allow Hope for the City to use a portion of the 1200 Mendelssohn Ave. North
building for a retail store. The Planning Commission did not like the idea of retail sales in the
Industrial zoning district as shown in the June 9, 2003 Planning Commission minutes. . Mr.
Gandrud was informed of the Planning Commission discussion on this matter.
At the request of the City Manager, this request by Mr. Gandrud was given to the City Council as
part of their weekly report. The feedback from the City Council members back to the City
Manager regarding this matter showed that there was an interest to consider a change to the
zoning code thatwould allow some retail sales in the Industrial zoning district.
After some discussion with the City Manager, it was determined to begin the process to consider
a change to the zoning code to permit some limited retail sales and service in the Industrial
zoning district. I spoke to the City Attorney regarding this matter. I told him about my concerns
and the concerns of the Planning Commission. As a result, he drafted a change that would allow
accessory retail sales and/or service with a conditional use permit in both the Industrial and Light
Industrial zoning districts. There would be a limit of no more than 10% of the building footprint
space allowed for retail sales and/or service. A parking requirement was also added.
The amendment drafted by the City Attorney is different than the proposal made by Mr. Gandrud
in several ways. First, staff is suggesting that the amount of space be limited to no more than
10% of the building footprint. The reasoning for this is that within the Light Industrial and
Industrial zoning district, there are multiple-story buildings that have significant floor space. Using
the footprint size limits the amount of retail space. Second, staff is suggesting that the retail use
only be permitted by conditional use permit. This would allow the City to determine if a specific
location is appropriate for a retail use. Issues to be considered would be the circulation pattern in
the parking lot, the number of parking spaces and access to the local street system. Other
tenants in the building may be concerned about the effect of a retail use on their existing
'I-
e
e
.
business. The conditional use permit would allow for a public hearing to get these comments.
Third, staff is also recommending that the retail sales and/or services be accessory to a use
permitted in the Light Industrial or Industrial zoning districts. This would prevent a retail store
from opening unless it is related to an existing business in a particular building such at a
manufacturer, office or warehouse.
Parking for accessory retail uses and/or services would also have to meet the parking
requirements for accessory retail and service uses. For instance, if an accessory retail use were
added to a building, there would have to be parking at a ratio of one space for each 150 sq. ft. of
accessory retail space. Some buildings or sites may not qualify for accessory retail space
because they may not have enough parking for all uses on the site.
Staff is suggesting that the accessory retail uses and/or services be allowed by CUP in boththe
Light Industrial and Industrial zoning districts. In Golden Valley, there is very little difference
between the two districts because everything permitted by right of CUP in the Light .Industrial
zoning district is permitted in the Industrial zoning district.
I have researched how other cities permit accessory retail uses within Industrial zoning districts.
Minnetonka permits up to 25% of the total space inan industrial area for accessory retail use as
long as the building appearance is not changed and if the retail-parking requirementis met for the
retail portion of the building. There is no conditional use permit required if the total accessory
retail space is less than 25% of the total space. With a conditional use permit, the total retail
space can go up to 50% of the entire building.
In St. Louis Park, up to 15% of industrial buildings may be used for accessory retail space as long
as the parking requirement for retail space is met and the outside appearance of thebl.lilding is
not changed. .No CUP is required. The comment from S1. Louis Park staff is that thereisa
"tipping point" when an area will turn from industrial to retail because the value of property goes
up if the property is more retail than industrial. Industrial users will be driven out if too much retail
is allowed because the rents will go up.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
After reviewing the way other cities in the area regulate accessory retail uses and/or services,
staff believes that the proposed ordinance change will not have a negative impact on the Light
Industrial or Industrial areas in the City. The CUP process will permit a review of the proposed
use to insure that it will work in a specific location. Also, parking will have to be provided at the
same level as any other retail space in the City.
-1'-
.
ORDINANCE NO. ,2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE .AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Amending Zoning Code Regulations
Retail Sales and Services
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains:
Section 1. The City Code is amended hereby in Section 11.35, subd. 4 by
adding the following:
S. Retail services and/or sales, provided such sales and/or services
are conducted in an area less than 10% of the building's footprint.
Section 2. The City Code is amended hereby in Section 11.36, subd. 4 by
adding the following:
R. Retail services and/or sales, provided such sales and/or services
are conducted in an area less than 10% of the building's footprint.
Section 3. The City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99
entitled "Violation of a Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
e entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and
publications required by law.
e
Adopted by the City Council this
day of
,2003.
