Loading...
Agenda and Packet (2)AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2021 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD ELECTRONIC MEETING Due to the COVID­19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of the City Council will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.021,rather than in person at the city council’s regular meeting place at Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The Public Hearings portion of the City Council agenda allow for the public to provide comments on those agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for the public to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of two options: City Council Meetings EMAIL your comments to the City Council at publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. All comments received by 6:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the city council meeting. This is the preferred method of public participation for City Council meetings. WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom Cable Channel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952­227­1630 when the Mayor opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Mayor will take each call in the order received. If you wish to make a public comment under the Visitor Presentations portion of the City Council agenda, please review the Guidelines for Visitor Presentations and complete and submit the online form. NOTE: For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record. A.5:00 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Note:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.Interview City Council Candidates 2.Roundtable B.7:00 P.M. ­ CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance) AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2021CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDELECTRONIC MEETINGDue to the COVID­19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of theCity Council will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to MinnesotaStatutes, Section 13D.021,rather than in person at the city council’s regular meeting place at ChanhassenCity Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota.The Public Hearings portion of the City Council agenda allow for the public to provide comments onthose agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for thepublic to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of two options:City Council MeetingsEMAILyour comments to the City Council at publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. All commentsreceived by 6:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the city councilmeeting. This is the preferred method of public participation for City Council meetings.WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom CableChannel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952­227­1630 whenthe Mayor opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Mayor will take each call in theorder received.If you wish to make a public comment under the Visitor Presentations portion of the City Councilagenda, please review the Guidelines for Visitor Presentations and complete and submit the online form.NOTE: For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record.A.5:00 P.M. ­ WORK SESSIONNote:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Interview City Council Candidates2.Roundtable B.7:00 P.M. ­ CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance) C.OATHS OF OFFICE 1.Administer Oaths of Office for New City Council Members D.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS 1.Mayor's Address 2.Commission Vacancies E.ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS 1.Designation of Official Newspaper F.CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be considered as one motion.  There will be no separate discussion of these items.  If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.  City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item.  Refer to the council packet for each staff report. 1.Approve City Council Minutes dated December 29, 2020 2.Approve City Council Minutes dated December 14, 2020 3.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated December 1, 2020 4.Resolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 Street Improvement Project (Project 20­05) 5.Award Consultant Contract for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design and Construction Administration Services Project 6.Approve Partial Release of Development Contract for Chanhassen West Business Park G.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda) 1.Dr. Richard Scott, Carver County Public Health H.NEW BUSINESS 1.Appoint City Council Member ­ Oath of Office 2.Approve a Request for a Rezoning and a Four­Lot Subdivision (Deer Haven) with Variances Located at 6480 Yosemite I.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS J.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS K.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1.City Council Resignation 2.Review of Claims Paid 01­11­2021 3.On­Line Building Permit Informational Flyer L.ADJOURNMENT AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2021CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDELECTRONIC MEETINGDue to the COVID­19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of theCity Council will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to MinnesotaStatutes, Section 13D.021,rather than in person at the city council’s regular meeting place at ChanhassenCity Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota.The Public Hearings portion of the City Council agenda allow for the public to provide comments onthose agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for thepublic to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of two options:City Council MeetingsEMAILyour comments to the City Council at publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. All commentsreceived by 6:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the city councilmeeting. This is the preferred method of public participation for City Council meetings.WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom CableChannel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952­227­1630 whenthe Mayor opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Mayor will take each call in theorder received.If you wish to make a public comment under the Visitor Presentations portion of the City Councilagenda, please review the Guidelines for Visitor Presentations and complete and submit the online form.NOTE: For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record.A.5:00 P.M. ­ WORK SESSIONNote:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Interview City Council Candidates2.RoundtableB.7:00 P.M. ­ CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance)C.OATHS OF OFFICE1.Administer Oaths of Office for New City Council MembersD.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS1.Mayor's Address2.Commission VacanciesE.ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS1.Designation of Official NewspaperF.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion.  There will be no separate discussion of these items.  Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately.  City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item.  Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approve City Council Minutes dated December 29, 20202.Approve City Council Minutes dated December 14, 20203.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated December 1, 20204.Resolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 StreetImprovement Project (Project 20­05)5.Award Consultant Contract for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design andConstruction Administration Services Project6.Approve Partial Release of Development Contract for Chanhassen West BusinessParkG.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSVisitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete andsubmit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda)1.Dr. Richard Scott, Carver County Public HealthH.NEW BUSINESS1.Appoint City Council Member ­ Oath of Office2.Approve a Request for a Rezoning and a Four­Lot Subdivision (Deer Haven) withVariances Located at 6480 YosemiteI.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONSJ.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONSK.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION1.City Council Resignation2.Review of Claims Paid 01­11­20213.On­Line Building Permit Informational Flyer L.ADJOURNMENT M.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting.  In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council.  That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior to the meeting. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.  Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Interview City Council Candidates Section 5:00 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  SUMMARY Thursday, January 7, 2021: 4:15 pm ­ Mark von Oven 4:45 pm ­ Susan Kibler 5:15 pm ­ Bala Chintaginjala 5:45 pm ­ Jerry McDonald 6:15 pm ­ Scot Lacek Monday, January 11, 2021: 5:00 pm ­ Ryan Soller 5:30 pm ­ Wilma Ruppert 6:00 pm ­ Cheryl Ayotte ATTACHMENTS: Mark von Oven Application & Resume Susan Kibler Application Bala Chintaginjala Application & Resume Jerry McDonald Application Scot Lacek Application & Resume Ryan Soller Application & Resume Wilma Ruppert Application & Resume Cheryl Ayotte Application 12/22/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 3/5 Attach resume (if desired) vonOvenResumeJan2021.pdf Activities and Affiliations* In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Volunteer, Second Harvest Heartland Volunteer, Habitat for Humanity Volunteer, Loaves & Fishes I started attending Minneapolis City Council meetings as a resident of Minneapolis in 2008 and realized that local government was something I would want to be involved in at some point. When we moved to Chanhassen in 2017, I started looking for ways to get more involved despite the time limitations of being a new parent. I was elected to the Lotus Lake Conservation Alliance board and had the opportunity to represent our residents in front of Chanhassen City Council in 2019 during a controversial debate. As a closing announcement in that council meeting, the ability to learn how the city works and represent more of Chanhassen via the Planning Commission was surfaced. I readily seized the opportunity, and it has been an outstanding learning experience through the entire 2020 calendar year. I fully expected the Planning Commission to be interesting and educational, but I honestly underestimated how much I would enjoy the experience in all aspects. I have had the opportunity to work with an impressive group of people in the Chanhassen City Staff. I’ve gained valuable experience through actively participating in efficient, well-run meetings using Roberts Rules of Order, combining findings of fact with passionate input from residents. I’ve learned more about the inner workings of our city and all it has to offer in the last 4 months than I have in the last 4 years. As a lifelong learner, I desire more of these experiences and am hungry to share more of my time and talent with the citizens of Chanhassen. With this position opening up I can’t help but again seize the opportunity to learn more, do more and make an even larger impact on this great city. I am confident through these experiences and my own personal drive, I can hit the ground running in this position and begin contributing immediately. 12/22/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 4/5 Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* There are three strengths of mine I believe directly benefit the citizens of Chanhassen: Representation - I have a desire to ensure that ALL citizens and all views are fully represented. Ensuring every voice is heard with unbiased consideration is something I’ve always promoted, however this notion has been further strengthened through my experience on the Chanhassen Planning Commission. I’ve honed my ability prepare for meetings through staff reports, facts and findings, and resident input. I’ve demonstrated skills to debate an agenda item with an open mind as well as produce outcomes which are beneficial to residents (and avoid creating unintended consequences!). Cooperation – While I always enjoy a good debate, I also believe that we create enduring solutions when we can find middle ground via thoughtful compromise. I believe that every level of government can benefit from having a diverse set of individuals who can put aside differences in the spirit of making meaningful progress for the citizens they represent. Having worked for two Fortune 50 companies in a supporting function, there is always a healthy balance that needs to be maintained between what the business functions immediately want, and the sustainable, supportable solutions that an engineering function would like to provide. Often I have found myself at the intersection of these organizations, negotiating win-win outcomes and brokering solutions that enable both sides to flourish. Analytical Thinker (but still human!) – I am a problem solver and lifelong learner. Trained as a computer engineer through math and computation and later getting my MBA to bring business leadership skills has enabled me to address the toughest problems with a unique combination of both logic and empathy. I can logically navigate the potential short- and long-term impacts of a decision while at the same time empathetically assessing and appreciating the human impact on stakeholders, suggesting a solution that works in both capacities. I would be honored to have the opportunity to serve the residents of Chanhassen through these strengths while improving the hometown I have fallen in love with! Planning Commissioner, Chanhassen Planning Commission Information Officer, Lotus Lake Conservation Alliance - Chanhassen, MN Board of Directors, Good Company Brewing - Minneapolis, MN Board of Directors, Jacobs Marketing - Minneapolis, MN N/A 12/22/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4443 5/5 Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply N/A MARK VON OVEN, MBA Page 2 of 3 TARGET CORPORATION, Minneapolis, MN 2012-2018 Vice President, Enterprise Data Analytics & Business Intelligence​ (2017-2018) Developed and led a global Data and Analytics organization (275+) through Target’s retail transformation to drive data-based decisioning at scale, creating a centralized Center of Expertise (COE) from 13 disparate analytical teams. Responsible for strategic direction and enterprise delivery of analytics and reporting to drive reliability and business value for all functions of the company, including Merchandising, Pricing, Assortment Planning, Marketing, Supply Chain, Retail Stores, Finance, HR, Law, Guest Relations, REDCard, Product Development, and Real Estate. Managed a $25M annual operating budget. ●Delivered $250M incremental sales impact via analytics and technology enabled solutions ●Launched internally produced analytics and data visualization platform to vendors generating $2M in annual revenue and eliminating $2M of third party spend ●Reduced sta​ff​ by 30% while increasing capabilities and throughput via automation and retraining existing resources ●Produced enterprise analytics vision & strategy, promoting test and measure methodology and aligning the organization on Key Performance Metrics ●Influenced senior leadership to create first-ever Chief Analytics O​ffi​cer position at Target ●Advanced timeliness of event insight delivery from weekly to every 15 minutes through use of open source technologies and restructure of analytics technology stack Director / Senior Director, Business Intelligence & Analytics​ (2012-2017) Directed the global Data and Analytics organization for Target’s Merchandising and Marketing functions. Responsible for delivery of analytics and reporting to drive decisioning across product, price, promotions, and presentation as well as campaign and channel measurement. Led a team of 120+ professionals with accountability for $15M annual budget. ●Drove a $20M improvement in Marketing ROI by developing automated, personalized o​ff​ers through guest purchase algorithms and o​ff​er optimization ●Implemented Agile methodology across the organization, reducing the average delivery time from 9 weeks to 3.5 weeks across all areas ●Eliminated over $2M spend on vendor analytics tools by introducing a product-thinking mindset and developing team skills ●Created metrics that unified the organization across disparate enterprise priorities ●Built a high-performing team of collaborative professionals, focusing on enhancing communication with business partners to discover and act upon missed opportunities ●Leveraged relationships with Merchandising senior leadership to begin transformation from a reporting team to a trusted analytical partner in decision-making ● ●Introduced “Big Data” to Target by conducting a series of pilots with third party vendors and leading a small, nascent data science organization to test and learn THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, Cincinnati, OH 1998-2012 Senior Business Intelligence Manager, NA Customer Analytics​ (2007-2012) Led customer analytics team to deliver sales growth on top of an $85B business through technology and analytics. Drove data harmonization and visualization through coordination of customer analytics across P&G North America. Partnered with IT development and enterprise architects to deliver real time information across all P&G business units and major customers. Commercialized Global Business Services with P&G executive management, embedding Business Intelligence into global P&G strategy. Led a team of 30+ professionals. ●Delivered over $320M in incremental sales as a direct result of NA Customer Analytics ●Led relationship with Target IT senior management, driving annual growth on $3B sales ●Recognized as “instrumental to CEO strategy” by P&G Business Intelligence (2010) 12/22/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4445 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4445 3/4 In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* If yes, please list My family and I have greatly enjoyed living in a Chanhassen for over 25 years; more than half of my life. There is so much to love about this city. In 2019, I opened a small business in Chanhassen: "Board & Brush Creative Studios". Owning and running a business, and even thriving during the past difficult year, has brought me even more passion for Chanhassen to continue its positive growth. Both my children (now adults) grew up in Chanhassen and enjoyed the excellent schools and were active in many activities and organizations. My son is now at Berklee college of Music, due largely to the wonderful influence of Mr. Songer (CMSW) and his passion for teaching music. My son achieved Scouting's highest rank of Eagle Scout (Troop 337) and as a Scout, he collected used instruments to refurbish and donate to the Carver Elementary School. It would be an honor to serve for the betterment of a city that my family has enjoyed so much. As a longtime Chanhassen resident, and small business owner, I'm very interesting in seeing our community continue its very positive growth, while retaining our important civic and social values, our small-town atmosphere and sense of community. The people in Chanhassen and the city leaders never fail to impress myself and my family. It's no wonder Chanhassen is a regular top city in so many nationwide "Quality of Life" surveys. In my 22-year career at United Health Care, I successfully managed my marketing team in execution, data management and process efficiencies. I believe my use of these skills would be a great asset to the City of Chanhassen. Additionally, I'm very task-oriented and always finish what I start. I work very cooperatively with other people and enjoy helping people succeed and reach their goals. I enjoy public speaking and communicating ideas. I have a knack for finding the right approach to just about any project and I don't hesitate to jump in to help where I'm needed. 12/22/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4445 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4445 4/4 Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply Assistant Cub Scout Leader Pack 337, 2007-2009 Chanhassen Rotary. 2019 - 2020 Southwest Chamber of Commerce. 2019-2020 Running Cross-Country Skiing Dogs Cooking Piano 12/21/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4439 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4439 3/4 Activities and Affiliations* In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* N/A In my view, political system is the best process to help our residents, at any level of the Government. An elected official, can focus on the ideas he or she has, to implement them for city development. I have 4-year Civil engineering Professional degree and has 10 years of construction experience, which will help to understand city residents day to day issues, either for sewage/Drainage system or city planning or smart building technology implementation for future construction activities, etc. For any place either for a small village or big city, development starts with Civil engineering, starting from planning, building roads, drain system etc. I am confident that my education, experience and skills will help me to help our residents. Besides, I have been working in IT for the last 20+ years, which will help to rebuild this city to implement new technology solutions, for example, Cyber Security or similar solutions. Environmental Commission, in the year 2015. N/A Digital Technology. I want to create a Cyber Security Team and build it to protect City assets from Cyber crimes. 12/21/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4439 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4439 4/4 City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply Balakrishna Chintaginjala 1 | Page Email: Ph Experience Summary 20 Years of Over All IT experience. 20 Years of SAP Basis, Security and Oracle/HANA DB Administration. Experience Details: 3 Years of HANA 1.0/2.0 DB administration 5 Years of SAP Business Objects BI Platform 4.10/4.20 15 years of Installation, Configurations of R/3 & NW 7.xx systems Upgrade experience of NetWeaver NW 7.0 systems to 7.30 for BW Upgrade experience of Vertex O-Series from 4.1 to 6.0 4 Years of Oracle database experience. 2 Years of Enterprise Portal administration/J2EE Experience. 2 Year of ITS administration 5 Years of Windows NT/2000/2003 Enterprise server, Internet Information server (IIS) 4.0/5.0-administration. 1 Year of I2-TM (Transportation Management) administration 2 years of ABAP development experience. 5 Years of Linux and 3 years of AIX experience and HP UNIX Education Civil Engineering, Bachelor of Technology JNTU, INDIA. Trainings: • SAP Business Intelligence 4 Administering Servers (Business Objects 4.0). • SAP Basis-ADM326: SAP ECC Upgrade, SAP America. • Attended “SAP ERP UPGRADE” SAP Seminar 2008 • SAP Basis-ADM.506: Oracle DB Administration II (Performance Tuning) – SAP America. • SAP BASIS-BC 505: Oracle DB administration, - SAP America. • SAP Security BC-940: Security and Technical Auditing- SAP America. Certifications: Skill summary: • SAP NW 7.5.0 system Basis/Security administration • HANA 1.0/2.0 DB administration (SystemDB and Tenant Databases), Backup and Recovery Procedures and upgrade DB Patches. • SAP HANA 1.0/2.0 Security Administration. • Production, Operational Support and troubleshooting HANA DB issues. • System Refreshes from Production to Non-Prod Systems, using LVM methodology. • SAP BI BOE4.20 Administration, including Promoting objects from DEV environments to Rest of the Landscape. • SAP OSS Administration. • Installation and configuration of SAP NW 7.50 Systems. • Upgrade skills from NW7.3 to NW7.4 of BW systems. • SAP ECC 6.0 Upgrade and Unicode conversion. • Solution Manager 7.10, Installation and configuration. • Enterprise Portal installation, configuration, troubleshooting and tuning. • Design and Implementation of System Landscape and Client strategy. • Management of client administration (Creation, Copies, and Refreshes & Deletes). • Transport Management System (TMS) administration • Configured Computing Center Management System (CCMS). • Administered databases (SAPDBA, Managing Table spaces, Tables, Indices, Data files, planning and • Executing database re-organization). • Designing and implementing Backup and Recovery methodology. • Maintained Data dictionary, Data interfaces, RFC configuration. Employment: Employer: Canadian Pacific Railways, Minneapolis, MN; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (full-time); 02/25/2015 – Till date Database: HANA 1.0 SPS#12 Patch # 25, HANA 2.0 SPS #02 Patch # 05 OS: Suse Enterprise Linux Server 12.0 ((x86_64) & Windows 2008R2 Servers. Application: SAP NetWeaver 7.40, ECC6.0 EHP7, NW 7.50 SP13, Solution Manager 7.2 SP 08; SRM 7.0 EHP3, Enterprise portal, PI; GRC 10.1 (SP 8), Business Objects BI Platform 4.1 SP08, SAP FIORI, SAP BSI 10.0 High Availability: SUSE Linux Enterprise HA environment. Change Management Tools: HP Service Manager /SAP Solution Manager Charm. 3rd Party software: Open Text-VIM. Balakrishna Chintaginjala 2 | Page • HANA 1.0/2.0 DB administration experience • Performed basis steps during Trucking Dashboard project. • Worked on SAP FSPER Project. • Supporting Production HANA databases in our SAP Environment. • Supporting users on HANA Security authorization issues. • Performed BW upgrade from 7.30 to 7.40. • Involved in HANA migration for GRC system. • Supporting production systems, including daily technical checks. • Worked on BSI Tax Factory Cyclic and Regulatory bulletins. • Worked on System Refresh using LVM 2.0. • Upgraded Open Text - VIM (Vendor Invoice Management) and supported Post-Go-live. • Involved in the Implementation of Inter model Gate project using Tomcat and this project is for opening and closing Gates automatically for inbound and Outbound Trucks from the Yard. • Supported BOBJ production activities like stopping and starting BOBJ servers during OS level patching and this activity happens every month. • Promoted BOBJ reports from Non-Prod environment to Production environment, as requested by functional team. Employer: B100 Info Tech, LLC Client: IBM/Miller Coors, Colorado; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Contract-Remote work); 09/2013 – 12/2014 OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6.4 (Santiago) & Windows 2008R2 Servers. Database: Oracle 11G Application: SAP Net Weaver (BI) 7.40, ECC7.01 EHP4, NW (EP) 7.31, Solution Manager 7.1, Business Objects Enterprise 4.1 SP2; SRM 7.0 EHP3, Enterprise portal, PI • Worked on BW 7.40 ABAP and JAVA Installations, SRM JAVA 7.40 and SRM 7.40 ABAP, TREX, GATEWAY, PI, Portal installations and configurations. • Worked Integration between BW and rest of source systems. • Worked on Solution manager 7.1 Managed systems configuration, updated Kernel patches and imported JAVA support packs to fix issues as recommended by SAP and applied SAP notes as well when necessary. • Established all interconnections between Solution manager and rest of systems in the landscape. • Configured LMDB configurations to integrate newly build systems with SLD and Solution manager. • Generated xml files during support packs download for newly build systems. • Regenerated xml file for applying the support packs for DEV2 Systems based on iDEV systems as DEV2 systems are built identical to iDEV • Backed up newly built systems with SNAP Manager. Employer: B100 Info Tech, LLC (I own this company) Client: MTS, Eden Prairie, MN; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Contract); 10/2012 – 04/2013 Database: Oracle 10G/11G/BRTOOLS OS: AIX 6.1 & Windows 2008R2 Servers. SAP: Net Weaver (BI) 7.31, ECC7.01 EHP4, NW (EP) 7.31, Solution Manager 7.0. 3rd Party: Business Objects Enterprise 4.0 SP4 • Installed and configured NW (BI) 7.31 systems (ABAP and JAVA) and Business Objects 4.0 systems. • Configured Interfaces between BW, ECC and Business Objects Enterprise 4.0 systems including RFC connections, Source systems, ALE partner profiles and Distribution models, etc. • Effectively resolved SAP application and Database issues. • Prepared xl sheet for Disk sizes for BW systems to monitor the disk growth, which helped us to estimate storage requirements. • Worked with BW functional team very closely to make sure they get good basis support during data loads and also during day to day activities. • Managed the Oracle database to ensure to have enough space during BW data loads. • Configured Portal integration steps between BI ABAP, BI JAVA and Business Objects systems. Employer: B100 Info Tech, LLC Balakrishna Chintaginjala 3 | Page Client: WaltersKluwer Financial Services, St Cloud, MN; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Contract); 09/2011 – 09/2012 OS: Windows 2003/2008 Servers. Database: Oracle 10G/11G/BRTOOLS Application: SAP NetWeaver 7.01 BI 7.0 EHP1, ECC7.0 EHP1, Enterprise Portal, Solution Manager 7.0, CRM 7.0 3rd Party: Tax software -Vertex – O series 4.1/6.0 and Sales Returns 8.5, Gold client 8.0. Change Management Tools: Remedy, RST • Coordinated ECC transition project from DELL to HCL. • Troubleshot ECC and CRM issues and resolved them during and after CRM EHP1 upgrade. • Performed Transports regularly and fixed TMS issues. • Performed Vertex monthly Tax updates. • Upgraded Vertex O series from version 4.1 to 6.0. • Implemented SAP Notes as part of SAP recommended steps to fix issues. • Troubleshoot and resolved day to day issues like printers, Database and ECC and CRM security authorizations. Employer: Accenture (full-time)/Cargill (Client), Hopkins, MN; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Full time); 12/2008 – 05/2011 OS: AIX and High Availability. Database: Oracle 10G/11G/ BRTOOLS SAP: NetWeaver 7.0/7.3, BI 7.0/7.3, ECC7.0 EHP3, TM 7.0 SCM, EP, PI 7.1, BOBJ, Solution Manager (CHARM). Change management: Remedy, HP Open View. • Installed and configured BI70 ABAP and JAVA stacks, SCM, Enterprise Portal and PI on AIX UNIX on HA and Oracle DB environment for WAVE1 and WAVE2. • Installed Oracle database 10G on separate UNIX servers for ABAP and JAVA stack for BW systems, EP systems and SCM systems. • Created Transports requests in CHARM in Solution manager and assigned the transport requests to the changes made to the objects and released from development system. Imported copy of transports into QAS system. Finally, only the error free transport imported into Production system. • Upgraded Support pack stacks on NW7.0 EHP1. • Supported systems during and Post GO-LIVE activities for WAVE1. • Coordinated BOBJ and BI functional team to generate interfaces. • Configured SNC between BI and BOBJ Systems. • Performed BI ABAP and BI JAVA/Portal integration. • Upgraded Net Weaver 7.0 EHP1 to 7.3 SP2 for BI Systems. • During upgrade Oracle issues able to solve to continue the upgrade. • Troubleshot Source system connections, ALE partner profile issues. • Did Client Administration including Client Creating clients, Client copy, and Client export, Remote Client Copy, Client Deletion and Assigned Logical Systems to clients. • Downloaded Early Watch Alert Reports from Solution Manager on weekly basis and implemented SAP recommendation to improve Performance of BW systems. • Configured SNC between BI and BOBJ systems for all Environments from DEV to Production. • Worked with HP open View to update the product test defects status and resolution. • Worked on 11G Oracle Real Application clusters Environment. Employer: Netmatrix solutions, Inc Client: Janus; Denver, CO; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Contract) 4/2007 – 10/2008 OS: HP UNIX/Linux/Windows 2000/2003 advanced server. Database: Oracle 9.2.0.8.0, 10G. SAP: R/3 4.70 Enterprise ext 200, BW3.50, ITS 6.10, ESS, ECC6.0/Netweaver 7.0. III Party software: BSI Tax factory 8.0, Business objects. Change management: Remedy. • Configured Transport management and performed daily transports and resolved TMS issues. • Scheduled batch jobs monitored and resolved failed jobs. Balakrishna Chintaginjala 4 | Page • Have sound knowledge of installation and configuration and troubleshooting of SAP Auto-ID Infrastructure (RFID product), SAP Event Management for tracking events for individual objects, processes or parts of these throughout the entire supply chain. • Did ALE administration and troubleshot idoc issues. • Did System copy from Production to Quality system and performed all necessary pre and post refresh tasks. • Supported day-to-day operation 24 x 7 on production environment. • Worked on MS Project to monitor and prepare projects and review project schedules. • Tested GUI upgrade from 6.40 to 7.10 on sand box, made sure it is working. Then coordinated with network team for GUI 7.10 installation on all workstations through SMS Push. • Upgraded BSI Tax factory from 7.0 to 8.0. • Upgraded Oracle from 9I (9.2.0.8.0) to 10G (10.2.0.2). • Used BRTOOLs for performing Tablespace extensions, adding data files, to find and fix the corrupted data blocs, etc. • Worked on 11G Oracle Real Application clusters environment. • Installed BRGUI to perform Oracle DB activities from my workstation • Installed SAP Web Application Server JAVA and SAP NetWeaver Developer Studio. • Used Visual Administrator and other Administration tools to configure Web AS JAVA and monitored Web AS JAVA. Did user administration in JAVA environment. • Installed support Packages for JAVA stack using JSPM and troubleshot issues. • Installed and configured BW BEx Pre-Calculation server. Tested for the pre-calculation server is active and available and also checked for IGS availability. Did setup for pre-calculation in Process Chains. • Troubleshoot Information Broadcasting (Excel workbooks). • Installed and configured TREX and BI accelerator, established RFC connection from BI system to BIA Box and monitored the installation logs. • Performed initial BIA administrative tasks, Maintained RFC connection, and configured TREX alert server for the BI accelerator, configured database failover alerts, Monitored BI Accelerator, stopped and started BI accelerator as and when needed. • Administered BIA indexes, enabled the trace whenever need to troubleshoot issues and maintained security authorizations. • Performed the following regular task s like checked summary, current result and history and the workload on the BIA hosts with the BIA monitor and BIA availability connection test, checked the basis BIA settings by executing BIA system check and checked central BIA functions using the alert server and checked BIA by CCMS. • Performed following activities to integrate BI with EPortal, Created RFC destination in J2EE engine and in the Portal. Maintained SSO (Single Sign On) in the BI system. Exported BI certificate to the BI system. Imported BW certificate to the portal. Created BI system in the portal and configured User management and exported portal certificate to portal and imported to J2EE engine. Imported portal certificate to BI system. Maintained user assignment in the portal and Imported Basis plug-in to BI system. • Did OSS notes research to find useful information to resolve issues. • Configured RFC destinations, load balance them and troubleshot to fix issues. • Installed and configured SAP 3rd party SNC software “Cybersafe –Trust broker” and updated SNC string in SU01-SNC tab to make Single Sign On (SSO) working in Application server and enable SSO in GUI. • Involved in Disaster recovery and fixed RFC destination connectivity issues, database issues, security profiles for R/3, BW, BSI Tax factory and Business objects during testing and coordinated with functional people to complete the testing successfully. • Applied support packs, Early Watch Alert plug-ins, upgrade SAP kernel 640 patch levels from 175 to 196. • Analyzed the Early Watch Alert reports and resolved OS, Database and Application level issues. • Configured printers did spool administration and fixed printing issues. • Checked systems logs, ABAP dumps, failed updates, batch jobs, developer traces, user logins, BDC sessions and work processes, etc to make sure system is available for business always. Employer: Netmatrix Solutions, Inc. Client: Thermo electron Corporation; MA. Role: SAP Security Administrator; 11/2006 - 3/2007 OS: HP UNIX. Database: Oracle 9I/BRTOOLS BRGUI Application: SAP R/3 4.70/BW 3.50 • Documented the procedures and configured security auditing process and monitored all necessary counters. • Took backups regularly using Veritas backup methods and restored whenever necessary. • Installed and configured Transport Management System. Balakrishna Chintaginjala 5 | Page • Performed day-to-day transports and fixed transport related issues. • Monitored the oracle data files and tablespaces, increased the sizes when needed. • Applied OSS notes, OS patches, database independent and kernel patches. • Set up and maintained Central User administration. • Resolved the SAP background jobs issues. • Configured TMS configuration and performed transports. • Setup the following ALE configuration, Created logical systems, assigned logical systems to clients, defined target systems for RFC calls, created distribution model, generated partner profiles in the source systems and distributed model view, generated partner profiles in the target systems, created inbound parameters of a logical system for message type MATMAS. • Troubleshot IDOC processing effectively. • System refresh from production to QA system. • Recreated source systems while troubleshooting issues after system refresh for BW. • Downloaded the weekly SAP BW and R/3 service reports and coordinated with database team and OS admin group to discuss issues and get them fixed. • Troubleshot the ABAP dumps, analyzed, did research for OSS notes and applied them to fix issues. • Applied support packs and kernel patches and Performed OSS administration. Employer: Netmatrix Solutions, Inc. Client: Mylan Laboratories; W VA; SAP R/3 Basis/Security Admin (Contract); 2/2006 – 10/2006 OS: Win 2K server/advanced server/MCS. Database: Oracle 9.2.4.0 Application: SAP ECC 5.0, SAP BW 3.50. • Installed and configured ECC 5.0. • Configured Transport Management system and performed Transports. • System refresh from production to QA system. • Maintained and created Aggregates and Hierarchies (both time dependent and time-independent) • Info Package Management for data loads via IDoc /PSA, Flat file creation/load PSA (used to source data from legacy system into BW). • Created custom and modified standard Info Objects based on Master and Transactional data from SAP and flat files into BW • Performed performance optimization. • Installed of BW, Support Packs, Front-end Patches, and BW Plug-Ins and applied OSS notes. • Performed daily monitoring checks in Production, weekly checks for all systems and resolved day to day issues. Employer: Netmatrix Solutions, Inc. Client: ExxonMobil; Houston, TX; Role: SAP Basis (Contract); 2/2005 – 1/2006 Database: Oracle 9.2.4.0. OS: HPUX/AIX Application: SAP R/3 4.6C/BW 3.5B/ITS 6.10 Change Management: Remedy. • Installed and configured BW 3.50 on AIX and oracle database 9.2.0. • Carried out post-installation activities. • Did system copy and resolved BW source connection problems • Configured Autosys Weekend shutdown schedule for BW systems and solved all related issues. • Resolved memory related problems in BW systems. • Activated the integrated Internet Transaction Server. • Applied support packs and plug-ins. • Configured Transport Management System. • Resolved TMS problems. • Effectively troubleshot user authorization problems • Resolved ITS external user access problems Employer: Netmatrix Solutions, Inc. Balakrishna Chintaginjala 6 | Page Client: KAO Brands; Cincinnati, OH; Role: SAP Security Administrator (Contract); 12/2004 – 1/2005 Database: Oracle. OS: AS400 Application: SAP 4.70 Enterprise/APO 3.10 • Installed and configured APO 3.10. • Created logical systems and created ALE environment. • Created and tested ALE user’s communication among different clients. • Created roles tested and implemented. • Trouble shot the authorization problems and resolved them. • Interacted with users, collected information and resolved the following audit related issues like, • Batch Administration Authorization, Run Background job via different Account, Delete any background job, Batch input access, SAP default passwords, SAP* account lock or not, SAP* backdoor access, SAP_ALL profile access, Custom table security, Table modification access, Production lock settings through SM30 or SCC4, modify any account password, locking sensitive transactions, SAP Password complexity settings, OSS admin Accounts, Modify security using SU01, Custom Program security, Custom transactions, development authorization, import transports, Broad Access role like SAP_ALL_RESTRICTED role. Client: KODAK; Rochester, NY; Role: SAP Security Administrator (Contract) 9/2004 – 11/2004 Database: Oracle 9I SAP: 4.70 Enterprise 3rd party Software: VIRSA Systems. • Installed and configured APO 3.10 and live cache 7.40. • Enabled 3GB memory option for the Live Cache. • Day to day support for APO and resolved issues. • Created roles and profiles using profile generator • Created users and assigned roles to them. • Setup ALE configuration and created distribution model. • Setup Central User Administration and distributed users to different clients in the landscape. • Worked on Sarbanes and Oxley software to remediate the user conflicts for SODs. • Worked on VIRSA-VRAT tool to identify users with ‘SOD’ conflicts • Used A-B-C analysis to track users’ # of months ago a user executed the transactions with the task group (TG1, TG2) and resolved the conflicts. • The following transactions used to analyze conflicts /VIRSA/ZVRAT, ZRRS, ZB37, ZB29, SU01, SUIM, ZRTC • Documented the resolution in EXCEL sheet after analyzing the conflict with indication of different status codes like 20, 25 and 50. Client : AVANEX Corporation, Fremont, CA; Role: SAP Basis Administrator(Contractor); 5/2004 – 9/2004 OS: Windows 2000 ad Server/Sun Solaris. Database : Oracle 9.2.0.4.0 Application: SAP 4.70 Enterprise extension set 1.1. • Installed and configured SAP 4.70 Enterprise on Sun OS and configured diverse landscapes (DEV, QAS, TRN, PRD) and also configured central, dialog instances • Applied all necessary support packages and upgrade to latest kernel patches. • Configured Transport management system and scheduled background job for importing transports automatically into unit test clients in DEV instance. • Managed and Monitored transports among different clients. • Installed and configured Advanced Planner and Optimizer (APO) 3.10 and Live Cache 7.40. • Prepared the Live Cache host and enabled 3GB memory option and adjusted necessary profile parameters as per the OSS note 110172. • Installed LCSETUP Tool on the Live Cache host before installing the LIVECACHE. • Performed LIVECACHE post-installation activities viz setting up data to the livecache instance, checking the live cache instance and perform periodic jobs. • Created OSS Ids, developer keys, registered sap standard objects for modification and obtain keys. Balakrishna Chintaginjala 7 | Page • Configured workflow, auto-forwarding agent to forward emails to outlook and scheduled background jobs to move emails from sap to outlook. • Did research and applied OSS notes. • Monitored database, application and accordingly resized tablespaces. • Monitored system logs regularly, analyzed and resolved ABAP dumps. • Configured ALE and sent MM release strategy config from DEV to QAS and PRD as well. • Opened OSS connection for SAP remote support and for monitoring of PRD system as a part of GO-LIVE process. • Setup FTP access to move files from SAP server to Local file server. • Coordinated with functional consultants and got the necessary info and Created roles and profiles for FI/CO, MM, PP, SD and PDM using Profile Generator, created userids and assigned roles to users. • Created logical systems, destinations, created Distribution Model View and configured Central User administration. • Inserted missed authorizations during testing and after post GO_LIVE. Client: British Petroleum; Chicago, IL; Role: SAP Basis Administrator (Contract); 1/2004 – 4/2004 OS: SUN Solaris 8.0, Windows 2K3 Enterprise Server 64-Bit Intel ITANIUM Architecture. Database: Oracle 9.2.0.4. Application: SAP R/3 4.7 Enterprise Ext 1.1. • Assignment: Migration of SAP R/3 4.7 Enterprise from SUN Solaris to WIN2K3 Enterprise Intel 64-Bit. • Installed and configured SAP 4.7 enterprise with Ext set 1.1 on Sun 8.0 and Oracle 8.1.7. • Configured Oracle Standby database on one of Sun servers. • Installed Win2k3 server, Oracle 9.2.0 and Oracle patch for IA 64-bit. • Installed and configured SAP 4.7 enterprise ext set 1.1. • Performed R/3 Load export from Sun box and imported into Win2K3 server. • Installed central instance on Win2k3 server. • Performed post installation activities viz., cleaning the tables, importing profiles. • Applied latest Kernel patch. • Ran BDLS to adjust the Logical system names and also ran SGEN. • Used SAPDBA tool to take BR BACKUP. • Down loaded OSS notes and applied. • Modified standard and created custom Info Source/Data Source, ODS, and Info Cubes (standard and MultiCube) related to SD and in preparation CRM applications • Created and activated Communication Structure, Transfer Structure, Transfer Routine, Update Rules (both ODS and InfoCube level), and plan Conversion Techniques • Maintained and created Aggregates and Hierarchies (both time dependant and time-independent) • Info Package Management for data loads via IDoc /PSA, Flat file creation/load PSA (used to source data from legacy system into BW) • Created custom and modified standard Info Objects based on Master and Transactional data from SAP and flat files into BW • Trained Power Users on utilizing, developing, and administer BW Queries • Performed performance optimization • Installed of BW, Support Packs, Front-end Patches, and BW Plug-Ins • Created, generated profiles, Authorizations, object classes, objects, and roles and assigned to user master. • Modified existing SAP roles, regenerated and assigned to the User master. • Transported profiles between clients within R/3 system and between R/3 systems using client copy option. • SAP Portals EP6 SP1 Unification and Administration: Design and sizing Portal Architecture, Installation, Upgrade, configuration, integration and Unification of Portal components including Trex, Novel Netware, views, EBP and SAP components like BW, CRM and other Non-sap Applications. User Management and security, Content Management, Knowledge Management, Collaboration, Dcom, WAS6.20/J2EE Administration, J2EE engine connectivity, Backups and other infrastructure related issues for various Business scenarios. Configure Single-Sign-On for 4.7 R/3, BW3.1, SolMgr3.1, EP6.0 and ITS6.20, Install Unification Server, R/3 & BW Unifier. Employer: Geosoft Infotech, CA Balakrishna Chintaginjala 8 | Page Client : Agilent Technologies (HP), Palo Alto, CA; Role : Oracle DBA (Contract) 2/2001 – 11/2003 OS: Windows 2000 servers, Hardware RAID systems, Database: Oracle 8i. • Installed SAP R/3 3.1H and configured SAP landscapes viz., Development, Performance Testing, production. • Multiplexed database files for the fault tolerance on Hardware RAID levels RAID1/ RAID5. • Installed Oracle software and created the database as per the initial sizing. • Performed the database tuning and involved in the regular backup scheduling and restoration assignment. • Bench marked for Operating System tuning and studied different counters to find out Bottlenecks and upgraded the hardware to take care of future growth. • Administered database tuning, multiplexed the control files and redo logs, put them on different. • Checked regularly for the database growth and resized the data files as per the requirement. Employer: Geosoft Infotech, CA Client: NIKE Inc, Portland, OR; Role: I2-TM Administrator (Contract); 5/2000 – 1/2001 OS: Windows 2000 advanced server. Database: Oracle 8i • Installed and configured oracle 8i on Windows 2000 advanced server. • Installed all necessary service packs. • Created database, administered and tuned to improve the performance. • Installed I2-TM (SAP 3rd party software) and configured all the services viz. DSC Server, Financial Server, API Server, EDI Server, AddrVALSAPToTMRfcSrvr, OderDlvySplitSAPToTMRfcsrvr, RateSAPToTmRfcSrvr, SAPtoTMIDOCSrvrNoM, TMtoSAPSrvr, optimizer, Pc*miler, Track and trace • Created User ids for FTP access for DATA GATE users. • Monitored performance tuning on NT servers during IDoc processing to check the load on processor and Memory bottlenecks etc due to TM application servers. • Effectively managed troubleshooting of the Track and Trace (web) server. 1/5/2021 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4452 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4452 3/4 Activities and Affiliations* In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* LMPA MIPLA St. Hubert's Catholic Church Participation in many running races/marathons. I believe my broad background in engineering, finance, operational efficiency and improvement, and my legal background would be beneficial as part of the city council team. I moved to Chanhassen (Excelsior address) from Woodbury many years back. Woodbury had similar city leadership, fiscally responsible, yet looking to always better serve the needs of the community. I believe this type of leadership is what decent citizens and famiiies are looking for in a safe place to live. I want to ensure the reputation and quality of life are maintained and improved upon for current and future residents and families. I am not applying to this position as a political-driven stepping stone. I have had many successes through my life and simply look to provide my God-given talents to be used with others for a common goal. I am not looking to join an organization that is driven by party politics. I have communicated with Julia Coleman, who indicated that the city council is driven by results, analysis, and doing the work for the people. I believe this is the way it should be, regardless of one's political views. - Educational background to understand financial, operational, legal, and scientific issues. - Public relations experience to know proper communication positioning for difficult or sensitive issues. - Ability to work well in team environments, including brainstorming, listening, and debate skills. - Demonstrated ability to work with diverse groups of people, in terms of age, race, gender, occupation, experience. - Knowledge of Chanhassen communities, businesses, and concerns via 15 years of residence. - Bring experience of living in Illinois, Pennsylvania, California and several communities in Minnesota and travelling to almost every major city in the U.S. as well as international travel to six of seven continents. - Raised 3 children in Minnesota. - Effective delegator and team-builder, as acquired from my mentors and experience in the corporate world. - I've reviewed the city's financial and legislative priorities and plans, and my views are consistent with those and I believe my skills would be helpful to drive to those objectives. - I've done my 'due diligence' on what is involved in being a city council member, including viewing past council sessions, discussing hour commits, pros/cons, etc. with Julia Coleman, and keeping abreast of city issues and surrounding area through the Chanhassen Villager, etc. Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association - Board member and VP. 1/5/2021 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4452 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4452 4/4 If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association Lake Minnewashta Preservation Association (LMPA) - Vice President, Board member. 2014 - Present. Minnesota Intellectual Property Law Association (MIPLA) - member. Currently involved with Angie Stenson, Chanhassen Transportation Planner and Chanhassen City Engineer to evaluate Arboretum Area Transportation Plan options. My Industrial Engineering background in process flow analysis, factors to consider in transportation modeling are being viewed as useful to this effort. I would continue this effort and similar efforts in transportation or financial planning as value to the city. As Vice-President of the LMPA, I have been involved in preserving and improving the quality of the Lake Minnewashta area. With other Board members, we have interfaced with Chanhassen city leadership, Carver County, the DNR, Park Management, County Commissioners, the University of Minnesota and others to evaluate ecological challenges and opportunities with the watershed area, such as invasive species management. I have led the State grant process for aquatic invasive species treatment and education. I would continue to find environmental and ecological issues and projects an area of interest for me. SCOT ALLEN LACEK Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul Area Office: Cell: Email: SUMMARY  Sold over $20 MM in Business Analytics, ERP, and CRM solutions to customers while employed by Microsoft, IBM, CSC, Peoplesoft, Oracle, Deltek, Rolta, and Evosys.  Top performing sales representative at Microsoft, Oracle Corporation, and Evosys.  Experience spans start-up ventures to Fortune 500 Corporations. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE INOAPPS CONSULTING 2019 - 2020 Regional Sales Director  Leveraging working relationships with over 100 Oracle sales representatives, built pipeline and sold consulting and SaaS solutions from $0 to $12MM in 10 month period. Focus on Oracle’s Cloud EPM, HCM, and SCM product areas. EVOSYS GLOBAL CORPORATION 2016 – 2018 Regional Sales Director  Developed new Midwest territory from $0 to $1.5MM in sales in 8 months.  Top North America sales rep for 2017 and 2018 sales years.  Based on Midwest success, assigned to evangelize Mountain and West Coast territories.  Sold consulting and Oracle’s Cloud software applications with over 100 Oracle field sales representatives and management across the Business Analytic, ERP, HCM, SCM, CX pillars in over 170 prospect pursuits. ROLTA INTERNATIONAL, INC. 2012 - 2014 National Solutions Executive  Sold Oracle enterprise software consulting (Business Analytics, EBS, Cloud) to Fortune 50  Grew sales pipeline for enterprise solutions from $0 to $15 MM in 8-month period.  Quickly ramped up, closing first $250K deal in 3 weeks. DELTEK CORPORATION 2010 - 2012 Sales Director Sold ERP and BI solutions to project oriented businesses.  Sold over $5 MM in solutions, focusing on ERP and Business Analytic solutions.  Led the full sales engagement and territory management, from prospecting, sales strategy, ROI analysis, pricing, negotiations, cultivating additional sales, and contracts.  Customers included Qualcomm, American Native Corporations. ORACLE CORPORATION 1991 – 1996 & 2008 - 2010 Consulting Sales Manager Sold CRM, ERP, and Business Analytic consulting services to Fortune 500 companies.  Overachieved quota by 119% by selling $2.6 MM consulting (6 months)  Overachieved quota by 109% in year 2.  Sold to CPG companies, including Land O Lakes, Hormel, 3M, and Wells Dairy. Senior Sales Consultant – Distribution & Financial Software Applications  Delivered award-winning sales performance  Overachieved quota by 123% in 1994 and 142% in 1995. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 2005 - 2007 Business Analytics Sales Manager Sold $8.4 MM of products and solutions into the North Central District’s top 250 customers.  Overachieved quota by 105% (ranked first in country in growth and revenue).  Instituted several District best practices, including Sarbanes-Oxley Executive event. IBM CORPORATION 2003 - 2005 Senior Sales Manager - Business Intelligence Sold Business Intelligence offerings within State of Minnesota in quota-carrying role, including managing sales cycle for prospects in a team sale environment, and solution selling IBM hardware, software, and services. Concentration on Analytical CRM, OLAP, Balanced Scorecard, and Data Mining opportunities across multiple industries with Fortune 500 customers (e.g., Cargill, Wells Fargo, 3M, Target, Mayo Clinic, Best Buy, Fingerhut)  Sold over $7M in IBM BI solutions.  Drove multiple Analytical CRM initiatives with ‘C’ level executives across territory to sell IBM and partner (e.g., Siebel, Unica, Gentia, Brio, Business Objects, Retek) solutions.  Overachieved 2003 quota by 116% and 2004 quota by 140%. QUEST ONE DECISION SCIENCES Director – Sales In a start-up company environment, developed partnership with Manugistics, and solicited prospects for product and service offerings from trade conferences and cold call leads in a quota-carrying role.  Coordinated solution strategy with Product Management and Marketing, including use of web- enablement, collaboration, and analytical applications.  Evaluated use of analytical techniques, such as Real Options Valuation (ROV), EVA, and ABC, in business intelligence and B2B software products.  Customers included General Motors and many of its suppliers. PEOPLESOFT, INC. Manager – Consumer Packaged Goods Industry Marketing For a new corporate initiative, managed corporate and field product planning and marketing resources, driving vision through execution phases of industry software solution into marketplace.  Developed original industry solution templates with Industry Business Unit and worked with Product Marketing to release to field.  Led software and service partner (e.g., Big-5) alliance relationships.  Determined strategic use of Business Analytics CRM, OLAP, Internet, Supply Chain Planning, Promotional Planning, Manufacturing, and Front Office applications in industry solution.  Customers included Borden Foods, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Qualcomm. Education M.B.A. – Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA ● B.S., Industrial Engineering – University of Illinois, Champaign, IL ● J.D., William Mitchell College of Law ● C.P.I.M.. ● Series 7 (expired) 12/21/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4435 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4435 3/4 In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* I would also encourage you to take a look at my campaign materials from my recent run for city council this 2020 election: https://sollerforchanhassen.weebly.com/ (the media page will also link you to other resources where I answered questions about my candidacy and platform). My wife Kailey and I moved here when we fell in love with the idea of Chanhassen; a small town with city amenities, world class parks, lakes and trails, quality schools, and a distinct community persona. Now we’re starting our family here, we’ve laid down roots in the faith community here and we’d be blessed to stay here forever. As Chanhassen continues to undergo change and it's population approaches 40,000 in the next two decades, it is important we keep the attractive character of the town intact while also welcoming innovation and the positives of growth. I want to be a servant and a leader on the council for those who have called this city home for decades and for those who choose to start their life here. I’m committed to keeping the promise of Chanhassen Forever attainable for all of us no matter which chapter of our life we find ourselves in. There are forces at work that can break the promise of Chanhassen Forever if we do not have steadfast and innovative leadership on the Council. The economic climate has been undeniably shaken to the core by COVID-19, and our city, our residents, and many of our businesses have been and will continue to be ravaged by this crisis. If we do not act decisively and with a passion for success, the Chanhassen we know and love will not look the same on the other side of this pandemic. As a healthcare innovator, business professional, and technology advocate, I see a critical need to contribute both creativity and long-term strategic thinking to the Council. 1. More than 3,000 Chanhassen residents have voted for me *An opportunity to appoint a council member gives the existing council a chance to choose their own colleague, but the risk of appointments is that positions meant to represent the people are filled by someone who has not put in the work to go speak to the people and ask for their support. *I would strongly encourage this council to consider a candidate for this vacancy in light of their willingness to put their name forward and get out in the community to hear from people and secure their vote. 2. Public Policy *I am a student of policy and understand what goes in to creating it, writing it, researching it, etc. 3. Finance *As an MBA and business professional I am well-versed in accounting, financial planning, and financial reporting. *I also understand the financial element of strategic decision making and return on investment 4. Negotiation *Like members of the existing council, I will unapologetically advocate for the residents of Chanhassen. This means being tough with external forces that want to operate here (developers, etc.) and making sure the city is getting the best deal. * I have negotiated government contracts with city, county and state for my company, so I have been on the other side. 5. Technology *While we're doing a good job, this city still needs to focus on improvements to its utilization of technology to benefit the people that live here. The adoption of new tech that actually makes people's lives better is my entire professional passion, and a personal interest. 12/21/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4435 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4435 4/4 If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply Carver County BPOU Executive Committee, Vice Chair Como Student Community Cooperative, Minneapolis, MN (https://cscc.umn.edu/) - Board of Directors - Finance Committee - Conciliation Committee No additional memberships to list. - Transparency and resident engagement - Fiscal Policy - Technology Adoption - Senior Well-being and Healthcare - Strategic, Long-term planning Ryan Soller Strategic and innovative professional, passionate about the development and proliferation of new technology to improve people’s lives. EMPLOYMENT 08.2020-Present ENTERPRISE ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE – MatrixCare by ResMed + Led a team of account managers owning 1,000+ clients and over $60M in annual revenue. + New product launch and commercialization leadership 06.2017– 08.2020 ENTERPRISE ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE – MatrixCare + Number one sales achiever in the company (2019) + President’s Club (2018, 2019) + Ownership of the company’s top, strategic accounts + Brought siloed teams together through new collaboration meetings + Mentored two new reps, both making president’s club in their first full year. + Led efforts for MatrixCare Gives, our charitable program for our clients 06.2015 – 06.2017 ACCOUNT MANAGER – MatrixCare + Consistent top-five performer, winning successive President’s Club awards + Owned a migration program for legacy software, growing revenue 600%+ + Brought a heart for continuous improvement to rigid, low-value processes 02.2014 – 05.2015 ACCOUNT SPECIALIST, CUSTOMER SUCCESS – MatrixCare + Owned accounts worth 18% of company revenue + Retained over 99% of total recurring (SaaS) revenue annually + Led client events with up to 60 in attendance in 12 national locations + Optimized events to grow revenue and pioneered a client-hosted model to eliminate rental expenses, thereby driving profitability for the business. + Facilitated a project that saw 275 employees spend a day in the life of a local customer, promoting new relationships and a client-centric culture. 08.2012 - 02.2014 FINANCIAL SOFTWARE ANALYST – MatrixCare + Dedicated analyst for top-tier, national accounts + Designed and presented webinars attended by 40+ clients each + Strong understanding of revenue cycle management and EHR + Mentored new team members. LinkedIn |C 952.261.4962 | rasoller@gmail.com SKILLS Leadership Business Development Strategic Alliances, Partnerships Digital Marketing Cross-Functional Collaboration Presentations Customer Success Communication Negotiation Continuous Improvement Event Planning CRM, Business Automation Analytic s Sales Execution, Closing Deals Strategic Account Planning Healthcare Industry EDUCATION M ASTER OF B USINESS ADMINISTRATION – Carlson School of Management Medical Industry Leadership Institute (MILI) Affiliate Medical Industry Valuation Lab As a consultant team, produced market evaluation, product launch plan, financial analysis, and business recommendations for three local business ventures. New Product Design, Business Development - Medtronic BACHELOR OF ARTS – Bethel University Summa Cum Laude VOLUNTEER St. Hubert’s Catholic Church + Youth Ministry Como Student Community Cooperative + Board of Directors + Finance Committee + Conciliation Committee Ramsey County Historical Society + Curatorial Intern St. John the Baptist Catholic Church + Youth Ministry Our Lady of the Prairie Catholic Church + Youth Ministry Belle Plaine Schools + MSHSL Speech Coach 12/21/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4436 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4436 3/3 Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply CAP; Dakota County Advisory Board; Dakota County Technical College Board, Zoning Board - Dakota Cty; Notary Republic; SHRM; Grace Church Volunteer and Member; Election Judge for 12 years; Development, Events, Zoning, Workforce Development Education: Mergenthaler Technical Maryland Business Administration GPA: 3.8 Inver Hills Community College (Mn State College) Minnesota Human Resource Administration GPA: 4.0 University of Minnesota Minnesota Business Administration Human Resource & Legal Administration GPA: 3.6 St. Thomas Minnesota (Mini MBA Coursework) Computer/Technical Skills: Microsoft (Outlook, Word, Excel, PowerPoint) iCIMS Webhire PeopleSoft SAP WAWF - Government Contracts Professional Associations/Affiliates: HAZMat Certified SHRM Dakota County Advisory Board (Zoning Board of Adjustment) -2013 - present Certified Election Judge Notary Commissioned Volunteer: Feed My Starving Children, Union Gospel Mission, Adult/Teen Challenge, Grace Church (Eden Prairie) Business References: Steve Brehm President (Owner) – Berry Coffee Services 952-937-8697 Richard Forschler Sr. Managing Partner @ Faegre Benson, etal. 612-766-6902 Steve Lenertz Director @ Collins (formerly UTC/Goodrich) Aerospace 952-892-4000 Jeff Siemon Retired (NFL - Minnesota Vikings) 952-929-0628 Richard Knutson Retired (CFO@ Larkin, Hoffman, etal.) Eden Prairie, Mn. 12/31/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4449 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4449 4/5 Activities and Affiliations* In addition to serving your community, why do you want to be a City Council Member?