Linda Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Donald G. Taylor, City Clerk
Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun Post on
,2003.
209043
:.
.
.
e
lIey
Planning
763-593-80951 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
June 5,2003
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Amendment to Text of Industrial District in Zoning Code
I am attaching a copy of a letter I received from Gary Gandrud, attorney for Hope for the City. In
this letter, Mr. Gandrud is asking that the text of the Industrial district of the zoning code be
changed in order to allow a portion of space in an industrial building to be used for retail space.
Mr. Gandrud has suggested language to be added to the zoning code. I have met with Mr.
Gandrud's client regarding this use. I will bring some information about Hope for the City to the
meeting for your review.
At this time, I am asking the Planning Commission for direction on this proposed change in order
that I can get back to Hope for the City. If this type of change seems to make sense, it would be
brought back to the Planning Commission for an informal public hearing.
'\.
.
.
e
FAEGRE & BENSON LLP
2200 WELLS FARGO CENTER, 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-3901
TELEPHONE 612.766.7000
FACSIMILE 612.766.1600
www.faegre.com
June 2, 2003
Mr" Mark Grimes
Planning. and Development Director
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588
Re: Proposed Text Amendment in Industrial Zoning District
Dear Mark:
This purpose of the this letter is to propose a small text amendment (the "Amendment") to
the City of Golden Valley's Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). A copy of the draft
Amendment is attached as Exhibit A and, for the reasons which follow, I hope that you will
support it.
My client, Hope for the City, is a Minnesota-based 501 (c)(3) organization devoted to
improving the livesofthe Twin Cities' inner-city residents in. Hope for the City
accomplishes this laudable objective by seeking, accepting, and organizing significant gifts
of unsold merchandise from major corporations (including Target Corporation). Hope for
the City then serves as a conduit for these donations, channeling them to needy individuals
and other charitable organizations.
As part.of its. mission, Hope for the City has also developed a supporting organization known
as the Rock Bottom Thrift Store ("Rock Bottom"). Rock Bottom presently operates a store
in Rockford, Minnesota, where it sells donated items that are unsuitable for direct use. All of
the funds produced by such sales are then recycled to support Hope for the City.
Recently, Rock Bottom has been seeking alternative locations in which to open a second
outlet, and for a variety of reasons the preferred location is in a building located at 1200
Mendelssohn Avenue North in Golden Valley (the "Building"). The Building consists of
52,224 square feet. Rock Bottom would devote portions of the premises to. office and
warehouse uses, as well as 3,228 feet to retail space.
Unfortunately, the Building is located in the City's Industrial Zoning District, where retail
uses are not permitted.
Minnesota Colorado Iowa London Frankfurt Shanghai
'0
.
.
.
Mr. Tom Burt
June 2, 2003
Page 2
In order to permit Rock Bottom to operate in the Building, Hope for the City respectfully
requests a minor amendment to the Ordinance. Proposed language for such an amendment is
attached to this letter as Exhibit A.
In addition to addressing Hope for the City's immediate need for space, the proposed
Amendment is compatible with the defined purposes of the Industrial Zoning District.
Section 11.36, Subdivision 1, of the Ordinance states that the purpose of the Industrial
Zoning District is to "provide for the establishment of industrial and manufacturing
development and uses along with directly related and complementary uses which, because of
the nature of the product or character of activity, requires isolation from residential and
commercial areas." (Emphasis added.) In this case, Hope for the City's plans for the
Building are just such a complementary use because, although it is an important charitable
activity, a thrift store is precisely the type of retail enterprise that should be isolated from
residential and commercial areas.
As a result, I believe that the Amendment is a rational and important change to the
Ordinance, which I urge you to support.
S. ~lYYO~
d
'-
.
.
e
EXHffiIT A
Proposed Text Amendment
Section 11.36. Subdivision 3(L)
"L. General retail services and or sales by non-profit entities, provided such sales are
conducted in less than ten percent (10%) of the building's Gross Floor Area."
"-
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. ,2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Amending Zoning Code Regulations
Retail Sales and Services
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Code is amended hereby in Section 11.35, subd. 4 by
adding the following:
S. Accessory retail services and/or sales, provided such sales and/or services
are conducted in an area less than 10% of the building's footprint.
Section 2. The City Code is amended hereby in Section 11.35, subd. 6 by
adding the following:
G. Accessory retail services and/or sales - one space for each 150 square feet
of retail floor space.
Section 3. The City Code is amended hereby in Section 11.36, subd. 7 by
adding the following:
Q.Accessory retail services and/or sales - one space for each 150 square feet
of retail floor space.
Section 4. The City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
ApplicClble to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99
entitled "Violation of a Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim.
Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and
publications required by law.
Adopted by the City Council this
day of
,2003.
Is/Linda R. Loomis
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/Donald G. Tavlor
Donald G. Taylor, City Clerk
. (This ordinance will be uncodified and referenced in Chapter 25 of the City Code).
...
.1
I
0,
-.
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
.
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
PE
FO.R
THE'
I
I
I
I
7807 Creekridge Circle / Edina, Minnesota 55439
Tel: 952-897-7712/ Fax: 952-842-7712/ Email: ewalker@welshco.com
www.hopeforthecities.org
.J
!I
!I
!
!
I
I
I
!I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
:H OPE~~V
C~I TY
AboutHope For The City
Hope For The City is a privately funded relief organization, driven by business and community
leaders, that is working hard to reach the most vulnerable in our communities with the help they
so desperately need. We believe that Hope For The City serves as a model for private sector
involvement in addressing short-term needs and offering long-term solutions.
I
I
I
I
!I
!I
!I
I
I
I
I
Simply put, Hope For The City acquires society's excess production and gets it to those in great
need who would otherwise have little or no access to such goods. In the year 2002 the total retail
value of goods distributed exceeded $120 million. This was done with great efficiency and
effectiveness. Not stopping there, Hope For The City specifically targets as working partners
those organizations that offer more than a hand out to individuals and communities by providing
opportunities for personal growth and community transformation.
All goods are provided at no cost to Community Partners and those they serve. Additionally,
Hope For The City is committed to keeping administrative and fundraising costs below 3%.
Remarkably, in 2002 costs were below 1 %.
As a federally recognized 501(c)(3) organization, support for Hope For The City is tax
deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Please read further, pull out the accompanying map, and learn more about the vital work being
done and the tremendous growth Hope For The City is experiencing.
I
I
I
"'
.1
I
".
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
I
I
,HO\p~Z7,;~~I!'
....'. ,,c"'...., _ ".,_ ...... 'U""."". "
", --'., -'" .. .,-,"_.-.---- ,", .<<.....,..-.,..
C 1"0r" . ....,
. .
.. ~. .. ',;.-. ' ". .. ,.-,
. "-':_'_' .....: ',0;
: ,-::;"-;', -:;...:::. :':
". """,_,," ':'._>i~"': ",;:..-.
':_~.<"c:.;,;
Making a Difference Through Compassion, Effectiveness, and Efficiency
Hope For The City began with the commitment by members of the business community to
engage the private sector more effectively in addressing community needs. This is done by
drawing on the insights we have gained managing successful enterprises to locate and procure
excess resources from the business sector and distribute those goods through existing
organizations.
We believe that by engaging business and community leaders, and encouraging personal
transformation among both those in need and those with the resources to help, Hope For The
City is making a deep impact in many lives. Significantly, it is also reducing the burden on
government to provide services to those we touch.
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In Minnesota during the year 2002, Hope For The City distributed roughly $12 million in goods
such as food, clothing and personal.care items to low income individuals and families through 55
local groups we call Community Partners. Over 3,500 individuals in Minnesota alone are served
each month by these efforts. Importantly, Hope For The City's Community and National
Partners represent a variety of communities and address more than short-term crises by offering
opportunities for personal, spiritual transfonnation to encourage long-term stability.
Overseas, Hope For The City has partnered with missionary groups, private volunteer
organizations and non-governmental agencies to provide goods such as food, clothing,
educational materials, medicine and medical supplies to people living in regions of the world that
are facing desperate need. The total of this assistance exceeded $108 million in the year 2002.
Overall growth in retail value of goods distributed has been from $1.2 million in the year 2000,
to $8.6 million in the year 2001, to in excess of$120 million in 2002. In order to sustain this
level of activity, it is necessary to expand the base of compassionate individuals and
organizations that are committed to a private sector response to the n~ed that exists in the world.
Hope For The City offers such an opportunity, with the added assurance that the work is being
done effectively and with great efficiency.
I
I
I
. ":.I
:J
:J
~
:J
[J
JI
:J
I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
HOP.E .~~~
CITY
Why Hope For The City
Five Reasons to support this vital work:
);;> Extraordinary leveraging. A few thousand dollars places hundreds of thousands or even
millions of dollars worth of goods where they are desperately needed.
);;> Works with existing organizations with established reputations. No reinventing or
duplicating of services.