* Specific qualifications for this position* Yes No Are you currently serving on other Boards, Commissions, or Committees?* If yes, please list Yes No Have you served on a Board, Commission, or Committee in the past?* Rotary Club of Chanhassen -Director of Community Services 2015 Received Chanhassen Rotary’s 2018 Distinguished Service Award  (June 28, 2018) Skipper Salute Blue Star Moms Recycled Rides Bob and I have lived here 25 years. We had added onto our home and have moved my mother, Kathy, into the addition. Chanhassen is our home for life. Coupled with my belief of the city's worth, I enjoy a life of service. The city is in transition. I want to be a part of that transition. There will be many challenges coming out of a Pandemic year for our businesses in town and our residents and schools. I’m familiar with and can build bridges with the school districts. All my children attended Minnetonka schools. I have volunteered in district 112 and district 276. The city staff and council already have had a working relationship with me. I have volunteered in the Park & Rec. Committees and numerous City/Rotary activities and celebrations; February Festival /4th of July celebration to include the Parade, Senior Commission picnics and programs, all working with members of the city staff. I have served as a Senior Commissioner. I have volunteered countless hours to the city's community programs and the Carver County Court system. I bring 30 years of strong business and volunteer experience. My previous employment has afforded me the opportunity to develop my skills in negotiations, finance and operations, and I have been “giving back” through work with non-profits, including Chanhassen Rotary, Chanhassen Senior Commissioner, Volunteer on the Park & Rec. Advisory Committee, Chanhassen Friends of the Library and the Carver County Veterans Court system. (I volunteered 2000-man hours in an 18-month span to help bring the Carver County Veterans Court system online as the Court Coordinator). I have a proven track record to engage in healthy debate to help reach positive and mutually beneficial solutions on difficult issues facing our city. I can constructively look at our city’s distribution of resources to determine partnering opportunities with other cities and organizations, Public Safety challenges, city services, especially programs that affect property values and resource stability. 12/31/2020 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4449 https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/4449 5/5 If yes, please list Please list organization memberships and positions held* Please list areas of special interest* City Website Facebook Twitter Chanhassen Villager Other How did you hear about the city council vacancy?* Select all that apply • Senior commission. Board member 2017-2018 • Member of the Chanhassen Parks and Recreation System Plan Advisory Committee 2017 • Beyond the Yellow Ribbon, Chanhassen, 2009 to 2018, Founding member, I helped write and submit the charter to the State of MN • Chanhassen Beyond the Yellow Ribbon, secretary 2012-2016 • Chanhassen Beyond the Yellow Ribbon, treasurer 2016-2018 • Chanhassen Friends of the Library, 2004-2010 • Semper Fi Flo Board member, 501© (3), 2018- 2019 • Rotary Club of Chanhassen - Director of Community Services 2015 • STRIVE Mentor / volunteer for Chanhassen HS 2017-2018 • Volunteer Carver County veteran court Coordinator 2013-2015 • Family Support group (Fort Snelling and 101st ABD, KY) from 9/11 to 2011 • Volunteer, Hennepin County court system, WATCH Volunteer 1995-1998 • Deephaven Elem. PTO president, 1983 to 1984 Help define city's role to help support the small business community. Help revitalize the City's Beyond the Yellow Ribbon program. The Council's liaison between the Senior Center and the Council at large. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Roundtable Section 5:00 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.2. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No:  SUMMARY Council Liaisons to City Commissions CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Administer Oaths of Office for New City Council Members Section OATHS OF OFFICE Item No: C.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  SUMMARY City Attorney Andrea McDowell Poehler will administer the Oaths of Office to the following: Council Member Lucy Rehm Council Member Haley Schubert ATTACHMENTS: Lucy Rehm Oath Haley Schubert Oath CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Commission Vacancies Section PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS Item No: D.2. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No:  SUMMARY There are 14 vacancies on City Commissions: Planning Commission ­ Two three­year positions Park & Recreation Commission ­ One two­year and two three­year positions and one or two youth positions Environmental Commission ­ One two­year and three three­year positions Senior Commission ­ Three three­year positions Applications for Commission vacancies will be accepted beginning January 14, 2021 Application deadline is January 29, 2021 Interviews will be conducted on February 8 and 22, 2021 between 5­7 pm Additional interview times may be added, depending on the number of candidates. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Designation of Official Newspaper Section ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS Item No: E.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM­061 PROPOSED MOTION "The Chanhassen City Council designates the Chanhassen Villager as its official newspaper." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND The City Council must designate an official newspaper that meets qualifications of state statute. The Chanhassen Villager has submitted a request for this designation. Their price per column inch for 2020 is $7.07 (a 4% increase from 2020 rate of $6.79). Residents may either subscribe or request a free subscription be delivered to their home. Staff recommends that the Chanhassen Villager be appointed as the City’s official newspaper. ATTACHMENTS: Letter from Chanhassen Villager dated December 21, 2020 Minnesota Statute 331A.04 concerning Appointment of Official Newspapers 331A.04 DESIGNATION OF A NEWSPAPER FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS. Subdivision 1.Priority.The governing body of a political subdivision,when authorized or required by statute or charter to designate a newspaper for publication of its public notices,shall designate a qualified newspaper in the following priority. Subd.2.Known office in locality.If there are one or more qualified newspapers,the known office of issue of which are located within the political subdivision,one of them shall be designated. Subd.3.Secondary office in locality.When no qualified newspaper has a known office of issue located in the political subdivision,but one or more qualified newspapers maintain a secondary office there,one of them shall be designated. Subd.4.General circulation in locality.When no qualified newspaper has its known office of issue or a secondary office located within the political subdivision,then a qualified newspaper of general circulation there shall be designated. Subd.5.Other situations.If a political subdivision is without an official newspaper,or if the publisher refuses to publish a particular public notice,matters required to be published shall be published in a newspaper designated as provided in subdivision 4.The governing body of a political subdivision with territory in two or more counties may,if deemed in the public interest,designate a separate qualified newspaper for each county. Subd.6.Exception to designation priority.(a)Notwithstanding subdivisions 1 to 3,the governing body of a political subdivision may designate any newspaper for publication of its official proceedings and public notices,if the following conditions are met: (1)the newspaper is a qualified medium of official and legal publication; (2)the publisher of the newspaper furnishes a sworn statement,verified by a recognized independent circulation auditing agency,covering a period of at least one year ending no earlier than 60 days before designation of the newspaper,stating that the newspaper's circulation reaches not fewer than 75 percent of the households within the political subdivision; (3)the newspaper has provided regular coverage of the proceedings of the governing body of the political subdivision and will continue to do so;and (4)the governing body votes unanimously to designate the newspaper. (b)If the circulation of a newspaper designated under this subdivision falls below 75 percent of the households within the political subdivision at any time within the term of its designation as official newspaper, its qualification to publish public notices for the political subdivision terminates. Subd.7.Joint bidding.A bid submitted jointly by two or more newspapers for the publication of public notices must not be considered anticompetitive or otherwise unlawful if the following conditions are met: (1)all of the qualified newspapers in the political subdivision participate in the joint bid; (2)the existence of the joint bid arrangement is disclosed to the governing body of the political subdivision before or at the time of submission of the joint bid;and Copyright ©2017 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 331A.04MINNESOTASTATUTES20171 (3)the board is free to reject the joint bid and,if it does,individual qualified newspapers do not refuse to submit separate bids owing to the rejection of the joint bid. History:1984 c 543 s 23;2003 c 59 s 1;2004 c 182 s 14 Copyright ©2017 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 2MINNESOTASTATUTES2017331A.04 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated December 29, 2020 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the City Council minutes dated December 29, 2020.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 29, 2020 Mayor Ryan called the City Council Meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman McDonald, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Coleman STAFF PRESENT: Heather Johnston, Matt Kerr PUBLIC PRESENT: None Mayor Ryan: Thank you and good afternoon. Today we are conducting a special meeting and public hearing. For the record we have four Council members present. Councilwoman Coleman is absent. Our first action is our agenda approval. Council members, are there any modifications to the agenda as printed? Please respond with a yay or nay when I call your name. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion, yay or nay? Campion: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Council, if you could hold on one second we’re having a… Councilman Campion, could you respond with a yay or a nay please? Campion: Nay. Johnston: They can hear each other on Zoom? We just can’t hear them. Mayor Ryan: No worries. Council, we can’t hear you so Matt’s working on fixing the problem right now so we’re just on hold for a minute. Thank you. There was a break at this point to fix the audio connection on Zoom. Special City Council Meeting – December 29, 2020 2 Mayor Ryan: I’m just going to go back real quickly for agenda approval because I couldn’t hear you the last time. I saw your lips move but I couldn’t hear you so for the record, we have four Council members present with Councilwoman Coleman absent. Our first action is our agenda approval. If there any modifications to the agenda, please respond with a yay or nay. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: Nay. Mayor Ryan: I am nay as well so we will proceed with the published agenda. The only action item on our agenda today is a public hearing for a liquor license for Lunds & Byerlys Wines & Spirits. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF OFF-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR LUNDS & BYERLYS WINES & SPIRITS, 780 WEST 78TH STREET Mayor Ryan: We will begin with the staff report. Ms. Johnston, please? Johnston: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Council members, thank you for attending a special meeting. This is a liquor license for Lunds & Byerlys. The officers and managers have changed so we received a request for an off-sale liquor license. They are in the process of restructuring their entity and transferring the license to Lund Beverages, LLC. The officers and managers have unchanged, only the company name has changed from Byerlys Beverages, Inc. to Lund Beverages, LLC. Law enforcement conducted background investigations on all the principals including criminal history, driving records, and outstanding warrants on four officers and managers and no negative comments were found. This is a public hearing and we did publish this public hearing so with that I will turn it back to the Mayor. I stand for any questions. Mayor Ryan: Council, before I open the public hearing do you have any questions for Ms. Johnston? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: No, I do not. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Special City Council Meeting – December 29, 2020 3 Tjornhom: Councilman Campion? Campion: No. Mayor Ryan: I hereby open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. We also have a phone line that has been published and I will wait for a minute to see if anyone calls in or steps to the microphone. There was a break at this point to post the phone number for the public. Mayor Ryan: Council, there’s nobody in Chambers and nobody has called so I hereby close the public hearing and bring it back to Council for any questions or a motion. McDonald: Madam Mayor, I’ll make the motion. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves a request for an off-sale intoxicating liquor license from Lund Beverages, LLC doing business as Lunds & Byerlys Wines & Spirits located at 780 West 78th Street. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Council members for the meeting today. I wish you all a very happy and safe New Year and looking forward to a great 2021. May I please have a motion to adjourn? Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. The council meeting was adjourned at 1:16 p.m. Submitted by Heather Johnston Interim City Manager Prepared by Kim Meuwissen CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated December 14, 2020 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.2. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the December 14, 2020 City Council minutes." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 14, 2020 Mayor Ryan called the City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman McDonald, and Councilman Campion, Councilwoman Coleman COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Heather Johnston, Kelly Strey, Kate Aanenson, Matt Unmacht PUBLIC PRESENT: Matthew & Laura Rosati 1798 Marigold Court Jackie Williams 7547 Walnut Curve Mayor Ryan: We have all of our Council Members present tonight. We know that they are on Zoom and hopefully they can now all hear us. Our first action is agenda approval so council members let me know if there are any modifications to the agenda as printed and please respond with a yay or nay. McDonald: Nay Tjornhom: Nay Coleman: Nay Campion: Nay Ryan: Nay. So we will proceed with the published agenda. We have no Public Announcements tonight. Next is our Consent Agenda. Tonight we have Consent Agenda item numbers 1 through 7. All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be recorded as a single motion based on staff recommendation. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Are there any items that the Council would like to consider separately? Councilman McDonald? Councilman McDonald: No. Councilwoman Tjornhom: No. Councilwoman Coleman: No. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 2 Councilman Campion: No. Mayor Ryan: I have one that I would like to move. Consent Agenda Item No. 4 and I will move that to New Business. Johnston: Madam Mayor? Mayor Ryan: Yes? Johnston: We have gotten some recent comments as recently as a minute ago on Number 2 if the Council wanted to hear those on the Lake Lucy Road Island development if you wanted to pull that as well. Staff would recommend pulling that piece of information. Mayor Ryan: Okay. We will move Consent Agenda Item No. 2 and Consent Agenda Item No. 4 and we will move those to New Business and we will take those first. We’ll take D-2, then D-4, followed by the outdoor storage ordinance, the budget and CIP and Chapter 4, Fees. We’ll bump those down. I’ll make that change. With those changes, is there a motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 1, 3, and 5-7? CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the Interim City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated December 7, 2020. 2. Item removed for separate discussion by Mayor Ryan (H-1. New Business) 3. Approve Final Plat, Development Contract and Plans and Specifications for The Park 3rd Addition 4. Item removed for separate discussion by Mayor Ryan (H-2. New Business) 5. Resolution 2020-66: Designate Polling Place Locations for 2021 Elections. 6. Approval of Cartegraph Software Renewal. 7. CARES Act Final Budget. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS - NONE City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 3 OLD BUSINESS: AVIENDA WETLAND CREDIT PURCHASE NOTICE OF DECISION EXTENSION Mayor Ryan: Next up is Old Business – Avienda Wetland Credit Purchase. I’m not sure who is taking that. Matt Unmacht: That’s me. Can everybody hear me? Mayor Ryan: Matt. Are you Zooming in? Hello, Matt. Yes, I can hear you. Unmacht: I’m going to attempt to share my screen here. Can everyone see my PowerPoint that says Avienda? Mayor Ryan: Yes. Unmacht: This item is on Old Business. This involves the wetland replacement plan notice of decision that was issued for the Avienda project. That’s what I’ll be going through. So this Council’s well aware of the Avienda project so I won’t go over it in too much detail. A 115-acre development project here in Chanhassen for a regional lifestyle center. Development will include retail, housing, mixed-office space, etc. There are many wetlands that exist on the project site. Development on the site includes 4.5878 acres of wetland conservation act jurisdictional wetland impact. This mitigation is required at a 2:1 ratio, meaning that twice as much wetland needs to be replaced as is being impacted. This is proposed through the purchase of wetland banking credits. The applicant submitted a wetland replacement plan to the city in February of 2017. After much back and forth at that time with the technical evaluation panel and other related parties regarding wetland sequencing and wetland mitigation, ultimately the Chanhassen City Council approved the wetland conservation act replacement plan on December 18, 2017. Subsequently, a few days later a notice of decision was issued to formally issue this replacement plan approval decision. That decision is set to expire three years from that date, which is December 22, 2020. The applicant is requesting an extension of that approval decision. It’s important to note that Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District originally opposed the decision to approve the wetland replacement plan back in 2017. When the applicant came in and requested an extension if that decision, I put together what’s called a findings of fact document as the LGU for the wetland conservation act for the City of Chanhassen. I put together this document and sent it out to the technical evaluation panel (TEP) to get their comments and recommendations on this extension request. I also solicited comments from the Watershed District, DNR and the Army Corps of Engineers. The findings of fact document ultimately show that because the scope of the project had not changed in any way, the project had been previously approved and that the wetland credits have already been purchased, the notice of decision should be extended to December 22, 2023. The TEP agreed with this determination and they offered no additional comments. They signed the findings of fact document and that is in your staff report. The Watershed District also provided comments, they mirrored their same comments from the original application. Those are City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 4 also included in the staff report. With that, I’ll open it up for questions or any comments that the Council may have there is a proposed motion up there as well. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Thank you. I will go around and ask Council if they have any questions. I’ll start with Councilman McDonald. McDonald: I have no questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: I have no questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: I have no questions, thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Matt, just a couple of questions. For clarification, is it typical to extend these applications for another three years or is there a shorter window of time or what? How is this typically handled? Unmacht: Per the wetland conservation act statute, the standard timeline is actually five years. I’m proposing three years here because that’s what was originally approved in 2017. Why that was three years back then I don’t know. The statute used to read three years but that was changed in like 2011. I’m not sure why it was three years back in 2017 for this approval so I’m going with another three but technically we can go with five. Anything longer than that would need to have TEP approval but I don’t see any reason to need to go longer than three or five. Mayor Ryan: Right. Okay. But recommended not to go any shorter, understood? Unmacht: Correct. Mayor Ryan: Then the last, just some questions obviously the Watershed wasn’t a proponent of this. Are we or have we done instead of just banking credits are we looking at joint projects that we could utilize as opposed to these credits? Kate Aanenson: I can address that. Matt and I spoke about this. One of the conditions of the original wetland alteration permit was $300,000 and so we actually bought a piece of property on Pioneer Trail and the Watershed District bought a piece next to it so we partnered up on that. I think one of the conditions that we felt strongly about which I know the Watershed, because at City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 5 that time there wasn’t much banking credit, so we actually said let’s put that money and find a piece of property that would be the best way to provide additional stormwater improvements within the city. So that $300,000 has been spent and I think that’s what Matt was pointing out. We’ve already made some action on the wetland alteration permit. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Perfect. That was my biggest question in terms of instead of just the credits, finding a project t use so I appreciate the update on that. I don’t have any other questions. Matt, thank you for your presentation. Council, does anyone have any questions or is there a motion? Coleman: I’ll make a motion, Madam Mayor. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilwoman Coleman. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the extension of the Notice of Decision of the WCA replacement plan and sequencing flexibility with conditions for the Avienda Project. All voted in favor and the motion passed 5 to 0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you for the presentation. Next, we have two public hearings. Johnston: Madam Mayor? Just a point of clarification. Did we move those items from Consent to Old Business or… Mayor Ryan: New. Johnston: New Business. Okay, I apologize. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: You’re welcome. APPROVAL OF ON-SALE BREWER TAP ROOM AND SMALL BREWER OFF-SALE LIQUOR LICENSES – CHANHASSEN BREWERY COMPANY LOCATED AT 951 WEST 78TH STREET. Mayor Ryan: Public Hearing. Johnston: For the taproom. Aanenson: Sorry. Just give me one second. The application before you is for Chanhassen Brewing Company, LLC doing business as Chanhassen Brewing Company. As I mentioned, they are proceeding along and have found a great site. They occupy approximately 2,500 square feet located at the old Perkin’s site, which is located at 951 West 78th Street. There will be 165 seats inside and 24 on the patio and the restaurant anticipated being opened on January 15. The done a background check, law enforcement has, with Matt Rosati and Laura who are here. There were City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 6 no negative things found so we are recommending approval of the liquor license. It is a public hearing so if you want to open the public hearing we will take the comments on that. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Before I open the public hearing, Council, I’m not sure if you have any questions for staff. Councilman McDonald, any questions? McDonald: No questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: I did have one question. Are we charging any fees or accepting any payment in relation to the liquor license before we know whether or not that they can actually operate, given what is going on with COVID? Johnston: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Coleman, we have charged the standard fees at this point in time. The County is exploring different programs that might help with offsetting some of those fees but at this point in time the fees have been charged. Mayor Ryan: Any comment or question follow-up, Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: Sure. I would love to hear from the Rosatis if that’s going to be an issue, if they have any concerns with that without being sure that they will be able to open given the Governor’s orders and everything going on. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Good question. We’ll call them up shortly. Or you can come up now. Councilman Campion, do you have any questions? Campion: No additional questions right now. Mayor Ryan. All right. I don’t either. I welcome Mr. and Mrs. Rosati or just Mr. Rosati. Just state your name and address for the record please. Matthew Rosati: Sure. I’m Matthew Rosati, 1798 Marigold Court representing Chanhassen Brewing Company at 951 West 78th Street. Part of the whole process with COVID and actually getting a loan I did have to think about happen if we remained in a shutdown and part of that is also the off-sale liquor license and we will be selling crowlers and growlers. Really kind of hitting social media to put our name out there. We figure as long as we get open by a certain time and in this area based on other breweries around here, that we can sustain a business with just off-sale sales. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 7 Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you. Council, do you have any questions for Mr. Rosati before I open the public hearing? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I was having trouble hearing him. I wonder was his mic on or off? Aanenson: Yeah, it’s on. McDonald: Because I’m sorry I didn’t hear anything of what you said. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Rosati: I can repeat it. Aanenson: Get really close. Rosati: Get really close? Part of the loan process and actually getting opened up and leasing I made sure I had a plan if COVID was still and issue. Part of the liquor license is on-sale and off- sale and based upon the local breweries in this year, they’ve done a really good job with off-sale with crowlers and growlers and really providing that service of being able to get the beer out there. Part of the off-sale liquor license that will be having the crowlers and growlers and I do plan on using that as much as I can. You have to produce a little bit more beer to keep your numbers up but like I said it seems like the southwest corner has done a really good job having those off sales and they’ve been able to survive. Hopefully that was a little bit louder. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilman McDonald, were you able to hear better? McDonald: Yes, I was and I thank you for repeating that. Based upon all of that, I have no further questions. Mayor Ryan: All right. Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom, any questions for the applicant? Tjornhom: No. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: Thank you, Mr. Rosati for that explanation. Please let us know if that situation changes. I know a lot of cities have considered and actually passed refunding a portion of the liquor license fees for the time that businesses were not able to sell. If that becomes an issue, and this goes out to all Chanhassen restaurants and establishments selling liquor, please let us know. I would like to learn more about that. Rosati: I appreciate that. Thank you. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 8 Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions at this time but I just want to say congratulations to Matt and Laura for the progress that has been made. Rosati: Thank you. It’s been fun. Mayor Ryan: Thank you for now. Obviously there is a lot of excitement. We’ve been anticipating this. I know there were some hurdles to overcome but we are happy where you are at now and the potential of moving this forward is really exciting for Chanhassen. Happy to have you guys here tonight at this point in time and looking forward to the futures having your brewery. Thank you. With that, I will open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. I don’t see anyone coming forward so I will close the public hearing. Aanenson: There’s no one on the phone. Mayor Ryan: Yeah, I figured. I would have seen the red light flashing. To Councilwoman Coleman’s question, it was at the first of the year that we used grant dollars. Aaneson: I think the first shutdown we actually refunded some of the license…I think they came at the same time back in March. Mayor Ryan: It was a grant, correct? Johnston: Madam Mayor, yes we used some of our CARES dollars in order to do grants back to folks who had paid liquor licenses. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Again, what Councilwoman Coleman had suggested, I know that there is a package on the table coming from both the State that got passed today as well as potentially something coming out of D.C. We will of course as a city keep our eye on that and potentially if we run into more shutdowns and challenging times obviously we will address that for all of our small business owners and we will bring that back to Council. Councilwoman Coleman, thank you for bringing that up. With that, if there is a motion that a Councilmember would like to make I would appreciate it. Campion: I will make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman Campion. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 9 Council Campion moved and Councilman McDonald seconded that the City Council approve the request for an on-sale brewery taproom and small brewer off-sale liquor license from Chanhassen Brewing Company, LLC, doing business as Chanhassen Brewing Company. All voted in favor and the motion passed 5 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 5 to 0. Congratulations. We are looking forward to having you here. A few of us were hoping for samples tonight (laughter). We have one more public hearing. ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR CHANHASSEN MS4 AND SWPPP. Mayor Ryan: I’m guessing that’s Mr. Howley. Howley: That’s Matt. Mayor Ryan: Oh, Matt! You’re joining us again. Unmacht: Yes, I’m back. This will be just as exciting as the brewery discussion, I promise (laughter). I’m just kidding. I’ll do my best. Can everyone see my screen again? Mayor Ryan: Yes. Unmacht: And it is the presentation, I believe? Right? This is a public hearing that is required for the City’s Annual MS4 Permit. No formal action will be needed or required by Council for this public hearing. Any comments that we receive we will consider for inclusion on our SWPPP and our MS4. I will get going here. Really quick, just some brief background. An MS4 is a municipal separate storm sewer system. It’s conveyance or system of conveyance that is owned by a public entity such as Chanhassen designed for collecting and conveying stormwater. Not a combined sewer and not part of the publicly owned treatment works. The City, we have a MS4 permit basically is what that means. The MS4 permit is designed to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants entering state waters from stormwater systems. The bulk of this is accomplished through what are called six minimum controlled measures. As an MS4 permittee, the City is allowed to discharge clean stormwater into state waters. We must satisfy the requirements of the MS4 general permit, one of which is to hold an annual public hearing on our permit and on the stormwater pollution prevention plan. One of the requirements of the permit is to development a stormwater pollution prevention plan or program. Basically, it’s a plan that describes how the City will prevent non-point source pollution from a construction site. It’s a valuable tool and becomes the backbone of an entire construction process related to erosion and sediment control and stormwater management both during construction and post-construction. Quickly, I’ll go through the MCMs, the minimum control measures. MCM1 is public education and outreach which is exactly what it sounds like. The City is required to hold seminars when we can, distribute education materials, etc. MCM2 is public participation and involvement. This involves engaging the public to become invested in water quality. One way we accomplish this goal is by being enrolled in the Adopt-a-Drain program. That program allows Chanhassen residents to City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 10 adopt a stormwater inlet in their neighborhood. Basically, they are responsible for cleaning it every so often and reporting on what they clean on the surface of the inlet once or twice a year. Another part of MCM2 is exactly what we are doing tonight, the public hearing to facilitate any public participation and input, if there is any. MCM3 is illicit discharge detection and elimination. This involves detecting and eliminating non-stormwater discharges to our MS4. We have to have procedures in place for investigating, locating and responding to spills, along with training staff on illicit discharge recognition along with many other things. MCM4 is construction site and stormwater control. Basically, we just want to make sure that no sediment or pollutants are leaving active construction sites. We accomplish this through enforcing strict rules along with having site plan reviews and construction site inspections. MCM5 is post- construction stormwater management. This is how we permanently manage stormwater on-site. A rain garden, a stormwater pond, etc. We manage that through this MCM5. We develop and operations and maintenance agreement for stormwater BMPs through this MCM. Lastly, pollution prevention and good housekeeping. This involves preventing pollution from our municipal operations for the City itself. We are required to inventory and address municipally owned sources of pollution such as materials stored at our public works facility, the City’s road salting program, etc. This MCM outlines requirements to inspect and maintain municipally owned outfalls, ponds, BMPs, and training our employees on proper stormwater pollution detection. That’s really it. If anybody has any questions or comments, I would be happy to answer them, and any public input as well. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Matt. Before I open the public hearing I will again ask Council if they have any questions. Council McDonald? McDonald: No further questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: No questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: No questions. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Campion? Campion: No questions. Mayor Ryan: I don’t either so I will go ahead and open the public hearing. Again, please come forward and state your name and address for the record if you have any comments. We also have a public comment call-in number if there is somebody watching that wants to call in to make any comments as it relates to this. There is nobody here coming forward and it doesn’t look like anyone is calling in so I will close the public hearing and bring it back to Council. I know that City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 11 there is no formal action being taken. Are there any additional questions or comments from anybody on Council for Matt? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: No further questions. My comment would be to thank you staff for putting these plans together. I know we have been doing this for many years and we’ve always ended up putting a pretty good plan together, so thank you for your efforts. Unmacht: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman McDonald. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Tjornhom: No. Thank you for your presentation, Matt. Great job! Unmacht: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: No questions but I echo the gratitude. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions. Well done, Matt. Mayor Ryan: I second all of the comments. First, thank you to Matt for putting the presentation together and also just want to commend our staff for the hard work that goes into this plan. Obviously, it is really important for our stormwater. It’s something our residents notice as well when there is a construction project near where they live and the impact to their neighborhoods, their homes. I just think overall it has an important impact on the community as a whole. I appreciate you putting these plans together and sharing the with Council tonight I appreciate it. Next up we have New Business. ORDINANCE 663: APPROVE THE REZONING OF 1601 LAKE LUCY ROAD (ISLAND) AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION. Mayor Ryan: We changed the order just a little bit so let me pull that back. First up was from the consent agenda D-2 and it’s an approval of rezoning of 1601 Lake Lucy Road, it’s the island out in Lake Lucy, and approval of summary ordinance for publication. Ms. Aanenson, I think this is something that you are going to… The reason why administratively it got pulled off is, as Ms. Johnston said early on, that right before our Council meeting we received a couple of emails as it relates to this project and so just to make sure that we bring it forward and address those comments tonight is important. There was a public hearing held where comments were taken from residents at that time but these comments came in this evening so I thought it was important to address those as well. Ms. Aanenson, if you want to… City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 12 Aanenson: Sure. So this item, as you mentioned Mayor, did go to the Planning Commission who had a pretty good robust conversation with the applicant, too. This is a lot of record. It has building capacity. A house could be built on it today and just pull a building permit. It doesn’t have to go through and site plan or anything. Because a lot of record means that you can build. The applicant wanted to do an accessory dwelling unit attached to the principal structure. In order to do that we recommended the path of the PUD ordinance. Because it is guided low density there is actually a couple of different zoning options they could have applied for. The R- 4 they could have requested to get a number of homes on there. It exceeds the five acres which you need for a PUD, so that’s another reason that we felt comfortable with that. The other reason with the PUD is you can attach reasonable conditions to the property. With this, we actually restricted the size of the accessory dwelling unit. The Planning Commission was kind of split on that. They thought that maybe that was onerous. At the end, we felt it was important the PUD also says that those two properties have to go together. They cannot be sold independently. Whoever owns the principal structure always has to maintain the second one so it can never be subdivided so you will always have one structure. It will be served by septic and well. The existing driveway will be maintained in place. Instead of improving that if a private street or a public street was to come down there and service four so we felt that was the least impactful. I know Mr. Wicka, the property owner, has worked to clear out a lot of the buckthorn. Again, the City ordinance doesn’t restrict the size of a structure so if somebody wanted to build a bigger house, that could happen. In looking at the goals that the applicant wanted and to make sure we have some control over that property, we felt that the PUD with the restrictions that were put in place includes some of the outbuildings, the number of docks. So all those conditions were part of the PUD. We reviewed that with the City Attorney. Again, the Planning Commission was fully supportive of the project itself. If there are specific questions that you may have, I would be happy to answer those. Mayor Ryan: I think they came in via email…or actually both came to me directly so I forwarded it on to Ms. Johnston if she wants to read some highlights. Johnston: Madam Mayor, members of the Council, the first set of comments came from Matt and Suzanne Woods. I don’t have an address. They were concerned about the proposed size and scale of the development in terms of having two homes on the property, and then expressed a concern that if this is approved, is the Council will to approved guest houses or accessory structures for other people as well so really it was about the size and the scope. The second comment also came in tonight and that was from Kirk and Camille Swanson. They basically said that they agree with Matt and Suzanne Woods’ comment and also indicated that they would like to build an accessory structure on their property. I do not have an address for them either. Those were the general comments and perhaps Ms. Aanenson wants to address them. Aanenson: Again, this is a 9-acre site so because a PUD requires 5 acres so anybody that would have that large of a piece of property and wanted to do an accessory structure, we could evaluate that in the same circumstance. Again we looked at what the PUD ordinance says and there are City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 13 some trade-offs. We are restricting the potential of other buildings going on the site by one principal building tying it to the other building that they can never be subdivided. Then again, because it is a larger lot of 9 acres, there are not that many unique properties in the City that would have that same capacity. Mayor Ryan: So when it’s over 5 acres you can have as many accessory structures as you like? Aanenson: No. To recap that again, the cap for the accessory dwelling was capped at 1,600 square feet and only two bedrooms and then there was some outdoor storage buildings, those were capped. As to the number of docks there is currently two 0n the site and we said you cannot add any more than two docks. Those two docks have been there for quite a while. Mayor Ryan: Then just to address the concerns, I know that it was part of a packet and I know the applicant has done a lot of work in terms of buckthorn removal, working with Ms. Sinclair and getting a tree assessment. As I know, you did and other members of staff heard from a lot of residents that either are on the lake, look out onto the lake and are concerned how does the build then affect tree loss. Aanenson: I know Mr. Wicka is on the… This plan would just come in for a building permit so we would review that and the City Forester would too. She has walked the site. The other thing I want to mention too is the bridge going across. We’ve asked that they consider fire suppression, too. All those things have been addressed where if it just came in for a straight building permit, they are not required to do fire suppression so those are adds that we’re requesting. I know that Mr. Wicka has worked with the City Forester regarding some significant trees on the site. Again, we would make sure that those be maintained in place as we are looking at the building footprint. What’s been shown today is illustrative. It’s not the final, final plan. The City Forester I’m sure would be happy to walk it again when they get things staked out. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Thank you. Council, do you have any questions? The applicant is on the Zoom call so if there is questions that you want direct towards the applicant feel free to do that. Mr. Wicka, I thank you for joining us tonight. I’m going to go through a roll call again and ask if you have any questions for staff or for the applicant. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I guess at this time I really don’t. The only question, I guess what I don’t understand is this is almost 10 acres. Why wouldn’t they be allowed to build two houses on it if they wanted to? I’m not sure I got that from the presentation. Aanenson: I think that’s where the Planning Commission came down and felt like that it seemed like a reasonable request and the fact that there really wasn’t two different ownerships. It would be one owner with an accessory dwelling so they would be forever linked and that’s part of the PUD Ordinance that you are also approving tonight. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 14 McDonald: Okay. Because I seem to recall a couple of years ago we had the same thing over on Lotus Lake and I can’t remember what the outcome of that was. I know the house never got built but it was going to be a detached garage with a living quarters above it and I thought that we said that was permissible but I could be mistaken. That’s where my question comes from because I had thought we had go through this once before and put some criteria in place for doing this. Aanenson: The city code does allow via a variance to do a separate dwelling unit within a house. We actually have one of those coming forward and that’s a separate process. This is a little bit different because it’s not inside the house. It’s detached from the house and that’s why we went with a PUD. Again, the PUD is structured uniquely to this piece of property. It’s a different path. McDonald: Yes but the property I’m referring to was the same thing. It was detached. The house was down by the lake and the detached garage was going to be up on the shore aways. It would have been a detached, it was going to be a mother-in-law residence and I know it went through a number of things about again putting two units on one lot. I just thought we had gone through and settled all of that. That’s… as to why. I guess if you are saying the PUD would allow it, then that’s fine. I believe that the property owner should be able to build a mother-in-law residence if they wish. Of course at that point everybody wants to be independent so they would want their own place. I can understand all of that but if the PUD allows it, then I guess were going to…same thing. No further questions. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman McDonald. Any questions or comments, Councilwoman Tjornhom? We can’t hear you. Tjornhom: Now you can hear me I bet. Kate, I’m wondering if once these buildings are on the property, say five years goes by, can they come back to re-do the PUD and add more structures to this property if they want to or is this just going to, because of what they are going through now with this PUD, is this binding? Moving on into the future? Aanenson: Anybody can request an ordinance amendment so in five years if someone wanted to apply, that’s a decision that would require a public hearing and the City Council would have to weigh in on that. It would have to go through the same process this one did. It’s technically a rezoning so that would require Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council. Tjornhom: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Councilwoman. Councilwoman Coleman, any questions or comments? Coleman: Just one question. I know one of the emails we received said this would “open a can of worms.” Can you explain why this does not do that? Aanenson: Again, this is a nine-acre piece of property and PUD requires at least five acres so someone else would have to have those same unique attributes. Those are all the decisions that City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 15 go into doing a PUD. The first thing are the PUD findings or the intent statement as the City Attorney always had to look at is that you do some tradeoffs. So by having less density there, we looked at combining a driveway that was really two and then saving a lot of slope and a lot of trees. Those are the attributes of recommending this course of action. Coleman: Great. Thank you. I just wanted that clearly stated for the record. I appreciate that. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Councilwoman. Councilman Campion, any questions? Campion: One question. Ms. Aanenson, you had made a comment that this property cannot be subdivided in the future. Can you just explain what enables that and if its not possible to come and, I don’t know if we would be rewriting the PUD. I can’t believe there would be no mechanism to subdivide the property at any point. Aanenson: As its currently written in the PUD, they can’t subdivide. They would have to come back through the city and they could ask for a rezoning to something else. Campion: Okay. Aanenson: Again, this is low density. There are four zoning options: the RLM, RSF, R-4 or the PUD so they could come back at a later date and ask for that. But that again would require a public process, Planning Commission public hearing and approval by the City Council. Campion: Understood. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you and Ms. Aanenson I appreciate you, I know all of us have asked multiple times because I think especially with the last couple of emails that we received tonight about the can of worms and if this is allowed, then everybody should be allowed to do it. But I think the clarification comes that it’s the size and acreage that that’s why this have been allowed. I appreciate you explaining that or clarifying that for Council especially, but for all the residents. I know this has been a project that Mr. Wicka has been working on for a number of years with staff to try to come up with the least intrusive way to build on this island. I know he greatly respects the bluffs, the trees, the natural environment. It’s his family, his young children, multiple children and wants like I said to be the least intrusive to this land as possible. He’s worked extensively with the Fire Chief to make sure that the safety measures are in place for emergency vehicles. I know that was a concern with the Planning Commission. I think overall we’re used to seeing that untouched island but most of the neighbors that abut him, I think two of the neighbors that are directly abutting his access anyways, wrote letters in support of this development. While there are concerns which are understandable, I think overwhelmingly the support from the neighbors and he’s conscientious and I think just from a piece of his letter that he wrote, “We are planning to build green structures using solar for power, geothermal for heating and cooling, green roofs on parts of the structures, highly efficient building designs,” etc. and he wants to make sure that the bluff areas and shorelines will not be affected in terms of tree City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 16 canopy and coverage. I know that he wants to be a responsible steward of the land so I appreciate staff taking the time to really work through this so there isn’t that impact to not only our natural resources and the lake but the neighbors as well. Thank you for that. With that said, Council if you don’t have any further questions for staff, if there is a motion, I would entertain a motion, please. Please? McDonald: Madam Mayor, I’ll make a motion. Councilman McDonald moved and Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve rezoning the property described in Exhibit B located at 1601 Lake Lucy Road with an approximate area of 9.03 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development- Residential incorporating the attached ordinance with standards, summary ordinance, and adoption of the findings of fact and decision. All voted in favor and the motion passed 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Ms. Aanenson. Next up is another consent agenda item. I had actually pulled this one off and this has to do with a development at the Crossroads of Chanhassen and Ms. Aanenson, will you be doing this one for Christian Brothers Automotive. CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN GATEWAY PUD, MODIFICATION TO PUD-SPECIFIC DESIGN FEATURES, AND AMENDMENT TO CROSSROADS OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,100 SQUARE-FOOT AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SHOP LOCATED AT 8941 CROSSROADS BOULEVARD; AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE 664. Aanenson: This item appeared at the Planning Commission and when it first came in we worked through a few issues there regarding the architecture and the like, but this project located at the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Highway 101, the Kraus Anderson project area, really had some unique things down there. It has a gas station, we anticipated probably some banking drive- thru so when this came forward we kind of thought, hmm. But actually, the architecture and everything as we anticipated turned out really well and as the developer explained their goals and how they like to see them fit in. It’s a 5,100 square-foot automotive facility, very high end. The architecture looks great on the site. The Planning Commission was really intrigued with how they made it fit in and work, orientate it. I just want to compliment Sharmeen Al-Jaff on the planning staff who worked really hard with the applicant to make a superior project. The presentation by the applicant was fantastic. I think they really sold the Planning Commission about what they are trying to do so it’s exciting. It’s a great project down there as how they figured how to sit within the site. They have another Christian Brothers Automotive up in Maple Grove where they are next to a daycare so they thought that was a nice ancillary relationship and also with the Park and Ride that they can use that. Someone can pick them up. But it is not your traditional auto repair. They are kind of doing more of an electronic kind of thing so it’s a nice fit. One of the Planning Commissioners did also ask how they would manage some of the residue, stormwater runoff, parked cars and they had really good responses on all of that. The City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 17 Planning Commission did recommend approval of the auto repair and very excited that they picked that spot. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Ms. Aanenson. I pulled it off not in opposition or concern about it, but obviously it’s a new business in that part of town. It’s right next to the Kwik Trip down there right off of Highway 212. Just because it’s a large building and on first blush when it came to the Planning Commission, I know there were concerns but I wanted to highlight a couple of things that came from the Planning Commission meeting, just because I thought it was important for us to read it into record tonight at the Council Meeting if there were any concerns that it didn’t get its fair share of questioning. I wanted to highlight a couple of things about the business itself. Again, Mr. Wakefield I thought did a really nice job explaining it for Christian Brothers Automotive. Commissioner Reeder had asked about the difference in Chanhassen between a repair business, is this a repair business and not a collision repair business? I think that’s important from a noise perspective and the applicant said that they don’t do anything to the exterior to a vehicle at all. They don’t do any touch-up paint, no window replacement. They are strictly internal and with a modern vehicle as you said Ms. Aanenson it has a lot to do with the electronics and the electronic diagnosis. All the work happens within the bays to the vehicles and there is no body work at all. I thought that was really important. Another concern coming from neighbors in some of the emails that were received is just the overall look of the site and will there be a lot of cars in the lot waiting for repair. The applicant said that the stipulation and the restrictions that they have accepted that require any vehicles that are in the parking lot, especially for overnight, must be operable and so they have to be driven under their own power. They don’t leave cars sitting in that parking lot and the first nine vehicles they will have go in the bays overnight so I though was important that there aren’t going to be cars just left out in the parking lot there. Another question had to do with traffic. Originally, I think there was proposed to be a bank there or that was the original use intent and they commented that it will actually reduce the traffic that would have been generated by 60%-80%. They said the McDonald’s that’s already there and operating, we do less business by volume from a traffic standpoint all day than they do in 30 minutes so it shouldn’t add to any traffic concerns. If you will indulge me a little bit more here, another big concern when you think about an automotive repair business is the noise. I just want to read this verbatim because I thought it was really well articulated. “The building orientation places the bays facing inboard and away from the street. The only people who might hear anything out of us might be the Kwik Trip. We’ve done two acoustic studies in other locales for other municipalities and we know without a shadow of a doubt that by the time the sound reaches our property line and crosses onto somebody elses, our loudest noise which is an air hammer is 74 decibels at the door and is attenuated out somewhere between 40-50 decibels at the street.” I had no idea what that meant so I was glad that he put in a point of reference. He said that his speaking voice is somewhere between 50-55 decibels so I think that was really helpful. I appreciate that. He said they work on about 17 cars a day and that’s it. Last but certainly not least, how does fit in the community or in that neighborhood and what is the business in general? He said that they have been in operation since 1982. They have over 230 stores and they’re looking, like you said Ms. Aanenson, in Maple Grove and other areas and they are near Tender Time Childcare and KinderCare so they are well suited and there’s no problem being next to a City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 18 daycare. The final point, “We are a highly professional company, extremely reputable, incredibly clean, deeply embedded within the communities that we serve and service.” I wanted to bring those out just because I know there were concerns from the neighbors about putting an automotive shop in that space and I just thought a lot of times the Planning Commission notes may not get read other than Council and parties that are looking directly at something. I just wanted to make sure we addressed those at the Council level. Thank you for letting me indulge everyone with that. Aanenson: I appreciate you doing that. I think a couple of things, when they first came in we were concerned about the traffic and this is a group that really knows their business so it was very helpful that they were able to provide that empirical data to help us make a good decision. In addition to that, we know automotive, this type of business is, there’s people looking for those lots. This is why we are amending the PUD. Looking at first if this is going to fit in, but they really knew their business and how it fit in and we know that this is a needed business. They really worked hard and gave us the data that we needed. Just like you say the traffic circulation, that was one of our first concerns. It also does provide their own some noise attenuation. They’ve got Kwik Trip next to them and its kind of a nice partnership there. Yes, we are very excited that they are coming. Mayor Ryan: Well thank you. Council, I’ll go around and ask if you have any questions or comments as it relates to this project. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I have no further questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions. Mayor Ryan: All right. With no questions, is there any motion. Coleman: I’ll make a motion. Mayor Ryan Thank you, Councilwoman Coleman. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 19 Councilwoman Coleman moved and Councilman Campion seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approves the site plan consisting of a 5,100 square-foot automotive repair shop, Planned Unit Development PUD Amendment for Chanhassen Gateway allowing automotive repair shops with standards, and summary ordinance 664 for publication purposes. Planning Case 2020-21 as shown in plans dated October 30, 2020, including the attached Findings of Fact and Decision, subject to conditions. All vote in favor and the motion passed 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Thanks, everyone. Thank you, Ms. Aanenson. I appreciate it. Now we get to the original New Business. APPROVE A CODE AMENDMENT REGULATING THE OUTDOOR STORAGE OF BOATS, TRAILERS, AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. Aanenson: This item kind of trickled down during a work session presented by the City Council. Complaints go either way. Some people want them and some people don’t. I’ve been asked to identify the problem. I’ll just give you a real brief overview and kind of let you ask the questions because obviously there are strong feelings on both sides. Some residents had expressed a desire to store trailers and recreational vehicles in their driveway. The problem is our current ordinance did not permit boat trailers and recreational vehicles be stored currently in the driveways and they are put in the side yards. Looking at allowing one boat trailer or recreational vehicle be stored because right now we don’t limit. We have a lot of vehicles. The rationale was just to see how this ordinance… Again, this is just a draft what we are recommending to you. We surveyed a number of cities. I’m not going to spend a lot of time going through all that empirical data but we surveyed a number of cities. How they enforce them and the number that they would have. Right now, except for the side yard we don’t limit the number in the back. The proposed change would allow one boat trailer or recreational vehicle be stored in the driveway so this would be the difference. You could put a camper or a boat in the driveway. It limits properties to storing a maximum of two. Again, as I stated we don’t have a cap right now. It includes boat trailers and the provision requiring items to be cleaned, well kept, and operable. Right now the only thing we say is operable is kind of RV so you could have an older boat kind of sitting there that you haven’t decided what you are going to do with yet, and then prohibit the storage of extraneous materials. Sometimes someone may have a trailer and they maybe put plywood boards up on it and fill it full of things and store it on the property. This illustrative drawing shows kind of where you could, where you can and cannot store. You can store, in the existing ordinance you can put it anywhere in your backyard. You can’t store it in the front yard or your driveway. You can store in the side yard which is very common. The proposed ordinance will allow you to put something in your driveway but not in the front yard and the side yard. Let’s show this a different way illustratively showing where the current ordinance, side yards and the rear. One of the things we talked about with the Planning Commission too, some people only have a 7-foot side yard, some people have a 10-foot. When you squish them in there and if you’re the neighbor, its not always appreciated when you look out your window and see those. Sometimes City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 20 that can be a problem, too. And then the size of the trailer. Again, we have no limit. This would be the current ordinance. The red is where you can’t park them. The green is where you can, what’s being proposed. Right here would be where you could put something in your front driveway. Some of the discussions the Planning Commission had if you put something in the front driveway and then you take that capacity from using your cars, then your car’s going to go into the street. The Planning Commission did discuss that quite a bit and saying well if that’s a deterrent then maybe that’s a good thing. That maybe you need to put your boat somewhere else if it’s taking up some of the capacity as you get into those maybe the teenage years where you have more drivers or family visiting. This is the proposed ordinance. The red would not be allowed. You can only have one in the front. The other one would have to be on the side. I know there were questions about that, too at the Planning Commission. Again, the proposed ordinance red would be not prohibited. It’s over the property line. The sight distance in the side yard was also an issue, too making sure that you have those back where people can see behind. The proposed ordinance, again, the red is where you can’t and the green would be permitted. The proposed ordinance represents a change to something highly visible and longstanding. Herein, as you found out, is the rub. Because this has been going on for a long time. People have stored things on their property. To date, the way its been handled is on a complaint basis. Every neighborhood has their own tolerance. We also have HOAs that manage it or ask the City to manage it when it’s in the HOA but we, again, generally complaint based. The other thing, we did notice this in the Villager. I know some people felt like we should have done a survey. Typically, we don’t do a survey when we did like the ordinance allowing bees, those sort of things. We haven’t done that. We did try to do a placement ad on the front page of the paper and put them out on our social media platforms to ask for feedback. As you probably recognize, the Council would probably recognize that, some people didn’t feel that was adequate. Again, right before we came to the Council meeting we got about 30 resident comments and they’re split in favor and against. Some of the common ones preferenced for less regulation, that current enforcement is unfair, can’t store in the rear or side yard without damaging your property. People don’t like that. Opposed comments are that it harms aesthetics. People felt that it lowered property values, means more cars being parked in the street, as I said takes up some of that capacity. We did send you additional emails after the packet went out. Trying to stitch all those together. What we’re suggesting here is there is no rush on doing this. There are a lot of different ways you can go. Just take some more time. We can go out and try to get some, there are existing conditions out there that have never been enforced and I think that might be a little bit of angst for some people who are currently and now they have to change how they are doing that. I think that might be something we want to look at, doing a little bit more surveying this summer. Seeing how people are using their property and get a better handle on that. How many HOAs have enforcement. Maybe just taking some more time to gather more information from residents and kind of see if we can address those issues in a different way. Because this is city initiated, there is no deadline for this so we certainly, if you wanted to table this and have it come back on a work session and kind of get better direction of some idea that we may have, we would be happy to do that too. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 21 Mayor Ryan: All right. Thank you Ms. Aanenson. As you mentioned, its an issue that people feel passionately on both sides, if we’re talking sides, but just generally as it relates to this issue. One thing that I do want to make abundantly clear, I did receive a phone call right before I came here and it was a resident who opposed the ordinance change but alluded to the fact that the decision had already been made at Council. I just want to be very clear that no decisions are ever made before we have a Council meeting for number one; and number two, and particularly in this case, we have never even discussed this ordinance as a Council. It got brought up in a Council work session round table and then it moved forward and I thought in the short amount of time it was really well written in terms of doing the legwork and understanding it, but we really never discussed this as a Council. No decisions have been made. No discussion at Council and I still think that there is a lot of uncovering to do, in my personal opinion. But I want to hear from the rest of Council and get their thoughts on it as well. I think we have just barely scratched the surface in resident feedback as well as what all kind of the nuances are as it relates to this ordinance and what this ordinance could and should be that is the right way to go. With that, I will open it up to questions from Council and I will start again with you, Councilman McDonald, with any questions or comments. McDonald: Yeah. I guess I would echo a lot about what you said about being not sure that we’ve gone through this through the detail that we really should because every house in every neighborhood is different. I think it’s a little difficult to try to do a one-size-fits-all without looking at things. I mean based upon all of that, I would actually propose a motion that we table this and give Council a better opportunity to ask more questions and to kind of spread out the discussion a little bit more. I’m in favor of the motion to table. Mayor Ryan: All right. Thank you, Councilman McDonald. I’ll come back after we hear from everybody and if you wanted to make a motion at that time but we will just keep going through with any questions or comments. Councilwoman Tjornhom, any questions or comments? Tjornhom: Thank you. I think I would agree with Councilman McDonald. I don’t think this has had enough time to really be vetted and I think when you have residents that are responding to something this passionately, it deserves, that they deserve, Council’s time and thoughtfulness in making sure that whatever conclusion they come to, it’s something that works for everybody. Because everyone has a driveway and everyone has different ways of using that driveway. I would certainly be in favor of tabling this for now. Mayor Ryan: All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: I agree. I think a lot of people are just getting wind of this now. I’m even up to the Council meeting still getting emails and text messages about this issue. I don’t think it would hurt by any means to get a bit more public comment on this. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Campion? City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 22 Campion: Correct. I am comfortable if this issue gets tabled to allow more discussion; however, I am strongly in support of the proposal. I think that MacKenzie did a great job researching this and while it’s not perfect and there are going to be both sides to a topic like this, I think that this seems like a reasonable plan. It addresses some of the issues or nuances of the current ordinance but at the same time it does allow residents to use their driveway. To use their property. We do live in a city with multiple lakes and public launches and I think that forcing people that might have a two-car garage or just other circumstances where off-site storage of your boat during the summer time maybe is not a reasonable assumption. I am a boat owner myself, so I face some of these challenges. I see how it could be taken advantage of and people could be parking in excess in their driveway, or if they are not maintaining the upkeep and appearance of the boat, then we should be able to deal with those circumstances, but I do feel pretty strongly that the ordinance of no parking of boats in driveway is just unenforceable. I don’t think that the City is staffed adequately to be patrolling this City and making sure that no one is parking boats in their driveway. If you go and you start picking on one neighbor who happened to get reported by his neighbor, that seems unfair in that there are probably a couple hundred others that are doing the same across the city at any point in time over the summer. Those are my thoughts. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman Campion. As far as I’m concerned, as I stated in the beginning, I just think that there is still a lot that we need to uncover and I would like have this brought back to a work session and we can discuss it. And in the meantime figure out a way to continue to gather more feedback from HOAs, from residents, and then just look at kind of holistically, or big picture of what this ordinance means. I think that there are so many variables when it comes to the ordinance, whether it’s seasonable, number of boats, size of boats, RVs, campers, what that means. I think that there is just some real concerns that residents have as to the overall impact to the look and feel and aesthetics of a neighborhood. While one person may have that, the neighbor may not and doesn’t like the look and feel of it. I just think that we really need to do our due diligence in understanding what ordinance we are putting in place, and to Dan’s point, so that if the ordinance is there it has to be something that can be enforced in a reasonable manner. I think that’s kind of what got us into this in the first place. Before I ask Council, I know that there is some interest in tabling this. I know two residents are here to speak to this. I’m guessing that’s what you’re hear for? Even though it’s not a public hearing tonight, that was done at the Planning Commission, I do welcome you to come forward if you would like to say anything. Just state your name and address and if you have a couple of comments, we welcome those. Jackie Williams: 7547 Walnut Curve. I sent an email to all of the City Council. I also sent an email to the Planning Commission for their meeting before this meeting. I hope you all got that and read that. Yes, it went in the paper. Not everybody gets the Chanhassen paper or reads it. It went on Facebook. I’m on Facebook and I was it because I like the City of Chanhassen page. A lot of people aren’t on Facebook, or if they are on Facebook they may not like the Chanhassen City page so they might not see that. I would like to see a mass mailing go out possibly. Just a simple postcard that this is even being considered because I think most property owners I don’t think know that this is even trying to be done. I’m sure there will be many more people so I’m City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 23 glad you’re talking about tabling it because I think there’s many more people that are really concerned about it and many of the Chanhassen residents take pride in their property and don’t want to look at RVs and boats in the neighbor’s driveway. It’s probably more in the summer than in the winter. We have good property values and I don’t want to see those go down. I’m hoping you’re vote no to this change because I think it’s an eyesore in a lot of neighborhoods. Houses have many different sizes and values here in Chanhassen but many of them are of high value, and I just can’t see those neighborhoods with RVs sitting in the driveways and boats and stuff all the time. I just think it’s an eyesore and it just doesn’t look good. I’m hoping that you can look into this more and vote no. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Appreciate it. We don’t have anyone else here to speak but thank you for stepping forward and making those comments to add to the record as well. With that, there is a proposed motion on the screen. If there is an alternative motion, I know Councilman McDonald you had mentioned tabling it. You could make a recommendation of… I know that we don’t have to put a time limit on it because of it was brought forward by us and then if you could give direction to staff if it’s something that you would like to have brought back to a work session for further discussion. I directed that at you Councilman McDonald because you had first said that something you were interested in, but I would stand for a motion from anybody and any motion. McDonald: I’ll make the motion that the Chanhassen City Council tables the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20, Zoning of the City Code concerning outdoor storage of boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles. I guess part of my suggestion also would be that maybe in January we make this one of our priorities for the city staff to look at so they can bring it back to Council within a timely manner within about the second or third quarter at the latest. That could be determined at the goal-setting meeting. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you. Before the additional comments, we do have a valid motion on the table. Is there a second? Coleman: I second the motion. Councilman McDonald moved and Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the Chanhassen City Council tables the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20, Zoning of the City Code concerning outdoor storage of boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles. All voted in favor and the motion carried 5-0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 5-0. That item will be tabled and will come back. We’ll talk about it early in January when we talk goal strategies and then if it could be brought back to a work session for discussion and at that time maybe come up with a plan for communication efforts to HOAs rather than gathering feedback, etc. We will let you guys work on that plan. I appreciate it. Thank you for coming tonight. I appreciate it. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 24 RESOLUTION 2020-XX: ADOPT FINAL LEVY & 2020 BUDGET AND 2021-2025 CIP Johnston: Madam Mayor, I think Kelly Strey is on the line to do the presentation for that. Kelly Strey: Good evening, Councilmembers. Right before this my screen froze up so I just reloaded and I’m hoping its all going to keep going here. I’m going to share my screen. Just a moment. Aanenson: I also have it up Kelly if you can’t get it. Strey: Okay. It just froze again. Aanenson: I’ve got it up here in the Council chambers so if you want to just give me the advance sign then I would be happy to click along. Strey: Sure. Okay. Mayor Ryan: We can’t see it yet. Strey: Unfortunately, the whole thing is frozen on my here but I have a printed copy so I’ll go off of that. Kate, if you want to go to the second slide. It’s the budget calendar. Just quickly, going over tonight we are at our final meeting. We’ve had lots of meetings all year long about the budget and we are here tonight for the final adoption of the tax levy, the budget, and the fee schedule. The fee schedule is your next item right after the budget. That is a separate item but the budget was developed with those fees in mind so if you are adopting the budget it is factoring in those fees. If you want to click on to the next screen that says Max Levy at 2.77. In September, the Council adopted a preliminary levy that was a 2.77% increase in the total levy over last year. That included elimination of the library debt service referendum levy because we were at the end of the library bonds. Those were paid off just recently. Those funds were redirected towards capital. Then there was an increase in the General Fund. During October and November staff continued to work on the budget and revised the budget projections to reduce the proposed property levy by $32,000 which brought the increase down to a 2.5% increase. We also proposed an option to use that $32,000 to move forward on the addition of an IT position that was planned for the 2022 budget process. With this $32,000, that position could move forward mid year and Council indicated some support for that so tonight we have prepared the resolution for approval at the 2.77%. Without the IT position it would a reduction in this levy by $32,000. We also had talked about at the previous meeting that we would be proposing using some fund balance for some one-time expenditures, and that is a total of $90,000. Your fund balance is sufficient to do that and stay well above your targeted 50% of next year’s budgeted expenditures. That is something that would fit within the usual expectations of fund balance a way to fund those one- time expenditures. I guess that is it for that slide. If you could move forward to the General Fund expenditures. This is just a quick summary of how that is divided among the departments with the changes in that so total expenditures would be increasing 2.6% and that’s in the General City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 25 Fund. On to the next slide. This is another summary of the General Fund revenues just to show you where your revenues come and as you can see, in the General Fund the majority of the revenues do come from property taxes. We are expecting some decreases in charges for services intergovernmental revenue next year that also affects where the property tax levy needs to be. Onto the next slide that says what factors change the budget for 2021. This levy at 2.77% is a $325,000 levy increase with that IT position mid-year addition as I noted. The use of fund balance would be for a compensation study and the organizational study and emergency contingency of $50,000. That emergency contingency really is if we don’t have any more funding, the CARES funding has ended but we still anticipate that we will have some paid sick leave. As a result, there may be some other things that come up that are COVID pandemic- related, so we just put in a $50,000 contingency. That would not be spent if those things do not occur or if some funding does come up from the feds or the state on that. It is just to kind of set aside I the fund balance that we are thinking there might be a possibility of having some needs there. On to the next slide. The special revenue funds budget is the same as what was presented earlier in the budget process. These are smaller funds and these funds have revenues that are specific to expenditures for special purposes. On to the next slide is the enterprise fund operating budget. On this one the stormwater management budget did change as a result of discussions about adding increased annual expenditures for pond maintenance going forward and that increased the fee for that stormwater management. That is the final slide that I have. I can stand for any questions. Mayor Ryan: Thank you for the presentation. I know as you pointed out at the beginning of your presentation and I think it’s the very first slide, that this isn’t our first time discussing the budget. That started back in February and we have talked about it repeatedly. I think that’s always important to note for those that may tune in at the last meeting for what the final budget and levy is going to be and they think gosh, they moved through this pretty quickly. That’s why I think that first slide is so important to really highlight how many times we as a Council, staff discuss all aspects of our budget before we make any decisions. Quite frankly, even up until the last meeting there were some movement and discussion and this time as it relates to the IT position. Thank you for the presentation again tonight. I know its information that we’re all familiar with. With that, I will move it to Council for any questions as it relates to the presentation. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I have no questions as it relates to the presentation. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: I also have no questions. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: No questions, thank you. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 26 Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions for me either. Mayor Ryan: All right. Thank you. I don’t have any questions. I did want to highlight something that I think is important just again as we are moving through the process and budgeting. Transparency is always something that’s really important. We get questions on how if there are overages and fund balances are used and I just want to share how much I appreciate that you bring forward potential ways to spend these fund balances and how they are utilized is really important from a planning perspective but also from a transparency perspective. I’m glad that that slide has been added to this presentation. Thank you for that. Again, I just want to, I know the proposed motion has to do with the 2.77% increase and I know as a Council we asked staff to work really hard to get down to that 2.5%, but in the last couple of months I think what we have realized and come to realize is the importance of that IT position and by going back up to the preliminary levy at 2.77%. the importance of getting that IT position in mid-year and potentially sooner if we can is going to be something that is really important to how we operate as a City going forward. I think we realize how dependent we are on having effective, proficient, efficient technology and we need those folks to help support that. I’m glad that is under consideration to add back in and keep the levy at the 2.77%. One other comment that I would like to make is that I just wanted to note and acknowledge and share my appreciation. When we talked about the CIP, I guess it was a month or two ago, we looked out, I know it’s a five-year planning document, but we got into a lot of discussions around what that planning document meant and I just want to acknowledge that I’m glad that we kept those numbers in there, but that we changed that line item to unfunded to highlight that there is a need but at this point is unfunded and I think that’s really again important to recognize as a planning document some of the needs that are out there but yet we don’t have funding for to keep on our radar. I just want to acknowledge that and say thank you for changing a longstanding document. We’ve never done that before so I just want to say thank you for making that small change to acknowledge the concerns that we as Council have that while we know we need to plan, there’s no funds associated with it at this point. With that, I don’t have any questions and those are really my comments. In addition to the ongoing discussions we’ve had at Council I just want to acknowledge and thank how hard City staff and departments had worked this year and every year, but in particular this year. I know we as Council very demanding in terms of keeping this levy as low as possible knowing the impact that it’s going to have on residents in a challenging year. We kept going back and asking if you could keep cutting and getting it as low as possible and I just want to appreciate your, if Ms. Johnston you could pass along to the entire department heads. I know there’s a few here tonight but just for your hard work trimming down your budget as much as possible so thank you for that. Johnston: Thank you, Madam Mayor. The rest of them are listening I’m pretty sure. Mayor Ryan: With that, Council, are there any further questions or is there a motion as it relates to the adoption of the final levy and 2021 budget and 2021-2025 CIP? City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 27 McDonald: Yes, Madam Mayor. I’ll make a motion. I would like to preference the motion with the fact that I was a huge proponent of the 2.5% and really pushed for that but I think as you began to point out, one of the things that the pandemic has shown us is the importance of the IT positions. I think going forward we are going to living under this cloud of the pandemic at least through most of next year. I think it’s critical. McDonald moved, Campion seconded that the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020- 67 establishing the 2021 final levy of $12,066,700 and approve total general fund budget of $12,208, 200, the enterprise funds operating budget of $6,288,500 and the special revenue funds operating budget of $228,900 and debt service in accordance with existing bond requirements. It also approve the CIP for the 2021-2025 with a 2021 budget total of $38,198,010 and the five-year total amount of the CIP is $109,888,425. All voted in favor and the motion carried 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Councilman McDonald, when you were reading that I going to play a tape to my kids and say remember when you didn’t want to practice reading your numbers out loud? (laughter) Well done. Thank you for that. AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 4, FEES. Strey: I don’t have a PowerPoint for this one. All of the information is in your background that lists the fees that are changing. They are related to zoning permits, technology fee, the surface water management development fees, and sewer and water fees, GIS fees. I believe that is the majority of them. There is a lot of background attached to this item. You also have the utility rate study that Ehler’s performed for us that supported the utility rates as proposed. With that, I stand for questions. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Council, any questions? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: No questions at this time. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: No, no questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: No questions, thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No questions. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 28 Mayor Ryan: I don’t have any questions either and these were fees that have been discussed at length so I don’t have any questions as it relates to this as it ties to the overall budget discussion as we worked through it over the last few months. With that, is there a motion from any Councilmember? Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, McDonald seconded that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 4 of the Chanhassen City Code revising the fees for 2021. All voted in favor and the motion carried 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, everyone for that. Next we have Council Presentations. I will go around and ask if there’s any Council presentations. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I have nothing tonight except this could be my last City Council meeting. I just want to say thank you to everybody I served with. I am extremely proud of what this Council has accomplished this year. We faced some big challenges, number one of which was definitely trying to get a new city manager. I think I am very surprised that we have thought along the same lines, same questions, same concerns, and I think that we have done is we have narrowed the field down to any one of which would be a very good city manager. For that, thank you Councilmembers. It was a fairly easy process I guess when we’re thinking along the same lines. Thanks very much. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman McDonald. Councilman Tjornhom? Tjornhom: I’m going to have to I guess echo what Councilman McDonald said. This is my last Council meeting. It’s been almost 20 years of every other Monday. My daughter asked what do I get for that? I said, a thank you but what I really get is just the pleasure to serve this community. All the times of door knocking and meeting residents and conversations on the phone and representing them and trying to be their voice. I’m so proud of this community and what they’ve made it and what the future is for it. It’s so bright. I want to thank City staff for always being so supportive and my fellow Councilmembers past and present. Thank you so much for supporting and helping me all those times when decisions were tough. Once again, thank you so much, everybody, for allowing me to be a City Council member from Chanhassen. I’m very proud of this town and everybody that this in it, so thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Coleman? Coleman: Yes, thank you Mayor Ryan. I would like to say a few words if that’s all right? Mayor Ryan: Of course. Coleman: I just wanted to say thank you so much to everybody and this will also very likely be my last Council meeting unless unforeseen circumstances happen and we are called in again this City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 29 month. When I was sworn to the Council I discussed how incredibly inspired and humbled I was to be sitting here. Inspired by the people of Chanhassen and humbled by the faith they entrusted in me. I leave today with the same sentiment adding one more gratitude. Grateful to the people of Chanhassen for electing me to the Council, for putting me on the ballot in August and for electing me to the State Senate in November. I’m grateful to all of the constituents who called, wrote, came to Council, or shared their thoughts with me at monthly open office hours, reminding me who and what I am fighting for every day. Grateful to City staff for very patiently walking me through my first elected position and a variety of very complex issues. Grateful to my Mayor and fellow Councilmembers for their wisdom and insight, and for the unexpected friends I have made along the way. Grateful to the mentors who I would have never expected helping me to become a better leader through each monumental decision, and grateful to the beautiful city for granting me grace when I sought to find my footing as a first-time mother. While my time here is ending due to a call to serve at the legislature, I am still deeply invested in the future of this city and pray that the next Council appoint my replacement with someone who has institutional knowledge, critical experience in city governments, and the strength to guide Chanhassen through uncertain times. I ran for Council hoping to make Chanhassen and even better place to live, work and raise a family despite outside circumstances hurting billions around the globe, I sincerely hope that my efforts in these endeavors have touched the lives of our neighbors and residents of the City. I am inspired by the people of Chanhassen, I am humbled by their support, and I am grateful for their faith in me and I am forever your servant. Thank you, all. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilwoman Coleman. Campion: This is not my last Council meeting. I can say that. It has been a pleasure serving with all of you. Julie and Bethany, best of luck in your future endeavors. Jerry, we’ll see if we can find a way to keep working together. That’s it for me. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman Campion. Before I share some final thoughts for the year before we adjourn, I have one quick shout-out thank you. This past weekend was our Toys for Tots and I want to extend appreciate to Assistant Chief Nutter for his leadership on this endeavor for Toys for Tots along with all of the residents, staff members that contributed help. Ms. Johnston, I know you helped load the trucks. I appreciate your time and effort on a really important donation and community event so I really appreciate everybody’s time and effort. Another kind of special shout out to some Longacres residents who contributed $385 toys. I really appreciate their efforts in supporting this. In total, we were able to donate 1,277 toys to the Toys for Tots organization and drive. Thank you, everybody for your hard work. As I stated in a post this weekend, it’s amazing to see community continue to look out for community. If there was ever a time of need it was certainly this year and for residents and staff, the Fire Department, all to come together again for this initiative and this drive is so meaningful and we are so appreciative of all the hard work and effort on this. Again, special thanks to Assistant Chief Nutter. Again, I just want to share some final thoughts before we adjourn for the year. Like I said, I just want to say a few things. It is without question that 2020 has been a challenging year. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 30 We have navigated an ongoing and ever-evolving pandemic. We have had significant changes with long-serving staff retiring. We as a Council have made weighty decisions about road projects and CARES Act funding spending, ordinance changes to help our restaurants survive, switching to remote Zoom meetings so that we can continue conducting the business of the city. We are deeply engaged in hiring a new city manager. We have spent hours and many meetings addressing budget concerns or cliffs, as they affectionately became known with the intent of setting up the City for long-term financial stability. I could go on with this list as there has been a lot of hard work that we have done over this past year but the point being that I want to say thank you to both the remarkable colleagues and city council members, as well as city staff for your hard work and diligence throughout the year. We have worked together, asked many questions of each other, and moved forward together with our focus always being on how can we best serve our residents. As mentioned in the previous comments, obviously the city council is going to look a little bit different in 2021 with new council members joining us but we are not quite sure what that final council makeup is going to look like. I also want to extend my thanks and gratitude to Councilwoman Tjornhom who served on City Council from 2005 to 2020, so 15 years. Councilman McDonald from 2007 to 2020 and that is 13 years. I think you both know we will have formal ceremony once restrictions are lifted but I just want to extend my thanks and appreciate on behalf of Council and residents for your commitment to serve Chanhassen. Councilwoman Coleman, while it was only two short years on City Council you certainly had a great impact and we are happy to know that you are going to continue to represent Chanhassen in St. Paul as one of Chanhassen’s State Senators so we wish you the best of luck. It was a big year but as I stated before in many ways I believe that we as a Council and the City have become stronger. To staff, my fellow Council members, thank you for a year that we will never forget and to everybody, all residents, I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a joyous holiday season. I wish you all well. Stay healthy and I look forward to reconnecting and, again, beginning the business of Chanhassen in 2021. Thank you, everybody. Anything on Administrative Presentations? Johnston: Madam Mayor, I wanted to highlight two things. Number one, we have added a Fire Department Update on the last one because we don’t have public safety representation so there are Fire Department stats on our Correspondence Discussion. Just to draw people’s attention to that since that’s a new thing. The second thing is just to add my thanks to the Council for all of your patience with me for the last six months. I look forward to working with you in the upcoming year as well. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: You’ve been a great addition so thank you. Any questions Council on the Correspondence Discussion? Be that I don’t hear any murmurs I am going to turn it over to Councilwoman Tjornhom if she would like to make a motion to adjourn for her last meeting. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The council meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. City Council Meeting – December 14, 2020 31 Submitted by Heather Johnston Interim City Manager Prepared by Kim Meuwissen CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated December 1, 2020 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.3. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated December 1, 2020.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated December 1, 2020 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 1, 2020 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steven Weick, Mark Randall, Doug Reeder, Laura Skistad, Eric Noyes, Michael McGonagill, and Mark Von Oven MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; Robert Generous, Senior Planner; Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer; and Matt Kerr, IT Support Specialist PUBLIC PRESENT: Bala Chintaginjala 8982 Southwest Village Loop Roger Frerichs 6648 Lake Lucy Drive Ken Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Duke Zurek 9451 Foxford Road John Wicka 2547 Bridle Creek Trail Weick: Before we begin I would like to just call a quick roll call to make sure we do have a quorum. When I announce your name, just say here for the commissioners on the Zoom call. Commissioner Randall? Randall: Here. Weick: Good. Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: Here. Weick: Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Here. Weick: Commissioner Skistad? Skistad: Here. Weick: Yes, thank you. Commissioner Noyes? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 2 Noyes: Here. Weick: And Commissioner Von Oven? Von Oven: Here. Weick: So we have a full house, seven commissioners tonight, and a quorum. Thank you for that. Just quickly reviewing the guidelines for this evening’s meeting. This is a Zoom meeting. Please be patient with us as we work through that and make sure that everyone is heard that wants to be heard. Also, for the commission members please don’t hold side chats or text messages discussions. We just need to make sure that all of our discussions are public and for the public record. Again, there are three items on tonight’s agenda. The items are presented as follows: Staff will present the item. We will then have a moment for clarifying questions from the Planning Commission. I did want to just take a moment to clarify the process. I would ask that the Commission members consider the type of discussion we have following the staff presentation and limit that conversation to clarifying questions only. By that I mean, I actually grabbed an example that I had in our previous meeting from the transcript where I asked for clarification about the number of recreational vehicles that were allowed on the property, which was great and I got the answer to that and then I went on to sort of give an opinion about that, about what I thought about the number and what I thought that would do to the amendment. That’s really not the appropriate time to have that type of debate or opinion. We really just want to ask clarifying questions of staff. The reason for this is twofold. First and foremost, it’s our responsibility to allow staff, the applicant, and all of the public participants to be heard through an unbiased ear. We’ve all done a lot of research, we’ve looked at these items in a lot of detail and preparation, and the time for us to discuss is really after we’ve heard from all of the parties that are present tonight. Second, it will help expedite the process ultimately by limiting repeated discussion that might be had throughout the evening. So you’re not getting graded, you’re not getting corrected, and you certainly won’t get interrupted, but just keep that in mind as we work through the process. We want an opportunity to ask each group questions and then at the end bring all of that information together and then have our discussion about the item. After staff’s presentation and clarifying questions, the applicant can make a presentation and we can ask clarifying questions of the applicant as well, I will then open the public hearing. It is a little bit different in today’s world. We have received emails, those will be summarized for the record and noted for the record. Anyone here in person who would like to make a comment about an item may come forward and be heard. We are practicing social distancing within the chambers and we are taking telephone calls so if you are listening the phone number will appear on the screen and you may call in and be heard for the record as well. Once we’ve heard from everybody we will close the public hearing and then the Planning Commission can discuss, clarify things with staff and then work on a motion and a vote. Thank you for hearing me out on that. With that, I will present our first item. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 3 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHANHASSEN GATEWAY PUD, MODIFICATION TO PUD-SPECIFIC DESIGN FEATURES, AND AMENDMENT TO CROSSROADS OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,100 SQUARE-FOOT AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SHOP LOCATED AT 8941 CROSSROADS BOULEVARD. Weick: I will give it to Sharmeen. Al-Jaff: Thank you Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. The application before you is for a site plan to allow an automotive repair shop within the Crossroads Development. The site is located southwest of Crossroads Boulevard. It has an area of .79 acres and is zoned Planned Unit Development. Just a brief background on this. The 2030 Land Use Plan guided the site mixed-use. The area surrounding 212/101 intersection has been guided mixed use. These are the types of designations for uses that will meet the daily needs of the surrounding area. They also will accommodate high-density residential developments. In 2005 the City approved a concept plan for this area overall location and basically the area located north of Highway 212 was guided residential. The southern portions was a combination of commercial as well as office spaces. Again with the intent that these are neighborhood types of commercial uses that will meet the daily needs within this vicinity. We began working with Christian Bros. approximately six or seven months ago. This is an auto repair facility. Auto repair shops are not a permitted use within the Crossroads Development. As part of the work that we asked of them we needed a complete design that they submitted. The request is for a 5,100 square-foot building. Because this is a Planned Unit Development the overall site coverage is calculated as not to exceed 70%. In this case the total hard surface coverage within this entire development is 43.8%. The architecture of the building and design is attractive. All four elevations of the proposed building have received equal attention. Materials used on the building are of high quality. It is proposed to include brick, block, EFIS, as well as metal. The garage doors (there will be nine of them) are proposed to be made of glass and metal. They are fully screened. The overall design of the building is compatible and harmonious with existing buildings as well as future proposed buildings. This is accomplished through using compatible materials, complementary design elements including parapet walls, pronounced entryway, use of canopies over the windows, awnings over the windows, and glass windows throughout this development. Parking for this building is buffered from views through evergreens and landscaping. The total required parking for this development (there is a shared parking agreement for all of the buildings) and the total should be 247 and this entire development is proposing 278 parking spaces. Signage is proposed to include two wall-mounted signs facing northwest and southeast. Signage is in compliance with the ordinance. They do need to apply for a building permit but these are individual letters, backlit. There is one monument sign proposed along the northwest corner of the site and it may not exceed 24 square feet. Trails and sidewalks are intended to allow for connection between the subject site and the surrounding area and it will separate pedestrian from vehicular traffic. The landscaping plan is in compliance with ordinance. The shrubs along the east side of the site will fully screen the parking lot as well as the garage doors on this side. The applicant is proposing to Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 4 have a bench at the entrance in the southeast corner of the building. Lighting plan is in compliance with ordinance. What you see along the right side of the screen is existing light fixtures. What the applicant is proposing is very compatible with this development. This development was permitted a maximum number of 71,500 square feet of total building area. With this building the total number is going add up to 67,271 square feet. As I mentioned earlier, the current standards for the planned unit development do not list auto repair shops as a permitted use. Staff has prepared ordinances that regulate the automotive repair shop. The site plan cannot be approved without approval of this planned unit development amendment. We are recommending approval of the application with conditions. I’ll be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thank you, Sharmeen. Very thorough as was the staff report. At this time I would open it up for commission questions. You can go ahead and just speak up if you have them. McGonagill: Sharmeen, the question I have go back to the site plan. Walk me through, I have two areas of curiosity. One is how the effluent will be handled inside the bays. What are they doing to wash down the bays, clean up, because there is oil and stuff leaking every day? How will that be handled inside the facility itself environmentally? Does it go to our stormwater? Does it go to sewage? Where is it going? The second one is out in the parking lot, the slope of the parking lot. Which way does it go? For example, if someone brings in a car and its leaking oil as they do and they are bringing it there for maintenance in rain, snow, whatever, which way will it go? Will it go to the stormwater pond that you have there? I’m just curious about that. To keep the contamination as I would call it on that site? Aanenson: Sharmeen, do you want to let the applicant answer that question? If that’s all right, Commissioner McGonagill? Al-Jaff: Sure. McGonagill: Sure, that’s fine. Or we can wait until the applicant presents. Aanenson: I think they are probably more technically… McGonagill: We can do that. What about the overall site grade? Do you know that? Henricksen: Sharmeen, I can butt in here if you guys can hear me. This is Erik Henricksen. I’m with the Engineering Department. I’m the Project Engineer. I did review of these plans. To kind of go back to your previous question, if I recall in the plans, and I would leave this up to Kimley- Horn too, but I believe they have a coalescing oil water separator. It’s a system that is pretreatment prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. I believe I did see that on the site plan. As far as slopes or grades it is relatively a flat lot. When the PUD was built out as mass graded, this lot was a part of that mass grading so it is relatively flat. As far as the parking lot itself, it does grade and drainage does go to the storm that’s going to be collected there so it Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 5 would be routed to catch basins in the parking lot. As far as the issue when cars are leaking in a repair area there is really no pretreatment on the storm that it goes directly to but the main focus again is how you deal with the pits and the drainage inside, which again is that pretreatment. It did appear adequate from our review. Again, I think Kimley-Horn knows more about the ins and outs of the, or the minutiae of that part. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s what I was expecting was some sort of a water coalescer. Usually that’s what you will see. Thanks. Wakefield: This is Jonathan Wakefield. I’m the property procurement director for Christian Bros. Automotive. I’m more than happy to answer the first part of the question regarding how we handle the internal cleanliness of the shop. We are not a wash-down shop at all. Modern EPA standards wouldn’t allow that and we’ve been compliant since we started operating in 1982. The way that we operate we have a Zamboni-style machine. It looks like something you would see on a small-scale hockey rink. It is a daily clean and scrub of the particulate matter that drops from the cars. That includes snow melt, so on and so forth. There are trench drains within the shop to take snow melt, rain, and so forth. That’s carried to the 750 gallon sand and oil separator that the Engineering folks alluded to earlier. I can go into a deep dive of our environmental compliance but we literally have a three-level containment system that more than exceeds state and federal containment requirements. Again, if you want me to go deeper into detail I certainly can, but we are as above and beyond as can possibly be imagined. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I have. Weick: Thank you. Great. Other questions from the commission or clarifying points? Von Oven: This is Commissioner Von Oven. On the staff report pages 13 and 14 is where you’ve got the PUD amendment and there you indicated staff had some concerns. In the bullet points below that, two bullet points I wanted to call out and just understand if they are somehow related or if they are not at all related. Bullet 2: All repair, assembly, disassembly… shall occur within a closed building. The second to the last bullet point is all service garage doors shall be screened. Is a garage door with a screen on it considered a closed building? Al-Jaff: No. The screening of the garage door is through landscape purposes. Von Oven: So we’re not talking about screens that allow noise through. We are talking about like blackout? Al-Jaff: No. Visual screen. Weick: Like the trees. Al-Jaff: So the trees along this… Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 6 Von Oven: Thank you. No further questions. Al-Jaff: Thank you. Aanenson: If I may, Chairman, I think that was one of the things that we contemplated when we looked at the orientation of the building for noise. This is adjacent to kind of the frontage road adjacent to 212 and so looking at that orientation the bays internally, but then that screening, the landscaping screening provides an additional visual impact and the noise attenuation. So that’s, it was kind of a twofold thing. We’ve had other auto repairs that there was conditions put on that the doors had to down the whole time. That is really onerous. For one, staff to try and enforce, and then seasonal times of the year that there may be some ambient noise. We have confidence that the way this operation is going to go that it would fit in. Again, we know there’s a demand fr this type of service in the community, and this seems like a good site. Kind of a transition when you are behind the existing gas station with that Kwik Trip and working on that orientation. Weick: Thanks, Kate. Reeder: I’m Mr. Reeder. Does what we’re doing here is a repair business and not a collision repair business? Does our ordinance distinguish between those? Al-Jaff: Yes, it does. What you have here is basically the equivalent of changing tires, oil. It’s not a body shop. It is actually engines and the running of… Reeder: So you would not expect to have a car that’s missing a front end or a … or whatever sitting in this parking lot? Al-Jaff: Well it depends on what type of damage has… Aanenson: Let’s let the applicant answer that. Wakefield: Again, this is Jonathan Wakefield. We don’t do anything to the exterior of a vehicle at all whatsoever. We don’t even do touch-up paint to a bumper. No window replacement. None of that. We are strictly internal and with a modern vehicle, a very high percentage of the work that we do is electronic and electronic diagnostic. Most vehicles have 32 on-board computers and/or sensors and that’s the vast majority of what you fix anymore. The mechanical aspect is still very important but our technicians are really accomplished at working with both a wrench and a laptop. So, all the work happens within the bays and happens to vehicles that, they are not there to have any kind of body work at all whatsoever, they’re just there to be repaired and put back on the road. Does that answer your question? Reeder: It does for you. My question for staff is whether or not the subsequent owner of this building would be restricted to that kind of repair? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 7 Al-Jaff: Yes, they would be. Reeder: How? Al-Jaff: The city code defines auto repair shops and differentiates it from body shops. What the applicant is requesting is an auto repair shop, not a body shop. Reeder: So if somebody wanted to put a body shop in this building, they would have to go through an amendment to the PUD? Al-Jaff: That is correct. Reeder: In this current proposal are there any regulations on how many cars they can have sitting in their lot waiting for repair? Al-Jaff: No, there isn’t. There’s a limit on the number of parking spaces, there’s a limit on the square footage and how many bays there are so I’m assuming that if they reach capacity as far as vehicles that need to be fixed, they just will let their clients know that their appointment would have to wait to a later date or time. Wakefield: If I may I can elaborate on that as well. So there’s also is a stipulation in the restrictions that we have accepted with staff and those restrictions require that any vehicles that are in our parking lot, especially for overnight, must be operable. In other words, they can drive under their own power. If they can’t, they are in the bays overnight. They also have to be licensed. That keeps derelict vehicles from staying for extended periods of time. We don’t want that. A, it’s a bad look. This is a high-end neighborhood. We want to look like our neighbors and be attractive to them. That’s Item 1 and the other, somewhat self-serving here, when the cars leave, that’s usually when we get paid. So there is no incentive for a vehicle to stay long term, overnight occasionally as maybe somebody has to work late and they can’t pick up their vehicle until the next morning and so it forces a courtesy. The first nine vehicles we have go in the bays overnight, and if there happen to be some stragglers, we’ll put them in a lighted part of the parking lot and they will be picked up or worked on the next day. Aanenson: Chairman, if I may? Weick: Yes. Aanenson: That’s condition number 9 of the PUD and that’s what regulates it and that’s what Ms. Al-Jaff was talking about. We do differentiate it in the code but it is further spelled out in the PUD ordinance what was specific to this zoning district. Weick: Thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 8 Reeder: Mr. Chairman, I’m not sure if I heard all of that but everything he says sounds super to me. Is that our requirement or the decision of the company that’s coming into this building at this time? Aanenson: It’s our requirement in the PUD. It says no vehicles that are inoperable can be parked there and that also they have to be licensed. That’s pretty much universal throughout the zoning district in the city. All other places that would do repairs. Reeder: Super. Weick: Great questions. Do you have more, Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: I think I’m good. I’m just looking for the trash receptacle. I assume it’s on the end of the building, is that correct? Al-Jaff: That is correct. It is along the north, right here. Weick: Which is towards Kwik Trip I think, right? Reeder: Super. Thank you. Al-Jaff: Northeast. Weick: Great. Other commissioners with questions? Hearing none, I would ask the applicant to rejoin us and if there is something to add. I know we’ve heard from you a couple of times already and we certainly appreciate that. That is very helpful. But we’d give you an opportunity to speak about the project and the neighborhood if you would like. Wakefield: Absolutely. So again, my name is Jonathan Wakefield. I’m the Property Procurement Director for Christian Bros. Automotive. I also have representation from Kimley-Horn. Christian was kind enough to give up an evening to back me up if you ask anything too terribly technical. Our Chief Development Officer is also on the call so you’ve got a Director and a CDO. That hasn’t happened before and hopefully that speaks to how important this project is to us and how taking root in your community is something that we dearly want to have happen. Also, a representative from the current owner of the property is here. We are in the process of buying it, developing it, and it is our goal to bring it to fruition. In looking at the history of this site, the lot that we are occupying was original designed for a bank. There are some things about Christian Bros. Automotive that I want to get into; some advantages that may not be too apparent. One of them is that our traffic count is extraordinarily low. As compared to a bank, we will reduce the traffic that it would have generated by 60-80%. So, at worst 60%. At best, 80%. The McDonald’s that’s already there and operating, we do less business by volume from a traffic standpoint all day than they do in 30 minutes. It’s stunning. There’s a value add in having a very low traffic generator. That’s really speaking to the transactional side of Christian Bros. coming in Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 9 and becoming part of this development. From a noise standpoint, that wasn’t brought up here in this particular forum, but it was brought up by staff. It was a detracting letter that was sent in an email. Somebody gave their voice and had a concern I wanted to address that as well. As staff alluded to our building orientation places the bays facing inboard and away from the street. The only people who might hear anything out of us might be the Kwik Trip, at worst. We’ve done two acoustic studies in other locales for other municipalities and we know, without any shadow of a doubt, that by the time the sound reaches our property line and crosses into somebody else, our loudest noise, which is the air hammer which takes the nuts off of a tire, is 74 decibels at the door and is attenuated out to somewhere between 40 and 50 decibels at the street. For reference, my speaking voice, I’m told, is somewhere between 50 and 55 decibels. I can talk all day as my staff will tell you, but we’re not running an air hammer all day. We work on about 17 cars a day, and that’s it. We are a true repair shop. We are not a tire and lube shop. That’s not our bit. We don’t need 200 cars a day to come through to have a viable business. That’s not what we’re there for. We see some real advantages. There was a line in the staff report that I really enjoyed and it was talking about neighborhood commercial uses: “Those uses that meet the daily needs of the residents.” That’s exactly what we do. A gas station does that. Having a childcare facility there does that. Across the street, although not part of this development necessarily, the Park and Ride does that. McDonald’s does that. Businesses that may or may not be liked in what they do but have a strong and positive impact on the community in the way that they serve it. Christian Bros. Automotive certainly does that. There were some environmental questions. I think I answered those. Lighting has been talked about. Again, that’s the transactional part of our presentation but I also want to move into the relational aspect of Christian Bros. and who we are and why we do what we do. We’ve been in operation since 1982. We have over 230 stores across the nation approaching 30 states. We may have 30 states. I’ve actually lost count in the 10 years I’ve been with the company. This is not our first rodeo by any stretch of the imagination and it’s not our first store in this particular area or your state. We are also in places you may have heard of: Maple Grove where incidentally we are part of, we are actually in their parking lot, for Parnassus Preparatory Charter School, so we play very well with others, even educational facilities like Primrose who is directly adjacent to us. Also in the Maple Grove facility, there is a Tender Time childcare facility as well and our Lakeville location we are one lot over from a KinderCare and actually we are directly adjacent to a KinderCare in Clive, Iowa. We’ve got another location coming up in Inver Grove. Two more in development: one in Woodbury and one in Savage. Actually a couple more that are too early to talk about. I say all that to say this: We are a highly professional company. Extremely reputable. Incredibly clean. I would challenge anyone and we offered this to staff as well, at least I told Christian to offer it to staff. Feel free to drive and look at any of our other facilities, the way they are operated, way we handle cars, the way we treat our customers, the shuttle vehicles that we have and then we take them to work and back, which helps reduce the car count. We are excited about the Park and Ride, that somebody could conceivably drop their vehicle off and before they hop on that mass transit vehicle, drop it off with us. We will fix your care while you are at work and come pick you up at the parking lot and take care of you. That’s a service that very few can offer. Again, I can’t stress enough how deeply embedded we are in the communities that we serve and service. We don’t look at our customers as customers or clients. They are friends. I know that sounds a little bit salesy but we Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 10 are a faith-based company and we are very proud of that and we feel that if we’re allowed to be a part of this community, a part of this development, we will have a lasting impact. I don’t know if I said it or not but since 1982 we have not closed a single location. Our business model is sound. Automotive repair is an essential business and during this time of COVID where we are all coping and doing strange things like having meetings in your home office, we have continued to shine. We had one down month and then it picked up immediately. Actually, the month after our down month was the best month we’ve ever had. We’re survivors and we’ll do well here and are very much looking forward to being part of what you already have and possess here: a great community. Again, I’m open for any questions. I’ve been with Christian Bros. for 10 years. There’s not a whole lot that hasn’t been thrown at me before and I can take it. Weick: Well, thank you very much. It’s a great presentation. You answered quite a few questions of mine. In that presentation, and I will certainly turn it over to our commission members if there are any clarifying questions they need to ask you or your team. We’ll give everyone a second to gather their thoughts if they would like. Wakefield: This is usually the part where I say I’ve flown in from Houston, Texas and my time is your time, but obviously we are not doing that right now. So I’m actually going to get to have dinner after this with my family so that’s kind of cool. Weick: That is a good side of it, yes. Wakefield: Anything you’ve got. We’re an open book. Very transparent. Weick: Are you working on something over there, Commissioner McGonagill? Okay. I wasn’t sure if you were turning or not. Okay. McGonagill: I’m good. Weick: I can see you. I can’t see everybody else. It doesn’t sound like, it sounds like you’ve touch on everything and you’ve certainly answered a few questions, throughout the staff presentation as well, so thank you very much. I appreciate the detail you provided and it certainly left our Commission members speechless so it must have been thorough. I will now open the public hearing portion of this matter. I will say that we did receive a couple of emails, or at least two and those are in the record. I think one was in favor and one was opposed to the building of the item. Al-Jaff: Correct. Staff has received phone calls. Weick: Okay. Al-Jaff: Mainly inquiries about what is the development and we just were able to answer all of their questions and ensure that if they had any comments or any concerns to let us know. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 11 Weick: Okay. Great. Anyone here present this evening who would like to come forward and speak an opinion on this item may do so at this time. Just please state your name and talk as loud as you can because the microphone is covered with plastic. Thank you for coming this evening. Chintaginjala: Good evening. May name is Bala Chintaginjala. My address is 8982 Southwest Village Loop. That is a townhome. From my home this proposed project is 800 feet away. By the way, I spoke to Sharmeen earlier today about this project. She tried to explain. Actually, I went through this project last weekend. It was very good. I am also a civil engineer. I worked for 10 years in the construction field but for the last 20 years I’ve been working in IT. I want to thank the applicant for investing in our city. He created jobs and also he will fulfill the needs of neighborhood residents. My request is, as long as we can keep the noise levels low as for the allowable limits, as for the core, and pollution is under control as for the limits. I don’t have any problem. I welcome this project and I want to vote yes for this project. Thank you very much. Gentlemen, thank you. Excellent job. Weick: Thank you so much and thank you for coming this evening and offering your views on this project. Very important. Anyone else present who would like to come forward on this item? We also have the call-in number on the screen. Is it lighting up over there? Al-Jaff: Nothing is happening. Weick: All right. So I mentioned the emails have been noted and are in the record and thank you this evening for speaking. Your opinion on the item as well. We’re just checking the phones. We’re just making sure anyone who wants to call in, can. I know it’s weird. We’ve done this a couple of times but it still is a challenge to get used to the new way of doing things but we will perfect it, I’m sure. With that, I will close the public hearing portion of this item. We’ve heard from staff, our applicant, as well as members of the community in person and via email, and telephone calls earlier. So thank you to everyone who has expressed their views and opinions on this item. At this time the item is open for the Planning Commission to discuss the item amongst ourselves, voice any opinion, concerns, and certainly would be open to a motion and a second as appropriate. Yes, Commissioner Skistad. Skistad: I am Commissioner Skistad and I appreciate all the work that went into this proposal and I’m excited about having it. I do think it’s something we need for the community and it’s very well done and very well thought out. The building is beautiful, so this would be something that I would definitely support. I appreciate all of the parties that worked so hard on this project. Weick: Awesome. Thank you. I concur. Some things that were touched on that I had written down. Certainly people had mentioned noise a lot and one thing that I had sort of, I know Commissioner Reeder had mentioned it, is it like, could it be a body shop and it’s not like that. My big question was, is it like one of those quick-change oil places where you got like you mentioned. They make money by turning cars. Turn and burn. Turn and burn and that’s where I Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 12 think you can start to get into unsightly potentially traffic patterns, noise patterns. They’re not as concerned with limiting those things, right? They need to get in and out. That’s clearly not what’s going on here and so I think that’s great. In fact, having seen that area and, I don’t think it’s the number one probably noise unsightly or detractor, if you will, in that area. That Kwik Trip is packed and like there’s cars everywhere, and people pumping gas and going in and out of the store and running through the car wash. All this stuff. I just think it’s a good use of the land and I think it will be a, I honestly believe it will be a good neighbor for the area. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I would agree with you and I think the thing that I think about with their effect is true. I mean a third of the price of your car these days is electronics. Weick: Right. McGonagill: And you’re not, everybody guarantees their drive trains for 100,000 miles but the electronics are the ones you’re working on so I think it’s good. I appreciate the way they thought it out. I do also appreciate staff’s conditions that you put in there on the fact of it has to be drivable, things like that have to be kept sitting out there and there are some conditions to try and keep it up as nice as possible and I think it would be a good add. These kind of facilities, if you think about it, it will probably hire 12-15 people that will be good, permanent jobs by the time you go through it all, not counting the suppliers, not counting anything else that goes through there. It’s a nice extension so I’m in favor of it, Mr. Chairman. Weick: Awesome. We would certainly entertain a motion if there weren’t… Reeder: Mr. Chairman? I’m prepared to make that motion. I think it’s a good project in a good place. I’m pleased with the operation suggestions that they have so I would make the motion. Reeder moved, Noyes seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Site Plan consisting of a 5,100 square-foot automotive repair shop and Planned Unit Development amendment for Chanhassen Gateway allowing automotive repair shops with standards, Planning Case 2020-21 as shown in plans dated received October 30, 2020, including the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation, subject to conditions. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Weick: The motion passes unanimously 7-0. Again, thank you for all your hard work Sharmeen. I know this has been a long one and detailed and it’s very important any time we are amending PUD and adding a new neighbor. We want to make sure that its right for the neighborhood and this feels like a good one. Thank you for your hard work. Thank you to representatives from Christian Bros. as well. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 13 Aanenson: I would just like to make a reminder Chairman that this item does go to the City Council so for anybody that’s following along, that will be scheduled for the December 14th City Council meeting for final action. Weick: Thank you and thank you for coming and speaking this evening as well. Appreciate that. We do have a couple other items on the agenda this evening. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY AND SUBDIVISION OF A FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION (DEER HAVEN) WITH VARIANCES LOCATED AT 6480 YOSEMITE AVENUE. Weick: With that I will turn it over to Mr. Generous? Yes. Generous: Thank you Chairman Weick. Commissioners… Randall: Chairman? I’m going to recuse myself from this… Weick: Okay. Just for the record Commissioner Randall has recuse himself from this item and this item only which means he will not offer opinion or vote on the item. Thank you, Commissioner Randall. Generous: Thank you Chairman and Commissioners. Planning Case 2020-22, Deer Haven Addition. Tonight’s the public hearing. This goes to City Council on January 11, 2021. The applicant is Kenneth and Barbara Ashfeld. I just noticed that my title, it’s a rezoning as well as a subdivision approval with variances for the 33-foot right-of-way, 24-foot street, and a private street for a four-lot single-family residential development. The property is located at 6480 Yosemite Avenue. This is north of Lake Lucy Road about halfway between there and 63rd Street. It’s on the easterly edge of the Pheasant Hills development. The right-of-way for Wood Duck Lane runs to the north of this property but the road stops a little bit to the west of this property. There is a small right-of-way access onto Yosemite that was dedicated with previous plats, 16.5 feet each time that they platted something. There’s only 33 feet of right-of-way. On page 5 I see there is a typo in the report that says 31 feet but it should be 33 feet. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District. It’s guided for Residential-Low Density development which permits densities of 1.2 to 4 units per acre. Part of my PowerPoint, I didn’t go into the rezoning a lot but Rural Residential District is not consistent with the Land Use designation for the property; however, our Comprehensive Plan allows that zoning to stay in place until a development proposal comes forward. At that time the rezoning must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Under the Residential-Low Density land use designation there are four consistent zoning categories: RSF which is single-family residential, R-4 which is mixed-low density residential, RLM which is residential low and medium density, and PUD-R. The property to the west is a Planned Unit Development-Residential. It has smaller lots and smaller setback requirements. On the northeast and south sides of this development are properties that are zoned Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 14 RSF which is single-family residential. They’re requesting rezoning to single-family residential which would be consistent with the three sides of this property plus they are smaller than the minimum criteria for PUD-R zoning, so the most appropriate zoning and what we are requesting approval of is the RSF rezoning of the property. The existing site is approximately 2.8 acres with access via a private driveway that uses city right-of-way to get out to Yosemite and then the driveway down to the home. The site is partially wooded. There’s one single-family home on it. It’s served with sewer and water service that runs to the northwest between two of the homes in the Pheasant Hills development. The proposed subdivision request if for 4 single-family lots. Access would be via our public street, that doesn’t show up here, out to Yosemite and then direct access to the individual lots would be via a private street. Within the development public sewer and water would be extended and they’re going to provide stormwater treatment. They’re currently in for preliminary plat approval so we don’t have any of the final construction plans. Erik will actually go into those a little bit later. As part of this development there is currently approximately 59% tree cover. Ordinance allows 30% to remain after development. They estimate currently under their preliminary plans that they would meet that 30% tree preservation. The tree preservation shows up as these cross-hatched areas on this map. With the final plat we want them to verify that they are in fact meeting those tree preservation requirements and that they install appropriate tree preservation fencing. With this, Erik will actually take over. Hendricksen: Thanks, Bob. Thank you Mr. Chair and Commissioners for the opportunity to present Engineering staff’s review of the proposed preliminary plat for the Deer Haven subdivision. It will be a little bit of what Bob kind of went into but try to get into some of the minor minutia beginning with the grading for the subdivision. It has been proposed to be accomplished over two phases which is common when the goal would be to have custom-graded lots. The first phase of which the extents are highlighted in purple, would accommodate the installation of public utilities such as water and sanitary sewer. It would also accommodate the buildout of the stormwater BMPs along with public road and a private street The second phase highlighted in yellow, would be the individual lots which will be custom graded and would ultimately be reviewed during building permit submittal. The provided grading plan and stormwater narrative appear to be feasible. While both illustrate how surface water requirements and subdivision ordinances would be met such as erosion control measures or drainage being routed away from buildings and routed to stormwater BMPs for treatment. Ultimately, the applicant will be required to provide a geotechnical report and updated plans when the final plat and final construction plans are submitted for review. Sanitary sewer and water main will be extended from the existing public utilities adjacent to the proposed subdivision. Sanitary sewer will be extended roughly 550 feet from an existing manhole located at the end of Wood Duck Lane and water service will be extended from an existing main abutting the subdivision. Based on the existing topography and the existing pipe invert elevations at the manhole within Wood Duck Lane, a gravity sanitary sewer system is being proposed and while the water main will be extended resulting in a dead-end main, the applicant is proposing to connect the existing home’s water service to the newly extended main. Currently it’s had from a different water main to the east. With that proposal it will promote a higher level of water quality for the future of the property owners of the subdivision. Lastly, the applicant is proposing an 8-inch water main to be Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 15 extended while the minimum diameter of water main that the city will allow per our standards is 6 inches. If feasible, based on fire flows and pressure, the city will require a 6-inch line be installed instead. A 6-inch water main would promote lower maintenance costs in the future along with the additional water quality benefits as the volume of the water in the dead-line would be less. It would cycle out or refresh more often. Access to the subdivision is being proposed off Yosemite Avenue via a newly extended public street with individual lot access being had from the extensions of the private street as Bob indicated. The image shown illustrates this combination of public and private street extensions with the green arrow being the portion of the public street, and the yellow arrow being the portion of the private street. Because the current right-of-way extending from Yosemite Avenue does not meet the 60-foot wide standard set forth in Chapter 18, the applicant is requesting a variance for both right-of-way width and public street width. After much review by City staff of the multiple options of providing access to the proposed subdivision, staff finds this request to be the most reasonable and prudent approach. If the applicant were to extend the existing Wood Duck Lane cul-de-sac, which is illustrated by the red arrow, it would further exacerbate a non-conforming cul-de-sac, which is already 1,100 feet long as illustrated in the orange. Additionally, the City cannot grant approval of a private street through public right-of-way with the extension from Yosemite being a private street all the way into the subdivision is not feasible. As such, staff believes that the proposed 24-foot wide public street located within a 33-foot wide right-of-way will adequately serve the subdivision of the 4 lots. However, the applicant will be required to secure additional right-of-way from the property to the north in order to construct the street which was highlighted in the staff report for this agenda item. The applicant has already engaged that property owner and is working towards the grant of easement which will be a condition to be recorded currently with the recording of the final plat. With that, Bob, I turn it back over to you. Generous: Thanks Erik. The provision of private streets and right-of-way and street width variances are covered under the subdivision ordinance. Private streets may be permitted if they meet the criteria in Section 18-22 of the Subdivision ordinance. The applicant is proposing to use existing right-of-way to provide the public street connection; however, that right-of-way is only 33 feet wide. Our current standard is 60 feet. However, all of that is off site from this development and their existing right-of-way so we are allowing them to use that. Additionally, new street design requires a 31-foot street back to back and they’re proposing a 24-foot street back to back which would fit within that 33 feet of right-of-way and give us enough space on either side for snow storage and stormwater attenuation. As Erik said, we believe that it meets all the criteria variance findings for Section 18-22. Use of the private street provides additional potential benefit, reduces the amount of impervious surface that will be in that development as well as potential for additional grading. Additionally, they’re going within existing right-of-way that’s off the property and that’s the variance for the substandard street width and right-of-way width. The hardship is due to the existing circumstances within this area. There’s only 33 feet of right-of-way existing for a public street and there is not a need to access the other properties with the service private street into the development going to the south off of Wood Duck Lane. However, Wood Duck Lane would be public within the Stoddardt development if they wanted to develop an additional lot off the south end which is north of Wood Duck Lane. There is a Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 16 potential for doing that onto a public street. This site is very unique in the community. As Erik pointed out they can’t go Wood Duck Lane to the west and extend that right-of-way because we have an overly long cul-de-sac. This provides a cul-de-sac that is shorter and it won’t be detrimental to the public welfare because the public access off of Yosemite would be a public street and it’s just the four lots within this development that will have direct access onto the private street. Staff believes they meet all the criteria and findings for a variance under the subdivision ordinance. With that, staff is recommending approval of the rezoning from Rural Residential to Single-Family Residential, approval of the four-lot subdivision and this is for preliminary plat approval with a variance for the use of the private street as well as the 33-foot right-of-way for the public street and a 24-foot wide street design, and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that, I would be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thank you. I appreciate it. Great report and great presentation. While our Commission gathers their thoughts and questions, I did have couple. It relates to the grading and I was out there and there’s like a road there. I was afraid to drive it because I thought it looked like a private drive so I didn’t want to drive back there and look at it. I went up on that (63rd) and you can kind of peer in between the house and you can see the property. It’s a pretty significant hill, I call them hills, the grade is fairly significant and it sounds like that is going to be graded down. I guess my question would be when that gets graded down does that create any type of like a bowl situation with the homeowners that are on Yosemite and then maybe the homeowners to the west. You know what I mean? When the purple area and yellow area get graded out to the east and the west then does that create an area that’s significantly lower than the areas to the east and the west? I call it a bowl, right? Like everything comes down into that development. I’m just curious if it creates that situation. Hendricksen: From the proposed grading plan the… on the west side, they’re going to have to tie in to the existing grades at their property line. What the custom-graded lots and this preliminary grading plan showed was essentially kind of backyard swales that would pick up any kind of drainage and direct it north to right where your cursor is, Bob, is where the stormwater BMP is. So that’s kind of a stormwater basin essentially. Conversely, on the west side it’s kind of more or less sheet flowing with the private drive and the front yards directing all the drainage to that stormwater. I don’t know if that adequately answers the question but I don’t anticipate. Stormwater from what we saw in the preliminary grading plans was being accounted for and routed appropriately. There will have to be some refined design with the public street section as that was conditioned. It’s definitely feasible. We have stormwater infrastructure off Yosemite that this can be tied into because this will be public stormwater and public drainage but I, that’s kind of the general overall grading. Weick: I think that answers it. I didn’t know if we were creating some kind of a weird sort of backyard situation. Henricksen: Right. With preliminary and final plat, especially with custom-graded lots we definitely ensure that the original proposal is feasible. The purple section is what would be Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 17 graded first to get all the infrastructure and everything teed up and then I don’t know the actual ins and outs if the lots will be sold individually or how that will be done, but when a builder comes in for custom-graded lots, we ensure that whatever lot is sold that the grading plan that they’re proposing because they can alter a little bit where the house pad is, how they’re building out the lot, we ensure that the drainage, that’s one of the main things to look for on these building permits on the grading plan, is consistent with the overall plan of the subdivision. It’s not lost along the way. Weick: Cool. Okay. Then I have one other quick question I think I know the answer to but the straight city street that comes into the private then joins at the bend to the private, we (the City) maintains it. Plows it up to the bend? Okay Henriksen: Currently with what’s being proposed there’s not really adequate space for a full cul- de-sac so what we are anticipating seeing and what was kind of shown on the preliminary plan would be kind of that modified hammerhead approach and that’s again for snow storage. That kind of shows it. When get more refined plans we’ll probably condition that to maybe move. We’ll talk to our Street Superintendent to see what the best kind of plowing operations would be but that would be owned and maintained a city, a public street. Weick: Okay. Thank you. That’s the only other question I had. I would open it up to other commissioners. Skistad: I have a follow-up question to Commissioner Weick’s question. When we did that custom grading I’m just reminded of that other project that we looked at where they had a serious problem with the drainage, which is I’m sure what the other Commissioner is speaking about as well. How do they ensure that they are following that custom grading plan? Do they have like a before and after review of some kind? Henriksen: That’s a really good question. When the preliminary and final plat get approved by that time we get the final construction plans which shows the overall intent of the grading plan. When a builder comes in for a building permit they also have to provide a survey with proposed grades in which we review to make sure that the drainage is adequately being accounted for and relatively reflects what the overall drainage intent was with the subdivision. Once a building permit is issued the builder will go out and grade, and by the time the lot is built out they have to do what is called an as-built grading survey and that will go to our building permit specialist and they’ll kind of take a look at it… They’ll look at what the proposed plan was from what the as- built is showing, see if it jives. If it doesn’t, obviously they have to do follow up and then inquire with the surveyor but then we’ll actually go out on site and do a visual inspection to make sure it’s graded as, generally as the intent of the building permit. So throughout the process there is a lot of checks that are involved. That the Engineering Department and Water Resources will even be looking at erosion control and go through to ensure that the buildout is per the permit. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 18 Skistad: Okay. That makes sense. So there’s a couple of different survey requirements that happen through the process? Henricksen: Correct. Reeder: Two questions. One, I’m not a proponent of private roads. I would like to hear a little bit more of why we’re not proposing a public road all the way down. And secondly, what happens to the ownership of the outlot? Who will own and maintain the outlot? Generous: The primary reason for not going with a full public street for the private street section was the additional hard cover that would be created on site and the additional stormwater improvements that would have to be put in place as well. There’s addition maintenance requirements for the City. Public streets are generally intended to connect multiple properties. This is going into one property so it doesn’t make a lot of sense to continue a public street down there. We looked at the opportunity. They could put in a public street but then we would get an additional 11 feet of pavement within the roadway section and additional grading to the side property lines. That’s the primary impact between the public and private street. The maintenance of the private street goes with the benefitting properties. It’s either through an access and maintenance agreement or in the staff report we recommend that they establish a homeowners association to address the maintenance and long-term care for that private street. Reeder: What about the outlot? Generous: The outlot could be association ownership or it could be an individual ownership but they would. On top of that it’s the easement and access agreement that would cover the maintenance of the street itself. It may also address the maintenance of any landscaping that is installed within there and the mowing of the property. The applicant may be better able to express his intent with the outlot itself. Reeder: Okay. That’s a good question because it seems like somebody needs to be in charge of that outlot for the future is somebody stores a junk car or something. Weick: Fair enough. We’ll leave that for the applicant to answer when they present. Thank you, Commissioner Reeder. Any follow up that you have on that or are you okay? Reeder: I’m good. Weick: Okay. Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Bob, I’ve got two areas of questions. The private street, looking on page 10 of the staff report… My first question on a private street and this is something we’ve seen private streets before by I don’t recall one that was this long with this many homes on it. This has got four homes and I noticed that the fire hydrant is at the bottom of that street so you get a fire truck Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 19 down in there what’s he going to do? He can’t get out. He can’t get around. I mean the hydrant’s right about where cursor is. We try to be pretty rigorous about having conforming cul-de-sacs or a way a fire truck can get in and out and we can still have access. There is four homes along her now and that’s one area of concern that I have. How does the private road allow it to be that way? Where the other way we’re always in there trying to be sure we have fire truck access and turnaround access. Henricksen: So the fire hydrant was something we noticed and Public Works kind of looked at it through the lens of well someone’s going to have to plow that and they’re probably going to push that snow all the way down that private road and it’s going to hit that hydrant and that’s going to be a nuisance to maintain and the like. So we, on the construction plan review which we provided to the applicant and their engineer commented on the possibility of relocating that hydrant. When it comes to access for emergency services and fire, the Fire Department, the Chief, they do review of placement of hydrants. At this time there wasn’t necessarily a comment or condition because that’s something they will assess and review in greater detail on a final plat and final construction submittal. At this point we’re kind of looking mainly for feasibility. Function over the form of it right now but to your point, with private roads there are details within the fire code that show placement of let’s say a hydrant where is says Outlot A on this exhibit here which would require a little bump out and maybe a little more clearance for the Fire Department. With this being a dead-end too they take a lot of that into consideration. Where the hose runs. Access for vehicles going in and out during an emergency situation. I hope that answers the question but essentially that is something that staff, both Public Works/Engineering and the Fire Department do those types of reviews. That was also caught by fire comment here. McGongaill: I understand but we’re now, I realize you’ll do that perhaps when they go through and plat it but you’re going through the process now I believe of approving whether you have a private road or not and that’s one of the concerns I have, particularly able to have access to turn around. The second thing with that is those four houses that are in there, I know what’s going to happen. The garbage trucks are going to go down there and he’s going to have to back all the way back out again. He’s not going to be able to turn around. Same thing if it would snow or winter. Again, it’s the whole issue of being able to access it. I understand your comments about not wanting to widen the right-of-way to make the public road with the amount of time it would take up, but that solution for this many houses down in there does concern me. Generous: If I may, Commissioner? The ordinance does provide for the provision of a hammerhead turnaround which is what this area would be and I believe it’s 70 feet but I’m not, 60 feet in length. McGonagill: I never hear that one. Henricksen: It’s a 20-foot radius which again was assessed for feasibility to meet the turnaround. That’s again for a dead-end fire apparatus road. That would ensure something as large as a fire truck would have the ability to turn around rather than backing up all the way. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 20 Generous: Which would also accommodate a garbage truck. McGonagill: Next question areas is tree cover, on the map on the tree cover, I think it was purple almost, where all the trees were left. Yeah. That one. Basically, what’s happening, they’re having to clear cut and grade the whole thing except for that bottom right-hand corner? Generous: Any place that shows hatches preserve canopy area. As Jill has pointed out, we think that they may be to provide additional preservation and we want them to verify that. Under the preliminary plan they complied with ordinance. We always push them when we do the final review to see if we can additional preservation. McGonagill: When I was looking at the staff report, let me see if I can find it here. It talked about the fact that it wasn’t going to be planned. There were going to try to maintain, get within the plan, by working with them, but we were concerned trees being damaged by construction… Here it is. It’s on page 14. Generous: In the back of Lot 3? McGonagill: Yes, we’re talking about the back of Lot 3 which is going to take out all those. Then again it’s, we spend a lot of time trying to preserve tree cover here. I realize it’s one lot that they’re going, one big area we’re going for 30% but I kind of go back to the fact of that it’s a private drive/streets, would be wanting to look at almost the 30% per lot, but that’s just my opinion. It is not a clarifying comment. I apologize. Weick: So, in answer to your question is, yes, most of the trees will go out. Generous: Unless they can revise the plan to show additional preservation. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I had, Mr. Chairman. Weick: Thank you. Skistad: I have one more question. When you were talking about, I’m sorry I can’t remember who, but the, actually I think Bob it was you, was they wanted an 8-inch PVC water main versus the 6-inch. Why would they want an 8-inch versus a 6-inch? What would be the purpose of that? Hendricksen: That was me who had addressed that. Typically it’s to provide more flow. My assumption, and I won’t speak for them I guess, my assumption would be that in some cities that may be the minimum so they were just, when they doing the design they were thinking that 8- inch might be minimum size… In the City of Chanhassen we do 6-inch C900 PVC, the plastic stuff, and I think we’ve checked the static pressures in the area here so it should have adequate, the fire flows and pressure with the 6-inch main. What I was alluding to with the water quality is Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 21 because you have a smaller pipe. On a dead-end main, you’re dependent on the people drawing the water and kind of flushing the system for you. Granted, it is a public main and we would flush it, that hydrant yearly. With a smaller volume of water and people drawing from it you’re going to have some higher quality of water than the 8-inch. There are no commercial or industrial facilities here that might require that higher fire suppressions or sprinkler systems or anything like that. But I digress, I would I guess let their engineers let us know why they want this. Skistad: Okay. Thank you. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner Skistad. Other questions? Those were great. Hearing no more, thank you Bob, and I will invite the applicant to make a presentation. Thank you. I repeat, just be sure you speak loudly into that plastic-covered microphone. Thank you. Kenneth Ashfeld: Thank you Mr. Chair and the rest of the Commission. Thank you for allowing me to approach you this evening with this application. Firstly, I would like to thank your staff for doing a very thorough review and providing any guidance on what is truly a pretty property. I have an opportunity to work with very great guidance from him. I say this tongue in cheek that I may live there but I think your staff, as many years as Kate and Sharmeen and Bob have worked on this project, they probably know it better than I do. I am here to answer any questions that you may have. There was a few raised that I think I can address. Mr. Chair and the rest of the Commissioners, feel free to dive in at any time. Weick: Okay. Thank you. Ashfeld: I invite you to do that. It’s a very unique piece of property but a very nice setting in through there. I made note of at least three questions that came up. Commissioner Reeder asked about the ownership of that outlot and it would be intent to create an HOA of the four of us. Not a large HOA. And put covenants on the properties for the maintenance of the roadway and maintenance of the stormwater BMPs as well the mowing. The entire property has been mowed all these years. It’s been mowed like a park and at the end of the day, that’s what I would still like it to be. I’m going to continue to live there. Related to the tree cover, I was very fortunate to have the opportunity for the City Forester to come out and visit with me on some of the trees. Actually, some of the trees that we were really thinking of saving, after she had a chance to look at it and advise me, she felt that they should go. They’re damaged over the years. They’re sickly. There’s a couple of pine trees that they’re dead all the way up to the very tops so there like a, I can’t remember what a tree in Florida is, but. So she was advising that those trees go. Weick: Okay. Ashfeld: When we, our first step was to come through with a preliminary plan just to get your opinion, your feedback on whether this is all going to work and then on the final plat bring all the details back together. Like I say, Erik and Bob have been very thorough in providing us guidance Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 22 on that. On the 8-inch water, I do work for a municipality, the City of Maple Grove, and 8-inch is our minimum so that’s we were assuming, but to Erik’s point, and it’s a very good point, that for water quality purposes it would be better to work with the 6-inch. We would make that change. With that, that’s all I have really to say and I would stand for any questions that the Commission may have of me. Weick: Thank you, and I’ll open it, Commissioner Members can just jump in if you do have any further questions for the applicant. We’ll give folks a chance to collect their notes. Hearing none, thank you. Thanks for bringing this project forward and being able to answer our questions. We have heard from staff and the applicant. At this time I will open the public hearing. The phone number is on the screen. 952-227-1630 if anyone is present and would like to speak about this item may come forward at this time. I don’t believe we received emails. Generous: I haven’t… Weick: I didn’t see anything in the packet either. I’m mumbling a little bit but there were no emails submitted on this item. There is no on present coming forward, and unless the phone is rattling off the hook over there, I will close the public hearing portion of this item. With that, Commission Members may comment, offer some opinions, some concerns, and anecdotes? Anything you would like. We certainly would consider a motion as well as appropriate. I guess I’ll kick off if people are sort of gathering thoughts. I try and compartmentalize things and the thing that kind of went unsaid in all of this I think, if I read this the correctly, the homes themselves meet all of the RSF codes. There’s no variances on the lots themselves and the homes which to me is nice. Now, there is significant consideration around how you access the homes so I get that. But I don’t want to lose sight that the homes themselves meet all the lot setbacks and lot coverage. Having looked at the property it’s a nice little carving of land in there. I think it looks attractive. But again to your point, Commissioner McGonagill, I think access is the biggest thing in making sure that it’s safe, first and foremost, for the folks that choose to live there. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. That’s my concerns. I realize too that people…the property now…but after we do the grading and take out the trees. I know that those are over trees and they will go…to recycle them but it change that whole look down through there. I do appreciate the fact the homes meet the code. That’s all the same thing…they’re not doing something crazy here. But I do question because…the density qualification for three homes. It was two and worked something else out I would probably be, that way I would more room for a road and cul-de-sac. I sit here long enough that I really come to try to be pretty rigorous about being sure that we always really good access to places…school buses, cars, fire trucks, and ambulances. All that. They’re on a narrow private drive even though it does have a hammerhead, I think about in the wintertime. People plowing snow where we know…that access problems will be a problem. I don’t have a solution for that, obviously. It’s an area of concern, I guess. Tree cover loss, grading and the access for utility and commercial vehicles. Three areas I’m having trouble getting over and not seeing a solution for. I thought of that…cut through, if you connect, if it’s a cul-de-sac to the south, you can cut through it versus cutting through the owners’ Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 23 property for that, come straight through that way. There’s not an easy solution for this. There’s right-of-way. There is owners to the south. Difficult… Weick: Thank you. Skistad: I have a comment. When I first looked at it I thought it looked, just looking on the plat, it looked too small have all of these homes on it but then you calculate the acres out. There all .35, .35 acres, .41 and 1.1 acres so they are not on the smaller sizes. They are actually on the larger sizes, even with the road there. So there’s more space there than it appears when you are looking at the drawings, for instance. Weick: I would have been interested to hear from affected neighbors. Having not heard opinion one way or another I can only assume these people are okay. I give folks the benefit of the doubt so I like to think that they sense that this fits and is okay. Other thoughts out there? I know Commissioner McGonagill raised some very good questions and concerns. Any other opinions on that? Von Oven: I think mine comes actually as a combination of those two. I’m not terribly crazy about the combination of things that Commissioner McGonagill brought up. At the same time, if I try to put on my prediction hat, those things are more likely to pose problems for the future residents of that private street then they are of the existing residents who are in the vicinity of it and did not offer comment or any kind of reason for this not to happen. I think, had we received a bunch of comments from the surrounding property saying why this private road would be a bad idea, I might be more inclined to push back, but given the fact that this seems to be the best solution to a tough-to-solve problem, I actually do not see any reason to deny it. So, I am in favor of what we are doing here. Weick: You said that a lot better than I did. Thank you. Which isn’t hard to do. Believe me. Reeder: Mr. Chairman, I think there is a practical solution to this piece of property and complete the development in this area and I think the private road is fine. There is no sense in building asphalt that is not needed which would be the public right. So I’m happy with the way this is presented. Weick: Great. Maybe you could put the motion up. I’m not pushing anyone in this direction but I certainly invite other comments or a motion. Skistad: Can I just ask one more question before we go? I look at the road. It’s 24 feet and I know we heard all the presentation for this but there’s no. I prefer a little bit wider roads in general also, but there isn’t anything in the City that allows you to move a little bit more into that outlot and make it a little bit greater, at least along the trunk of that line? Could the owner decide to do that if they chose to have it a little bit wider? I can see that there is no parking or anything Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 24 along that, I mean there won’t be parking on the road because they can’t. Because they have to have room for the emergency vehicles or the garbage or whatever. Henricksen: Is it okay for me to speak up to the Commission? So, for private streets or private roads, they are signed no parking. That’s a fire code or a fire requirement. There is no parking on private roads. For the portion of the public right-of-way that would be installed at the proposed 24 feet, speaking with Fire, we would sign that for no parking on one side at a minimum. Whenever a road is installed or has kind of that sub par or a little less wide than our 31-foot back-to-back, that’s typically the case when we sign it for no parking and that would be a potential condition on the final plat. That’s still, obviously, that has to be passed by Council, no parking ordinances like that. It would be something that would be assessed once we get the actual plans to look at what the cross-sections... Skistad: Okay. So the answer is really no. That’s what this area allows based on what you’ve looked at and 24 feet, and then you just have to deal with the 24 feet. Okay. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I guess as I continue to go through this, someone said it and I think they expressed my opinions pretty well. There are several issues I have with it that when I look at them in total I can’t get over it. I must be honest. I’ll be voting against it. That’s not to say the product shouldn’t be developed, but…I just don’t have a solution here where I can say it’s palatable to me. I worry, I think about the houses to the east and houses to the west, but also just the access in there and how traffic patterns are going to be and I just don’t like it. That’s the best way to describe it. I just don’t. Sorry, but that’s where I’m at. Weick: You do not have to apologize. I want to be respectful of your need to consider and that’s why I’m sort of allowing some moments here to reflect and think on this item, but certainly speak up if you have other questions or comments or if Commissioner McGonagill sparked something in your mind. Reeder: Mr. Chairman? I am prepared to make a motion. Commissioner Reeder moved, Commissioner Von Oven seconded to recommend approval of 1) Rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single Family Residential (RSF); and 2) Subdivision approval to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide direct access to the four lots and a variance to use the 33-foot right-of-way and 24-foot street section subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report; and 3) Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. The motion passed with a vote of 5-1. Commissioner McGonagill voted against the motion and Commissioner Randall recused himself and did not vote. Weick: This item will go January 11 in front of City Council if you are following. Again, all comments, all notes are in the record for City Council and they will consider certainly all of our Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 25 questions and concerns. Thank you to everyone who prepared for this item. We have one more item on tonight’s agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1601 LAKE LUCY ROAD FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (LOW DENSITY). Weick: With that I will turn it over to Sharmeen. Thank you, Sharmeen. Al-Jaff: Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, the application before you is a request to rezone from rural residential to planned unit development. Briefly, the site is located south of Lake Lucy Road. It is surrounded by Lake Lucy in its entirety. The site has an area of approximately 9.03 acres. It is currently zoned rural residential. Access to the site is gained via Lake Lucy Road. The 2040 Land Use Plan guides the subject site for low density residential. Within a low density you can have 1.2 units per acre but no more than 4 units per acres. This category can be either zoned into single-family residential, R-4 which is a mix of low density, residential low and medium density, or planned unit development-residential. Rezoning this property into any of those categories would allow the site to be consistent with the 2040 Land Use Plan. Brief background. Back in 1993 the owners of the island at the time came in for a wetland alteration permit for the purpose of constructing a bridge and a driveway to access the driveway. There were multiple extensions granted to this. The work was completed on the bridge as well as the driveway in 1999. Some of the things that have taken place that we also need to point out is that since 2018 staff has been working with the applicant very closely. This site is truly unique. It is the only island that has building rights within the City of Chanhassen. The applicant’s goal is to build a single-family home for their family and an accessory dwelling unit for his mother. The site contains bluffs and wetlands. It is located within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Lucy and it has 100% tree canopy cover. The access driveway off of Lake Lucy Road connects the island to Lake Lucy Road via a bridge. The length of this driveway is approximately 1,600 feet and this is just the distance between Lake Lucy Road and the bridge right here. Looking at the different options, we know that this is a lot of record, it is entitled to the building of a single-family home. The applicant’s request was to have a principle structure with an accessory dwelling unit. This can either be achieved via subdivision or rezoning the site to planned unit development. We looked at the impact of subdividing the site versus rezoning it to planned unit development. With a subdivision, you will be able to accomplish the additional home; however, you will have to widen the driveway to 20 feet. There is additional grading, tree removal, hard surface, potential for two additional home sites rather than the two that the applicant is requesting. Also, there is more potential for grading with the extension of public utilities. Through a planned unit development, the applicant would be able to use the existing driveway. There is a septic system that is proposed on the site as well as a well. We are able through the planned unit development regulations to cap the size of the accessory dwelling unit. We can require the use of a single internal driveway and the planned unit development governing the site would establish additional limitations on the site. The applicant selected to move forward Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 26 with a planned unit development approach. With that, staff directed the applicant to put together a concept, bring it before the city to allow us to evaluate the request, and bring it before you. It is important that we point out this is a concept. It was intended to give us an idea of what it is the owner of the property’s intentions were and how to write proper ordinances that address concerns, improve potential development of the site, add regulations and improve the quality of development. Some of the things that we’re able to accomplish is that the total permitted site coverage is 20%. What the applicant is proposing is going to be below 15%, 14.5% with this concept. We sent this concept to multiple agencies including the watershed, the DNR, and staff at the city, and there was one reoccurring theme that was pointed out by the different agencies and different staff members and that had to do with the amount of grading and what can be done to reduce the grading. So we had a discussion with the property owner and the initial proposal basically looked at serving the main home via one driveway. At the southern portion of the island the driveway would split to serve the accessory dwelling unit. We recommended that the applicant unify those driveways and share access, basically eliminating everything that you see in the hatched red and the applicant can talk about that further but he did agree to this request and understood that this was a concern to many different departments and different staff members. What some of the other elements that this planned unit development will regulate is the fact that you can have one single-family home and one accessory dwelling unit. The ownership of those two homes; they cannot be sold separately. These will remain under single ownership. There is no short-term lease and with short term we are defining it as less than three months. We are limiting the size of the accessory dwelling unit. There are measures in place to ensure fire prevention. We are requesting that the driveways be combined. The applicant was directed to continue working with staff to promote preservation of natural features of the site. We are limiting the size of the accessory structures which also include water-oriented structures for the island. We are also regulating dock rights within this development. Staff is recommending approval of this application of this request because I had mentioned earlier, yes it can be subdivided but this is a mechanism for the city to regulate the future development of this site. This is the type of development when basically a one-size-fits-all ordinance was difficult to implement on a parcel such as this one. We are recommending approval with comments in the staff report and as an adoption of the attached ordinance. One thing I do need to point out is that staff received three emails in addition to the emails included in your staff report. They were from Gregory Fast, Kathryn Randall (also goes by Betsy), and Kim and Tom McReavy. The emails basically included comments requesting minimizing grading, concerns with potential light pollution on the island, impact to surrounding habitat. Other comments involved support of the project, commending the applicant for removing buckthorn from the island. With that, we will make sure that these are incorporated as part of the public record when this items appears before the city council. I’ll be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Great. Thank you. I will open it up for commissioners to ask questions. McGonagill: I have the same questions I had before on the previous item and it’s about fire. They’re going to have a well and other fire suppression sprinklers inside the structures? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 27 Al-Jaff: Correct. McGonagill: So there’s not a hydrant or anything down there? There’s no sewage down there? They have their own septic system? Al-Jaff: Correct. And there was a rather lengthy meeting that took place between the fire chief and the applicant. They walked the site and they agreed upon a consultant that specializes in fire suppression. The applicant would be able to speak to this matter further. McGonagill: In the conversations with the fire chief is it his intention, as I just sit here looking at the bridge, will the bridge take a fire truck? Al-Jaff: Yes, actually it would. McGonagill: So they could get equipment down there. Al-Jaff: Correct. So what we are waiting for is official certification that the bridge will be able to handle the truck. Preliminary investigations tell us that yes, it will be able to handle it. McGonagill: Under the conditions of the PUD can you put in a requirement that the bridge always be able to handle a truck? Bridges age. To meet that. I don’t know if there is a code for that but I just want the ability to get an ambulance down there. At least to get one small piece of equipment in there. If there was an emergency, that’s whose going to respond and I don’t want to see the fire truck go blasting down through there no knowing if the bridge won’t take it and it ends up in the lake. Aanenson: I’m not sure you mentioned this Sharmeen but the house will be fire sprinkled. McGonagill: Yes, she said that. But they respond. Like a 9-1-1 call, somebody calls and has a heart attack or something and the fire guys, they respond. What I’m looking for is can in the PUD you put requirements similar to commercial bridges. That it’s maintained at a certain standard to allow fire equipment access. Al-Jaff: Specifically from a safety standpoint and emergency management, that will be the intent. Staff will check with the city attorney to ensure that…It is staff’s intent to ensure that this requirement is part of the planned unit development. We will check with legal counsel. McGonagill: The second question is similar to that. Is access for other commercial vehicles, garbage trucks, etc., they will have the same? Aanenson: Can I just clarify that, too? I think oftentimes in situations like that you have to bring your garbage up to the street. That’s actually a private driveway so typically you take your trash up to the end of the driveway, but we can clarify that. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 28 McGonagill: Okay. Very good. Because it’s, I just think about natural activities, landscaping, and construction. People are going to always be doing something down there. There’s going to be a weight requirement on that bridge? Aanenson: Yes, when they are constructing the house for sure. McGonagill: For sure and then as you go down the road it will be there too. I just want to ensure that it’s maintained safely. I realize it’s a private drive. It’s not our responsibility. But with a PUD it is. I mean we could put that in the PUD if that’s the way we want it to be done and just ensure that it’s safe. Okay. That’s all the questions I have. Weick: Great. Thank you. Other questions? Noyes: I have a little bit of a follow up question to kind of the previous one and it’s related to that private road and the maintenance of it. I would imagine the property owner is responsible for the plowing of that road in the winter? The plowing of the snow? Are there any restrictions related to use of road chemicals on that road given that this is a bridge over a lake. Al-Jaff: So back in 1993 when the wetland alteration permit was approved for the construction of the driveway one of the conditions was limiting chemicals used on the driveway. Noyes: Thank you. Skistad: I’m going to assume that flooding is not really an issue. It is an issue? Al-Jaff: It is…the island sits over 30 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Lake Lucy so it’s fine. It will be okay. Skistad: Okay. The other question I had was the accessory dwelling unit. It says it has a maximum of two bedrooms and it may not exceed 1600 square feet. I’m just wondering why we are limiting it to two bedrooms because like a typical apartment would be 1200 to 1300 square feet for a three-bedroom and this would be 1600 so it seems like…I was just curious about that. Why we would be limiting it specifically to two bedrooms with 1600 feet? Al-Jaff: So the 1600 feet was requested by the applicant. Number of bedrooms within the structure, a couple of things came into play. The first one was the capacity of the septic system that is proposed out there. This site will take in the sewage from the main house as well as the accessory dwelling unit. The intent is to provide a place for mom to live as well as a potential caregiver. So these are the two reasons why we limited the number of bedrooms, directly relating to the septic system that’s going to serve this site. Also, we needed to ensure that this was not a full-fledged detached single-family home but rather truly an accessory dwelling unit and it was reasonable to limit the size. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 29 Skistad: Thank you. McGonagill: Follow up on Commissioner Skistad’s septic system question, has any sort of percolating test been done on the island to know if the septic system will work out there? Aanenson: Just a second. Can you make sure you are speaking into your microphone? McGonagill: Sure. I’m sorry. I’ll just repeat the question. Follow up on Commissioner Skistad’s question on the septic system. Has any sort of percolating test been done on the island to give a high degree of certainty that a septic system will work and not effluent go into the lake? Aanenson: The Building Official looked at that, just cursory soil types, and they believe there is a couple different types of systems but they are confident that one of those would work. McGonagill: Okay. Thank you. Von Oven: We’ve been very specific about this accessory dwelling unit so as not to make it a sellable total home. I guess, given my unfamiliarity with those things, is there anything about an accessory dwelling unit that makes it less safe than the requirements on a normal single-family home? Aanenson: No. It would still have to go through the building permit process. Be inspected like a regular one. Again, the goal was, there’s no limit to the square footage of a home so you can have one large home. In this circumstance they have identified a home and want to have an ancillary one instead of saying you are going to get two lots. We want to cap those so it doesn’t become two separate lots as Ms. Al-Jaff indicated. But it has to go through the same rigorous. It would have to meet as Sharmeen indicated there would have to be sewer and water which would be through the well and septic and in addition, all of the building codes. Von Oven: I understand that it was the request of the applicant to make that accessory dwelling unit a maximum of 1600 feet. I’m still confused on the max of two bedrooms. Sharmeen, I know you said part of the reason for this was to ensure that it doesn’t turn into a single-family home. Given that that’s covered in other areas, I’m going to make the assumption that the actual single- family home to be built can has as many bedrooms as it wants, right? Al-Jaff: That’s correct. As long as the number of bedrooms can be served via public or private utilities. Von Oven: Okay. I guess then my question ends up being this: Between these two structures, is there a maximum number of bedrooms that the proposed sewage system will be able to handle, and is that governed through some sort of inspection process? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 30 Aanenson: Correct. It is. They have to demonstrate that and it’s actually based on bedroom space to your septic and well. Let’s just go back to the two separate dwellings again. If you have enough to make it two complete homes then you have different traffic patterns, different use of the property. So when it’s intended to be ancillary and regulated by the homeowner, it’s a different feel than two separate homes with cars coming and going, two sets of trash being hauled up to the end of the driveway, that sort of thing. We are looking, it says one structure with something ancillary that is related to that principal structure. Von Oven: Thank you. Skistad: I guess I’m just going to ask a future question then. So if, let’s say that someone in the future, a new person has purchased the property. Perhaps they will probably have to install a new septic system so they won’t be able to increase the bedroom. The land won’t be able to have a three-bedroom instead of a two-bedroom unit unless they come back to us and ask for a variance? Aanenson: Yes. Or amend the PUD. Typically, if you add additional bedrooms, you have to demonstrate that you have sewer capacity. Could they oversize it to begin with? That’s potential. I’m not sure. That is something that would have to be looked at at the time when they are putting together the system. Any changes to the plan as laid out would have to come back. Any modifications, which would have to come back as a PUD amendment. That’s why the PUD was put together. To regulate all that’s being used. Skistad: I understand what you are doing. I understand what you are saying, but let’s say that they have an office and it just naturally becomes a bedroom at some point. I don’t know if there is a better way to write that. Because the goal is to just make sure obviously that we don’t overcome the sewage capacity because we don’t obviously want to spill anything into Lake Lucy. Weick: There is a septic field sizing attachment which is really long actually. They specify, and there’s two different options. They specify seven bedrooms and then they sort of explain how they can. It really comes down to the bedrooms. They explain how they can appropriately fit one or two mounds or septic systems to support the seven bedrooms where they can build one for the main house and one for the accessory structure. But there’s only so much space to be able to have the runout fields and all that kind of stuff. I think what they are saying is it sounds like they want that primary structure to be five bedrooms and honestly, I think all that’s left is just size. Aanenson: Capacity. Weick: Thank you. That’s a better word. Capacity. Is two bedroom. I think they are fully limited by septic and nothing else. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 31 Aanenson: So if one of the bedrooms in the accessory building was being used as an office, that’s fine. It wouldn’t affect. Weick: Right. Skistad: Okay. Weick: Great. These are great questions. It’s awesome. It’s really important. Reeder: Under normal regulations, is it possible for this accessory dwelling unit to be rented out or would that be illegal? How would be control that? Al-Jaff: They can rent it out but it cannot be a short-term lease. It has to be three months or more. Reeder: So we essentially have two residences on one lot? Al-Jaff: Correct. Which is permitted under a planned unit development. Aanenson: It was proposed, it was originally intended to be an accessory structure for a grandparent. Could it be used for something else? We always as planners try to anticipate something in the future. So if you’re doing a weekly rental, you have a different capacity whether there is two bedrooms. How it’s being used is different that someone who might rent it for the summer or something like that. That’s how we looked at that it. Looking at having a three-month as opposed to renting it out by the week. Reeder: So there’s no requirement that the accessory building, the person that lives in that building, be related to the main building? It can be anybody? It seems like we had one of these accessory buildings I think about two years ago that we approved and I can’t remember what the requirements were. Aanenson: Right now we have a variance requirement that you can finish your basement off and have someone living with you but that has to be related to you. It’s a different requirement. It is certainly a requirement that you could put on this property. That’s certainly under the PUD. You could say that the person living there has to be related. That’s an option. We gave a different option. Reeder: What is the intent of the proposed property owner? Aanenson: I would have to ask the applicant to speak to that. Skistad: I’m just going to look at this from a lease perspective again. I’m just going to assume that, let’s just say it sold and they want to lease this secondary area. I’m going to assume that you Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 32 could do a typical lease which runs 12 months and then possibly it turns into a month-to-month lease but that wouldn’t cause any problems here because they would have met the minimum. Aanenson: Yes. Skistad: Okay. Weick: Great. More thoughts or questions on this one for Sharmeen? Just holler if I’m rushing you as commission members. If you need some more time to read or think, just holler at me. I don’t want to push anybody. Von Oven: Hey, Commissioner Weick! Weick: Yes. Von Oven: I’m hollering at you. I’ve been sitting here trying to figure out how to ask this question so it’s not going to come out right. At the very beginning, Commissioner McGonagill talked about the bridge and it was very clear to me that an existing bullet, there is not an existing bullet in the PUD that says, “Hey, this bridge has to be safe.” So I think my question is more procedural. For us as a Planning Commission tonight, moving forward with this. If there are those of us who would like to see a bullet point in that PUD, is that be an amendment possibly? Is that a motion? Is that something that can be done after the fact? How does that work? Aanenson: I would recommend that you make it, if someone wanted that in the conditions, that you make that an amendment to the motion, that that be added. Von Oven: Okay. McGonagill: Following up to his question procedurally, does that happen after the first motion or can you make an amendment before then? Aanenson: You can make it as part of your original motion. Weick: As part of the motion. Aanenson: So what we’re checking on is the legality. It is a lot of record so they could build on that lot without going through this process and you would have the same jurisdiction. But we’ll follow up on that and have that answer if you want to amend that motion and get that clarified when it goes up to city council. McGonagill: Very good. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 33 Von Oven: Got it. Okay, sorry. I’m going to repeat what you just said to make sure I understood it. If the applicant was just going to build a single-family home, they could just do that in its current state? Aanenson: Yes. Von Oven: The reason why our concerns about the bridge holding an ambulance could be met is because they are asking for this variance. I’m sorry, this rezoning, in which case we have the ability to amend what is being proposed right now as the PUD? Aanenson: That is correct. Von Oven: I think I’m getting this thing down. Thank you. Weick: You’re killing it. But a motion is premature at this point because we have not heard from the applicant or the public hearing. So unless there are other… I will move at this point to, and we certainly have an opportunity to follow up with staff as questions come up. I would invite the applicant if they are on the Zoom call to make any comments or a presentation. Wicka: I am and thank you very much. Weick: Welcome! Wicka: Thank you. And thank you to all the members of the Planning Commission for considering this rezoning request. My name is John Wicka. I live at 2547 Bridle Creek Trail in Chanhassen with my wife and five daughters. We’ve been, I don’t know if this qualifies, in Chanhassen as long-time residents but we’ve been here is this house for 17 years. At least we’re not newcomers. I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you all and offer you a little additional information and commentary for your consideration as you consider this rezoning request. The first time my wife and I experienced the island was in June of 2018, just over two years ago and it was just recently put up for sale by Al and Mary Weingart who live on the adjacent property and still do. It was their dream to build a home out on the island. They’re the ones that oversaw the building of the bridge so I’ll come back around and talk more about that and I will be happy to answer any questions pertaining to the bridge. I understand there is a lot of concern in and around that. When we first experienced the island in June of 2018 I think our first reaction was I guess we couldn’t believe it was available. It’s sizeable. It has some acreage to it. It’s unique. It’s an island but it’s even better than an island. It’s an island with a pre-existing, very capable bridge that is intended to support fire trucks and construction trucks and so forth. It was really an ideal find for us. If you’ve had a chance to consider the topography map there, the top graphic map, it’s very interesting topography. It’s flat around many of the edges but it has this elevation in the center of the island and there are bluffs there. There are bluff setbacks there. There are wetland setbacks so there is a lot of dynamic things happening on the island but it is indisputably breathtakingly beautiful. We were excited about the opportunity because of the size Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 34 of the property and it had been our desire for several years to build a home for my mother who is now 86 years old near us. My dad died 21 years ago so this has been kind of something that we’ve been thinking of considering and planning for some time now. My mother is fiercely independent but she is 86 years old. She now really relishes or welcomes or is excited about the opportunity to maintain her independence but still have us just a moment’s notice away. So this was one of the big motivations for us to purchase the island because we thought it gave us the elbow room, if you will, to build a separate structure for her. Just two months later we purchased the island and at that time the first order of business was to eradicate the buckthorn. I think about it as kind of freeing the island because the buckthorn had a choke hold on the island. I think it was a neighbor’s comment that Sharmeen referenced a few moments ago that they were glad that we took out the buckthorn. I worked with Jill Sinclair. Walked the island with her over two years ago. She made some recommendations on some experts that could remove the buckthorn and treat it. It transformed the island back to its natural state. So it was very important for us to get the balance back to the island, and it doesn’t surprise me that the neighbors were in favor or positively affected by that because they all look at the island. It makes the view of the island so much more interesting because you get depth. It looked like an overgrown bush. You couldn’t see into it. You couldn’t penetrate it. Frankly, when you were on the island you couldn’t see the water from the interior of the island. So that was important to us. I don’t know what your experience is with buckthorn but I didn’t realize they grew into trees. Sizeable, 14-inch diameter type size trees. So it was not a small undertaking. At the same time in August of 2018 when we undertook the eradication of the buckthorn, we ran off full speed with an architect to build our dream home and with an attached, if you will, living structure for my mother. We intended to do that via connecting it by a skyway or a tunnel so that we met all of the city requirements. But, the things that make the island beautiful and unique and magical also make it a very challenging piece of property to build on. Again, there are bluffs. There are bluff setbacks. There are wetland setbacks. There was only one sensible place to put the septic system. There is a lot of elevation in the interior of the island so getting the grading right to get up that high is tricky business. Sadly, about five months later after spending a fair amount of money in architectural fees, we bagged it. We were demoralized. We couldn’t get it right. It was like putting together a puzzle and we couldn’t seem to kind of crack the code to make it work, so we stopped. We let several months go by. I did reach out to city staff and I had all sorts’ questions about variances and every time we turned around we hit another complication and we just couldn’t get it to work. But after kind of a cooling off period we took a second attempt at it but we stopped again because it just was overwhelming. It was an emotionally overwhelming, and I know you may be thinking how can it be so hard when there is that much space to work with? But again, all of the complexities layered on top of each other make it a very challenging task. So I circled back with city staff another time looking for more out-of-the-box solutions, if you will, and that’s when I discovered that single-family residential was an option. So, we started looking at that and we realized that that was a really big undertaking. As Sharmeen, the road coming down that services the island from Lake Lucy Road would have to be widened considerably. There were, I think, nine or more agencies that were involved in the original construction of the road and bridge in 1998-1999 and so to bring sewer and water down, the only way we could get our head around that would be to involve a developer and go through the whole subdividing of the island and that’s not what we Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 35 had in mind for the island. We were enamored with natural beauty of it and this felt like we would have to get very creative and create lots and the size of the roads and the cul-de-sacs and the infrastructure just made this a very undesirable option. That led us to the option to consider the PUD which, the way I understand it, is it provides some flexibility in creating exceptions that we are talking about here today but also requires, if you will, something in return, meeting the higher standards, sprinklers, or the turnarounds for the fire trucks, the higher building standards. We intend to build a green, being environmentally green with solar and geothermal and high building standards, and high-quality windows, and recapturing rainwater for reuse, that type of thing. So we intend to meet the higher standards in the conditions put upon the PUD request. This seemed to be a much more sensible solution, not only for what we were trying to accomplish, but really for all parties involved. The impact on the island is much lower than going for single-family residential. It’s better for the community, for the neighborhood, for the island, and so it seemed to be much more sensible and while I suppose the single-family residential is an option, it’s not a very good option. We would like to preserve the integrity of the island, not only now but into the future and we think this is a way to do that. I only have a few more comments if you can bear with me for just a few more moments. I did have a chance to meet with the city and county experts on some of the challenges that the island offers. I was able to walk the island with Fire Chief Don Johnson… (coughing). I just got over COVID so pardon the cough here. Weick: Thanks. Wicka: I’m in the clear now but I can tell it is still affecting my throat. I was able to walk the island with Fire Chief Don Johnson and he understandably had some concerns, some of them that you stated. That’s why we had gone through, I went back to the bridge builder and designers and it is and always was designed to carry not only construction trucks, but emergency vehicles and fire trucks. I’ll come back and be happy to answer questions about that. We also incorporated turnarounds for the fire trucks. I heard some of that commentary and concerns in the previous PUD that you were discussing. So we have accounted for that. I also was able to have a Zoom meeting with Terry Jeffery, Watershed Planning Manager with Bluff Creek. I also learned quite a lot in my conversation with Terry and was very pleased because I know this is high on everybody’s list, keeping the integrity of the water and the cleanliness of the lake. That’s certainly a concern of ours. I was very pleased in that conversation with Terry. He was very matter of fact. He knew exactly which five concerns he had that we needed to meet and we went through them together. I won’t put words in his mouth because I’m sure he’s commented on his own, but by the end of the conversation I think we, I think I can say both agreed that the island actually handled all of these requirements very well, actually. We didn’t have any concerns there. I’ll trust that he gave his own report and that it’s consistent with what I’m saying. The driveway, the purpose for that driveway that runs further to the south that forks off was to service the accessory dwelling unit. The reason for that, and I have a little bit of heartburn giving that up I’ll be honest with you, but I’m willing to make that a condition is because it’s flat. If you can see those topographic lines there it doesn’t climb the elevated area of the island. It runs along the south side and is largely flat. That was intended to make it easier for my aging mother to be able to go out and walk and get outside, frankly, and enjoy the island. But, as I said, we have agreed Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 36 to make it a condition. There were multiple comments on that assuming that’s still desirable we have agreed to have the one driveway service both dwelling units. My final comment is I did initiate some outreach to the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association and that consisted of all lot owners on Lake Lucy and they are the ones most impacted by any development that we do on the island, whatsoever. So I did initiate some outreach there. Because of COVID we weren’t able to organize any in-person meeting, but I did encourage them all to bring any questions or concerns with me. I did hear from three of the parties. I was able to answer their questions. Most of them were curiosities and clarification. I believe I have all of their support, at least I’m not aware of anyone that doesn’t support it. I was able to provide them with clearer maps than were available on the city website so they could get a better understand of what we were after. So, I feel pretty good about engaging the neighborhood and as I said I heard from some of them but I think it was all positive interaction and I hope and I believe that I have their support. Again, I would like to thank you all for your consideration here and I’m happy to take any questions you might have. Weick: Wow. Thank you so much. That offers a lot of color and clarity on what you’re trying to do and thank you for hanging in there with your cough and giving us that. That’s really helpful. I will open it up though. I know there were several questions that commission members had raised that I know would have been properly answered by you. I don’t know if those have already been answered but we’ll open it up to the commission members to either ask follow ups on those questions or ask new questions. McGonagill: Thank you for a very good presentation and walking us through this. You walked with the Fire Chief so I would assume, talk to us about the bridge that there is a certain design standard the bridge has been designed to and it was for construction equipment and for fire equipment and it is your intention to maintain that standard in the bridge going forward? Wicka: Yes it is Commissioner and thank you for the opportunity to come back around and address the concerns around the bridge. Fire Chief Johnson was, we had quite a lot of back and forth via email after our meeting and he was able to provide me with the specifications on the two, I believe they are the two largest trucks, but they are also the two primary trucks that would service the island in case of a fire. I did share that with the company that built the bridge. They went to their engineers and shared with me that the bridge was designed and built to support trucks of that size. That answers I think the question in terms of when it was originally built. I think your question is a fair one in terms of ongoing upkeep and maintenance and as long as it’s a reasonable interval so that, because I am sure there are cost implications that come with this, but as long as there is a reasonable interval to recertify it with an engineering firm that it is still capable or operating as designed, still capable of supporting those trucks, I would be happy to incorporate that. McGonagill: Thank you. I appreciate that because just like you I’ve got some elderly parents and when I call emergency services I want them to be able to get to them, and it’s very true to you, too. On the design, one of the questions I have for you is, I didn’t see it. I may have missed it Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 37 because I just probably missed it. There’s a two-story guest house and there is also an accessory structure at the end of the first driveway. Is that a garage? Wicka: I think it’s ultimately going to be a multi-purpose structure. It’s put there because as someone was pointing out earlier we’re going to be responsible for a lot of private driveway here. So I’m envisioning a plow in there and probably other utility-type tools and needs for the island. We put it there so it was kind of closer to the access point of the island and also a little bit out of the way although we intend to design it such that it’s equally attractive to the rest of the structures on the island. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I had Mr. Chairman. Weick: Great. Thank you. Any other questions for our applicant? Skistad: I don’t have a question I just have a, I guess a statement. My goal, my questions about the limitations of the bedrooms was just to make sure we weren’t putting a limitation over the property unnecessarily. That was the only goal with that. I think it sounds like a great project so I’m for it so that was the reason for reason for those questions. Weick: Great. Thank you. Wicka: And thank you Commissioner for that thought. I appreciate it. When it was suggested that it be limited we were agreeable to it because as previously stated the concept is just a space for my mother and perhaps a caregiver. So thank you. Aanenson: Mr. Chair, if you want to open the public hearing. Weick: I will. I was just giving people a second in case they wanted to speak. I always feel like I’m talking over somebody. Thank you Commission members and thank you for, again, a really thorough and honest appraisal of how you are going to use that beautiful piece of property so thank you very much for joining us. At this time I will open the public hearing portion. If anyone would like to come forward and speak and opinion on this matter may do so now. Sharmeen, you already. I might be mixing my cases but I think you already summarized the emails for us, right? Al-Jaff: I did. Weick: Yes. Thank you. And those will be in the record and the telephone number has been up on the screen for a little bit. Would you like to? Yeah, absolutely. So we have someone joining us here in chambers. Again, as you’ve heard, just please speak very loudly into the microphone. Frerichs: Thank you very much. I’m Roger Frerichs and we are neighbors on Lakeway Drive, the street right over next to it. I didn’t come here with any particular speech in mind but I came with less knowledge and so after hearing the discussion of the owner, it sounds like he’s trying to Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 38 maintain the beauty that that island has and that’s why I think it should be something that we should favor. Weick: Thank you so much. I’m happy to agree. I do think it’sa , considering the alternatives, I think it’s certainly a good use. Any phone calls? Al-Jaff: I haven’t heard so far. None. Weick: None. With that and with no one else here in chambers I will close the public hearing portion of tonight’s matter and open to commissioner comment, discussion, and motion. And I pre-empted a little bit there. It is getting late, I have to admit and I’m maybe getting a little dreary. I offered my opinion there a little bit too soon but I am certainly in favor of this PUD. I imagine that if there is concern from neighbors or public like myself, I was envisioning a typical development that we look at where they come in and they grade it down, they clear out the trees, they build four houses and four docks. You know what I mean? That option I think would be disappointing at least to me and I imagine for some of the local residents as well. I would imagine once seeing and hearing these plans it puts to rest those concerns of dramatically changing the view of that island which I just don’t think will happen. I am certainly strongly in favor of the PUD in this instance, and if things want to be added to it, we can certainly do that as part of the motion. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you to stick with the other, just to the small amendment we talked about on the bridge just for emergency access. I’m also there with you because, let’s face it. This is privately owned. It’s property that someone has owned and purposed. They have the constitutional right to develop it and they worked through the process and I think it’s about as nice as one could imagine if he carries out the plans that he’s talking about it would be great. So, yes I think it’s a good use of the property for a very unusual one. Weick: Yeah. Sure. McGonagill: It will add a lot to look of the lake in many ways. But I will be proposing the, some amendment on the, just so the bridge remains within a certain level of usability by fire, by emergency equipment. I’ll say it that way. And I’ll let staff sort out what it needs to look like. Weick: Fair enough. How do the rest of you feel? Von Oven: And therein lies the experience of Commissioner McGonagill because I’m sitting here racking my brain trying to figure out how we amend this thing on the fly and get that all in and he knows he can just rely on staff to do that. I’m in the same boat. It’s funny. One, what a fantastic project both from the standpoint of I’m super jealous of what you are doing. This is beautiful and what a great project. Two, it’s probably the first project that’s come through where as a commissioner I have zero fear of us setting some sort of a precedent here because we’re never going to see another property like this so, variance away here. It’s great. The third part is Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 39 that I’m not at all worried about the applicant and his any lack of letting that bridge deteriorate. He will have every reason in the world to ensure that emergency personnel can access that property. The reason that I will support, however Commissioner McGonagill gets this done, is for the next owner. For that owner down the road who might be renting the property out, which I am also in favor of for long term and I’m glad that provision was put it there, to just ensure that we don’t end up with a situation many, many years from now where someone is renting out the property to someone else and they’re letting the bridge deteriorate. I do not want to put any undue burden on Mr. Wicka for yearly engineering reviews of the bridge. I just don’t know how that works. But finding a way where we ensure that for the long term that very unique structure maintains safety standards without putting the undue burden on Mr. Wicka is what I would be in favor of. McGonagill: I support you in that regard. Five daughters, he’ll have 15 grandchildren pretty soon and he will want emergency personnel in there. Weick: Great. Those are great thoughts and great viewpoints. Go ahead. McGonagill: Are you ready for a recommendation? Weick: Sure. McGonagill moved, Skistad seconded for the Planning Commission to recommend approval of rezoning of the property located at 1601 Lake Lucy Road with an approximate area of 9.03 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development-Residential incorporating the attached standards and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision recommendation, including an amendment that staff will work with the property owner to develop appropriate safety standards for the continued maintenance of the bridge. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner McGonagill. We have a valid motion. Do we have a second? Skistad: I’ll second that. Weick: Thank you Commissioner Skistad. We have a motion and a second. Any last minute comment? Hearing none we will have a roll call vote and I will start with Commissioner Randall, if he returned. Weick: Again, thank you to everyone who prepared and good luck with the property and I think this item does go to City Council. Aanenson: Correct. Actually it goes on the 14th. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 40 Weick: December 14th. If you are following this item at home, December 14th in front of City Council. Again, thank you to everybody and that is our final public hearing for this evening. Would someone please note the Commission minutes from November 17th. Our last meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Skistad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 17, 2020 as presented. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner Skistad. Kate, are there any administrative presentations? Aanenson: No. We did not have any City Council updates but I just wanted to apprise you of something. I did receive an email from someone on 63rd Street, Mr. Meyer, who said he wasn’t able to, he didn’t see the number flash across the screen. That was on the second item. So he gave me his phone number and I will contact him tomorrow and get his concerns because that item goes on the January City Council meeting. We’ll make sure that those concerns are addressed and he may have an opportunity to speak so I’ll follow up on that. I appreciate the fact that he emailed me right away and could catch it. I just wanted to let you know that this is our last meeting of the year so we will be gathering January 4th and actually, we have four items that will be in for sure. We have some other ones contemplating be we try to hold back once we get to four just because it ends up being a long meeting. These were very different items, all of them, and had a lot of complex issues. I appreciate your due diligence on that. So yes we will have a meeting on January 4th. With that, that’s all I had Mr. Chair. Weick: All right. I don’t have anything other than to say I thoroughly enjoy, I was going to say love, but maybe that’s too strong. But I thoroughly enjoy working with this Planning Commission. You guys are a lot of fun and make a very difficult Zoom-meeting effort very pleasurable so thank you all of the Commission members. You guys are prepared and funny and it’s awesome, so thank you. With that I would entertain a motion to adjourn, Skistad moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Kim Meuwissen CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Resolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 Street Improvement Project (Project 20­05) Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.4. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG 20­05 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council accepts the feasibility report for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20­05 and calls for a public hearing to be held on January 25, 2021.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND On November 27, 2019, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) for consultant services for the project. On December 20, 2019, the Engineering Department received two proposals from consultants for consultant services. On January 13, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Kimley  Horn & Associates and authorized preparation of a feasibility study. On February 11, 2020, the Engineering Department hosted an open house to introduce and discuss the project with the public.  Notifications were sent to residents in the nearby areas who will be affected by the project. On April 13, 2020, the City Council accepted the feasibility report for the project and called for a public hearing to be held on April 27, 2020. On April 27, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation of plans and specifications. On May 26, 2020, the City Council accepted the plans and specifications and authorized publication of an advertisement to bid the project. On June 19, 2020, the City opened sealed bids for the project. On June 22, 2020, the City Council called a Public Hearing to be held on July 13, 2020. On July 13, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing and tabled adoption of the assessment roll and awarding a CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, January 11, 2021SubjectResolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 StreetImprovement Project (Project 20­05)Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG 20­05PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council accepts the feasibility report for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20­05 andcalls for a public hearing to be held on January 25, 2021.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn November 27, 2019, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On December 20, 2019, the Engineering Department received two proposals from consultants for consultant services.On January 13, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Kimley  Horn & Associates and authorizedpreparation of a feasibility study.On February 11, 2020, the Engineering Department hosted an open house to introduce and discuss the project withthe public.  Notifications were sent to residents in the nearby areas who will be affected by the project.On April 13, 2020, the City Council accepted the feasibility report for the project and called for a public hearing to beheld on April 27, 2020.On April 27, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation ofplans and specifications.On May 26, 2020, the City Council accepted the plans and specifications and authorized publication of anadvertisement to bid the project.On June 19, 2020, the City opened sealed bids for the project.On June 22, 2020, the City Council called a Public Hearing to be held on July 13, 2020. On July 13, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing and tabled adoption of the assessment roll and awarding a construction contract to July 27, 2020. On July 27, 2020, the City Council decided to not move forward with the project in 2020. On November 10, 2020, the City Council approved a contract amendment with Kimley Horn & Associates to facilitate minor updates to the 20­05 feasibility study and contract documents in addition to re­bidding the project as the 2021 City Street Rehabilitation project.  DISCUSSION The 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation project has been renamed the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation project.  The project number (20­05) remains the same as do the six neighborhood areas identified for rehabilitation in the project. Staff utilized the City's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the project limits as shown in Figures 1­7 (attached).  None of these areas have had major rehabilitation performed after the original urbanized street construction (only maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack­sealing, and seal coats). The six neighborhood areas follow: The Lake Lucy Road area which lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.7 miles of streets built­out between 1988 and 1992. The Redwing Lane area which also lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.5 miles of streets built­out in 1980. The Trappers Pass area which lies north of Pleasant View Road and west of TH 101 with approximately three miles of streets built­out between 1985 and 1994. The Choctaw Circle area which lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.4 miles of roads built­out in 1978. The Kurvers Point Road area which also lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.6 miles of streets built­out between 1991 and 1992. The Marsh Drive area which lies north of Rice Marsh Lake and south of TH 5 with approximately 1 mile of streets built­out in 1986. An RFP for a geotechnical exploration and pavement evaluation was prepared and distributed by the Engineering Department for the Trappers Pass, Marsh Drive, Redwing Lane, and Lake Lucy Road areas.  American Engineering Testing, Inc. was hired to perform the work and prepare the geotechnical report for these project areas.  The Engineering Department had previously issued an RFP and had a geotechnical report prepared for the Kurvers Point and Choctaw Circle areas.  This report was prepared by Braun Intertec in the fall of 2018.  The City conducted the geotechnical assessment and pavement evaluation to aid in the analysis of proper roadway pavement rehabilitation designs for the project. Kimley­Horn was provided the geotechnical reports for the neighborhood areas in the project scope to incorporate with the feasibility study and subsequent design.  Based on the geotechnical reports and the feasibility study, four of the six areas should be rehabilitated by a full depth reclamation (FDR) technique in lieu of a mill and overlay.  This is primarily based on the existing Overall Condition Index (OCI), existing pavement thicknesses and condition, and the supporting soils.  The other two areas (Choctaw Circle and Redwing Lane) are recommended to be a mill and overlay.   All of the streets identified have deteriorated over the years and are in need of roadway pavement rehabilitation.  The project was designed in 2020 but the City decided to not move forward with the project due to several factors.  The City's revised Capital Improvement Plan for 2021­25 plans for the rehabilitation of the same project area and streets in 2021. As with any road rehabilitation project, minor spot repair of curb and gutter and other public utilities are planned.  The majority of the roadways within the project areas do not have an existing trail or sidewalk.  Any existing CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, January 11, 2021SubjectResolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 StreetImprovement Project (Project 20­05)Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG 20­05PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council accepts the feasibility report for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20­05 andcalls for a public hearing to be held on January 25, 2021.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn November 27, 2019, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On December 20, 2019, the Engineering Department received two proposals from consultants for consultant services.On January 13, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Kimley  Horn & Associates and authorizedpreparation of a feasibility study.On February 11, 2020, the Engineering Department hosted an open house to introduce and discuss the project withthe public.  Notifications were sent to residents in the nearby areas who will be affected by the project.On April 13, 2020, the City Council accepted the feasibility report for the project and called for a public hearing to beheld on April 27, 2020.On April 27, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation ofplans and specifications.On May 26, 2020, the City Council accepted the plans and specifications and authorized publication of anadvertisement to bid the project.On June 19, 2020, the City opened sealed bids for the project.On June 22, 2020, the City Council called a Public Hearing to be held on July 13, 2020.On July 13, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing and tabled adoption of the assessment roll and awarding aconstruction contract to July 27, 2020.On July 27, 2020, the City Council decided to not move forward with the project in 2020.On November 10, 2020, the City Council approved a contract amendment with Kimley Horn & Associates tofacilitate minor updates to the 20­05 feasibility study and contract documents in addition to re­bidding the project asthe 2021 City Street Rehabilitation project. DISCUSSIONThe 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation project has been renamed the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation project. The project number (20­05) remains the same as do the six neighborhood areas identified for rehabilitation in theproject.Staff utilized the City's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the project limits as shownin Figures 1­7 (attached).  None of these areas have had major rehabilitation performed after the original urbanizedstreet construction (only maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack­sealing, and seal coats).The six neighborhood areas follow:The Lake Lucy Road area which lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.7 miles of streets built­outbetween 1988 and 1992.The Redwing Lane area which also lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.5 miles of streets built­out in1980.The Trappers Pass area which lies north of Pleasant View Road and west of TH 101 with approximately threemiles of streets built­out between 1985 and 1994.The Choctaw Circle area which lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.4 miles of roads built­out in 1978.The Kurvers Point Road area which also lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.6 miles of streets built­outbetween 1991 and 1992.The Marsh Drive area which lies north of Rice Marsh Lake and south of TH 5 with approximately 1 mile ofstreets built­out in 1986.An RFP for a geotechnical exploration and pavement evaluation was prepared and distributed by the EngineeringDepartment for the Trappers Pass, Marsh Drive, Redwing Lane, and Lake Lucy Road areas.  American EngineeringTesting, Inc. was hired to perform the work and prepare the geotechnical report for these project areas.  TheEngineering Department had previously issued an RFP and had a geotechnical report prepared for the Kurvers Pointand Choctaw Circle areas.  This report was prepared by Braun Intertec in the fall of 2018.  The City conducted thegeotechnical assessment and pavement evaluation to aid in the analysis of proper roadway pavement rehabilitationdesigns for the project.Kimley­Horn was provided the geotechnical reports for the neighborhood areas in the project scope to incorporatewith the feasibility study and subsequent design.  Based on the geotechnical reports and the feasibility study, four of thesix areas should be rehabilitated by a full depth reclamation (FDR) technique in lieu of a mill and overlay.  This isprimarily based on the existing Overall Condition Index (OCI), existing pavement thicknesses and condition, and thesupporting soils.  The other two areas (Choctaw Circle and Redwing Lane) are recommended to be a mill andoverlay.  All of the streets identified have deteriorated over the years and are in need of roadway pavement rehabilitation.  Theproject was designed in 2020 but the City decided to not move forward with the project due to several factors.  TheCity's revised Capital Improvement Plan for 2021­25 plans for the rehabilitation of the same project area and streets in2021.As with any road rehabilitation project, minor spot repair of curb and gutter and other public utilities are planned.  The majority of the roadways within the project areas do not have an existing trail or sidewalk.  Any existing pedestrian ramps impacted by the project have been designed to be brought into compliance in accordance with the City's ADA transition plan.  City staff performed a condition assessment on the existing storm sewer structures to evaluate the need for improvements.  All identified needs have be incorporated into the project.  Kimley­Horn evaluated each neighborhood area for potential flooding during a 100­year event at all emergency overflows (EOF) for roadway low points and stormwater ponds.  The results for each area are summarized in the feasibility study and identified concerns have been addressed in the design.  A number of comments from the open house hosted on February 11, 2020, were also related to drainage concerns.  As appropriate, these concerns have been addressed in the design.   Major replacement of watermain and sanitary sewer mains are not necessary.  The valves on the watermain are planned to be rehabilitated by changing out the bolting on the existing valves.  The age of the original installation indicates the bolting is likely to be mild steel.  The bolts will be replaced with stainless steel to protect them long term from the corrosive soils found in Chanhassen.  Minor repairs primarily related to reducing infiltration and inflow are recommended for the sanitary sewer system. Proposed improvements will address current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District permit requirements.  Due to there being no new or re­constructed impervious surfaces in the project there are not any triggers for permanent stormwater management rules in either watershed district. Engineering is planning to have minor adjustments made to the drawings based on additional information obtained in 2020 after the project was cancelled.  For example, a pond clean­out in the Trappers Pass area is the largest item planned to be added to the project.  After the contract documents have been updated the project is planned to be re­bid in the first quarter of 2021.   Schedule The projected schedule for project is as follows: Funding Budget for the proposed work has been included in the 2021 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2021.  Unit pricing based on the bids received in 2020 was utilized to update the cost estimating within the updated feasibility report.  This project specific information also facilitated reducing unknowns typically determined during design and covered with contingency funding.  Funding for the project is proposed to come from the pavement management fund and special assessments to benefiting properties for the street improvement costs.  The special assessments will be managed per the City's Assessment Practice.  City utility enterprise funding will be utilized to cover the rehabilitation needs specific to each utility. The preliminary special assessment amounts for the six neighborhood areas identified to be completed are as follows: Lake Lucy Lane area:  $3,004 Redwing Lane area:  $1,996 Choctaw Circle area:  $2,040 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, January 11, 2021SubjectResolution 2021­XX: Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Hearing for 2021 StreetImprovement Project (Project 20­05)Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG 20­05PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council accepts the feasibility report for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20­05 andcalls for a public hearing to be held on January 25, 2021.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn November 27, 2019, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On December 20, 2019, the Engineering Department received two proposals from consultants for consultant services.On January 13, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Kimley  Horn & Associates and authorizedpreparation of a feasibility study.On February 11, 2020, the Engineering Department hosted an open house to introduce and discuss the project withthe public.  Notifications were sent to residents in the nearby areas who will be affected by the project.On April 13, 2020, the City Council accepted the feasibility report for the project and called for a public hearing to beheld on April 27, 2020.On April 27, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation ofplans and specifications.On May 26, 2020, the City Council accepted the plans and specifications and authorized publication of anadvertisement to bid the project.On June 19, 2020, the City opened sealed bids for the project.On June 22, 2020, the City Council called a Public Hearing to be held on July 13, 2020.On July 13, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing and tabled adoption of the assessment roll and awarding aconstruction contract to July 27, 2020.On July 27, 2020, the City Council decided to not move forward with the project in 2020.On November 10, 2020, the City Council approved a contract amendment with Kimley Horn & Associates tofacilitate minor updates to the 20­05 feasibility study and contract documents in addition to re­bidding the project asthe 2021 City Street Rehabilitation project. DISCUSSIONThe 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation project has been renamed the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation project. The project number (20­05) remains the same as do the six neighborhood areas identified for rehabilitation in theproject.Staff utilized the City's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the project limits as shownin Figures 1­7 (attached).  None of these areas have had major rehabilitation performed after the original urbanizedstreet construction (only maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack­sealing, and seal coats).The six neighborhood areas follow:The Lake Lucy Road area which lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.7 miles of streets built­outbetween 1988 and 1992.The Redwing Lane area which also lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.5 miles of streets built­out in1980.The Trappers Pass area which lies north of Pleasant View Road and west of TH 101 with approximately threemiles of streets built­out between 1985 and 1994.The Choctaw Circle area which lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.4 miles of roads built­out in 1978.The Kurvers Point Road area which also lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.6 miles of streets built­outbetween 1991 and 1992.The Marsh Drive area which lies north of Rice Marsh Lake and south of TH 5 with approximately 1 mile ofstreets built­out in 1986.An RFP for a geotechnical exploration and pavement evaluation was prepared and distributed by the EngineeringDepartment for the Trappers Pass, Marsh Drive, Redwing Lane, and Lake Lucy Road areas.  American EngineeringTesting, Inc. was hired to perform the work and prepare the geotechnical report for these project areas.  TheEngineering Department had previously issued an RFP and had a geotechnical report prepared for the Kurvers Pointand Choctaw Circle areas.  This report was prepared by Braun Intertec in the fall of 2018.  The City conducted thegeotechnical assessment and pavement evaluation to aid in the analysis of proper roadway pavement rehabilitationdesigns for the project.Kimley­Horn was provided the geotechnical reports for the neighborhood areas in the project scope to incorporatewith the feasibility study and subsequent design.  Based on the geotechnical reports and the feasibility study, four of thesix areas should be rehabilitated by a full depth reclamation (FDR) technique in lieu of a mill and overlay.  This isprimarily based on the existing Overall Condition Index (OCI), existing pavement thicknesses and condition, and thesupporting soils.  The other two areas (Choctaw Circle and Redwing Lane) are recommended to be a mill andoverlay.  All of the streets identified have deteriorated over the years and are in need of roadway pavement rehabilitation.  Theproject was designed in 2020 but the City decided to not move forward with the project due to several factors.  TheCity's revised Capital Improvement Plan for 2021­25 plans for the rehabilitation of the same project area and streets in2021.As with any road rehabilitation project, minor spot repair of curb and gutter and other public utilities are planned. The majority of the roadways within the project areas do not have an existing trail or sidewalk.  Any existingpedestrian ramps impacted by the project have been designed to be brought into compliance in accordance with theCity's ADA transition plan. City staff performed a condition assessment on the existing storm sewer structures to evaluate the need forimprovements.  All identified needs have be incorporated into the project.  Kimley­Horn evaluated each neighborhoodarea for potential flooding during a 100­year event at all emergency overflows (EOF) for roadway low points andstormwater ponds.  The results for each area are summarized in the feasibility study and identified concerns have beenaddressed in the design.  A number of comments from the open house hosted on February 11, 2020, were also relatedto drainage concerns.  As appropriate, these concerns have been addressed in the design.  Major replacement of watermain and sanitary sewer mains are not necessary.  The valves on the watermain are plannedto be rehabilitated by changing out the bolting on the existing valves.  The age of the original installation indicates thebolting is likely to be mild steel.  The bolts will be replaced with stainless steel to protect them long term from thecorrosive soils found in Chanhassen.  Minor repairs primarily related to reducing infiltration and inflow are recommendedfor the sanitary sewer system.Proposed improvements will address current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), MinnehahaCreek Watershed District, and Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District permit requirements.  Due to there beingno new or re­constructed impervious surfaces in the project there are not any triggers for permanent stormwatermanagement rules in either watershed district.Engineering is planning to have minor adjustments made to the drawings based on additional information obtained in 2020after the project was cancelled.  For example, a pond clean­out in the Trappers Pass area is the largest item planned tobe added to the project.  After the contract documents have been updated the project is planned to be re­bid in the firstquarter of 2021.  ScheduleThe projected schedule for project is as follows:FundingBudget for the proposed work has been included in the 2021 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2021.  Unitpricing based on the bids received in 2020 was utilized to update the cost estimating within the updated feasibilityreport.  This project specific information also facilitated reducing unknowns typically determined during design andcovered with contingency funding.  Funding for the project is proposed to come from the pavement managementfund and special assessments to benefiting properties for the street improvement costs.  The special assessments willbe managed per the City's Assessment Practice.  City utility enterprise funding will be utilized to cover the rehabilitationneeds specific to each utility.The preliminary special assessment amounts for the six neighborhood areas identified to be completed are as follows:Lake Lucy Lane area:  $3,004 Redwing Lane area:  $1,996 Choctaw Circle area:  $2,040 Kurvers Point Road area:  $4,282 Marsh Drive area:  $2,221 Trappers Pass area:  $3,005 The Redwing Lane and Choctaw Circle areas will be rehabilitated by a standard mill and overlay technique.  The Trappers Pass, Marsh Drive, Lake Lucy Lane, and Kurvers Point Road areas will be rehabilitated by a full depth reclamation.  The main difference in the assessment cost is related to this primary difference. These preliminary assessment amounts compare favorably to the final assessment amounts proposed in 2020. A summary of the project costs per area and funding sources is as follows: The improvements associated with the rehabilitation of the roadway portion of the project totals to approximately $3,800,000.  The attached CIP sheet indicates $3,600,000 is available.  Engineering coordinated with the Finance department regarding this difference.  The $3,600,000 was a projected collection amount from the initiation of the franchise fee.  Finance was able to update the actual revenue collected from the franchise fee and confirmed the $200,000 difference was available. RECOMMENDATION From an engineering and financing perspective this project is feasible, necessary, and cost effective.  Staff recommends the updated feasibility report for City Project No. 20­05 be accepted by the Council. Staff also recommends a Public Hearing be authorized and scheduled on January 25, 2021 to facilitate public input and comment regarding the project. ATTACHMENTS: Figures 1­7 ­ Project Area Mapping 2021­25 Streets CIP Map Feasibility Study 2021 CIP Sheets Geotechnical Report ­ Kurvers Pt & Choctow Cir Geotechnical Report ­ Trappers, Marsh, Redwing, Lake Lucy 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation Maps (Figures 1-7) Figure 1: Lake Lucy Road Area Map Figure 2: Choctaw Circle Area Map Figure 3: Kurvers Point Road Area Map Figure 4: Marsh Drive Area Map Figure 5: Redwing Lane Area Map Figure 6: Trappers Pass (West) Area Map Figure 7: Trappers Pass (East) Area Map ############################################################### # # ######################### Lake Virginia Christmas Lake Lotus Lake Brendan Pond Lake Harrison Kerber Pond Lake Susan Rice Marsh Lake Lake Riley Rice Lake Lake St. Joe Lake Minnewashta Lake Ann Lake Lucy ST15 ST14 ST17 ST61 ST18 Minnewashta Regional Park North Lotus Lake Park Meadow Green Park Lake Ann Park Chanhassen Pond Park Chanhassen Nature Preserve Chanhassen Recreation Center Lake Susan Park Rice Marsh Lake Preserve Power Hill Park Fox Woods Preserve Bandimere Community Park Bluff Creek Golf Course Hesse Farm Park Preserve Lake Susan Preserve Raguet Wildlife Management Are MN Valley National Wildlife Re MN Landscape Arboretum Seminary Fen Scientific & Nat* Bluff Creek Preserve Independent School District 11 Independent School District 112 Independent School District 276 Riley Ridge Park Lake Ann Park Preserve SA5 SA7 SA5 SA41 SA101 SA5 )212 PowersBlvdLyman Blvd AudubonRdGreatPlainsB lv d Chanhassen RdArboretumBlvd Ar bor et umBl vd Pioneer Trl Hwy 2 1 2 Hwy 212GalpinBlvdHazeltineBlvdMarketBlvdHwy 7 Hwy 7 Powers BlvdFl yi ng CloudDr Co Rd 101 ST101 ST101 GH117 Date Created: 11/25/2020 Document Path: K:\Departments\Engineering\PavementRehab2021\PavementRehab2021\PavementRehab2021.aprxCreated By: City of Chanhassen - Engineering Department µ0 3,000 Feet 0 0.5 Mile 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan Pavement Management - Streets (2021-2025) City of Chanhassen Legend 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2021 - Municipal State Aid (MSA) 2022 - Municipal State Aid (MSA) 2023 - Municipal State Aid (MSA)### ### ###2021 - County/State Project ### ### ###2024 - County/State Project kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651 645 4197 January 11, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: George Bender, P.E. Assistant City Engineer RE:Feasibility Report: City Project 20-05, 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council, The enclosed feasibility report has been prepared for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. This report is an update to the 2020 project that was ultimately not awarded by the Council due to impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and budget challenges. The only material change in project scope is adding in a stormwater pond cleanout in the Trappers Pass neighborhood, which was identified as a need in the Stormwater Pond Maintenance Plan presented to Council on October 26, 2020. This report investigates the rehabilitation of 6.2 miles of roadway throughout the City of Chanhassen including the following six areas: Lake Lucy Road, Choctaw Circle, Kurvers Point Road, Marsh Drive, Redwing Lane, and Trappers Pass. The investigation includes the following: roadway pavement rehabilitation, curb and gutter and pedestrian ramp replacement, storm sewer, stormwater pond and drain tile improvements, and minor water main and sanitary sewer improvements for the project areas. The proposed scope of work, estimated costs, financing and schedule for improvements are detailed in this report. Completing all the pavement improvements included in this scope would result in an estimated increase to the average Overall Condition Index (OCI) for city streets from 70 to 72. The City’s goal is to maintain an average OCI of 70 or greater; therefore, this project goes a long way in meeting our goal. Information utilized in the preparation of this report included utility as-builts, information gathered through field reviews, GIS information, property owner information meetings and discussions with City staff. All available information was reviewed and considered to determine the feasibility of the proposed improvements. We believe that the proposed improvements identified in this report are feasible, that they will benefit the properties in the project area and that they will benefit the City of Chanhassen. Sincerely, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Chadd Larson, P.E. Project Manager 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT Feasibility Report City Project No. 20-05 City of Chanhassen, Minnesota January 11, 2021 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT Feasibility Report CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA CITY PROJECT 20-05 Prepared By: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.I hereby certify that this plan, specification 767 Eustis Street or report was prepared by me or under my Suite 100 direct supervision and that I am duly St. Paul, MN 55114 Licensed Professional Engineer under the (651) 645-4197 laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature: __________________________ Chadd Larson, P.E. File: 160511046 Date: January 11, 2021 Lic. No. 41864 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 5 PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................. 6 Street Improvements ......................................................................................................................... 6 Storm Sewer and Drainage Analysis.................................................................................................. 7 Lake Lucy Road Area .............................................................................................................. 7 Redwing Lane Area ................................................................................................................. 7 Choctaw Circle Area ................................................................................................................ 8 Kurvers Point Road Area ......................................................................................................... 8 Marsh Drive Area ..................................................................................................................... 8 Trappers Pass Area ................................................................................................................. 8 Sanitary Sewer .................................................................................................................................. 9 Watermain ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Right-Of-Way and Easement Requirements .................................................................................... 10 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ............................................................................................... 10 ESTIMATED COSTS ............................................................................................................................. 10 METHOD OF FINANCING ..................................................................................................................... 12 Estimated Assessments .................................................................................................................. 12 Lake Lucy Road Area ............................................................................................................ 12 Redwing Lane Area ............................................................................................................... 12 Choctaw Circle Area .............................................................................................................. 12 Kurvers Point Road Area ....................................................................................................... 13 Marsh Drive Area ................................................................................................................... 13 Trappers Pass Area ............................................................................................................... 13 PROJECT SCHEDULE ......................................................................................................................... 13 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 14 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1 – Project Location Map EXHIBIT 2 – Typical Section EXHIBIT 3 – Roadway Improvements EXHIBIT 4 – Utility Improvements EXHIBIT 5 – Proposed Assessment Map APPENDIX B – PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE INFORMATION APPENDIX C – DETAILED COST ESTIMATES APPENDIX D – PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL 3 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This feasibility report was originally drafted for the 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. The feasibility report was approved by the City Council in April 2020. Final design for the project was completed and the project received contractor bids in June 2020. After review of the project bids and available City funding, the City Council rejected all bids in July 2020 and the project did not proceed. The project has been renamed as the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project and this feasibility report has been updated to reflect new funding amounts and minor changes to the project scope. This feasibility report has been updated and prepared for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. The project includes improvements to approximately 6.2 miles of local roadways within the City of Chanhassen in 6 distinct areas including the Lake Lucy Road Area, Redwing Lane Area, Choctaw Circle Area, Kurvers Point Road Area, Marsh Drive Area, and Trappers Pass Area. The following is a list of improvements evaluated for each area: ·Pavement rehabilitation by full depth reclamation (FDR) or mill and overlay. ·Spot curb and gutter and pedestrian ramp replacement. ·Drain tile replacement and installation. ·Storm sewer structure and pond improvements. ·Sanitary sewer manhole improvements. ·Water main, hydrant, gate valve and valve bolt replacement. The estimated cost for the proposed improvements for all project areas is shown below. These costs include an allowance for indirect costs. A summary of costs for each individual area can be found later in this report. IMPROVEMENTS ESTIMATED COSTS Roadway Improvements $3,796,980 Storm Sewer Improvements $483,045 Sanitary Sewer Improvements $357,000 Watermain Improvements $408,200 Indirect Costs $200,000 Total Project Improvements $5,245,225 The improvements are proposed to be financed through a combination of City of Chanhassen roadway and utility funds and special assessments to property owners. The following is a preliminary financing plan: 2020 Financing Source Amount Revolving Assessment Fund (City portion)$2,271,433 Surface Water Utility Fund $485,000 Sewer Utility Fund $360,000 Water Utility Fund $610,000 Special Assessments to property owners $1,518,792 Total $5,245,225 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 4 If the City Council chooses to accept this report, we recommend that the following project schedule be followed: City Council Receive Final Feasibility Report Call Public Hearing January 11, 2021 Public Hearing & Order Contract Documents January 25, 2021 Council Approves Plans and Specs Authorize Advertisement for Bids February 8, 2021 Bid Opening March 12, 2021 Neighborhood Meeting March/April 2021 Assessment Hearing & Council Awards Contract April 26,2021 Begin Construction May 2021 Substantial Construction Complete November 2021 Based upon the analysis completed as part of this report, the proposed 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05, are feasible, necessary, and cost effective, and would benefit the properties in the project area and the City of Chanhassen. We recommend the following: A. The City Council accepts this feasibility report and calls a public hearing for the improvements. 5 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 INTRODUCTION This feasibility report was originally drafted for the 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. The feasibility report was approved by the City Council in April 2020. Final design for the project was completed and the project received contractor bids in June 2020. After review of the project bids and available City funding, the City Council rejected all bids in July 2020 and the project did not proceed. The project has been renamed as the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project and this feasibility report has been updated to reflect new funding amounts and minor changes to the project scope. The Chanhassen City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. The proposed project includes improvements to approximately 6.2 miles of local roadways spread throughout the City of Chanhassen. These areas have only received general maintenance since the original street construction as described below: ·Lake Lucy Road Area – Approximately 0.7 miles of roadway located east of Powers Blvd (CR 17) constructed between 1988 and 1992. ·Redwing Lane Area – Approximately 0.5 miles of roadway located east of Powers Blvd (CR 17) and south of the Lake Lucy Road area constructed in 1980. ·Choctaw Circle Area – Approximately 0.4 miles of roadway located west of TH 101 and adjacent to Lotus Lake constructed in 1978. ·Kurvers Point Road Area – Approximately 0.6 miles of roadway located west of TH 101 and south of the Choctaw Circle Area constructed between 1991 and 1992. ·Marsh Drive Area – Approximately 1.0 mile of roadway located north of Rice Marsh Lake and south of TH 5 constructed in 1986. ·Trappers Pass Area – Approximately 3 miles of roadway located west of TH 101 constructed between 1985 and 1994. No major pavement rehabilitation has been performed on these roadways since their original construction, resulting in deterioration of roadways and a need for improvements. None of these roadways were originally constructed per the City’s current standard street section which includes a sand sub-base and drain tile; however, localized areas of the roadways have had subsequent drainage improvements completed. Minor improvements and repairs that have not already been completed will also be made to public utilities in the project areas. The proposed project includes the following improvements within the six project areas: ·Pavement rehabilitation by full depth reclamation (FDR) or mill and overlay. ·Spot curb and gutter and pedestrian ramp replacement. ·Drain tile replacement and installation. ·Storm sewer structure and pond improvements. ·Sanitary sewer manhole improvements. 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 6 ·Water main, hydrant, gate valve and valve bolt replacement. A project location map is shown in Appendix A, Exhibit 1. PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS The project scope includes improvements to six separate neighborhoods throughout the City of Chanhassen. The areas were chosen based on the maintenance history, year they were constructed and pavement condition. The majority of roadways within all project areas do not have trail or sidewalk. There is a limited number of pedestrian ramps located within the project areas. The ramps that are not currently meeting ADA standards will be reconstructed and are included as part of this project. The following is a summary of the proposed street and utility improvements included as part of this project. STREET IMPROVEMENTS The City evaluates the condition of street pavement based on an overall condition index (OCI) every three years. A street with an OCI less than 49 is considered in poor condition. All project areas identified in the project scope are in poor condition and in need of repairs. A geotechnical report prepared by American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) was completed on March 11, 2020 for the City of Chanhassen. The report evaluated different pavement rehabilitation techniques ranging from mill and overlay to full reconstruction for each project area. Soil borings, pavement cores and ground penetrating radar (GPR) where performed in each project area to determine the existing pavement and underlying soil conditions. The findings from the geotechnical report indicate that full depth reclamation (FDR) is the preferred rehabilitation technique for most of the roadways. Mill and overlay was also determined to be feasible on some of the roadways. FDR consists of creating a recycled aggregate base made up of the existing bituminous pavement and underlying base material. A new section of bituminous is then paved on top of the recycled base. Mill and overlay only removes the upper section of the existing bituminous and does not allow for improvements to the aggregate base material to be made. Based on information in the geotechnical report and coordination with City staff, each area was evaluated for the appropriate pavement rehabilitation method. The same technique will be used on all roads in each individual area to provide a consistent final product and construction efficiency. Full reconstruction of the roadways was considered but eliminated from further evaluation due to available project budget. The following table summarizes the recommended treatment and the range of OCI’s for each project area. PROJECT AREA OCI RANGE MILES OF ROADWAY REHABILITATION TREATMENT Lake Lucy Road Area 13.65 – 36.45 0.7 FDR Redwing Lane Area 38.08 – 67.71 0.5 Mill & Overlay Choctaw Circle Area 24.81 – 44.2 0.4 Mill & Overlay Kurvers Point Road Area 12.98 – 34.29 0.6 FDR Marsh Drive Area 27.64 – 39.67 1.0 FDR Trappers Pass Area 17.39 – 48.54 3.0 FDR Since the pavement reclamation and mill and overlay processes can be completed without removal of curb and gutter, only spot replacement will be necessary to address surface drainage and poor curb and 7 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 gutter conditions. Replacement locations include areas of observed settlement, utility excavation areas, and as determined by the field engineer during construction. An allocation of 10% of total curb length was included in the cost estimate for spot replacement. The actual limits of replacement will not be determined until construction. In 2017, the City performed curb and drain tile replacement in the western half of the Trappers Pass area; therefore, only 5% curb replacement was estimated for this area. The City performed a field review of the drain tile in each project area and provided recommended improvements that are included in the cost estimate for this project. The improvements include replacement of existing drain tile that is in poor condition and adding new drain tile in areas where reoccurring drainage issues have occurred. The proposed roadway improvements are included in Appendix A, Exhibits 2 and 3. STORM SEWER AND DRAINAGE ANALYSIS The project areas fall within two watershed districts; Minnehaha Creek (Lake Lucy Road and Redwing Lane areas) and Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek (Choctaw Circle, Kurvers Point Road, Marsh Drive, and Trappers Pass areas). There are no triggers for stormwater rules in either watershed district for this project because there are no new or reconstructed impervious surfaces. City staff also performed a condition assessment on the existing storm sewer structures to evaluate the need for improvements in project areas. Since the roadway improvements are limited to pavement rehabilitation measures, it is not feasible to replace the existing storm sewer system. Therefore, a detailed drainage analysis was not performed on each project area. However, each neighborhood was evaluated for potential flooding during a major (100-year) event at emergency overflows (E.O.F.) for roadway low points and stormwater ponds to determine if there were any significant issues. A summary of the assessment is listed below: LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA There are four roadway low points within the project area. The E.O.F. for each low point appear to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. There are two stormwater ponds in the project area, each pond E.O.F. appears to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. Two open house comments were received for this portion of the project area. A property owner at 6531 Troendel Circle commented that they get ice buildup along the curb and gutter. This area will be further reviewed during construction for potential curb and gutter replacement to correct any localized drainage issues. A property owner at 861 Vineland Court commented about lack of existing drain tile. Additional drain tile has been added to Vineland Court and is included in the project. REDWING LANE AREA There are two roadway low points within the project area. The E.O.F. for the low point along Penamint Lane appears to flow north to pond LL 1-26 which means that it does not drain downstream. After visual inspection, the properties north of the low point along Penamint Lane appear at or below the E.O.F elevation. There are three stormwater ponds in the neighborhood. As mentioned above, the E.O.F. for pond LL 1-26 appears to be at or above the elevation of adjacent properties to the north. The E.O.F. for pond LL 1-9 appears close to the property at the southwest corner at Penamint Lane and Penamint Court. Field survey was performed to determine the E.O.F and property low opening (L.O.) elevations. For LL 1-9, the E.O.F elevation is above the L.O. elevation, but the L.O. elevation is three feet above the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 8 modeled 100-year high water level (H.W.L.) for LL 1-9. Based on follow up conversations with the City, there are no recommended improvements. An open house comment was received from a property owner at 6840 Redwing Lane regarding areas of infiltration being wet and unusable in the spring. This is a typical scenario for infiltration areas during the spring and therefore no improvements are planned to address this comment. CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA There are two roadway low points within the project area, both appear to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. There are no stormwater ponds in the neighborhood’s portion of the project area. An open house comment was received from a property owner at 6780 Brule Circle regarding backyard drainage from other homes running through their yard. The comment also noted that surface grading had already been performed in an attempt to correct this situation. Localized private property drainage issues are generally outside the scope of this project as any correction of this issue would likely require grading on private property. KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA There are three roadway low points within the project area. Two out of three E.O.F. appear to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. The E.O.F. at Kurvers Point Road (south of Basswood Circle) runs west towards adjacent properties. A site visit was conducted to confirm E.O.F elevations in relation to adjacent properties. After visual inspection, the E.O.F. appears to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. There are two stormwater ponds along Kurvers Point Road, each appear to have a functional E.O.F. An open house comment was received from the property owner at 21 Twin Maple Lane regarding various drainage issues. Drain tile was incorporated into final design at this location. MARSH DRIVE AREA There are seven roadway low points within the project area. Five of the seven E.O.F. appear to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. The E.O.F. at Hidden Lane runs south towards adjacent properties. For the roadway low point along Hidden Court, the adjacent properties appear to be at or below the E.O.F. elevation. A site visit was conducted to confirm E.O.F elevations in relation to adjacent properties. After visual inspection, the E.O.F. appears to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. There are no stormwater ponds in this neighborhood’s portion of the project area. An open house comment was received from a property owner at 8030 Hidden Circle concerning poor pavement drainage. This drainage issue will be resolved with new pavement allowing better drainage of the cul-de-sac. TRAPPERS PASS AREA There are ten roadway low points within the project area. Nine of the roadway low points appear to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. The E.O.F. at Timber Hill Road low point flows south toward the adjacent properties along Timber Hill Road. A site visit was conducted to confirm E.O.F elevations in relation to adjacent properties. After visual inspection, the E.O.F. appears to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. There are four stormwater ponds in the project area. The E.O.F. for pond PC-P1.1 appears to be near adjacent properties along Piedmont Court. The E.O.F. for pond PC-P1.2 appears to be near adjacent properties 9 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 along Trappers Pass. For PC-P1.1, field survey was performed to determine the E.O.F and property low opening (L.O.) elevations. The E.O.F elevation is above the L.O. elevation, but the L.O. elevation is three feet above the modeled 100-year H.W.L. for PC-P1.1. Based on follow up conversations with the City, there are no recommended improvements. For PC-P1.2, a site visit was conducted to confirm E.O.F elevations in relation to adjacent properties. After visual inspection, the E.O.F. appears to be functional and located an adequate distance away from adjacent properties. No open house comments were received for this portion of the project. City staff identified operational issues with the ponds located between Oxbow Bend and Trapline Circle in the Trappers Pass area, including pond PC-P1.4 and the larger adjacent pond. Survey work was completed to confirm the existing conditions and identify the areas of improvement. The planned improvements could range from dredging the sediment to storm sewer pipe and structure replacement. City staff also performed a condition assessment on the existing storm sewer structures to evaluate the need for improvements in project areas. The assessment completed by the City recommends a range of improvements to storm sewer structures including ring adjustments, doghouse work, and complete structure replacement. There are no recommended storm sewer pipe improvements as part of the project. SANITARY SEWER The majority of existing sanitary sewer within the project areas consist of 8-inch PVC pipe. Approximately 2,000 feet of sanitary sewer located in the Choctaw Circle area consists of 8-inch ABS pipe. Televising was completed to identify the need for improvements to the sanitary sewer in all of the areas. Based on a review of the televising information, no major improvements will be required as the sanitary sewer is in adequate condition. City staff has prepared a condition assessment of existing sanitary manholes in the project areas to determine the need for repairs, reconstruction, or replacement. Improvements include the replacement of rings and castings as needed, rebuilding structures that are in poor condition and addressing infiltration issues. The detailed cost estimate in Appendix C includes these improvements. The proposed sanitary sewer improvements are shown in Appendix A, Exhibit 4. WATERMAIN The existing water main located within the project areas consist of 6-inch, 8-inch and 12-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP). The Kurvers Point Road area and Redwing Lane area consists entirely of 6-inch DIP. The Marsh Drive area, Choctaw Circle area, and Lake Lucy Road area all consist of both 6-inch and 8-inch DIP. The Trappers Pass area mainly consists of 6-inch and 8-inch DIP; however, 12-inch DIP water main is also present. Based on coordination with City staff, it was determined that most of the improvements will be limited to replacing existing bolts on gate valves. The specific gate valves needing improvement have been evaluated and determined by City staff to be included in this project. The City evaluated the feasibility of removing a portion of water main in the Lake Lucy area where there is existing 6-inch water main connecting Lake Lucy Road and Western Drive. This section of water main is located outside of the public roadway right-of-way and is within the backyards of multiple properties as seen in Appendix A, Exhibit 4 (3 of 4). Eliminating this water main section would alleviate maintenance access issues in the future. A water main elimination analysis report was completed on February 24, 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 10 2020 by WSB. This report concluded that removing the existing 6-inch watermain between Lake Lucy Road and Western Drive would not cause any disruptions or issues with water pressure and available fire flows. The cost to remove this section of water main and relocate the existing water services is estimated at $75,000. This cost is currently not included in the project costs. Proposed water main improvements for each area are shown in Appendix A, Exhibit 4. RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS This feasibility study assumes that no additional right-of-way will be required for the construction of this project. In addition, it is assumed that any easements required for construction will be dedicated at no cost to the City. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT An open house was held on February 11, 2020 to receive public input. City of Chanhassen and Kimley- Horn staff were present at the meeting to answer questions and provide information on the project. A total of 39 residents signed in and attended the meeting. At least one resident from each of the six areas was present. The main concern heard from property owners were related to drainage issues either within the road or on their private property. The scope of this project is limited to the public right-of-way and any improvements that can be made to improve drainage in the areas of concerned will be addressed during final design. Comment sheets submitted at the open house meeting are provided in Appendix B. The 2020 project also included public hearings at both the ordering of the project and assessment hearing phases. No material feedback was received at the ordering of project stage, however, since the assessment hearing was held after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, a great deal of public comment, both for and against the project, was received by staff and directly to the Council on the validity of the project. The main theme of the comments against moving forward with the project, and the assessments, stemmed from the economic burden the assessments would place on property owners who may already have been affected by the pandemic. It mainly was a question of timing, rather than need. This was the primary reason why the project was ultimately not awarded in 2020. ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated costs for 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05, are summarized below. The estimated project cost includes an allowance for indirect costs. Detailed cost estimates are provided in Appendix C. C.P. 20-05 Total Area Improvements Amount Lake Lucy Road Area $534,230.50 10% Redwing Lane Area $370,097.50 7% Choctaw Circle Area $304,439.00 6% Kurvers Point Road Area $545,536.50 10% Marsh Drive Area $847,537.50 16% Trappers Pass Area $2,443,384.00 47% Indirect Costs $200,000.00 4% Total $5,245,225.00 100% 11 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY Lake Lucy Road Area 413,000.00$ Redwing Lane Area 239,490.00$ Choctaw Circle Area 229,505.00$ Kurvers Point Area 428,235.00$ Marsh Drive Area 616,290.00$ Trappers Pass Area 1,870,460.00$ Roadway Subtotal 3,796,980.00$72% STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY Lake Lucy Road Area 48,730.50$ Redwing Lane Area 64,407.50$ Choctaw Circle Area 24,234.00$ Kurvers Point Area 45,101.50$ Marsh Drive Area 92,047.50$ Trappers Pass Area 208,524.00$ Storm Sewer Subtotal 483,045.00$9% SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY Lake Lucy Road Area 32,500.00$ Redwing Lane Area 31,200.00$ Choctaw Circle Area 25,700.00$ Kurvers Point Area 31,500.00$ Marsh Drive Area 64,200.00$ Trappers Pass Area 171,900.00$ Sanitary Sewer Subtotal 357,000.00$7% WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY Lake Lucy Road Area 40,000.00$ Redwing Lane Area 35,000.00$ Choctaw Circle Area 25,000.00$ Kurvers Point Area 40,700.00$ Marsh Drive Area 75,000.00$ Trappers Pass Area 192,500.00$ Water main Subtotal 408,200.00$8% INDIRECT COSTS 200,000.00$4% TOTAL C.P. 20-05 IMPROVEMENTS COST 5,245,225.00$100% 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 12 METHOD OF FINANCING The improvements described in this report are proposed to be financed through multiple funding sources. Based on the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the following is the preliminary financing plan for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05. 2020 Financing Source Amount Revolving Assessment Fund (City portion)$2,271,433 Surface Water Utility Fund $485,000 Sewer Utility Fund $360,000 Water Utility Fund $610,000 Special Assessments to Property Owners $1,518,792 Total $5,245,225 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS Special assessments are proposed to be levied against benefiting properties for the improvements included as part of this project. The rates have been established as a rehabilitation project based on the City of Chanhassen’s Assessment Practice updated November 2014. The proposed assessment method is described below. The benefitting properties will be assessed 40% of the roadway rehabilitation cost, including the full-depth reclamation, mill and overlay, bituminous pavement, curb and gutter replacement and drain tile. Only properties with direct driveway access to the roadways within each project area will be considered a benefitting property. Each area will have a separate assessment to reflect the improvements in those neighborhoods. The following is a summary of the proposed assessment rates for the street improvements included as part of this report. LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$413,000 Assessable Units:55 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$413,000/55 = $7,509.09 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($7,509.09/REU) = $3,003.64 REDWING LANE AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$239,490 Assessable Units:48 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$239,490/48 = $4,989.38 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($4,989.38/REU) = $1,995.75 CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$229,505 Assessable Units:45 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$229,505/45 = $5,100.11 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($5,100.11/REU) = $2,040.04 13 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$428,235 Assessable Units:40 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$428,235/40 = $10,705.88 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($10,705.88/REU) = $4,282.35 MARSH DRIVE AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$616,290 Assessable Units:111 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$616,290/111 = $5,552.16 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($5,552.16/REU) = $2,220.86 TRAPPERS PASS AREA Total Estimated Assessable Street Cost:$1,870.460 Assessable Units:249 REU Estimated 100% Assessment Rate:$1,870,460/249 = $7,511.89 Estimated 40% Assessment Rate:(40%)*($7,511.89/REU) = $3,004.76 The individual assessments range from $1,995.75 to $4,282.35 per property. The rate is affected by the type of roadway rehabilitation method recommended and the number of properties in the area. The total assessments to be levied against benefitting properties for the entire programmed improvements are $1,518,792. A preliminary assessment roll is provided in Appendix D detailing the proposed assessments by individual property owner for each area. A map of these properties is shown in Appendix A, Exhibit 5. A special assessment hearing would be required to levy assessments if the project is ordered by the City Council. At this hearing, the Council would determine the amounts of the assessment based on actual construction costs and interest rate to be charged. The assessments would be spread over 8 years. PROJECT SCHEDULE If the City Council chooses to accept this report, we recommend that the following project schedule be followed: City Council Receive Final Feasibility Report Call Public Hearing January 11, 2021 Public Hearing & Order Contract Documents January 25, 2021 Council Approves Plans and Specs Authorize Advertisement for Bids February 8, 2021 Bid Opening March 12, 2021 Neighborhood Meeting March/April 2021 Assessment Hearing & Council Awards Contract April 26,2021 Begin Construction May 2021 Substantial Construction Complete November 2021 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project │Feasibility Report January 11, 2021 │ City Project No. 20-05 14 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the analysis completed as part of this report, the proposed 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 20-05, are feasible, necessary, and cost effective, and would benefit the properties in the project area and the City of Chanhassen. We recommend the following: A. The City Council accepts this feasibility report and calls a public hearing for the improvements. APPENDIX A EXHIBITS LAKE LUCY RD. AREA CHOCTAW CIR. AREA KURVERS POINT RD. AREA MARSH DR. AREA REDWING LN. AREA TRAPPERS PASS AREA PROJECT LOCATION MAP 2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 EXHIBIT 1 ℄℄K:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_TYP SECT.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:42am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 TYPICAL SECTION EXHIBIT 2 5FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION 2.5" MILL & OVERLAY FULL DEPTH MILL & OVERLAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LEGENDK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_RDWY.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:42am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTHMARSH DRIVE AREA MAP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 3 - 1 OF 4 MARSH DRIVE AREA 101 101 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION 2.5" MILL & OVERLAY FULL DEPTH MILL & OVERLAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LEGENDK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_RDWY.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:43am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH CHOCTAW CIRCLE & KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA MAP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 3 - 2 OF 4 KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION 2.5" MILL & OVERLAY FULL DEPTH MILL & OVERLAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LEGENDK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_RDWY.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:44am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH LAKE LUCY ROAD & REDWING LANE AREA MAP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 3 - 3 OF 4 LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA REDWING LANE AREA 101 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION 2.5" MILL & OVERLAY FULL DEPTH MILL & OVERLAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LEGENDK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_RDWY.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:44am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH TRAPPERS PASS AREA MAP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 3 - 4 OF 4 TRAPPERS PASS AREA 555EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS STORM SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WATERMAIN GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_UTIL.dwg March 18, 2020 - 12:24pm2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTHMARSH DRIVE AREA MAP UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 4 - 1 OF 4 MARSH DRIVE AREA 28 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS 101101101 101101101 EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS STORM SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WATERMAIN GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_UTIL.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:48am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH CHOCTAW CIRCLE & KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA MAP UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 4 - 2 OF 4 KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA 9 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS 9 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS STORM SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WATERMAIN GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_UTIL.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:49am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH LAKE LUCY ROAD & REDWING LANE AREA MAP UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 4 - 3 OF 4 LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA REDWING LANE AREA 14 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS 16 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS 101101101 EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS STORM SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WATERMAIN GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_UTIL.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:51am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH TRAPPERS PASS AREA MAP UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 4 - 4 OF 4 TRAPPERS PASS AREA 77 GATE VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENTS 51 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 52 51 50 49 4847 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 3736353433323130 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 112111110 109108107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 989796 95 94 93 9291 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 280 260 250 80208040806080808090810081208140 8150 8160 8170 8180 8191 8181 8161 8141 8121 8101 8091 8081 8061 8041 8021 8001 8110 8114 8116 8118 8124 8283 8263 8243 8223 8203 8193 8183 8173 8163 8153 8143 8133 8123 8113 8103 331 321 311 8091 80818071 8061 8051 8040 8030 8020 8010 8000 271 261 80808090 8100 811081208130 8140 8150 8160 8170 8180 8190 310 320 330 340341 331 321 311 301 8128 8130 8132 8134 8136 8138 8140 8139 8137 8135 8133 8131 8129 8127 8123 8121 8117 8113 5PUBLIC SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAYK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_ASSESSMENT.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:51am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTHMARSH DRIVE AREA MAP PROPOSED ASSESSMENT MAP EXHIBIT 5 - 1 OF 4 MARSH DRIVE AREA 101 113114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133134135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 722172317241 7261 7271 71 51 41 21 20 40 60 40 30 20 2131 7361 7371 7381 7380 7370 7360 7350 7340 7330 7320 7310 7290 7280 7240 7220 7200 7160 7150 7140 7130 7120 7131 7151 A B 7251 101 101 153 153 154 154 157158159160161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 155156 197 196 195 194 193 192 191 190189 188 187 186 6850 15 31 517191101105 111 115 121 125 131 135 141 145 151 155 161 160 154 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 70 50 30 6811 6805 6801 6791 6781 6771 6761 67516750 6760 6770 6780 6790 6800 101 PUBLIC SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAYK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_ASSESSMENT.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:52am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH CHOCTAW CIRCLE & KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA MAP PROPOSED ASSESSMENT MAP EXHIBIT 5 - 2 OF 4 KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 199 198 6770 6781 6790 6800 6820 6840 6850 6870 6880 6890 6900 6910 6920 6921 6911 6901 6891 6881 6871 6841 6840 6821 6801 6791 6781 6770 6780 6790 6800 6820 6830 6771 6781 960 950 940 930 920 910 902 900 901 911 921 931 941 951 961 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 259 257 258 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 285 284283 282 281 280 279 278 277 276 275 274 273 272 271 270 298 299 246 247 297 296 295 294 293 292 291 289288 290 287 286 6500 6520 6540 6560 6580 6590 6581 6561 6541 6531 6501 6481 6491 6493 64951 6501 6511 900 880 860 840 820 861 881 901921 6561 6581 920940960980 6580 6560 6540 6520 6500 1000102010401060 1080 1100 6581 1121 1101 1081 1061 1041 1021 1001 981 961 941 921 6641 299A PUBLIC SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAYK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_ASSESSMENT.dwg March 18, 2020 - 5:30pm2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH LAKE LUCY ROAD & REDWING LANE AREA MAP PROPOSED ASSESSMENT MAP EXHIBIT 5 - 3 OF 4 LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA REDWING LANE AREA 101 302303 304305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326327 328 329 330331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404405406407 408 409 410 411 416 415 414 413 412 427 426 425 424 417 418 419 420 421422 423 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 428 429 430431 432 433 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 473474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491468 469 470471472 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 501 500 502 516 517 503 515 504 514 505506 507 508 509 510 511 513 512 541 518 540 519 539 520521 522 523 524 525 526 527528529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 6300 639063806370 6360 201 211 221 231 241251 261 271 6331 6341 6351 64216420 6410 6355 6357 6359 6363 6365 6367 63696371 6373 6375 6377 6379 6381 6383 6385 6387 6389 6391 6393 6395 6397 6399 6401 6403 6405 6407 6409 6411 6300 6306 6310 6320 6330 6340 6350 6368 6366 6341 6331 6321 6311 6301 6408 501 491 481 461 431 421 401 381 361 341 321 301 291 251 6260 6240 6220 6210 6201 6221 6241 6261 241 221 210 6281 6291 6301 6311 6331 6351 6371 6391 6340 6232 6230 6228 6226 6224 6222 6220 6218 6216 6214 185183 181 180 170 160 150 6208 6206 6204 6202 6200 98 96 94 92 90 88 86 87 89 91939597 96 94 92 90 88 91 93 95 97 96 94 92 90 88 9193 95 97 98 96 92 90 88 86 84 82 81 83 85 878991 93 95 97 99 101 100 110 120 130 121 111 6300 101 6310 6320 6225 6223 6221 6219 6217 6215 6213 6211 6209 6207 6205 6203 6201 6199 431 6300 6310 6311 6321 500 480 460 430 411 6320 410 420 430 6358 6356 6354 6352 6350 6340 6330 6320 6310 6300 3003406301 6311 6321 6331 6340 6330 290 6301 6311 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 6330 201 221241 260 280 6300 250 6362 6370 301 300310 331 301 291 300 313 314 315 316 317 446447448 449 450 451 542 543544 545 546 547 452 548 101 PUBLIC SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAYK:\TWC_Civil\City\CHANHASSEN\2020 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION\CAD\Plan Sheets\Exhibits\Feasibility\2020_PAVE-REHAB_FEAS_ASSESSMENT.dwg March 18, 2020 - 10:53am2021 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 20-05 NORTH TRAPPERS PASS AREA MAP PROPOSED ASSESSMENT MAP EXHIBIT 5 - 4 OF 4 TRAPPERS PASS AREA APPENDIX B PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE INFORMATION APPENDIX C DETAILED COST ESTIMATES Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 20,000.00$20,000.00$ 2 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 300 4.00$1,200.00$ 3 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 1100 10.00$11,000.00$ 4 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 140 5.00$700.00$ 5 WATER M GALLON 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 6 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION SQ YD 13000 4.50$58,500.00$ 7 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 800 2.50$2,000.00$ 8 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1500 75.00$112,500.00$ 9 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1500 70.00$105,000.00$ 10 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 140 32.00$4,480.00$ 11 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 100 40.00$4,000.00$ 12 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 500 22.00$11,000.00$ 13 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - REMOVE AND INSTALL LIN FT 440 28.00$12,320.00$ 14 8" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - REMOVE AND INSTALL LIN FT 250 35.00$8,750.00$ 15 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 16 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 100 32.00$3,200.00$ 17 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 1000 30.00$30,000.00$ 18 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 3,000.00$3,000.00$ 19 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 20 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 20 150.00$3,000.00$ 21 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 100 3.50$350.00$ 22 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 100 50.00$5,000.00$ 23 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ 24 SEEDING SQ YD 3000 2.00$6,000.00$ Subtotal 413,000.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 5 500.00$2,500.00$ 2 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 11 500.00$5,500.00$ 3 24" CASTING AND GRATE EACH 1 750.00$750.00$ 4 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 4 850.00$3,400.00$ 5 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 13 700.00$9,100.00$ 6 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 44.51 550.00$24,480.50$ 7 GROUT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 3 1,000.00$3,000.00$ Subtotal 48,730.50$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE CASTING EACH 1 250.00$250.00$ 2 CHEMICAL GROUT GALLON 35 40.00$1,400.00$ 3 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 16 250.00$4,000.00$ 4 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 16 400.00$6,400.00$ 5 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 1 850.00$850.00$ 6 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 15 700.00$10,500.00$ 7 GROUT MANHOLE - SANITARY EACH 7 1,300.00$9,100.00$ Subtotal 32,500.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 16 2,500.00$40,000.00$ Subtotal 40,000.00$ TOTAL LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA IMPROVEMENTS 534,230.50$ SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 1B CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) ESTIMATED COSTS: LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 15,000.00$15,000.00$ 2 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 20 5.00$100.00$ 3 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 200 4.00$800.00$ 4 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 900 10.00$9,000.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 20 15.00$300.00$ 6 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 50 5.00$250.00$ 7 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD 450 5.00$2,250.00$ 8 WATER M GALLON 25 50.00$1,250.00$ 9 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE TON 100 100.00$10,000.00$ 10 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.5")SQ YD 8500 4.00$34,000.00$ 11 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 600 2.50$1,500.00$ 12 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1400 75.00$105,000.00$ 13 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 50 32.00$1,600.00$ 14 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 100 40.00$4,000.00$ 15 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 200 22.00$4,400.00$ 16 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 17 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 200 32.00$6,400.00$ 18 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 700 30.00$21,000.00$ 19 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 20 100.00$2,000.00$ 20 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 3,000.00$3,000.00$ 21 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 22 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 20 150.00$3,000.00$ 23 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 100 3.50$350.00$ 24 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 25 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ 26 SEEDING SQ YD 1000 2.00$2,000.00$ 27 24" SOLID LINE PAINT LIN FT 15 6.00$90.00$ 28 CROSSWALK MULTI COMP GR IN (WR)SQ FT 120 10.00$1,200.00$ Subtotal 239,490.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 10 500.00$5,000.00$ 2 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 21 500.00$10,500.00$ 3 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 10 850.00$8,500.00$ 4 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 5 700.00$3,500.00$ 5 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 59.65 550.00$32,807.50$ 6 CONST CATCH BASIN - DESIGN 2X3 EACH 1 2,100.00$2,100.00$ 7 GROUT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ Subtotal 64,407.50$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 CHEMICAL GROUT GALLON 35 40.00$1,400.00$ 2 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 16 250.00$4,000.00$ 3 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 15 400.00$6,000.00$ 4 RECONSTRUCT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE EACH 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 5 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 15 700.00$10,500.00$ 6 GROUT MANHOLE - SANITARY EACH 6 1,300.00$7,800.00$ Subtotal 31,200.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 14 2,500.00$35,000.00$ Subtotal 35,000.00$ TOTAL REDWING LANE AREA IMPROVEMENTS 370,097.50$ SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 1C CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) ESTIMATED COSTS: REDWING LANE AREA ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 12,000.00$12,000.00$ 2 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 200 4.00$800.00$ 3 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 700 10.00$7,000.00$ 4 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 50 5.00$250.00$ 5 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD 400 5.00$2,000.00$ 6 WATER M GALLON 25 50.00$1,250.00$ 7 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE TON 100 100.00$10,000.00$ 8 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE - FULL DEPTH SQ YD 1200 5.00$6,000.00$ 9 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.5")SQ YD 6400 4.00$25,600.00$ 10 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 400 2.50$1,000.00$ 11 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1300 75.00$97,500.00$ 12 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 50 32.00$1,600.00$ 13 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 100 40.00$4,000.00$ 14 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 550 22.00$12,100.00$ 15 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - SCHED 40 LIN FT 70 30.00$2,100.00$ 16 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 17 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 100 32.00$3,200.00$ 18 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 600 30.00$18,000.00$ 19 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 3,000.00$3,000.00$ 20 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 21 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 10 150.00$1,500.00$ 22 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 30 3.50$105.00$ 23 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 100 50.00$5,000.00$ 24 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ 25 SEEDING SQ YD 2000 2.00$4,000.00$ 26 CROSSWALK MULTI COMP GR IN (WR)SQ FT 300 10.00$3,000.00$ Subtotal 229,505.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE PIPE APRON EACH 1 300.00$300.00$ 2 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 3 500.00$1,500.00$ 3 18" PIPE APRON EACH 1 1,000.00$1,000.00$ 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 5 500.00$2,500.00$ 5 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 1 850.00$850.00$ 6 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 5 700.00$3,500.00$ 7 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 18.88 550.00$10,384.00$ 8 GROUT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 3 1,000.00$3,000.00$ 9 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CU YD 12 100.00$1,200.00$ Subtotal 24,234.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE CASTING EACH 11 250.00$2,750.00$ 2 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 14 250.00$3,500.00$ 3 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 14 400.00$5,600.00$ 4 RECONSTRUCT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE EACH 3 1,500.00$4,500.00$ 5 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 11 850.00$9,350.00$ Subtotal 25,700.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 8" CUT & PLUG LUMP SUM 1 $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ 2 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 9 2,500.00$22,500.00$ Subtotal 25,000.00$ TOTAL CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA IMPROVEMENTS 304,439.00$ SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 1D CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) ESTIMATED COSTS: CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 20,000.00$20,000.00$ 2 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 20 5.00$100.00$ 3 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 250 4.00$1,000.00$ 4 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 1000 10.00$10,000.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 25 15.00$375.00$ 6 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 140 5.00$700.00$ 7 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD 50 5.00$250.00$ 8 REMOVE CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SQ YD 30 20.00$600.00$ 9 WATER M GALLON 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 10 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION SQ YD 13000 4.50$58,500.00$ 11 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 800 2.50$2,000.00$ 12 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1600 75.00$120,000.00$ 13 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 1600 70.00$112,000.00$ 14 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 140 32.00$4,480.00$ 15 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 100 40.00$4,000.00$ 16 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 1100 22.00$24,200.00$ 17 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - SCHED 40 LIN FT 50 30.00$1,500.00$ 18 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 19 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 150 32.00$4,800.00$ 20 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 850 30.00$25,500.00$ 21 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 25 100.00$2,500.00$ 22 8" CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SQ YD 60 100.00$6,000.00$ 23 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 3,000.00$3,000.00$ 24 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 25 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 20 150.00$3,000.00$ 26 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 40 3.50$140.00$ 27 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 100 50.00$5,000.00$ 28 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ 29 SEEDING SQ YD 3000 2.00$6,000.00$ 30 24" SOLID LINE PAINT LIN FT 15 6.00$90.00$ 31 CROSSWALK MULTI COMP GR IN (WR)SQ FT 150 10.00$1,500.00$ Subtotal 428,235.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 5 500.00$2,500.00$ 2 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 16 500.00$8,000.00$ 3 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 5 850.00$4,250.00$ 4 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 9 700.00$6,300.00$ 5 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 43.73 550.00$24,051.50$ Subtotal 45,101.50$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 CHEMICAL GROUT GALLON 15 40.00$600.00$ 2 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 20 250.00$5,000.00$ 3 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 20 400.00$8,000.00$ 4 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 20 700.00$14,000.00$ 5 GROUT MANHOLE - SANITARY EACH 3 1,300.00$3,900.00$ Subtotal 31,500.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 2 300.00$600.00$ 2 REMOVE HYDRANT EACH 2 800.00$1,600.00$ 3 HYDRANT EACH 2 6,000.00$12,000.00$ 4 6" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 2 2,000.00$4,000.00$ 5 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 9 2,500.00$22,500.00$ Subtotal 40,700.00$ TOTAL KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA IMPROVEMENTS 545,536.50$ SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 1E CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) ESTIMATED COSTS: KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 30,000.00$30,000.00$ 2 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 70 5.00$350.00$ 3 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 400 4.00$1,600.00$ 4 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 1600 10.00$16,000.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 75 15.00$1,125.00$ 6 WATER M GALLON 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 7 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION SQ YD 20000 4.50$90,000.00$ 8 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 1200 2.50$3,000.00$ 9 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 2400 75.00$180,000.00$ 10 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 2400 70.00$168,000.00$ 11 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 220 32.00$7,040.00$ 12 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 100 40.00$4,000.00$ 13 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 1200 22.00$26,400.00$ 14 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 15 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 300 32.00$9,600.00$ 16 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 1300 30.00$39,000.00$ 17 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 75 100.00$7,500.00$ 18 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 3,000.00$3,000.00$ 19 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 20 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 20 150.00$3,000.00$ 21 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 50 3.50$175.00$ 22 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 150 50.00$7,500.00$ 23 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 2 1,000.00$2,000.00$ 24 SEEDING SQ YD 4000 2.00$8,000.00$ Subtotal 616,290.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 8 500.00$4,000.00$ 2 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 15 500.00$7,500.00$ 3 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 5 850.00$4,250.00$ 4 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 13 700.00$9,100.00$ 5 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 40.64 550.00$22,352.00$ 6 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 60-4020 LIN FT 8.07 650.00$5,245.50$ 7 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 LIN FT 42 800.00$33,600.00$ 8 GROUT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 6 1,000.00$6,000.00$ Subtotal 92,047.50$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 CHEMICAL GROUT GALLON 50 40.00$2,000.00$ 2 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 32 250.00$8,000.00$ 3 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 32 400.00$12,800.00$ 4 RECONSTRUCT INSIDE DROP EACH 2 3,000.00$6,000.00$ 5 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 32 700.00$22,400.00$ 6 GROUT MANHOLE - SANITARY EACH 10 1,300.00$13,000.00$ Subtotal 64,200.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 30 2,500.00$75,000.00$ Subtotal 75,000.00$ TOTAL MARSH DRIVE AREA IMPROVEMENTS 847,537.50$ SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 1F CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) ESTIMATED COSTS: MARSH DRIVE AREA ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 60,000.00$60,000.00$ 2 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 70 5.00$350.00$ 3 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT 1000 4.00$4,000.00$ 4 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 3150 10.00$31,500.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 75 15.00$1,125.00$ 6 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 600 5.00$3,000.00$ 7 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD 1500 5.00$7,500.00$ 8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS WALK SQ FT 250 3.00$750.00$ 9 REMOVE CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SQ YD 30 20.00$600.00$ 10 SALVAGE BRICK PAVERS SQ FT 150 10.00$1,500.00$ 11 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV)CU YD 1100 35.00$38,500.00$ 12 WATER M GALLON 100 50.00$5,000.00$ 13 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 (RECLAIM)CU YD 900 10.00$9,000.00$ 14 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION SQ YD 61000 4.50$274,500.00$ 15 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 3700 2.50$9,250.00$ 16 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 7800 75.00$585,000.00$ 17 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3;C)TON 7800 70.00$546,000.00$ 18 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 600 32.00$19,200.00$ 19 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE FOUNDATION TON 200 40.00$8,000.00$ 20 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 2600 22.00$57,200.00$ 21 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - REMOVE AND INSTALL LIN FT 250 28.00$7,000.00$ 22 6" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - REMOVE AND INSTALL LIN FT 500 30.00$15,000.00$ 23 8" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - REMOVE AND INSTALL LIN FT 450 35.00$15,750.00$ 24 4" PERF TP PIPE DRAIN - SCHED 40 LIN FT 80 30.00$2,400.00$ 25 LANDSCAPING PROVISION LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 26 6" CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 250 15.00$3,750.00$ 27 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT 500 32.00$16,000.00$ 28 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB LIN FT 2650 30.00$79,500.00$ 29 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 75 100.00$7,500.00$ 30 8" CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SQ YD 30 100.00$3,000.00$ 31 TRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 32 INSTALL BRICK PAVERS SQ FT 150 30.00$4,500.00$ 33 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 5,000.00$5,000.00$ 34 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 2,000.00$2,000.00$ 35 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 70 150.00$10,500.00$ 36 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD CHIP LIN FT 110 3.50$385.00$ 37 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 250 50.00$12,500.00$ 38 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 M GALLON 4 1,000.00$4,000.00$ 39 SEEDING SQ YD 5000 2.00$10,000.00$ 40 CROSSWALK MULTI COMP GR IN (WR)SQ FT 220 10.00$2,200.00$ Subtotal 1,870,460.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 REMOVE PIPE APRON EACH 1 250.00$250.00$ 2 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH 23 500.00$11,500.00$ 3 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM)LIN FT 25 25.00$625.00$ 4 15" RC PIPE CULVERT DES 3006 CL V LIN FT 50 50.00$2,500.00$ 5 15” PIPE APRON EACH 1 800.00$800.00$ 6 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 48 500.00$24,000.00$ 7 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 20 850.00$17,000.00$ 8 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 5 700.00$3,500.00$ 9 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LIN FT 139.66 550.00$76,813.00$ 10 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 LIN FT 15.17 800.00$12,136.00$ 11 CONST CATCH BASIN - DESIGN 2X3 EACH 4 2,100.00$8,400.00$ 12 GROUT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 1,000.00$1,000.00$ 13 POND IMPROVEMENTS LUMP SUM 1 50,000.00$50,000.00$ Subtotal 208,524.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 CHEMICAL GROUT GALLON 200 40.00$8,000.00$ 2 CHANHASSEN 26" LID EACH 90 250.00$22,500.00$ 3 INSTALL I & I BARRIER EACH 90 400.00$36,000.00$ 4 RECONSTRUCT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE EACH 1 1,500.00$1,500.00$ 5 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 89 700.00$62,300.00$ 6 GROUT MANHOLE - SANITARY EACH 32 1,300.00$41,600.00$ Subtotal 171,900.00$ Item No Item Description Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 VALVE BOLT REPLACEMENT EACH 77 2,500.00$192,500.00$ Subtotal 192,500.00$ TOTAL TRAPPERS PASS AREA IMPROVEMENTS 2,443,384.00$ FIGURE 1G ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS ESTIMATED COSTS: TRAPPERS PASS AREA 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (C.P. 20-05) CITY OF CHANHASSEN APPENDIX D PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL 413,000.00$ 7,509.09$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 246 251600030 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & ANNE MCGINN 1121 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 247 251620130 SINGLE-FAMILY LESTER & JUDY BOLSTAD 1101 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 248 251620140 SINGLE-FAMILY GEOFFREY & JULIA SEPER 1081 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 249 251620150 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & AMANDA DURRANT 1061 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 250 251620160 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & TERESA SCHREMPP 1041 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 251 251620170 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & PANARAT UNGER 1021 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 252 251620180 SINGLE-FAMILY BRADLEY & KAROL JOHNSON 1001 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 253 251620190 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & KATHRYN MOZDREN 981 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 254 251620200 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & SUSAN DUCHENE 961 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 255 251620210 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & PAMELA O'CONNOR 941 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 256 251620220 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT KAHLMEYER 921 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 257 251620010 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON LOCHER 1100 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 258 251620020 SINGLE-FAMILY RANDALL & TRACY BENSON 1080 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 259 251620030 SINGLE-FAMILY LISA SLEZAK-MOSER 1060 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 260 251620040 SINGLE-FAMILY BRYCE FIER & MARY MARKUN-FIER 1040 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 261 251620050 SINGLE-FAMILY REBECCA HADRYS 1020 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 262 251620060 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & DENISE CLARKE 1000 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 263 251620070 SINGLE-FAMILY ANTONIO & AMY FRICANO 980 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 264 251620080 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & MONICA KOSVIC 960 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 265 251620090 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & PATTI MANNING 940 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 266 251620100 SINGLE-FAMILY JORGE GUANTER-GALTES & MIREIA MONLLOR TORMOS 920 LAKE LUCY RD 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 267 258710050 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & MARY LYNN PATTERSON 6580 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 268 258710040 SINGLE-FAMILY EDWARD & PAMELA CAPPELLE 6560 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 269 258710030 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL JOHNSON & GWEN WESTPHAL-JOHNSON 6540 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 270 258710020 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFREY KIFFIN 6520 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 271 258710010 SINGLE-FAMILY ZANE & ARCELIA DETERT 6500 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 272 258690020 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & MAREN REEDER 6501 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 273 258690030 SINGLE-FAMILY CLAUS & LEONARDA CANELL 6531 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 274 258690040 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN & JODIE KUEPPERS 6541 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 275 258690050 SINGLE-FAMILY JAY & LAURIE DONOHUE 6561 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 276 258690060 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & KAREN FLYNN 6581 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 277 258690070 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH CALDWELL 6590 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 278 258690080 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & KATHLEEN ANDERSON 6580 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 279 258690090 SINGLE-FAMILY ALEXANDER & KAITLIN HAAR 6560 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 280 258690100 SINGLE-FAMILY STEVEN & JODIE GRADY 6540 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 281 258690110 SINGLE-FAMILY BENJAMIN & KAREN WUJEK 6520 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 282 258690120 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & KATHLEEN NORTON 6500 TROENDLE CIR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 283 258690010 SINGLE-FAMILY CURTIS BINDER 6481 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 284 258710210 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & FOTINI DONNELLY 6491 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 285 258730010 SINGLE-FAMILY PHILIP & LEEANNE LARSON 6493 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 286 258730020 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & AMY CONWAY 6495 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 287 258710060 SINGLE-FAMILY PAMELA LIBBY 6501 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 288 258710070 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & JAMIE MCCAW 6511 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 289 258710080 SINGLE-FAMILY WALTER & CONSTANCE LINDER 900 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 290 258710090 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & SARAH CAVIN 880 VINELAND CT 149 N LAKESHORE DR, FONTANA, WI 53125-1120 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 291 258710100 SINGLE-FAMILY DONALD & CANDACE DECOSSE 860 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 292 258710110 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & KATHERINE BENSON 840 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 293 258710120 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFREY & NESSA SANDER 820 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 294 258710130 SINGLE-FAMILY WILLIAM & ELIZABETH MANNING 861 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 295 258710140 SINGLE-FAMILY VITO & MELAINIE QUAGLIA 881 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 296 258710150 SINGLE-FAMILY DOUGLAS & DARLENE OLSEN 901 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 297 258710160 SINGLE-FAMILY LUCAS FILGUEIRAS DUARTE 921 VINELAND CT 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 298 258710170 SINGLE-FAMILY KORD & HEATHER BRASHEAR 6561 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 299 258710180 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & ALANA HOPP 6581 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 299A 258530030 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & ANNE TEGEN 6641 NEZ PERCE DR 1 40% $ 3,003.64 3,003.64$ 55 TOTAL 165,200.00$ CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Roadway Assessment Assessment Totals Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - LAKE LUCY ROAD AREA 239,490.00$ 4,989.38$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 198 252000510 SINGLE-FAMILY RANY & KRISTIN BAANA 6780 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 199 252000520 SINGLE-FAMILY NATHANIEL HERMAN & LORI BESSINGER 6790 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 200 252000530 SINGLE-FAMILY SANDRA WALTON 6800 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 201 252000540 SINGLE-FAMILY BLAKE & LAURA FREESE 6820 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 202 252000550 SINGLE-FAMILY DIRK KREMERS 6830 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 203 252000560 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN SMITH & ELIZABETH REASON 6840 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 204 252000570 SINGLE-FAMILY JACK & ANN DOWNEY 6850 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 205 252000580 SINGLE-FAMILY GLENN & LISA KAUFMANN 6870 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 206 252000590 SINGLE-FAMILY BETH FLOTTMEIER & KIMBERLY AVELDSON 6880 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 207 252000600 SINGLE-FAMILY LAUREL YOUNG 6890 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 208 252000610 SINGLE-FAMILY BENJAMIN WOOLCOTT 6900 REDWING LN 5140 KIMBERLY RD, MINNETONKA, MN 55345-4426 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 209 252000620 SINGLE-FAMILY SHELLEY MEHL 6910 REDWING LN 499 SKYVIEW LN, CARVER, MN 55315 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 210 252000630 SINGLE-FAMILY ALEC YOUNG & ELIZABETH MATZEK 6920 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 211 252000250 SINGLE-FAMILY RYAN KENT & ANN SEVERSON 6921 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 212 252000240 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT DEHN 6911 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 213 252000230 SINGLE-FAMILY MITCHELL& KATHLEEN FREIDERICH 6901 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 214 252200220 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & ASHLEY SELLERS 6891 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 215 252000210 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & SUSANN JOHNSON 6881 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 216 252000200 SINGLE-FAMILY JERRY & CINDRA BAHMILLER 6871 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 217 252000190 SINGLE-FAMILY CASEY & KEVIN KURTT 6841 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 218 252000180 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW BRODAHL & TAMARA BRUESS 961 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 219 252000170 SINGLE-FAMILY JOEY & PATRICIA FLOE 951 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 220 252000160 SINGLE-FAMILY DEAN & LAURA BIRD 941 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 221 252000150 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & DEBRA LARSON 931 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 222 252000140 SINGLE-FAMILY ELEANOR & DIRK DOBBINS 921 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 223 252000130 SINGLE-FAMILY NANCY JEAN NORTH 911 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 224 252000120 SINGLE-FAMILY KATHRYN PETRICK 901 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 225 252000110 SINGLE-FAMILY BRYAN & CAROL MCGOVERN 900 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 226 252000100 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & AMY DEBLOCK 902 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 227 252000090 SINGLE-FAMILY LEROY & WANDA BITELER 910 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 228 252000080 SINGLE-FAMILY NICHOLAS JOHNSON & JENNIFER GLIDDEN 920 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 229 252000070 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & TAMARA ENGESETHER 930 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 230 252000060 SINGLE-FAMILY ANNE & DANA MOSTAD 940 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 231 252000050 SINGLE-FAMILY BRENT BAUER 950 PENAMINT CT 6000 WYNGATE LN, MINNETONKA, MN 55345-6557 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 232 252000040 SINGLE-FAMILY KEITH & JAYNE MOODY 960 PENAMINT CT 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 233 252000030 SINGLE-FAMILY RAY & MARY MIKKONEN 6781 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 234 252000020 SINGLE-FAMILY FOURCO LLC 6771 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 235 252000360 SINGLE-FAMILY TIMOTHY & CHARLOTTE SAVALOJA 6770 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 236 252000370 SINGLE-FAMILY NATHAN SERVEY & TAYLOR WALDIN 6780 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 237 252000380 SINGLE-FAMILY JOEL & ALEXIA SUITER 6790 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 238 252000390 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & MELISSA BROICH 6800 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 239 252000400 SINGLE-FAMILY BRUCE SCHULTZ 6820 PENAMINT LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 240 252000410 SINGLE-FAMILY HEIDI & MICHAEL COLGAN 6830 PENAMINT LN 2840 BREEZY HEIGHTS RD, WAYZATA, MN 55391 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 241 252000420 SINGLE-FAMILY IH2 PROPERTY BORROWER LP 6840 PENAMINT LN 1717 MAIN ST, SUITE 2000, DALLAS, TX 75201-4657 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 242 252000430 SINGLE-FAMILY DALE & MARY ANDERSON 6821 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 243 252000440 SINGLE-FAMILY CHAD SHARKEY & SARAH FORSMAN 6801 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 244 252000450 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN & JESSICA SHAUGHNESSY 6791 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 245 252000460 SINGLE-FAMILY ARNOLD & LORNA LEMKE 6781 REDWING LN 1 40% $ 1,995.75 1,995.75$ 48 TOTAL 95,796.00$ CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Roadway Assessment Assessment Totals Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - REDWING LANE AREA 229,505.00$ 5,100.11$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 153 250012000 / 254200451 SINGLE-FAMILY SCOTT & JANET WOLTER 6850 CHANHASSEN RD 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 154 254200450 / 254200010 SINGLE-FAMILY RICK & ROBERTA MURRAY 15 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 155 254200020 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & ASHLEY GUGGEMOS 31 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 156 254200030 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & JESSICA