);;> Distributes existing goods. A .smart and compassionate response to excess production
balanced with local and global need.
);;> Uses a business model. Developed by business leaders, it assures greatest effectiveness and
efficiency.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
);;> Because need exists and we have the means to address it.
"
- ;)
~1
:J
~
:)
;)
J
:I
3
3
~
J
:I
J
:I
HOP.E ~~~
CITY
Vision:
To be a bridge between the business sector and non-profit agencies that serve the
poor.
Mission:
We procure excess goods in society and redistribute at no charge to existing non-
profit organizations that serve the poor.
Goals:
;)
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
. Help non-profit organizations be more effective in their mission by meeting
the physical needs of their clients
. Partner with the business community to procure the excess in society and
redistribute it to the poor through non-profit organizations
. Facilitate relationships between the business and non-profit communities
. Act as a catalyst to strengthen relationships within the non-profit community
by increasing their coordinated efforts to assist the poor .
. Provide a. strategic avenue of giving for the business community
I
I
I
I
I
I
H 0 PEFOR
THE
CI.TY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
Community Partners
Agape Child Development ~enter
American Indian Housing & Community Development
Corporation
ArmourBearers Ministry
Bethany Fellowship, Inc.
Blood-n-Fire Ministries
Body of Christ, International
Bridging, Inc.
Cannon Community Church
CHAP Ministries
Cheerful Givers
Church of New Life.
The Cookie Cart Learning Center
Corner Cupboard
Ebenezer Church
Elohim Ministries
Emergency Food Shelf Network
Eshkol Mission:Gateway to Hope
Every Nation
Family and Youth Advancement Sen:ices
First Baptist Church of St. Francis
Giving In Grace Christian Center
Glorybound Family Restoration Center
GMCC- Division of Indian Work
Grace Bible Ministries
H.O.P.E.ofMinnesota
I
I
I
I
i
j
J
)
J
I
j
Harvesters' Team
Here's LifeInner City
Hunger Solutions
Inner City Christian Ministries
Living Word Worship Center
Love Power Ministries
j
I
J
Lutheran Colportage
Marie Sandvik Center, Inc.
Mental Health Resources
Metro Hope Ministries, Inc.
Motivating Teens to Victory
New Life Christian Foundation
Outreach Connections
Overcomers Outreach
Parenting With Purpose
Park A venue Foundation
Place of Hope
Reaching Arms International
The Refuge
Resurrection Life Church
RISE, Inc.
Robbindsale Women's Center
The Salvation Army - Minneapolis
The Salvation Army- St. Paul
Shelter House, Inc.
Source Ministries .
St. Steven's Human Services
St. Paul City Church
Starland Charities
Street Light Ministries
Total Victory Christian Center.
Tree of Life Church
True Love Ministry of Arts
Urban Hope Ministries
Urban Oasis
Urban Ventures
w
~
JI
.
.
w
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
U.S. Pistributlon
60 Community Partners Est.
$12.1M Total 2002
TOTAL DISTRIBUTe.N 2002 - $120,356,000
e
CMMIl'...............
............c:a
Oilwef"....
-...
hIItfIIlat...... CHtw
_Nt
......-
.,..........
.....u.0wtIIIM..--...
"_Ill
"
'"J,
.......foullllMloll
O......MN
---
.........,......,..,.,
"'-oM. ..
.
.
. A.
-.
PACIFIC
, '\.
.
.
. .
OCEAN
,
.
"All dol/sf figures are retail value. may change.for accounting purposes.
I
.1
t
!I
I
J
I
I
I
~
J
J
::a
.
~
:J
J
J
:::!
~
~
~
=2
:a
~
-s
--:
-6
--
-,.,
-r
~
:!
:r
I
I
. - .
I
!II
!II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hope For The City Statistics*
FY 2003
Distribution Goals
Overseas
Local & US
Total
Funding Goal
FY 2002
Distributions
Overseas
Local & US
Total
I
I
I
!I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
!I
Expenses
FY 2001
Distributions
Local & US
Expenses
., '. .:..-..-.-.-.,..-,'...".........-. ....
HOPEi'F08"
'.,',',.',.,..' JH~:.
CIT\ti
$150,000,000
$ 18,000,000
$168,000,000
$ 1,000,000
$108,226,000
$ 12,130,000
$120,356,000
$ 220,000
$ 8,600,000
$
58,000
* Distribution dollar amounts reflect retail value. For financial accounting purposes these amounts will vary.
Federal Tax ID (EIN)
I
I
I
37-1441658
I
I
I
!I
!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
!I
I
I
I
!I
!I
!
!!I
[it
!I
!!I
S
!l
!
!
HOPE~R~
CITY
Executive Leadership
Dennis J. Doyle
Co-Founder, Board President, CEO
CEO, Welsh Companies
Megan A. Doyle
Co-Founder, Board Vice President, COO
Board of Directors
Stuart 1. Ackerberg
President
The Ackerberg Group
Bryant Loving
President
Loving and Associates
Alicia M. Belton
Principal
Urban Design Perspectives
Craig T. Sulentic
President and CEO
The Egan Companies
Steve Brehm
President
Berry Coffee Company
Brian Sullivan
Businessman, Private Investor
Former Chairman and CEO, Pur Water Purification
Systems
Bryan Dejewski
Director of Marketplace Ministries
. Kingdom Oil
Lonnie E. Titus
Chaplain
Minnesota House of Representatives
Patrick Doyle
Consultant
Insurance Advisors, Inc.
Brian Woolsey
Executive Director of Operations
Th~ Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Center
Julie A. Flaherty
Attorney at Law
Of Counsel
Dave Gibson
Pastor of Missions and Outreach
Grace Church, Eden Prairie, MN
Jay Bennett, Attorney at Law
Managing Partner
Dunkley, Bennett, Christensen & Madigan, P A.
Mary Kiffmeyer
Secretary of State
State of Minnesota
Thomas A. Johnson, CPA
Partner
Boulay, Heutmaker, Zibell & Co. P.L.L.P.
Joe Lahti
Businessman, Private Investor
Former Chairman and CEO, Shujjlemaster
Erica Walker
Managing Director
Hope For The City
Bob Long
Vice President for Business Development
Welsh Companies
Former Council Member, City of Saint Paul
Mike Lynch
Procurement Director
Hope For The City
!I
!
. ."
I
-
!1
!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
it
It
I
I
I
it
!II
!I
'S
I
I
!!I
!
'-
!
I
I
JIM RAMSTAD
THIRD DISTRICT, MINNESOTA
WAYS AND MEANS
COMMITTEE
TRADE SUBCOMMITTEE
HEALTH SUBCOMMITTEE
December 20, 2002
Dennis and Megan Doyle
Hope For Th~ City
7807 Creekridge Circle
Edina, Minnesota 55439
Dear Demiis and Megan:
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
103 CANNON HoUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202) 225-2871
DISTRICT OFFICE:
1809 PL VMOUTH ROAD SOUTH, #300
MINNETONKA, MN 55305
(9521 738.fl200
(ongre~5 lOf tbe ~rdtd.l i>tate~
~OU5t of l\tpre~tntatibt~
Dasuington, 1.8at 20515-2303
mn03@mail.house.gov
www.house.gov/ramstad
Many thanks for your visit and the great humanitarian work your foundation is doing around the
world.
You are truly doing the Lord's work hereon earth and making a hug~ difference in the lives of
thousands of people.
As a member of the Lima, Peru, thission group I told you about, I am also grateful for your very
generous offer to send a container of medical supplies and other essentials to the good people of
Flores de Villas, the shantytown near Lima. In fact, our group is overwhelmed by the $20 - $30
million of supplies you have offered to send which will, literally, transform the lives of hundreds
of people in desperate need.
David and Gina Stavros, Joe and Amy Senser, Roger and Jo Lipelt and Kathryn Mitchell join me .
in thanking you for your truly great offer of assistance.
As you instructed, Roger Lipelt and Amy Senser will contact Erika Walker, your foundation's
Managing Director, to make arrangements for shipping the container of supplies to Lima.
Thanks again for your visit and help for the people of Flores de Villas. Please call if ever I can
be helpful to you.
My very best wishes for all the blessings of Christmas to you and your family.
S~rlY.
~STAD
Member of Congress
cc: Erika Walker
David and Gina Stavros
Roger and Jo Lipelt
Joe and Amy Senser
Kathryn Mitchell
~I.~~.~l.~
r~Fk.tv~
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Family and Youth Advancement Services, Inc.
1031 Payne Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55101-5567
Phone: 651-774-5567 Fax: 651-774-5924
E-mail: info@hmongfamily.org
Leading the family to a brighter future...
July 30, 2002
Hi Jessica!
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.e
I
I
I
Here is a"picture that I took when one of our families came to pick up the food that your
ministrY gave us on July 10. The five children in this picture are from o~r children's
program. The girl in the blue shirt is one of my volunteer from the youth program. I
hope this picture is good enough for you to use if you need to.