ABRAMS 51 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 157 254200040 SINGLE-FAMILY ELIZABETH & JEFFREY WELTER 71 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 158 254200050 SINGLE-FAMILY ALAN & BRENDA LEM 91 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 159 254200060 SINGLE-FAMILY GARY WELCH 101 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 160 254200070 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & LENORE DRYKE 105 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 161 254200080 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & BARBARA HECTORNE 111 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 162 254200090 SINGLE-FAMILY CHARLES & PAULA HALLAU 115 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 163 254200440 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & STACEY HORVICK 121 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 164 254200430 SINGLE-FAMILY KENTON & SHARON TOLLBERG 125 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 165 254200420 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSHUA & JENNIFER REITAN 131 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 166 254200410 SINGLE-FAMILY ALLISTER TUDOR & DENISE JONES 135 CHOCTAW CIR 20355 LAKEVIEW AVE, EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9361 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 167 254200400 SINGLE-FAMILY HARVEY & CATHERINE GREEN 141 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 168 254200390 SINGLE-FAMILY ANDREW BALAZS & KRISTEN FRAZER 145 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 169 254200380 SINGLE-FAMILY LAURA METTNER 151 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 170 254200370 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRIS & JANA CASTILLON 155 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 171 254200360 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH EDWARD ALEXANDER 161 CHOCTAW CIR 4662 KILDARE RD, MOUND, MN 55364-1859 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 172 254200350 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & JESSICA ENGLUND 160 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 173 254200340 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFREY & CAROL KAHNKE 154 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 174 254200330 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT HOFFNER & KAREN HUGHES-HOFFNER 150 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 175 254200320 SINGLE-FAMILY NEIL LIBSON & SUSAN DREVES 140 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 176 2545200310 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & KERRI DREESEN 130 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 177 2540200300 SINGLE-FAMILY REBECCA & MARC HEAGNEY 120 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 178 254200290 SINGLE-FAMILY LANCE & SUSAN STREFF 110 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 179 254200280 SINGLE-FAMILY JESSICA & JOSHUA FRIE 100 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 180 254200270 SINGLE-FAMILY WAYNE & CATHY DIONNE 90 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 181 254200260 SINGLE-FAMILY BENJAMIN & KIIRSTEN RAKERS 70 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 182 254200250 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS LAUBY & MARY BURKHARDT 50 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 183 254200240 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & AMBER BATTIN 30 CHOCTAW CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 184 254200230 SINGLE-FAMILY NICHOLAS & SANDRA GASSMAN 6800 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 185 254200220 SINGLE-FAMILY JAIMIE LAVANGER 6790 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 186 254200210 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & ANN RHODES 6780 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 187 254200200 SINGLE-FAMILY COLLEEN & STEPHEN FRANKWITZ 6770 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 188 254200190 SINGLE-FAMILY ALISHA & CONNOR GRAY 6760 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 189 254200180 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & CHARLENE BOROTZ 6750 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 190 254200170 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER BORNS 6751 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 191 254200160 SINGLE-FAMILY LEAH THOMAS & CHRISTINE SMITH 6761 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 192 254200150 SINGLE-FAMILY CARL & MELISSA ECKER 6771 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 193 254200140 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & JESSICA FRIBERG 6781 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 194 254200130 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & GLENDA SPEECE 6791 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 195 254200120 SINGLE-FAMILY CHARLES SIMON & ANGELA SCHLENDER 6801 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 196 254200110 SINGLE-FAMILY WILLIAM & STACY MCNABB 6805 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 197 254200100 SINGLE-FAMILY CYNTHIA WALSTON 6811 BRULE CIR 1 40% $ 2,040.04 2,040.04$ 45 TOTAL 91,802.00$ CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Roadway Assessment Assessment Totals Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - CHOCTAW CIRCLE AREA 428,235.00$ 10,705.88$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT A 253920270 H.O.A.KURVERS POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 7221 KURVERS POINT RD 0 40% $ --$ B 253920320 H.O.A.KURVERS POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION -KURVERS POINT RD 0 40% $ --$ 113 253920260 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & LAURANNA GODFREY 7231 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 114 253920250 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES HENRICK 7241 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 115 253920240 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW JENSEN & JENNIFER TIBODEAU-JENSEN 7251 KURVERS POINT RD 30 W POINT PL, EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9419 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 116 253920230 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & LISA FARLAND 7261 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 117 253920220 SINGLE-FAMILY KATHLEEN GROVER 60 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 118 253920210 SINGLE-FAMILY KARMIN & STEVEN CORKERY 40 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 119 253920200 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON & JODI RADEL 20 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 120 253920190 SINGLE-FAMILY TERENCE J MCGROTTY ETAL 21 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 121 253920180 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD ANTON & DIANNE DEERING 41 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 122 253920170 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & ELIZABETH HARRINGTON 51 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 123 253920160 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON & CHRISTINE OSTBYE 71 TWIN MAPLE LN 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 124 253920150 SINGLE-FAMILY CRAIG & SANDRA CARLSON 7271 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 125 253930140 SINGLE-FAMILY GERALD & ERICA ARNE 40 BASSWOOD CIR 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 126 253930130 SINGLE-FAMILY CAMERON & ERIN REINHART 30 BASSWOOD CIR 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 127 253930120 SINGLE-FAMILY ADAM & JESSICA GRINSTEINNER 20 BASSWOOD CIR 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 128 253930110 SINGLE-FAMILY KELLY & WHITNEY DAVIDSON 21 BASSWOOD CIR 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 129 253930100 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & DEBORAH WOLFF 31 BASSWOOD CIR 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 130 253930090 SINGLE-FAMILY FRANK & LISA MENDEZ 7361 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 131 253930080 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & NICOLE ENGASSER 7371 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 132 253930070 SINGLE-FAMILY KURT & DEANA FOSSEY 7381 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 133 253930060 SINGLE-FAMILY SCOTT JOHNSON 7380 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 134 253930050 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & NANCY KOCH 7370 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 135 253930040 SINGLE-FAMILY SUSAN APPLEGATE 7360 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 136 253930030 SINGLE-FAMILY BRAIN & KRISTEN APPLEGATE 7350 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 137 253930020 SINGLE-FAMILY JAY & SONIA WARMUTH 7340 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 138 253930010 SINGLE-FAMILY ALFRED & SUSAN HENDERSON 7330 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 139 253920010 SINGLE-FAMILY MOHAMMED NASHAWATY & HAZAR ALNAHASS 7320 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 140 253920020 SINGLE-FAMILY BROOKE & KJIRSTEN NYSTROM 7310 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 141 253920030 SINGLE-FAMILY DANNY & BRENDA VATLAND 7290 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 142 253920040 SINGLE-FAMILY COREY & AMY FRANKLIN 7280 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 143 253920050 SINGLE-FAMILY JACQUELINE KURVERS 7240 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 144 253920060 SINGLE-FAMILY FRANKLIN & MYRNA KURVERS 7220 KURVERS POINT RD 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 145 253920130 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON & DANIELLE HUTTNER 7131 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 146 253920140 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JODI OSTENDORF 7151 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 147 253920070 SINGLE-FAMILY STEVEN MESTITZ & PEGGY NAAS 7200 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 148 256950010 SINGLE-FAMILY ANDREW & JINNY SENN 7160 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 149 256950020 SINGLE-FAMILY CRAIG & LAURIE BURFEIND 7150 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 150 253920100 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & SOPHIE CHABIN 7140 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 151 253920110 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & SOPHIE CHABIN 7130 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 152 253920120 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & NARTHLADA FREEMAN 7120 WILLOW VIEW CV 1 40% $ 4,282.35 4,282.35$ 40 TOTAL 171,294.00$ CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Roadway Assessment Assessment Totals Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - KURVERS POINT ROAD AREA 616,290.00$ 5,552.16$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 1 253450130 SINGLE-FAMILY WILLIAM & DEBRA PRIGGE 390 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 2 253450120 SINGLE-FAMILY BISRAT & DENISE ALEMAYEHU 380 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 3 253450110 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & GAIL DIEDRICK 370 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 4 253450100 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & CAROL UDSTUEN 360 HIDDEN LN 2652 90TH ST SE, DELANO, MN 55328-8008 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 5 253450090 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & JULIE NESSLY 350 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 6 253450080 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW PATTEE & DONNA SPINELLI 340 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 7 253450070 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID LYONS & JULIE TENHOFF-LYONS 330 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 8 253450060 SINGLE-FAMILY KAREN OLSON 320 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 9 253450050 SINGLE-FAMILY CORY MILLER 310 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 10 253450040 SINGLE-FAMILY LEE & MARY KAUFMAN 300 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 11 253450030 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL ALBERTS & JENNIFER KOTTKE-ALBERTS 280 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 12 253450020 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & REBECCA BUSACKER 260 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 13 253450010 SINGLE-FAMILY KUE & CAROL VANG 250 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 14 253450140 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & DENISE MCALPIN 8001 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 $ 2,220.86 15 253450150 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & PAMELA MURPHY 8021 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 $ 2,220.86 16 253450160 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & LANA BERGO 8041 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 17 253450170 SINGLE-FAMILY STANLEY H LESTER 8061 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 18 253450180 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SONJA DENOW 8081 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 19 253450190 SINGLE-FAMILY JOANNE MARIE SOUSA 8091 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 20 253450200 SINGLE-FAMILY KATHRYN LESLIE RASMUSSEN 8101 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 21 253450210 SINGLE-FAMILY GREGORY & KAREN GMITERKO 8212 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 22 253450220 SINGLE-FAMILY SUSAN ROSE SULLIVAN 8141 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 23 253450230 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES RADTKE 8161 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 24 253450240 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & JEANNE HUNT 8181 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 25 253450250 SINGLE-FAMILY VENKATESH PARAMESHWARAN 8191 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 26 253450260 SINGLE-FAMILY LAMONTE & JANICE EASTVOLD 8180 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 27 253450270 SINGLE-FAMILY NATHAN & DENISE LEBENS 8170 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 28 253450280 SINGLE-FAMILY DALE & ZOLA KLABUNDE 8160 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 29 253450290 SINGLE-FAMILY DANA & EMILY SANDS 8150 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 30 253450300 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & ADELL GLASER 8140 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 31 253450310 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & LINDA GIORDANO 8120 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 32 253450320 SINGLE-FAMILY STEVEN TODD BLACK & SHANDA SOUTH 8100 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 33 253450330 SINGLE-FAMILY KAREN KLINSING 8090 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 34 253450340 SINGLE-FAMILY NGUYEN & BINH NGU CHAU 8080 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 35 253450350 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & AMBER WAHL 8060 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 36 253450360 SINGLE-FAMILY BRAIN & JEAN STECKLING 8040 HIDDEN CT 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 37 253450370 SINGLE-FAMILY EDWARD & HANNAH RAUPP 8020 HIDDEN CT 104 PLEASANT ST, READING, MA 01867-3021 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 38 253450380 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & MICHELLE HAIK 261 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 39 253450390 SINGLE-FAMILY JESSICA LOVERING 271 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 40 253450400 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK LAKOSKY & JULIE STEVENSON 8000 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 41 253450410 SINGLE-FAMILY ANDREW & EMMA TURNER 8010 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 42 253450420 SINGLE-FAMILY LAUREN & SHAUNA KOPP 8020 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 43 253450430 SINGLE-FAMILY SHANNON MCCLARD & SHERRIE PETERSON 8030 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 44 253450440 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SUSAN BLAKE 8040 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 45 253450450 SINGLE-FAMILY EVANGELINE CUBALCHINI 8051 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 46 253450460 SINGLE-FAMILY GREGORY DROZDEK 8061 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 47 253450470 SINGLE-FAMILY CLARISSA & FRANK TERSCHAN 8071 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 48 253450480 SINGLE-FAMILY JOEL MATTHEWS 8081 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 49 253450490 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & WHITNEY GOHAM 8091 HIDDEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 50 253450500 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & CARLA THOMPSON 311 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 51 253450510 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & JODI SCHLEYER 321 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 52 253450520 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & DEBORAH SEMKE 331 HIDDEN LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 53 253450530 SINGLE-FAMILY BRANDON & JENNIFER HOUGHHAM 8103 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 54 253450540 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & PRUDENCE BUSCH 8113 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 55 253450550 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & ELIZABETH ADAMS 8123 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 56 253450560 SINGLE-FAMILY MARY STUTELBERG 8133 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 57 253450570 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON & BRANDI STENSOS 8143 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 58 253450580 SINGLE-FAMILY SCOTT & CATHERINE GALLOWAY 8153 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 59 253450590 SINGLE-FAMILY RANDY & KRISTINE IMKER 8163 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 60 253450600 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD HLADKY 8173 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 61 253450610 SINGLE-FAMILY JEREMY & DANA STETZER 8183 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 62 253450620 SINGLE-FAMILY BRUCE & JOYCE BOJE 8193 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 63 253450630 SINGLE-FAMILY TERENCE & JOAN DEMETER 8203 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 64 253450640 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & GERALYNN COLOSEY 8223 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 65 253450650 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SUSAN THORUD 8243 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 66 253450660 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & MICHELLE AAS 8263 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 67 253450670 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBER & KATHLEEN OLMSTED 8283 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 68 253450680 SINGLE-FAMILY ANTHONY & JANET MERTES 8124 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 69 253450690 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & CHERYL KINSELLA 8118 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 70 253450700 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK RAY SCHUMACHER 8116 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 71 253450710 SINGLE-FAMILY CURTIS MATTERN & STACEY SEIM 8114 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 72 251820520 SINGLE-FAMILY PETER & JESSICA LAMBRECHT 8110 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 73 NOT USED 8108 DAKOTA LN 40% $ --$ 74 251820720 SINGLE-FAMILY JERRY & ELVIA FELDMILLER 8113 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 75 253450720 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & ANNA LARSON 8117 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 76 253450730 SINGLE-FAMILY BRENDA JANE WALSH 8121 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 77 253450740 SINGLE-FAMILY BLAKE SPILLERS & JENNIFER GRAHAM-SPILLERS 8123 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 78 253451090 SINGLE-FAMILY KRISSY & PETER DOHERTY 8127 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 79 253451080 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & PAULA FOLTZ 8129 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 80 253451070 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT MYERS 8131 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 81 253451060 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & SHERI LEWIS 8133 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 82 253451050 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & RENE LUCAS 8135 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 83 253451040 SINGLE-FAMILY JAY & REBECCA LEGLER 8137 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 84 253451030 SINGLE-FAMILY MARIE & DEAN SUND 8139 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 85 253451022 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & KATHRYNE SLAVICS 8140 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 86 253451010 SINGLE-FAMILY JON & SARAH HANSEN 8138 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 87 253451000 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL BOGDEN 8136 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 88 253450990 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & LAURIE SOPER-LANGLEY 8134 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 89 253450980 SINGLE-FAMILY PHILIP & LUCILLE REHM 8132 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 90 253450970 SINGLE-FAMILY TERENCE & PEI LING JAMISON 8130 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 91 253450960 SINGLE-FAMILY DANLD WILDMAN 8128 DAKOTA LN 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 92 253450950 SINGLE-FAMILY GENE & KIM HEIKKINEN 301 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 93 253450940 SINGLE-FAMILY AMY WESLEY & WISSAM KOSSEIFI 311 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 94 253450930 SINGLE-FAMILY TYLER & JANE PETERSON 321 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 95 253450920 SINGLE-FAMILY LOREN & KATHRYN SPENLER 331 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 96 253450910 SINGLE-FAMILY JAN WESTGAARD 341 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 97 253450900 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & PATRICIA HAMBLIN 340 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 98 253450890 SINGLE-FAMILY WILLIAM & KARIN OLSON 330 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 99 253450880 SINGLE-FAMILY LUKE & KIMBERLY NELSON 320 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 100 253450870 SINGLE-FAMILY ANGELA BIALCZYK 310 SINNEN CIR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 101 253450860 SINGLE-FAMILY DONOVAN LEE ISDAHL 8190 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 102 253450850 SINGLE-FAMILY CHERYL FELTON 8180 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 103 253450840 SINGLE-FAMILY KEITH & DIANA ANDERSON 8170 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 104 253450830 SINGLE-FAMILY DARRIN & MICHELLE ARLT 8160 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 105 253450820 SINGLE-FAMILY BRUCE & CYNTHIA MARENGO 8150 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 106 253450810 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & SANDRA BERGGREN 8140 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 107 253450800 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & RITA KLAUDA 8130 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 108 253450790 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & STEPHANIE KLEIN 8120 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 109 253450780 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPH LESER & COLLEEN CANNON 8110 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - MARSH DRIVE AREA Roadway Assessment Total Estimated Roadway Cost 616,290.00$ 5,552.16$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - MARSH DRIVE AREA Roadway Assessment Total Estimated Roadway Cost 110 253450770 SINGLE-FAMILY TREVOR & JULIE MAASSEN 8100 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 111 253450760 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JENNIFER HELMICK 8090 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 112 253450750 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & LOIS SAVARD 8080 MARSH DR 1 40% $ 2,220.86 2,220.86$ 111 TOTAL 246,516.00$Assessment Totals 1,870,460.00$ 7,511.89$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 300 252110010 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & SARA MUENCH 6400 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 301 252110020 SINGLE-FAMILY PATRICK & WILHELMINE GALLAGHER 6390 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 302 252110030 SINGLE-FAMILY KEVIN & DEBRA COOPER 6380 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 303 252110040 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & BRYAN WEIGEL 6370 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 304 252110050 SINGLE-FAMILY JONNA SHIELDS 6360 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 305 252110060 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & GERI MURPHY 201 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 306 252130130 SINGLE-FAMILY SARAH PRUETT & ERIC SCHULMAN 211 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 307 252130120 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & JANE HOGAN 221 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 308 252130110 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID PELTIER 231 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 309 252130100 SINGLE-FAMILY SANDRA REISHUS & MEGAN JENSEN 241 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 310 252130090 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD EWALD & POLLY STIVLAND 251 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 311 252130080 SINGLE-FAMILY NATHAN & MARTHA SCHRADER 261 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 312 252130070 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN & TIFFANY FISCO 271 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 313 258640040 SINGLE-FAMILY KAREN LARSEN TRUST 310 TIMBER HILL RD 9365 PALMER RD, BLOOMINGTON, MN 55437-2079 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 314 258640050 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & SUSAN VOELKER 300 TIMBER HILL RD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 315 258640090 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & STEPHANIE DILLE 291 TIMBER HILL RD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 316 258640080 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK HODDER & XUNYU QIAN 301 TIMBER HILL RD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 317 258640070 SINGLE-FAMILY TODD & SHELLEY KOLAND 311 TIMBER HILL RD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 318 258640060 SINGLE-FAMILY CHARLES & LINNETTE BETTS 6331 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 319 258650130 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & KATIE WENDORFF 6341 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 320 258650140 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & ALICE KLINKENBERG 6351 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 321 258650150 SINGLE-FAMILY BRET & JENNIFER BARHOOVER 6421 ROJINA LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 322 258650160 SINGLE-FAMILY JAYNE ARABANOS 6420 ROJINA LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 323 258650170 SINGLE-FAMILY LORI & TROY ROOVERS 6410 ROJINA LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 324 258650180 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & SYDNEY ROSENBERG 6355 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 325 258650190 SINGLE-FAMILY AMY & SCOTT HAIRSTON 6357 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 326 258650200 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFERY & SALLY GADBOIS 6359 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 327 258070010 SINGLE-FAMILY PETER & KATHERINE LUCAS 6363 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 328 258090010 SINGLE-FAMILY RANDAL & BRECK STORTS 6365 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 329 258090020 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & JULIETTE SCHNEIDER 6367 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 330 258090120 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL CARR 6369 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 331 258090110 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & SARAH EBELING 6371 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 332 258090100 SINGLE-FAMILY CYNTHIA COLSON 6373 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 333 258090090 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & MICHELLE STORK 6375 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 334 258090080 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & SUZANNE BOHN 6377 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 335 258090070 SINGLE-FAMILY BRADLEY BILLINGS & ANITA CORNELIUS 6379 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 336 258090060 SINGLE-FAMILY ALEXANDER & KARENEA LAI 6381 OXBOW BND 3020 FAIRWAY DRIVE, CHASKA, MN 55318 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 337 258090050 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & KAREN CONBOY 6383 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 338 258090040 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & KRISTEN HANSBERRY 6385 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 339 258090030 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & DIANA DAVIS 6387 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 340 258090160 SINGLE-FAMILY TIMOTHY KOCHER & CATHERINE CONNEL 6389 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 341 258090170 SINGLE-FAMILY KEVIN & KATHERIN WORMS-LYNCH 6391 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 342 258090180 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL NOBLE & BONNIE BURNS 6393 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 343 258090190 SINGLE-FAMILY GLENNA & CARIN STOLAR 6395 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 344 258070210 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & ANN MARIE HAYES 6397 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 345 258070220 SINGLE-FAMILY RICHARD & LISA SIMMONS 6399 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 346 258070230 SINGLE-FAMILY TINA & JORDAN LAMB 6401 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 347 258580110 SINGLE-FAMILY COREY & JULIE SMITH 501 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 348 258580100 SINGLE-FAMILY ROGER & GAYLE STECH 491 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 349 258580090 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SHALINI CARNEY 481 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 350 258580080 SINGLE-FAMILY KEVIN CAMPBELL 461 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 351 258580070 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & LINDA ROSLANKSKY 431 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 352 258580060 SINGLE-FAMILY ALEXANDRA WOODS 421 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 353 258570080 SINGLE-FAMILY IGOR KOROLEV & KAREN JORDAN 401 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 354 258570070 SINGLE-FAMILY JENNIFER & JOSEPH BECKMAN 381 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 355 258570060 SINGLE-FAMILY WAYNE & PAMELA BENBOW 361 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 356 258570050 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SONJA PRETASKY 341 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 357 258570040 SINGLE-FAMILY BENJAMIN & STACY ROHAN 321 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 358 258570030 SINGLE-FAMILY RONALD & LYDIA VELANDER 301 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 359 258570020 SINGLE-FAMILY THEODORE & HILARY BECKMAN 291 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 360 258570010 SINGLE-FAMILY TREVOR & LYN MCCULLOCH 251 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 361 252140050 SINGLE-FAMILY SACHA LIVING TRUST 6260 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 362 252140060 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & SALLY BICKEL 6240 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 363 252140070 SINGLE-FAMILY HAYLEY & DAVIS ZISMER 6220 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 364 252140080 SINGLE-FAMILY ADAM & HEATHER WILFORD 6210 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 365 252140010 SINGLE-FAMILY ERIC & HEIDI PRESTEEN 6201 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 366 252140020 SINGLE-FAMILY PETER & JANET MADDALENA 6221 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 367 252140030 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & KRISTINE MOES 6241 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 368 252140040 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & MARY JO BROKAW 6261 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 369 252120010 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & LISA HAZZARD 241 PIEDMONT CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 370 252120020 SINGLE-FAMILY ALLAN GREEN & KRISTINE SEVERSON-GREEN 221 PIEDMONT CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 371 252120030 SINGLE-FAMILY KRISTOPHER & AMY DUININCK 210 PIEDMONT CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 372 252120040 SINGLE-FAMILY RYAN & LISA CARLSON 6281 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 373 252110210 SINGLE-FAMILY FRANK & CATHERINE ZIMMERMAN 6291 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 374 252110200 SINGLE-FAMILY EDWIN & REBECCA EVERETT 6301 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 375 252110190 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & LINDA BENDT 6311 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 376 252110180 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH ALVAREZ & YUEFEN DENG 6331 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 377 252110170 SINGLE-FAMILY LOREN & DEBORAH GORDON 6351 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 378 252110160 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & SUSAN BRADY 6371 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 379 252110150 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & SUSAN REISS 6391 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 380 252090180 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & ALEXANDRA BIXLER 6340 CASTLE RDG 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 381 252090170 SINGLE-FAMILY NORMA KEIVES 6232 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 382 252090160 SINGLE-FAMILY PATRICK & ALISHA MURRAY 6230 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 383 252090150 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & AMY BURTON 6228 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 384 252090140 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & LAURINDA SCHUMACHER 6226 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 385 252090130 SINGLE-FAMILY DONALD & CHRISTINE SNEDE 6224 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 386 252090120 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & MARIAN HEINEMANN 6222 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 387 252090110 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & KATHLEEN ALBRECHT 6220 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 388 252090100 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & NANCY RYDLAND 6218 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 389 252090090 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & MARGO ANDERSON 6216 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 390 252090080 SINGLE-FAMILY STEVEN & SARAH YOCHUM 6214 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 391 252100110 SINGLE-FAMILY ALICE LAINE 185 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 392 252100100 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JANICE MOSTROM 183 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 393 252100090 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & AIMEE ANDREOTTI 181 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 394 252100080 SINGLE-FAMILY TODD & SARAH MCCUTCHEON 180 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 395 252100070 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & DOROTHY BELLING 170 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 396 252100060 SINGLE-FAMILY TRAVIS LEMKE & KELLI BROWER 160 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 397 252100050 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JAMIELYNN AHLSTEDT 150 CASCADE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 398 252100040 SINGLE-FAMILY PETER & KAREN MURRAY 6208 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 399 252100030 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & MICHELLE KLISANICH 6206 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 400 252100020 SINGLE-FAMILY DEREK & MELISSA STEVENS 6204 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 401 252100010 SINGLE-FAMILY ANTHONY & AMY HORNING 6202 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 402 252070010 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFREY & JOAN TAM 6200 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 403 255500040 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & ABBY BECK 98 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 404 255500050 SINGLE-FAMILY NANCY STORM 96 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 405 255500060 SINGLE-FAMILY DOUGLAS & ANGELA HOWE 94 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ Roadway Assessment CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - TRAPPERS PASS AREA 1,870,460.00$ 7,511.89$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT Roadway Assessment CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - TRAPPERS PASS AREA 406 255500070 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & ELIZABETH SCAMAN 92 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 407 255500080 SINGLE-FAMILY TERENCE MEYER 90 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 408 255500090 SINGLE-FAMILY MARY BRANDT 88 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 409 255500100 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMES & JENNIFER DISNEY 86 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 410 255500110 SINGLE-FAMILY LISA MARIE SHENCK 87 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 411 255500120 SINGLE-FAMILY JAY & KELLY BEAUDRY 89 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 412 255500130 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID BENNETT 91 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 413 255500140 SINGLE-FAMILY MEAGHAN & STEVEN VANDERSANDEN 93 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 414 255500150 SINGLE-FAMILY JAMI & KAREN SCHUPP 95 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 415 255500160 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & REBECCA OLSON 97 CASCADE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 416 255500170 SINGLE-FAMILY ALEXANDR BEZVERKHNIY & GALINA ZAIKOVSKAYA 96 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 417 255500180 SINGLE-FAMILY JOE SIMMONS 94 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 418 255500190 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & KATHLEEN MAHANNAH 92 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 419 255500200 SINGLE-FAMILY ROVERT & KATHY REIMLER 90 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 420 255500210 SINGLE-FAMILY CARL & EMILY HAWKINSON 88 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 421 255500220 SINGLE-FAMILY BRETT WILLIAMS & BRIDGET BURKEL 91 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 422 255500230 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & JANN VARNER 93 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 423 255500240 SINGLE-FAMILY NATALIE MARIE HARVEY 95 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 424 255500250 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER O'BRIEN 97 SHASTA CIR E 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 425 255500260 SINGLE-FAMILY JODI ATWOOD 96 OLYMPIC CIR 439 LAKE ST, EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-1901 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 426 255500270 SINGLE-FAMILY ALBERT & JANINE AFFLITTO 94 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 427 255500280 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN & LESLIE MCKEAN 92 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 428 255500290 SINGLE-FAMILY KURT & MAIA KNOX 90 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 429 255500300 SINGLE-FAMILY JERRY & CAROL MCDONALD 88 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 430 255500310 SINGLE-FAMILY GARY & SHARON HARRIS 91 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 431 255500320 SINGLE-FAMILY RAJIV & KAVYYA DAMA 93 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 432 255500330 SINGLE-FAMILY CARA BENOIT 95 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 433 255500340 SINGLE-FAMILY YEAN CHING TAN & GIBSON NENE 97 OLYMPIC CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 434 252080190 SINGLE-FAMILY KARIM & FARIDA MAMMADOVA 98 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 435 252080180 SINGLE-FAMILY NATHAN & COLLEEN HATZUNG 96 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 436 252080170 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & HEIDI NAUMAN 92 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 437 252080160 SINGLE-FAMILY NANCY LUNDGREN-SMITH 90 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 438 252080150 SINGLE-FAMILY BRADY HORMANN 88 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 439 252080140 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL KRUGER & DEBORAH ROBERTS 86 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 440 252080130 SINGLE-FAMILY JASON & JEAN RUSINAK 84 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 441 252080120 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSHUA & KELLI BILLS 82 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 442 252080110 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFERY & CATHERINE BRECKHEIMER 81 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 443 252080100 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & TIFFANY KLINKENBERG 83 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 444 252080090 SINGLE-FAMILY DELLY DEWITT 85 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 445 252080080 SINGLE-FAMILY DEREK & JAMIE NELSON 87 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 446 252080070 SINGLE-FAMILY REBECCA KNEZEVIC 89 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 447 252080060 SINGLE-FAMILY JENNIFER LYNN ZIMMERMAN 91 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 448 252080050 SINGLE-FAMILY LEE & KAREN BORIL 93 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 449 252080040 SINGLE-FAMILY TRISTAN & ADRIENNE AGRE 95 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 450 252080030 SINGLE-FAMILY SARAH SWEDLUND 97 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 451 252080020 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JAMIE MANNING 99 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 452 252080010 SINGLE-FAMILY ANDREW & ELIZABETH GUSTAFSON 101 CASTLE RIDGE CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 453 258070200 SINGLE-FAMILY MIKEAL BYSTROM JR 6300 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 454 258070190 SINGLE-FAMILY ALICIA JEAN PAVELKO 6306 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 455 258070180 SINGLE-FAMILY KELLY NEVERMANN 6310 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 456 258070170 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & CHELSEA MILLER 6320 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 457 258070160 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & ALISON BUICK 6330 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 458 258070150 SINGLE-FAMILY EVAN MARIASH & KELLY FIDGEON 6340 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 459 258070140 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & SARAH WENTZIEN 6350 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 460 258090150 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & CHRISTINE STONE 6370 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 461 258090140 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & KENAN GUILMETTE 6368 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 462 258090130 SINGLE-FAMILY JOAN & BURTON BENSON 6366 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 463 258070130 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & SARAH WAY 6341 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 464 258070120 SINGLE-FAMILY DERRICK BILDERBEEK & DYAN PADGETT 6331 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 465 258070110 SINGLE-FAMILY RYAN & AMY KROLL 6321 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 466 258070100 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & JERILYN HOOKS 6311 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 467 258070090 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & TERRY DENUCCI 6301 SUMMIT CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 468 258070080 SINGLE-FAMILY BENJAMIN & JEANNINE SMITH 6408 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 469 258580120 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JULIA NEWELL 411 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 470 258580130 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JEANENE CONZEMIUS 430 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 471 258580140 SINGLE-FAMILY KATHRYN & JOHN WILLIAMS 460 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 472 258580150 SINGLE-FAMILY KASHIF HASAN & SHAHEEN IQBAL 480 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 473 258580160 SINGLE-FAMILY BRADEN & AMANDA KATTERHEINRICH 500 TRAPLINE LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 474 258070020 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & KATHERINE QUINLAN 6403 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 475 258070030 SINGLE-FAMILY TIMOTHY & JEANNE PIETRINI 6405 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 476 258070040 SINGLE-FAMILY HOLLY & TONY FERRARO 6407 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 477 258070050 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & KIMBERLY COREY 6409 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 478 258070060 SINGLE-FAMILY LINDA & TIMOTHY RUDE 6411 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 479 258070070 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & JILL RAMSEY 6362 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 480 258650010 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & JILL KOKKINEN 431 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 481 258650020 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & LIZABETH MONTGOMERY 6300 STAG HORN LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 482 258650030 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & JANE MCGINTY 6310 STAG HORN LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 483 258650040 SINGLE-FAMILY MICHAEL & LAURA WILLIAMS 6311 STAG HORN LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 484 258650050 SINGLE-FAMILY DOUGLAS & STEPHANIE HAALAND 6321 STAG HORN LN 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 485 258570110 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & SAMANTHA CASSIOPPI 6301 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 486 258570120 SINGLE-FAMILY STEVEN & JANE WARNER 6311 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 487 258570130 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & MELISSA SUNDBOOM 6321 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 488 258570140 SINGLE-FAMILY BRANDT & KATHY COLVILLE 6331 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 489 258570150 SINGLE-FAMILY IGOR & ANASTASIA ARKHIPENKOV 6340 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 490 258570160 SINGLE-FAMILY ALYESKA PROPERTIES LLC 6330 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 491 258570170 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & DEBORAH LEUY 6320 TRAPLINE CIR 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 492 258650060 SINGLE-FAMILY MARC WITTENBERG 410 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 493 258650070 SINGLE-FAMILY MATTHEW & TARA STONE 420 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 494 258650080 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & AMY JOINER 430 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 495 258650090 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & KATHERINE O'BRIEN 6358 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 496 258650100 SINGLE-FAMILY STEPHEN & NANCY GIESE 6356 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 497 258650110 SINGLE-FAMILY 6354 OXBOW BEND LLC 6354 OXBOW BND 6330 TRAPLINE CIRCLE, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 498 258650120 SINGLE-FAMILY THOMAS & LAURIE FLECK 6352 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 499 258640030 SINGLE-FAMILY BRIAN & PAMELA PITTENGER 6350 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 500 258640020 SINGLE-FAMILY LISA MURIEL LUND 6340 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 501 258640010 SINGLE-FAMILY LANDON & SARAH GUILDAY 6330 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 502 258580050 SINGLE-FAMILY MARY GOAD-OLSON 6320 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 503 258580040 SINGLE-FAMILY CARL & ALEXIS FRIEDRICH 6310 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 504 258580030 SINGLE-FAMILY KEVIN & BROOKE SLAMA 6300 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 505 258570090 SINGLE-FAMILY ADAM & ROBBIN SCHAFER 300 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 506 258570100 SINGLE-FAMILY DANIEL & NICOLE CAMPION 340 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 507 258570180 SINGLE-FAMILY PHILIP & STACEY ALM 250 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 508 258570190 SINGLE-FAMILY TERESA HODNET 290 TRAPPERS PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 509 258580010 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & BARBARA ROY 6301 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 510 258580020 SINGLE-FAMILY ROGER & MARLYS SCHWABE 6311 OXBOW BND 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 511 252130010 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & JUNE BENTRUP 260 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 1,870,460.00$ 7,511.89$per REU PARCEL #PID #PROPERTY TYPE OWNER PROPERTY STREET NO.PROPERTY STREET OWNER ADDRESS REU ROADWAY ASSESSMENT PERCENTAGE ROADWAY ASSESSMENT AMOUNT TOTAL ASSESSMENT Roadway Assessment CITY OF CHANHASSEN: 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION (C.P. 20-05) Total Estimated Roadway Cost FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - TRAPPERS PASS AREA 512 252130020 SINGLE-FAMILY CHRISTOPHER & EMILY STRONG 250 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 513 252130030 SINGLE-FAMILY CATHERINE & STEVEN NORRIS 240 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 514 252130040 SINGLE-FAMILY ABIGAIL & JUSTIN KLOUS 230 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 515 252130050 SINGLE-FAMILY JOSEPH & KAREN CASEY 220 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 516 252130060 SINGLE-FAMILY 101 210 MOUNTAIN WAY 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 517 252110140 SINGLE-FAMILY HPA JV BORROWER 200 MOUNTAIN WAY 180 N STETSON AVE, SUITE 3650, CHICAGO, IL 60601 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 518 252110130 SINGLE-FAMILY TIMOTHTY & LORI DOSEN 6330 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 519 252110120 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & MARGERITE BOROWSKI 201 MOUNTIAN VIEW CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 520 252110110 SINGLE-FAMILY MARY JOAN LORENZEN 221 MOUNTAIN VIEW CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 521 252110100 SINGLE-FAMILY REBEKAH DUNHAM 241 MOUNTAIN VIEW CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 522 252110090 SINGLE-FAMILY CYNTHIA & JOHN PUGH 260 MOUNTAIN VIEW CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 523 252110080 SINGLE-FAMILY JUSTIN & APRIL UELAND 280 MOUNTAIN VIEW CT 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 524 252110070 SINGLE-FAMILY GREGORY & LEAH THOMPSON 6300 NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 525 252070020 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID CARLSON & CAROLE FICK 6199 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 526 252100120 SINGLE-FAMILY SHANNA O'BRIEN 6201 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 527 252100130 SINGLE-FAMILY JUDITH JAMES 6203 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 528 252100140 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & MICAELA YANDA 6205 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 529 252100150 SINGLE-FAMILY SEAN KNUTSEN 6207 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 530 252100160 SINGLE-FAMILY DAVID & SANDRA BUTLER 6209 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 531 252090010 SINGLE-FAMILY CHERYL MAGERS 6211 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 532 252090020 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT & CHERYL AYOTTE 6213 CASCADE PASS PO BOX 1037, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-1037 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 533 252090030 SINGLE-FAMILY PAUL & ANTOINETTE SCHRUPP 6215 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 534 252090040 SINGLE-FAMILY CAMERON & CATHERINE GUTHRIE 6217 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 535 252090050 SINGLE-FAMILY MARK & DIANE RUGLAND 6219 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 536 252090060 SINGLE-FAMILY KYLE JOHNSON 6221 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 537 252090070 SINGLE-FAMILY TODD & LEE MORTENSON 6223 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 538 255500470 SINGLE-FAMILY SCOTT STALMAN & KATHERIN GLYNN 6225 CASCADE PASS 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 539 255500460 SINGLE-FAMILY NANCY ANN MYHRE 6320 CASTLE RDG 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 540 255500450 SINGLE-FAMILY ROBERT DOHERTY 6310 CASTLE RDG 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 541 255500440 SINGLE-FAMILY RYAN WEINZIERL & LAUREN CALLAHAN 6300 CASTLE RDG 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 542 255500430 SINGLE-FAMILY JEFFREY STICHA & DEBORAH DALSIN 101 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 543 255500420 SINGLE-FAMILY MARNEE SHEPARD 111 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 544 255500410 SINGLE-FAMILY CARLTON & ANNE MOORE 121 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 545 255500400 SINGLE-FAMILY GLEN FEUERBORN 130 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 546 252070040 SINGLE-FAMILY LARRY & GAIL BEUNING 120 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 547 252070030 SINGLE-FAMILY JOHN & MARY GIOVINCO 110 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 548 255500370 SINGLE-FAMILY LISA & EDWARD ESTLOW 100 SHASTA CIR W 1 40% $ 3,004.76 3,004.76$ 249 TOTAL 748,184.00$Assessment Totals Capital Improvement Program City of Chanhassen, MN Contact Charlie Howley 2021 2025 thru Department Street Improvements Description Annual project to rehabilitate and/or reconstruct streets in the City. The 5 year Capital Pavement Management Plan identifies the planned streets for the next five years. The Plan gets updated every fall to review priorities and needs. Project #ST-012 Priority n/a Justification The City uses a Pavement Management System to monitor the condition of the City streets. While proper preventative maintenance extends the life of the street and is cost effective, a street will eventually deteriorate to a point that major maintenance is required. Rehabilitation projects extend the life of the street. In cases when utilities or poor sub grade needs to be replaced or where streets have deteriorated to a point where rehabilitation will no longer be practical, reconstruction of the street is necessary. A feasibility study is written to consider the merits of the project, scope of work and assessments. Budget Impact/Other The construction allotment revenue the City receives from MSA has been cut by 15% for 2021. No advancements are being approved by MSA until further notice. The City has an Assessment Policy, last updated in 2014, that identifies what and how much of the project is assessed to benefiting properties. Useful Life UnassignedProject Name Annual Street Improvement Program Category Streets/Highways Type Improvement Account #2 Account #1 601-6xxx-4xxx Total Project Cost:$59,152,000 Account #4 Account #3 Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Expenditures 26,895,0006,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000Construction 6,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000 26,895,000Total Prior 32,257,000 Total Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Funding Sources 19,000,0003,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 3,900,000 4,000,000Assessment/Revolving Assess Fund 975,000975,000MSA 1,320,000420,000 225,000 225,000 225,000 225,000Sewer Utility Fund 2,500,000500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000Surface Water Utility Fund 3,100,0001,300,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000Water Utility Fund 6,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000 26,895,000Total Prior 32,257,000 Total Capital Improvement Program City of Chanhassen, MN Contact Charlie Howley 2021 2025 thru Department Surface Water Management Description This program will provide inspection and cleaning of City stormwater ponds. This work may include sediment removal, placement of blanket, rip-rap or other erosion control BMP's, vegetation management and assessment, repair and replacement of inlet and outlet structures. Project #SWMP-032 Priority n/a Justification There are approximately 300 stormwater ponds in the City of Chanhassen, all requiring regular maintenance to assure they function to National Urban Runoff Program recommendations. This measure has also been identified in Chanhassen's National Pollution Discharge Elimination Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. The project will also minimize flooding potential. Budget Impact/Other Public works streets staff often do minor stormwater pond maintenance. Useful LifeProject Name Stormwater Pond Improvements Category SWMP Type Improvement Account #2 Account #1 720-7025-4xxx Total Project Cost:$4,070,000 Account #4 Account #3 Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Expenditures 3,250,000650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000Maintenance 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000Total Prior 820,000 Total Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Funding Sources 3,250,000650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000Surface Water Utility Fund 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000Total Prior 820,000 Total Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 A.1. Project Description .............................................................................................................. 1 A.2. Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 2 A.3. Background Information and Reference Documents .......................................................... 2 A.4. Project Area Conditions ....................................................................................................... 2 A.4.a. Subproject 1 (Kurvers, Choctaw) ............................................................................ 2 A.4.b. Subproject 2 (Minnewashta) .................................................................................. 2 A.5. Scope of Services ................................................................................................................. 3 B. Results .............................................................................................................................................. 4 B.1. Exploration Logs .................................................................................................................. 4 B.1.a. Log of Boring Sheets ............................................................................................... 4 B.1.b. Geologic Origins ..................................................................................................... 4 B.2. Geologic Profile ................................................................................................................... 4 B.2.a. Pavement Materials ............................................................................................... 4 B.2.b. Geologic Materials ................................................................................................. 5 B.2.c. Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 7 B.3. Laboratory Test Results ....................................................................................................... 8 B.4. GPR and Core Results .......................................................................................................... 9 C. Recommendations – Subproject 1 ................................................................................................. 15 C.1. Design and Construction Considerations .......................................................................... 15 C.1.a. Pavement Resurfacing and Reuse of Pavement Materials .................................. 15 C.1.b. Pavement Subgrades and Drainage ..................................................................... 16 C.2. Pavements ......................................................................................................................... 16 C.2.a. Subgrade Preparation and Proofrolls ................................................................... 16 C.2.b. Backfill and Material Compaction ........................................................................ 17 C.2.c. Design Sections .................................................................................................... 17 C.2.d. Pavement Materials and Compaction .................................................................. 18 C.3. Construction Quality Control ............................................................................................ 19 C.3.a. Excavation Observations ...................................................................................... 19 C.3.b. Materials Testing .................................................................................................. 19 C.3.c. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll .............................................................................. 19 C.3.d. Cold Weather Precautions ................................................................................... 19 D. Recommendations – Subproject 2 ................................................................................................. 19 D.1. Design and Construction Considerations .......................................................................... 19 D.1.a. Utility Support and Impact of Groundwater ........................................................ 19 D.1.b. Pavement Subgrades and Drainage ..................................................................... 20 D.1.c. Subgrade Correction Area .................................................................................... 20 D.1.d. Reuse of Pavement Materials .............................................................................. 21 D.2. Pavements ......................................................................................................................... 21 D.2.a. Subgrade Preparation and Proofrolls ................................................................... 21 D.2.b. Subgrade Correction Area Backfill ........................................................................ 22 D.2.c. Backfill and Material Compaction ........................................................................ 22 D.2.d. Design Sections .................................................................................................... 23 D.2.e. Pavement Materials and Compaction .................................................................. 24 D.3. Utilities .............................................................................................................................. 24 Table of Contents (continued) Description Page D.3.a. Subgrades and Trench Backfill ............................................................................. 24 D.3.b. Excavation Side Slopes ......................................................................................... 24 D.3.c. Selection, Placement, and Compaction of Backfill ............................................... 