Thank you so much for all that your ministry has given to us. Our families are happy
with everything that they have received from your ministry and they want you to know
that they appreciate your help so very much.
I personally want to thank you so much for letting us be one of your ministry partners. I
praise God for everything that we have received from your ministry. I want you to know
that your ministry has blessed our organization and we appreciate you so much. May
God continue to send your ministry storms of blessings.
If you "need anything else, please let me know.
God bless youl
Sincerely,
ifa-dW
Pa Thao Yang
" .
I
........--- .. .~ -.. ....... --.. '''- ......-... .."-. ..
..... 0_". ____.........._
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
------.....----.-........ -----.--.---.....---.. -...------.
I
--_.__._-_._..._._----------~~--~._.- -
.--.. . ---...-- .----..--.--.- --~-. -' . - ---::J::;.----..-.----
___.____.__.._____.__. ._..__________.__._.___~~_. _ '_~_ . _ tJI...;>c
'_~__...___.._____.___.___ __. __________.___ ~_m..~ -- .--"-'-'-
I
I
!
'---b-;j"~~~ ~-Tl7TI---------7" -....--. .-----------:.--.
~-~-~--c9#~------......-.-..__..---.-...-..--.-.
!
[j
~ _..__.....__ __..._____._w_--a.__.________.__....___..-..:_..___ -..---......------.--. -- ....- -....--
--....---.. ----...---.............- ------~-_...--....._-_.....------_.---_..__.....-
!
__'0._,___ ...._______. - -~---..----------.. --- ...;..-~-....;...--_..- -.-----....--.......--... ............-.....-.....-..-.... ..
lJ
.._.........._...._... ......____.... ____..._...~.. ......._.._. ......._ __"__'. .._......_-.0 .... 0__"'_ .~U ..__ _._ .___. ...--.........__.._.._..._..-:-.;.-..-_.~- .........--.. -.'.--'..- --~---.'
!
s
_._._. ...__............_._...-...___.,_ ."'____ .__ ___.___. .. _..____...__.._._..._...__.... ..__._... ._... ._...;.......;..___..;..___.____..___...U_ _..._......;..-.__ - ~. .~.~- ...... ... ..-.- .., .-.........
I
...-. - . '1-" -. -..--' "..-.. ..-.-- --.- - --.. --......
..... ..-.- . ..-......--1................-..------
I
I .- .--.-.....-.. ..........- ..-..
'."-"-"T .." --.--.. ....- -. -.-------... ... ...------00 ...-....- -.-......' .--.., u._______.___.__.._. .- - -.-...-"
--- .--... .- ..-.... -. -- '1"'- .. ......- ...... .-... ------ -.... -..--- -...,---.. - ...--. u' .-....-.. ..--' -. ..--....---..... ....---..--..----...-.---. --_._-~
._.' _. ........ ._......__...._..~......__.__..._ ............_~ _.. ._._....... ._ __00 ._.-..... ._u"
;.
... -. ,--........-.---.. - ._-~.._---_....__. ,- ....-..-.-..
!
......
. .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Executive Leadership and Staff
Dennis 1. Doyle, Chief Executive Officer
Megan A. Doyle, Chief Operating Officer
Erica S. Walker, Managing Director
952-897-7712 (Office)
952-842-7712 (Fax)
ewalker@welshco.com
David K. Stibbe, Development Director
952-897-7726 (Office)
952-842-7726 (Fax)
.dstibbe@welshco.com
Jessica L. Ebb, Community Partner Coordinator
952-897-7799 (Office)
952-842-7712 (Fax)
jebb@welshco.com
I
I
I
:'C._";', .. ...._......:.'.."_...;,'...
:1,.10,&'"&1 !~~~)
",' .. _,', _"_ _,_,_ ,', ,0"'_'-""
.,......I.....~................;-lM........
... .:~,:ull;5::..:':;.~::.';)/.~;
", ',.... -.'.--,'>" -c. .,',_..__' '.
Mike Lynch, Procurement Director
612-282-2222 (Office)
952-842-7712 (Fax)
mlynch@mn.rr.com
Luke 1. Mahowald, Warehouse Director
612-282-1916 (Office)
952-842-7712 (Fax)
lmahowald@mn.rr.com
Dana M. Mahowald, Administrative Assistant
952-897-7799 (Office)
952-842-7712 (Fax)
dmahowald@welshco.com
7807 Creekridge Circle
Edina, MN 55439
952-897 -7799
....u.u_~