25 D.3.d. Excavation Dewatering ......................................................................................... 25 D.3.e. Corrosion Potential .............................................................................................. 25 D.4. Construction Quality Control ............................................................................................ 25 D.4.a. Excavation Observations ...................................................................................... 25 D.4.b. Materials Testing .................................................................................................. 25 D.4.c. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll .............................................................................. 26 D.4.d. Cold Weather Precautions ................................................................................... 26 E. Procedures...................................................................................................................................... 26 E.1. Penetration Test Borings ................................................................................................... 26 E.2. Material Classification and Testing ................................................................................... 26 E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification .......................................................................... 26 E.2.b. Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................... 26 E.3. Groundwater Measurements ............................................................................................ 27 E.4. Ground Penetrating Radar ................................................................................................ 27 E.4.a. GPR Data Collection ............................................................................................. 27 E.4.b. GPR Analysis ......................................................................................................... 27 F. Qualifications .................................................................................................................................. 28 F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions .................................................................................. 28 F.1.a. Material Strata ..................................................................................................... 28 F.1.b. Groundwater Levels ............................................................................................. 28 F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility .......................................................................... 28 F.2.a. Plan Review .......................................................................................................... 28 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing ............................................................... 29 F.3. Use of Report..................................................................................................................... 29 F.4. Standard of Care ................................................................................................................ 29 Appendix ESAL Calculation Soil Boring Location Sketches (two sheets) Log of Boring Sheets (ST-01 through ST-20) Descriptive Terminology of Soil GPR Outputs Pavement Design Output (Subproject 2 – Minnewashta) A. Introduction A.1. Project Description This Geotechnical Evaluation Report addresses the proposed 2019 Street Resurfacing Project (City Project 19-01) in Chanhassen, Minnesota. City Project 19-01 will include improvements to three areas (two subprojects), described as follows: Subproject 1  Kurvers Point (Site 1; 0.61 miles) and Choctaw Circle (Site 2; 0.43 miles): pavement resurfacing, select curb and gutter replacement, and limited utility improvements.  We assume the spot utility improvements, if completed, will generally be 5 feet deep or less.  No traffic information was available. Given the residential nature of the streets, we have assumed the pavements will experience 50,000 equivalent single axle loads (ESALs) over a 20-year design period. Subproject 2  Minnewashta Parkway (Site 3; 1.57 miles): select curb and gutter replacement; localized subgrade corrections (near Red Cedar Point Road, adjacent to Lake Saint Joe); possible mill and overlay, reclaim/removal, or reconstruction with water main replacement and other limited utility improvements.  We assume any utility replacements will be less than 10 feet deep, and that they will be along the roadway between TH 5 and Kings Road.  MnDOT counts show average annual daily traffic (AADT) of 2,350 vehicles (2017) in the northern segment. With an “urban” distribution (defined by the Minnesota Department of Transportation [MnDOT] State Aid) and growth derived from the previous three traffic counts, we estimate Minnewashta Parkway will experience an estimated 299,000 ESALs over a 20-year design period. The traffic volumes and ESAL forecast is attached. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 2 A.2. Purpose The purpose of our evaluation was to characterize subsurface geologic conditions at selected exploration locations, evaluate their impact, perform GPR, and provide geotechnical and pavement recommendations for the 2019 Street Resurfacing Project 19-01 in Chanhassen, Minnesota. A.3. Background Information and Reference Documents To facilitate our evaluation, we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents:  A description of the scope and base map of the project area provided by City of Chanhassen in their request for proposal (RFP).  Geologic Atlas of Carver County available from the Minnesota Geological Survey.  Various publicly available sources of information, such as Google Earth® and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) LakeFinder.  MnDOT’s Traffic Mapping Application. A.4. Project Area Conditions A.4.a. Subproject 1 (Kurvers, Choctaw) Our experience and referenced documents suggest the most common soils underlying the Kurvers Point and Choctaw Circle project areas include glacial till. The streets of this subproject area are residential with bituminous surfaces and surmountable concrete curb and gutter. Topography in both areas is rolling. A.4.b. Subproject 2 (Minnewashta) Based on our referenced documents and experience, the native soils underlying the Subproject 2 area (Minnewashta) include glacial till with limited swamp and lacustrine deposits. Adjacent land use is residential. Minnewashta, a two-lane collector street, is currently surfaced with bituminous pavement and lined with concrete curb and gutter. The topography is rolling. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 3 A.5. Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was originally submitted as a Proposal to Ms. Stephanie Smith of the City of Chanhassen, for which we received e-mail authorization to proceed on May 16, 2018. Tasks performed in accordance with our authorized scope of services included:  Clearing exploration locations of underground utilities.  Performing 20 penetration test borings (labeled ST-1 through ST-20) and extending them to nominal depths of 10 feet below the pavement surface. Borings ST-13 through ST-20 were performed for Subproject 1, and ST-1 through ST-12 on Subproject 2.  Providing signs and flaggers as needed to protect motorists and our field crew during drilling for Subproject 2.  Performing ground penetrating radar (GPR) testing on both directions on each project street.  As an alternative service, performing at least one core and hand auger boring per project area (Kurvers, Choctaw, and Minnewashta) to help verify GPR results and evaluate material conditions. Note that we were unable to perform the initial core for Minnewashta due to traffic; at the request of the City, we re-mobilized with traffic control to perform the original core (C-1) and two additional cores (C-4 and C-5).  Performing laboratory moisture content tests, mechanical analyses (#200 sieve only), and organic content tests on selected penetration test samples.  Preparing this report containing a CAD sketch, exploration logs, a summary of the geologic materials encountered, results of laboratory tests, and recommendations for subgrade preparation, pavement thickness design, and utility placement. Note that our scope did not include visual evaluation of the pavement surface condition. Exploration locations and surface elevations at the exploration locations were determined using GPS technology that utilizes MnDOT’s permanent GPS Virtual Reference Network (VRN). Our scope of services did not include environmental services or testing, and we did not train the personnel performing this evaluation to provide environmental services or testing. We can provide these services or testing at your request. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 4 B. Results B.1. Exploration Logs B.1.a. Log of Boring Sheets Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and describe the geologic materials that were penetrated and present the results of penetration resistance tests, laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples retrieved from them, and groundwater measurements. Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the auger cuttings. Because sampling was not performed continuously, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths shown likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions. B.1.b. Geologic Origins Geologic origins assigned to the materials shown on the logs and referenced within this report were based on: (1) a review of the background information and reference documents cited above, (2) visual classification of the various geologic material samples retrieved during the course of our subsurface exploration, (3) penetration resistance testing performed for the project, (4) laboratory test results and (5) available common knowledge of the geologic processes and environments that have impacted the site and surrounding area in the past. B.2. Geologic Profile B.2.a. Pavement Materials The pavement material thicknesses measured in the borings on both projects are presented in Table 1. Additional pavement thickness results can be found in Section B.4 (GPR and Core Results). City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 5 Table 1. Pavement Thickness Summary Subproject Boring Street Pavement Thickness (in.) Notes Bituminous Aggregate Base* 2 ST-01 Minnewashta Parkway 5 1/2 15 ST-02 5 13 ST-03 6 14 ST-04 5 1/2 12 1/2 ST-05 5 1/2 12 ST-06 6 18+ 18 inches of apparent base to the beginning of first penetration test. Sampler driven from 2 to 3 1/2 feet appeared to penetrate additional bituminous pavement ST-07 6 14 1/2 ST-08 6 24 Aggregate appeared to extend to depth sampled with split-spoon ST-09 6 13 1/2 ST-10 6 11 1/2 ST-11 6 6 ST-12 5 1/2 18 1 ST-13 Choctaw Circle 6 7 1/2 ST-14 5 7 ST-15 Brule Circle 4 10 ST-16 Kurvers Pt Rd 5 1/2 8 1/2 ST-17 6 1/2 9 ST-18 Twin Maple Rd 5 1/2 8 1/2 ST-19 Kurvers Pt Rd 6 8 Geotextile fabric noted below aggregate ST-20 Willow View Curve 5 1/2 9 *”Aggregate base” was identified visually in the field as the layer below the bituminous pavement layer and does not imply conformance of the material to a particular gradation or specification (e.g. Class 5). B.2.b. Geologic Materials Tables 2 and 3 provide a summary of the soil boring results in the general order we encountered the strata on Subproject 1 and 2, respectively. Please refer to the Log of Boring sheets in the Appendix for additional details. The Descriptive Terminology of Soil sheets in the Appendix include definitions of abbreviations used in the tables City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 6 For simplicity in this report, we define fill to mean existing, uncontrolled, or undocumented fill. Table 2. Subsurface Profile Summary, Subproject 1* Strata Soil Type - ASTM Classification Range of Penetration Resistances Commentary and Details Pavement section N/A N/A  See Table 1. Fill SC, CL 4 to 10 blows per foot (BPF)  Present in ST-13, 14, 17 and 19.  Moisture condition generally moist.  Extended to depths between 2 and 7 feet where present.  Variable with some intermixed soils. Glacial till SM, CL 5 to 30 BPF  Moisture condition generally moist.  Consisted of mostly sandy lean clay, with limited silty sand, both with trace gravel.  Often brown and sometimes gray; some materials were rust-stained, indicating the occasional presence of water. Glacial outwash SP, SP-SM 17 to 33 BPF  Encountered only in ST-14.  Variable amounts of gravel; noted cobble at 10 feet.  Moisture condition was moist. Lacustrine (lakebed) deposits ML 9 BPF  Between 9 feet and termination depth (11 feet) in ST-16 only.  Gray, moist, loose sandy silt. *Abbreviations defined in the attached Descriptive Terminology of Soil sheets. Table 3. Subsurface Profile Summary, Subproject 2* Strata Soil Type - ASTM Classification Range of Penetration Resistances Commentary and Details Pavement section N/A N/A  See Table 1. Fill SM, SC, CL 3 to 11 BPF  Mostly about 4 to 7 feet deep, where present; extended to 11 feet (termination) in ST-8.  Typically moist; occasionally wet (ST-8).  Sometimes slightly organic (ST-3; ST-12).  Highly variable, with soils intermixed; contained bituminous pieces at 2 feet in ST-2, and wood pieces in ST-8 at 10 feet.  Possible cobbles and boulders. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 7 Strata Soil Type - ASTM Classification Range of Penetration Resistances Commentary and Details Glacial till SM, CL 4 to 30 BPF  Moisture condition moist to wet.  Consisted of mostly sandy lean clay and some silty sand.  Brown and occasionally gray in color; generally medium or stiffer in consistency. Lacustrine (lakebed) and swamp deposits Pt, ML, CL 3 to 9 BPF  Present in ST-6 and ST-7 and ST-12.  Peat and organic silt/clay present in each case.  Encountered from 4 to 9 feet deep in ST-6, underlain by apparent glacial soils.  In ST-7 and ST-12, present at the boring termination depth in ST-11.  Heavily layered shoreline deposits in ST-12, with silty, sandy and organic soils all present. Glacial outwash SP 4 BPF  Encountered at termination depth in ST-5 only.  Present below the observed water table (moisture condition: wet). *Abbreviations defined in the attached Descriptive Terminology of Soil sheets. B.2.c. Groundwater We did not observe groundwater during our drilling for Subproject 1. Lotus Lake, west of the project areas, has an ordinary high water level (OHW) of 896.4 feet above MSL. Based on the boring elevations and moisture contents of the retrieved samples, it appears groundwater was likely below the depths explored. The mottled and rust-stained color of some of the glacial till soils, however, suggests groundwater may occasionally be present within some soil layers. Groundwater was observed during our drilling operations for Subproject 2 as shown in Table 4. Table 4. Groundwater Observation Summary, Subproject 2 Boring Surface Elevation (ft)* Observed Groundwater Depth (ft) Corresponding Groundwater Elevation (ft) ST-5 953 1/2 8** 945 1/2 ST-6 950 9 941 ST-7 951 7 944 ST-12 949 6 943 *Rounded to nearest 1/2 foot. **Water level observed at 3 feet after further auger penetration. See Log of Boring for details. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 8 MnDNR records show an OHW for Lake Minnewashta of 944.5 feet above mean sea level (MSL), which is consistent with our observations. Seasonal and annual fluctuations of groundwater should be anticipated. B.3. Laboratory Test Results Laboratory test results, including moisture content, organic content, and mechanical analysis (#200 sieve only) tests, are summarized in Table 5. Table 5. Laboratory Testing Results Borehole Subproject Depth %<#200 Sieve Water Content (%) Organic Content (%) ST-1 2 (Minnewashta) 2 1/2 -- 15 -- ST-3 5 -- 36 4 ST-5 5 -- 31 -- ST-6 5 -- 114 27 ST-6 10 -- 23 -- ST-7 5 -- 81 19 ST-7 7 1/2 -- 122 -- ST-8 5 -- 17 -- ST-8 10 -- 22 -- ST-12 1 (Kurvers, Choctaw) 2 1/2 -- 13 3 ST-12 5 -- 25 -- ST-13 5 -- 17 -- ST-15 2 1/2 -- 10 -- ST-17 2 1/2 -- 17 -- ST-19 2 1/2 -- 16 -- ST-20 2 1/2 56 17 -- The moisture contents of the non-organic soils (< 2 percent organic content by weight) varied significantly and were often above their likely optimum moisture contents for compaction. The elevated moisture contents of soils tested in ST-6 and ST-7 reflect the substantial organic component of these lacustrine and swamp-deposited soils. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 9 B.4. GPR and Core Results GPR was used to determine approximate pavement layer thicknesses along the streets. GPR data was collected at a nominal 1-foot interval in both travel directions on most roads; exceptions were short cul-de-sacs or circles, which were collected in a single direction. Where “ground-truth” data (pavement cores) were performed, the interpreted layers from the GPR scan were compared directly to the measured thicknesses from the pavement cores and hand auger borings to validate the accuracy of the GPR analysis, with adjustments to the GPR as necessary to match the observed data. We have also included the approximate location of penetration test borings on the GPR figures, based on the GPS results of both, though offsets and the nature of measuring pavement thicknesses at boring locations make these thickness comparisons more approximate than with cores. Tables 6 and 7 provide the results based on our analysis using the RADAN software program. The Appendix shows the interpreted layer depth by foot along each street in the travel direction. Table 6. GPR Analysis Summary Statistics (BIT layer) Street Dir From To GPR Picked Length (ft) Bituminous layer thickness statistics (inches) Avg. 15th Pctle 5th Pctle Min Max Basswood Cir EB Kurvers Pt Rd North End 142 4.2 3.6 3.3 2.9 5.6 Brule Cir NB Choctaw Cir Cul-de-sac 502 5.1 4.5 4.1 3.9 7.5 Brule Cir SB Cul-de-sac Choctaw Cir 502 5.1 4.2 4.0 3.7 7.9 Choctaw Cir EB Cul-de-sac Chanhassen Rd 1599 5.3 4.4 3.7 2.7 9.1 Choctaw Cir WB Chanhassen Rd Cul-de-sac 1542 5.8 4.7 4.3 2.8 11.9 Kurvers Pt (Circle) SB North End South End 313 4.6 4.1 4.0 3.4 5.9 Kurvers Pt Rd NB Cul-de-sac Chanhassen Rd 1684 5.0 4.4 4.0 2.9 7.8 Kurvers Pt Rd SB Chanhassen Rd Cul-de-sac 1676 4.9 4.2 3.8 1.3 7.8 Twin Maple Rd EB Kurvers Point Rd Cul-de-sac 406 5.5 4.9 4.6 4.2 8.9 Twin Maple Rd WB Cul-de-sac Kurvers Point Rd 400 5.7 5.0 4.6 4.2 8.4 Willow View Curve WB Kurvers Point Rd Cul-de-sac 342 4.2 3.8 3.5 3.2 5.9 Minnewashta Pkwy NB TH 5 North County Line 8244 5.2 4.5 4.2 2.5 9.9 Minnewashta Pkwy SB North County Line TH 5 8214 5.1 4.4 4.1 3.4 9.5 City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 10 Table 7. GPR Analysis Summary Statistics (AGG layer) (where present) Street Dir From To GPR Picked Length (ft) Aggregate layer thickness statistics (inches) Avg. 15th Pctle 5th Pctle Min Max Basswood Cir EB Kurvers Pt Rd North End 142 14.0 13.0 12.3 11.1 17.7 Brule Cir NB Choctaw Cir Cul-de-sac 502 12.1 10.9 10.2 9.4 15.9 Brule Cir SB Cul-de-sac Choctaw Cir 502 12.1 11.0 10.6 9.2 15.9 Choctaw Cir EB Cul-de-sac Chanhassen Rd 1599 7.4 6.0 5.3 4.0 11.7 Choctaw Cir WB Chanhassen Rd Cul-de-sac 1542 6.6 4.8 3.3 1.6 11.4 Kurvers Pt (Circle) SB North End South End 313 13.8 12.3 11.5 10.3 17.9 Kurvers Pt Rd NB Cul-de-sac Chanhassen Rd 1684 -- -- -- -- -- Kurvers Pt Rd SB Chanhassen Rd Cul-de-sac 1676 -- -- -- -- -- Twin Maple Rd EB Kurvers Point Rd Cul-de-sac 406 9.4 7.9 7.1 5.8 13.6 Twin Maple Rd WB Cul-de-sac Kurvers Point Rd 400 8.1 7.1 6.6 5.8 11.0 Willow View Curve WB Kurvers Point Rd Cul-de-sac 342 -- -- -- -- -- Minnewashta Pkwy NB TH 5 North County Line 8244 15.8 12.2 10.6 8.5 23.2 Minnewashta Pkwy SB North County Line TH 5 8214 17.7 16.2 15.5 10.8 26.1 The apparent aggregate base in the GPR scan was often thicker than noted in the boreholes. We observed in some cases that multiple layers of similar granular material (base, subbase) often underlay the bituminous layer; these may have been difficult to differentiate in the side of the borehole. An example is Kurvers Point Road, where the borings on the northern half of the road showed a similar base section to the hand auger boring, including the noted geotextile layer. While no aggregate base was obvious in this portion of the GPR scan, the southern portion of Kurvers Point Road appeared to have a much deeper “base” than shown in the borings. In other cases, Minnewashta Parkway in particular, the apparent aggregate base layer was only visible in the GPR in select locations and may not represent the true average of the layer thickness. (On Willow View Curve, no aggregate base layer was obvious in the GPR data.) The GPR data attached to this report should be consulted to understand the GPR data and its potential limitations. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 11 We performed pavement coring and hand auger borings in five locations as shown below in Figures 1 through 3 and summarized in Table 8. We selected all locations based on GPR scan results. Figure 1. Approximate locations of Cores C-1, C-4, and C-5 on Minnewashta Parkway Figure 2. Approximate location of Core C-2 on Choctaw Circle City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 12 Figure 3. Approximate location of Core C-3 on Kurvers Point Road Table 8. Pavement Core and Hand Auger Results Street Core Bituminous Thickness (in.) Aggregate Base Thickness (in.) Notes Minnewashta Parkway C-1 5 -- Limestone aggregate base present; hand auger met refusal after partial penetration Choctaw Circle C-2 4 3/4 14 1/4 The identified aggregate base and underlying material (possible subbase) were similarly granular in composition Low-severity stripping in bottom inch Kurvers Point Road C-3 4 9 Core debonding and high-severity stripping likely affected recovered thickness. Geotextile present below aggregate base Minnewashta Parkway C-4 4 3/4 -- Limestone aggregate base present; hand auger met refusal after partial penetration Minnewashta Parkway C-5 6 -- Limestone aggregate base present; hand auger met refusal after partial penetration City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 13 Photos 1 through 5 show the cores. Photo 1. Core C-1 (Minnewashta Parkway) Photo 2. Core C-2 (Choctaw Circle) City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 14 Photo 3. Core C-3 (Kurvers Point Road) Photo 4. Core C-4 (Minnewashta Parkway) City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 15 Photo 5. Core C-5 (Minnewashta Parkway) Visible in Photo 2 is high-severity stripping, which can affect the constructability and service life of partial-depth pavement repairs such as mill and overlay. We recommend additional cores if such repairs are being considered. C. Recommendations – Subproject 1 C.1. Design and Construction Considerations C.1.a. Pavement Resurfacing and Reuse of Pavement Materials Our borings and GPR encountered a bituminous layer averaging about 5 1/2 inches thick over aggregate base ranging from about 7 to 10 inches. From a materials thickness and quality standpoint, it appears full-depth reclamation (FDR) can be utilized in order to obtain materials for aggregate base on the project. A proper reclamation depth will likely vary between about 10 and 12 inches. One possible limitation is the geotextile fabric noted in one boring and one core location in the Kurvers Point Road area near Twin Maple Road. The extent and precise depth of City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 16 this fabric is unknown. Reclamation extended into the fabric can cause equipment damage and substantially compromise the quality of reclaimed product, and we recommend exercising extreme caution or selecting another method of pavement removal if these risks are unacceptable. We recommend thorough quality control practices, including frequent sieve analyses of the reclaimed material, if the product will be reused directly on site as aggregate base or a stabilizing material with minimal processing. C.1.b. Pavement Subgrades and Drainage The pavement subgrades will consist of almost exclusively clayey materials. We anticipate the majority of the subgrade soils present beneath the existing roads will generally be suitable for pavement support. However, they are likely to be wet or become wet upon exposure and are likely to require additional work, such as moisture conditioning (drying), before they can be properly compacted. Removal and replacement, or various stabilization techniques, may prove to be a more efficient option in the event the soils are substantially over their optimum moisture contents. C.2. Pavements C.2.a. Subgrade Preparation and Proofrolls For preparation of any exposed subgrades prior to placement of new pavement sections or reclaimed aggregate (see below), we recommend proofrolling the subgrade soils with a loaded tandem-axle truck. This will assist in identifying any soft or weak areas that will require additional soil correction work. Areas that yield or rut more than 1 inch due to wheel traffic, depending on conditions, should be corrected. Failed areas should be compacted, or if too wet, we recommend that the upper 1 to 2 feet of the resulting subgrade be scarified, dried to a moisture content not more than 2 percentage points above optimum, and compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). If there are areas that still cannot be compacted, we recommend subexcavating the unstable materials to a minimum depth of 1 to 2 feet depending on the outcome of the proofroll, as well replacement material. The soils should be replaced them with suitable, properly compacted materials such as select granular material, aggregate base or larger diameter crushed aggregate (“3-inch minus”). City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 17 C.2.b. Backfill and Material Compaction Our materials and compaction recommendations are provided in Tables 9 and 10. Table 9. Engineered Fill Materials Locations To Be Used Engineered Fill Classification Possible Soil Type Descriptions Gradation Additional Requirements  Drainage layer  Non-frost- susceptible MnDOT select granular GP, GW, SP, SW See MnDOT Spec 3149.2B2 -- Pavements Pavement subgrade fill Select grading material SP, SM, SC, CL 100% passing 3-inch sieve < 5% OC PI < 15%  Below utilities in wet soils  Over wet excavation bottoms Coarse aggregate bedding GP, GW, SP, SW See MnDOT Spec 3149.G2 -- Table 10. Compaction Recommendations Summary Reference Relative Compaction, percent (ASTM D698 – Standard Proctor) Moisture Content Variance from Optimum, percentage points < 12% Passing #200 Sieve (typically SP, SP-SM)* > 12% Passing #200 Sieve (typically CL, SC, ML, SM) Within 3 feet of pavement subgrade 100 ±3 -1 to +3 More than 3 feet below pavement subgrade; utilities 95 ±3 ±3 *Alternatively, use the MnDOT Penetration Index Method C.2.c. Design Sections Table 11 shows the City of Chanhassen Typical Residential Street Section (Plate No. 5200). In our opinion, this section is suitable for reconstructed pavements required within Subproject 1. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 18 Table 11. City of Chanhassen Residential Bituminous Pavement Section Layer Thickness (in.) MnDOT Specification/Designation Bituminous wear 2 (1 lift) SPWEA340C Bituminous non-wear 2 (1 lift) SPNWB330B (can substitute the wear material above to simplify construction) Aggregate base (Class 5) (or reclaim) 12 3138 (or 3135, for more lenient requirements for reclaimed material) Subbase (select granular borrow) 24 3149 If the pavements will be reclaimed in place, recompacted and repaved, a 4-inch section as shown in Table 11 will be adequate for the design traffic. This will require removal and stockpiling of the reclaimed material or removal of 4 inches of the reclaimed material to accommodate the bituminous pavements. We recommend a minimum thickness of aggregate base (reclaim + residual aggregate) of 8 inches. The evaluation of mill and overlay or similar partial-depth pavement rehabilitation would require a detailed visual survey of the pavement surface condition and numerous cores to assess bituminous material condition. This work was outside the scope of our evaluation. C.2.d. Pavement Materials and Compaction We recommend specifying pavement materials as recommended in Table 11. We recommend compacting the aggregate base or reclaim materials to meet the requirements of MnDOT specification 2211.3.D.2.c. (Penetration Index Method). We recommend compacting bituminous pavements to at least 92 percent of the maximum theoretical Rice density per the Maximum Density Method (specification 2360.3.D.1), with bituminous materials and placement practices meeting the requirements of MnDOT Specification 2360. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 19 C.3. Construction Quality Control C.3.a. Excavation Observations We recommend having a geotechnical engineer observe all excavations related to subgrade preparation, and pavement construction. The purpose of the observations is to evaluate the competence of the geologic materials exposed in the excavations and the adequacy of required excavation oversizing. C.3.b. Materials Testing We recommend density tests be taken in excavation backfill and additional required fill placed below pavements and utilities. This includes DCP tests for aggregate base or reclaim and imported granular materials. We recommend Gyratory tests on bituminous mixes to evaluate strength and air voids and density tests to evaluate compaction. C.3.c. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll We recommend that proofrolling of the pavement subgrades be observed by a geotechnical engineer to determine if the results of the procedure meet project specifications and to delineate the extent of additional pavement subgrade preparation work that may be necessary. C.3.d. Cold Weather Precautions If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, all snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. D. Recommendations – Subproject 2 D.1. Design and Construction Considerations D.1.a. Utility Support and Impact of Groundwater The reuse of the utility trench backfill soils will have potential impacts on the pavement subgrades. If the backfill is not properly compacted, there is the potential for subgrade instability and settlement (and premature deterioration) of the driving surface. We anticipate the trench soils will consist mostly of clayey soils, with some stretches of softer lacustrine (lakebed) soils and swamp deposits. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 20 It is likely the clayey soils will need to be dried to achieve the levels of compaction recommended for utility support. Clayey trench soils that are exposed to moisture will be more susceptible to strength loss and may also become unstable, which will require moisture conditioning or removal and replacement with suitable soils. Soils containing greater than 80 percent silt and soils with greater than 5 percent organic content encountered in any trenches should be removed from the project and replaced with a suitable material. Groundwater was present in the borings near the lake crossing (ST-6, 7, and 8) and near the north terminus of the project (ST-12). For utilities installed in these areas, a coarse aggregate bedding material could be used to help overcome wet or saturated soil conditions. D.1.b. Pavement Subgrades and Drainage Outside of the potential subgrade correction area (described below), the majority of subgrade soils on Minnewashta Parkway will be clayey till soils, which are suitable for pavement support but susceptible to strength loss from additional water and traffic. The tested moisture contents suggest that many of these soils are over their optimum moisture contents for compaction and will require drying, removal and replacement, or stabilization techniques in order to support pavements. D.1.c. Subgrade Correction Area The thickness of the in-place aggregate section in ST-6 through ST-8 (including possible buried pavement in ST-6), it is likely that consolidation of the swamp-deposited, compressible organic soils have been the primary contributor to poor pavement performance in the area. There are a few options for reducing settlement:  Full replacement of undocumented fill and swamp-deposited soils (Option 1).  Partial soil correction (Option 2).  Alternative construction techniques, such as lightweight fill (Option 3). Given the limited depth of the swamp-deposited soils, which extended from 6 to 9 feet in ST-6 and ST-7, the most complete approach for the lowest relative cost will be Option 1. The soft clayey fill soils in ST-8 extended to boring termination; to limit cost and due to likely constrains on excavation limits, some of these soils may need to be left in place. Completely removing these soils by open cut methods would very likely require laying back slopes past the west side curb. We assume instead that trench boxes or other temporary retention will be used; in that case, we recommend removing as much of the unsuitable soils as possible with the selected option. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 21 We recommend a minimum longitudinal transition of 20:1 (horizontal:vertical) to avoid abrupt transitions and associated changes in subgrade and pavement performance. To reduce subgrade moisture and improve pavement performance, drain tile can be placed in the new backfill in the subgrade correction area, assuming there is sufficient elevation and profile to outlet the water to headwalls daylighted in the slope or existing storm sewer. Tile should be placed at the bottom of the subbase (select granular) layer in the pavement. D.1.d. Reuse of Pavement Materials Our borings and GPR encountered a bituminous layer averaging nearly between about 5 and 6 inches thick, typically with more than 12 inches of underlying aggregate base (according to the borings; as identified by samples from borings and hand auger borings, this material was similar to a limestone aggregate base). This should be considered sufficient for full-depth reclamation (FDR) of Minnewashta Parkway to depths of 12 inches or greater. We recommend thorough quality control practices, including frequent sieve analyses of the reclaimed material, if the product will be reused directly on site as aggregate base or a stabilizing material with minimal processing. D.2. Pavements D.2.a. Subgrade Preparation and Proofrolls For preparation of any exposed subgrades prior to placement of new pavement sections or reclaimed aggregate (see below), we recommend proofrolling the subgrade soils or reclaimed aggregate with a loaded tandem-axle truck. This will assist in identifying any soft or weak areas that will require additional soil correction work. Areas that yield or rut more than 1 inch due to wheel traffic, depending on conditions, should be corrected. Failed areas should be compacted, or if too wet, we recommend that the upper 1 to 2 feet of the resulting subgrade be scarified, dried to a moisture content not more than 2 percentage points above optimum, and compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). If there are areas that still cannot be compacted, we recommend subexcavating the unstable materials to a minimum depth of 1 to 2 feet depending on the outcome of the proofroll, as well replacement material. The soils should be replaced with suitable, properly compacted materials such as Select Granular Material (MnDOT 3149.2B2), aggregate base or larger diameter crushed aggregate (“3-inch minus”). City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 22 D.2.b. Subgrade Correction Area Backfill We initially recommend backfilling over the wet or submerged excavation bottoms with coarse aggregate bedding or similar soil as referenced in Table 13. MnDOT “select” materials (< 12 percent passing a #200 sieve) can also be used, but may be slightly more difficult to compact in wet conditions. We anticipate these materials will need to be imported. In general, clayey soils will be extremely difficult to work with “in the wet” and sand should be considered for backfill that will be placed below the groundwater surface if significant dewatering is not performed. Sumps or other means of dewatering will likely to be necessary to aid in backfill placement. Above the water table, on-site soils free of organic soil and debris can be considered for reuse as backfill and fill. The clayey and silty fill and glacial till will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or if spread and compacted over wet surfaces. Imported material needed to replace excavation spoils or balance cut and fill quantities may consist of sand, silty sand, clayey sand, sandy lean clay or lean clay. We recommend, however, that the plastic index of these materials not exceed 15. D.2.c. Backfill and Material Compaction Our materials and compaction recommendations are provided in Tables 12 and 13. Table 12. Engineered Fill Materials Locations To Be Used Engineered Fill Classification Possible Soil Type Descriptions Gradation Additional Requirements  Drainage layer  Non-frost- susceptible MnDOT select granular GP, GW, SP, SW See MnDOT Spec 3149.2B2 -- Pavements Pavement subgrade fill Select grading material SP, SM, SC, CL 100% passing 3-inch sieve < 5% OC PI < 15%  Below utilities in wet soils  Over wet excavation bottoms Coarse aggregate bedding GP, GW, SP, SW See MnDOT Spec 3149.G2 -- City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 23 Table 13. Compaction Recommendations Summary Reference Relative Compaction, percent (ASTM D698 – Standard Proctor) Moisture Content Variance from Optimum, percentage points < 12% Passing #200 Sieve (typically SP, SP-SM)* > 12% Passing #200 Sieve (typically CL, SC, ML, SM) Within 3 feet of pavement subgrade 100 ±3 -1 to +3 More than 3 feet below pavement subgrade; utilities 95 ±3 ±3 *Alternatively, use the MnDOT Penetration Index Method D.2.d. Design Sections We used MnDOT’s MnPAVE-Flexible software to estimate the required pavement thickness for Minnewashta Parkway at the estimated 20-year ESALs (299,000). We assumed a “clay loam” subgrade (similar to the sandy lean clay encountered) and first evaluated the City of Chanhassen Typical Residential Street Section (Plate No. 5200). MnPAVE-Flexible indicates possible failure of this section during the critical spring thaw period with only 4 inches of bituminous pavement; we therefore recommend increasing the bituminous thickness to 5 inches as shown below in Table 14. Table 14. Recommended Bituminous Pavement Section, Minnewashta Reconstruction Layer Thickness (in.) MnDOT Specification/Designation Bituminous wear 3 (2 lifts) SPWEA340C Bituminous non-wear 2 (1 lift) SPNWB330B (can substitute the wear material above to simplify construction) Aggregate base (Class 5) (or reclaim) 12 3138 (or 3135, for more lenient requirements for reclaimed material) Subbase (select granular borrow) 24 3149 (can be reduced in thickness to 12 inches with no effect on pavement life) City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 24 If the pavements will be reclaimed in place, recompacted and repaved, a 5-inch bituminous section as shown in Table 14 should be used. This will require removal and stockpiling of the reclaimed material or removal of 5 inches of the reclaimed material to accommodate the bituminous pavements. We recommend a minimum thickness of aggregate base (reclaim + residual aggregate) of 10 inches. D.2.e. Pavement Materials and Compaction We recommend specifying pavement materials as recommended in Table 14. We recommend compacting the aggregate base or reclaim materials to meet the requirements of MnDOT specification 2211.3.D.2.c. (Penetration Index Method). We recommend compacting bituminous pavements to at least 92 percent of the maximum theoretical Rice density per the Maximum Density Method (specification 2360.3.D.1), with bituminous materials and placement practices meeting the requirements of MnDOT Specification 2360. D.3. Utilities D.3.a. Subgrades and Trench Backfill The native glacial till soils encountered at likely utility elevations generally appear suitable for pipe and utility structure support and we anticipate that utilities can be installed per manufacturer bedding requirements. However, we encountered wet, clayey lakebed/swamp deposited soils in several borings within the proposed utility alignment; soils such as these will have limited stability and are not generally suitable for backfill or utility support. We recommend providing a contingency for further subcutting and soil replacement of utility backfill soils in such soils. This may already include soils that will be removed as part of the subgrade correction area described in Section D.2.b. of this report. At pipe elevations, we recommend a minimum subcut and replacement with MnDOT coarse aggregate bedding; this depth may need to be increased to two feet or more if the soils are particularly wet or soft. A geotechnical engineer should observe all utility trench excavations and subcuts. D.3.b. Excavation Side Slopes The project area soils appear to meet OSHA Type A, B and C requirements. We recommend constructing excavation side slopes to lie back at a horizontal to vertical slope of 1 1/2 to 1 or flatter. In significant depths of organic soils these side slopes may be need to made flatter or supplemental support may be necessary. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 25 All excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states that excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. Reference to these OSHA requirements should be included in the project specifications. Trenches deeper than 20 feet must be designed by a professional engineer. D.3.c. Selection, Placement, and Compaction of Backfill We recommend compacting backfill placed above and below utilities as shown in Table 13. D.3.d. Excavation Dewatering We recommend removing groundwater from the utility excavations if encountered and removing any water that seeps into excavations from sidewalls or the adjacent site work. Sumps and pumps will generally be suitable for short-term, small-scale water removal under the soil conditions likely to be encountered for this project. Alternative approaches should be considered for long-term or large-scale groundwater removal, particularly in proximity to the lakes and at low points. The contractor should develop a groundwater control plan for review by the engineer and project team. D.3.e. Corrosion Potential Clayey soils were present at likely utility depths, which are considered at least moderately corrosive to ductile iron pipe. We recommend corrosion protection or the use of corrosion-resistant pipe material if utilities will be bedded within such soils, particularly if they will be in close proximity to static groundwater over the long term. D.4. Construction Quality Control D.4.a. Excavation Observations We recommend having a geotechnical engineer observe all excavations related to subgrade preparation, and pavement construction. The purpose of the observations is to evaluate the competence of the geologic materials exposed in the excavations and the adequacy of required excavation oversizing. D.4.b. Materials Testing We recommend density tests be taken in excavation backfill and additional required fill placed below pavements and utilities. This includes DCP tests for aggregate base or reclaim and imported granular materials. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 26 We recommend Gyratory tests on bituminous mixes to evaluate strength and air voids and density tests to evaluate compaction. D.4.c. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll We recommend that proofrolling of the pavement subgrades be observed by a geotechnical engineer to determine if the results of the procedure meet project specifications and to delineate the extent of additional pavement subgrade preparation work that may be necessary. D.4.d. Cold Weather Precautions If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, all snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. E. Procedures E.1. Penetration Test Borings The penetration test borings were drilled with a truck-mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger. The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Penetration test samples were taken at 2 1/2-foot intervals and are shown on the boring logs. E.2. Material Classification and Testing E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice D 2488. A chart explaining the classification system is attached. Samples were placed in jars or bags and returned to our facility for review and storage. E.2.b. Laboratory Testing The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM or AASHTO procedures. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 27 E.3. Groundwater Measurements The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced and again after auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled as noted on the boring logs. E.4. Ground Penetrating Radar E.4.a. GPR Data Collection GPR data was collected on May 29, 2018. GPR collection occurred at posted speed limits and data was recorded along each street in the direction indicated in Table 6 of this report. Scans of the pavement were collected according to GSSI, Inc. (manufacturer) SIR-20 processor settings at a specified interval of approximately one scan per lineal foot in a single travel direction. A calibration file, required for data post-processing, was collected at the onset of testing. Linear distance along the roadway was measured using a wheel-mounted Distance Measuring Instrument (DMI). GPS data was also collected. E.4.b. GPR Analysis Data collected by the GPR unit was returned to our office and analyzed to estimate the pavement thickness, and where possible, the thickness of underlying pavement and/or aggregate base. Pavement layer interpretation was accomplished using RADAN 7.4, a software package included with the GSSI RoadScan system. The software includes tools to aid in delineating pavement layer transitions and automatically calculates their depths from the pavement surface using the calibration file(s) collected prior to or following testing. Where “ground-truth” data (cores or borings) were collected, the interpreted layers from the GPR scan were compared directly to the measured thicknesses from the cores or borings to validate the accuracy of the GPR analysis. These locations are shown on the GPR figures; in the case of borings, the locations should be considered approximate. The bituminous pavement was repaired with a cold-mix bituminous patch immediately after coring. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 28 F. Qualifications F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions F.1.a. Material Strata Our evaluation, analyses, and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth, and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be inferred to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and can be expected to vary in depth, elevation, and thickness away from the exploration locations. Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until additional exploration work is completed, or construction commences. If any such variations are revealed, our recommendations should be re-evaluated. Such variations could increase construction costs, and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them. F.1.b. Groundwater Levels Groundwater measurements were made under the conditions reported herein and shown on the exploration logs, and interpreted in the text of this report. It should be noted that the observation periods were relatively short, and groundwater can be expected to fluctuate in response to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, seasonal freezing and thawing, surface drainage modifications, and other seasonal and annual factors. F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility F.2.a. Plan Review This report is based on a limited amount of information, and a number of assumptions were necessary to help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications, and evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications. City of Chanhassen Project B1804714 January 10, 2019 Page 29 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing It is recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction. This will allow correlation of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered by the borings, and provide continuity of professional responsibility. F.3. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses, and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.4. Standard of Care In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made. Appendix Instructions: All yellow boxes require an input value. Dropdown choices are provided for Base Year (C18), Number of Lanes (C19), and Urban or Rural (C21). You must click on cells C18, C19, and C21 to access the dropdown choices. General Information Date Forecast Performed by Name of County or City Project Number Project Description Route Number Base Year (i.e. opening to traffic)2019 Number of Lanes (total both directions)2 = typical 2 lane Current AADT Urban or Rural Urban Historical AADT (enter a minimum of two years)Year AADT Enter oldest traffic data here 2013 2,200 Enter second oldest traffic data here 2015 2,150 Enter third oldest traffic data here 2017 2,350 Enter fourth oldest traffic data here Base Year AADT 2019 2,380 20-Year AADT 2039 3,130 35-Year AADT 2054 3,700 Growth Rate Vehicle Class %Flexible Rigid 2AX-6TIRE SU 1.37%0.25 0.24 3AX+SU 0.06%0.58 0.85 3AX TST 0.09%0.39 0.37 4AX TST 0.18%0.51 0.53 5AX+TST 1.45%1.13 1.89 TR TR, BUSES 0.67%0.57 0.74 TWIN TRAILERS 0.00%2.40 2.33 Total 3.83%NA NA 20-Year Flexible Forecast (10 Ton) =299,000 20-Year Rigid Forecast (10 Ton) =443,000 35-Year Flexible Forecast (10 Ton) =566,000 35-Year Rigid Forecast (10 Ton) =839,000 Revised: 4/16/2018 State Aid 10 Ton ESAL Traffic Forecast Calculator For State Aid questions and information concerning this tool, please contact State Aid Pavement Engineer Joel Ulring at joel.ulring@state.mn.us or 651-366-3831. 7/20/2018 NGL/Braun Intertec Chanhassen Braun Intertec project B1804714 Vehicle Type ESAL Factors 1.58% Minnewashta Parkway (City Project 19-01) MSAS 111 This ESAL calculator is for use with default Heavy Commerical Traffic values; click "User Defined Traffic Values" sheet below if you wish to enter your own Heavy Commercial Traffic values. 11 8 11 20 15 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 15 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, dark brown and gray, moist. CLAYEY SAND, trace Gravel, brown and gray, moist, medium to very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL SC Benchmark: Elevations were obtained using GPS and the State of Minnesota's permanent base station network. 985.7 984.4 982.1 975.1 0.4 1.7 4.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 183563, E: 537042. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-1 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-1 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 986.1 0.0 Depth feet 7 5 5 6 5 inches of bituminous. 13 inches of aggregate base. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray, moist, medium. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 7 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG CL 981.3 980.2 970.7 0.4 1.5 11.0 LOCATION: N: 183986, E: 537286. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-2 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-2 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 981.7 0.0 Depth feet 6 8 8 10 36 6 inches of bituminous. 14 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, with pieces of bituminous, dark brown and brown, moist. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, slightly organic, dark brown to black, moist. CLAYEY SAND, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium. (Glacial Till) SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL FILL SC CL OC=4% 963.9 962.7 960.4 957.4 955.4 953.4 0.5 1.7 4.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 184494, E: 537377. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-3 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-3 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 964.4 0.0 Depth feet 9 13 14 22 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 12 1/2 inches of aggregate base. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Till) SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, moist, stiff to very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG CL SM CL 961.8 960.7 958.2 954.2 951.2 0.4 1.5 4.0 8.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 184965, E: 537691. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-4 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-4 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 962.2 0.0 Depth feet 7 4 5 4 31 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 12 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Clayey Sand, trace Gravel, brown and dark brown, moist. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray, wet, soft to medium. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, brown, wet, very loose. (Glacial Outwash) END OF BORING. Water observed at 8 feet with 7 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at 3 feet with 9 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL CL SP An open triangle in the water level (WL) column indicates the depth at which groundwater was observed while drilling. Groundwater levels fluctuate. 953.2 952.1 949.6 944.6 942.6 0.4 1.5 4.0 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 185705, E: 537833. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-5 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-5 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 953.6 0.0 Depth feet 9 6 11 4 114 23 6 inches of bituminous. 18 inches of aggregate base. Possible bituminous pavement and aggregate base retrieved in split spoon sampler. PEAT, dark brown to black, moist. (Swamp Deposit) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, dark brown to gray, wet, medium dense. (Lacustrine Deposit) SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray, wet, soft. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water observed at 9 feet with 9 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL PT SM CL OC=27% 949.7 948.2 946.2 944.2 941.2 939.2 0.5 2.0 4.0 6.0 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 185975, E: 537898. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-6 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-6 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 950.2 0.0 Depth feet 7 6 3 6 81 122 6 inches of bituminous. 14 1/2 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Silty Sand, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, gray and dark brown, moist. ORGANIC SILT, with lenses of Peat and Organic Clay, black to dark brown and gray, wet. (Swamp Deposit) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, gray and brown, wet, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) END OF BORING. Water observed at 7 feet with 9 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL OL SM OC=19% 950.3 949.1 946.8 941.8 939.8 0.5 1.7 4.0 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 186111, E: 537933. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-7 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-7 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 950.8 0.0 Depth feet 9 2 3 4 17 22 6 inches of bituminous. 24 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Clayey Sand, trace Gravel, gray, moist. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, brown and gray, moist to 10 feet then wet. With pieces of wood at 10 feet. END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL FILL 951.4 949.4 947.9 940.9 0.5 2.5 4.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 186314, E: 537972. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-8 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-8 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 951.9 0.0 Depth feet 11 10 14 12 6 inches of bituminous. 13 1/2 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Silty Sand, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, dark brown and brown, moist. POORLY GRADED SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, grayish brown, moist to 10 feet then wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL SP SM 953.4 952.3 948.9 946.9 942.9 0.5 1.6 5.0 7.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 187016, E: 537990. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-9 5/29/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-9 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 953.9 0.0 Depth feet 8 15 18 30 6 inches of bituminous. 11 1/2 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, brown and dark brown, moist. SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Till) SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown with iron stains, moist, very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL SM CL 971.4 970.4 967.9 964.9 960.9 0.5 1.5 4.0 7.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 187957, E: 538234. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-10 5/30/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-10 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 971.9 0.0 Depth feet 7 9 14 21 6 inches of bituminous. 6 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, dark brown and brown, moist. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown to 7 feet then gray, moist, stiff to very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 8 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. PAV AGG FILL CL 961.1 960.6 957.6 950.6 0.5 1.0 4.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 188847, E: 538706. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-11 5/30/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-11 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 961.6 0.0 Depth feet 8 9 8 5 5 6 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 18 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Clayey Sand, slightly organic, trace Gravel, dark brown to black, moist. SILT with SAND, gray and brown, moist, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, wet, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) ORGANIC SILT, dark brown to black, wet, medium. (Lacustrine Deposit) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, brownish gray, wet, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) SILT with SAND, with lenses of Lean Clay, gray and brown, wet, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) END OF BORING Water observed at 6 feet with 14 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then grouted. BIT AGG FILL ML SP OL SP ML 948.4 946.9 943.8 941.8 939.8 936.8 934.8 932.8 0.4 1.9 5.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 LOCATION: N: 189947, E: 538656. Subproject 2. See attached sketch. ST-12 5/30/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-12 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 948.8 0.0 Depth feet 6 4 7 8 17 6 inches of bituminous. 7 1/2 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Clayey Sand, trace Gravel, with lenses of Lean Clay, dark brown and brown, moist. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL CL 943.9 943.3 937.4 933.4 0.5 1.1 7.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 187895, E: 562798. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-13 5/30/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-13 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 944.4 0.0 Depth feet 17 19 27 33 5 inches of bituminous. 7 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Clayey Sand, trace Gravel, brown, moist. POORLY GRADED SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, with Gravel, brown, moist, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Outwash) Occasional Cobbles encountered at 10 feet. END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL SP 913.0 912.4 911.4 902.4 0.4 1.0 2.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 187571, E: 563297. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-14 5/30/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-14 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 913.4 0.0 Depth feet 11 13 8 9 10 4 inches of bituminous. 10 inches of aggregate base. SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, with lenses of Lean Clay, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Till) SANDY LEAN CLAY, with lenses of Silty Sand, brown, moist, medium. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel, with lenses of Silty Sand, brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 8 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG SM CL SM 918.9 918.0 912.2 910.2 908.2 0.3 1.2 7.0 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 187749, E: 563514. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-15 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-15 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 919.2 0.0 Depth feet 6 9 8 9 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 8 1/2 inches of aggregate base. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray, moist, medium to stiff. (Glacial Till) SANDY SILT, gray, moist, loose. (Lacustrine Deposit) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG CL ML 924.3 923.5 915.7 913.7 0.4 1.2 9.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 184147, E: 563368. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-16 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-16 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 924.7 0.0 Depth feet 9 12 10 10 17 6 1/2 inches of bituminous. 9 inches of aggregate base. FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, dark brown and brown, moist. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL CL 917.2 916.4 913.7 906.7 0.5 1.3 4.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 184595, E: 563259. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-17 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-17 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 917.7 0.0 Depth feet 6 5 8 10 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 8 1/2 inches of aggregate base. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium to stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG CL 926.9 926.1 916.3 0.4 1.2 11.0 LOCATION: N: 184792, E: 563384. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-18 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-18 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 927.3 0.0 Depth feet 10 14 12 14 16 6 inches of bituminous. 8 inches of aggregate base.* FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, dark brown and gray, moist. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray with occasional iron stains, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG FILL CL *Geotextile fabric present below aggregate base. 910.8 910.1 907.3 900.3 0.5 1.2 4.0 11.0 LOCATION: N: 185098, E: 563244. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-19 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-19 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 911.3 0.0 Depth feet 6 11 22 30 5617 5 1/2 inches of bituminous. 9 inches of aggregate base. SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown and gray with occasional iron stains, moist, medium to very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 9 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. BIT AGG CL 926.6 925.8 916.0 0.4 1.2 11.0 LOCATION: N: 185291, E: 563480. Subproject 1. See attached sketch. ST-20 5/31/18 1" = 4'DATE:METHOD: Description of Materials (ASTM D2488 or D2487) ST-20 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerJ. Chermak BORING: SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL L O G O F B O R I N G BPF (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)Braun Intertec CorporationB1804714LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2018\04714.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 7/31/18 13:19Braun Project B1804714 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Chanhassen City Project 19-01 Kurvers Point, Cochtaw Circle, Minnewashta Chanhassen, Minnesota P200 % MC % ASTM Symbol Elev. feet 927.0 0.0 Depth feet Descriptive Terminology of Soil Based on Standards ASTM D 2487-11/2488-09a (Unified Soil Classification System) Group Symbol Group NameB Cu ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D GW Well-graded gravelE Cu < 4 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D GP Poorly graded gravelE Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelE F G Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelE F G Cu ≥ 6 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D SW Well-graded sandI Cu < 6 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D SP Poorly graded sandI Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandF G I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandF G I CL Lean clayK L M PI < 4 or plots below "A" lineJ ML SiltK L M Organic OL CH Fat clayK L M MH Elastic siltK L M Organic OH PT Peat Highly Organic Soils Silts and Clays (Liquid limit less than 50) Silts and Clays (Liquid limit 50 or more) Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor Inorganic Inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" lineJ PI plots on or above "A" line PI plots below "A" line Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA Soil Classification Coarse-grained Soils (more than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve)Fine-grained Soils (50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve) Sands (50% or more coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve) Clean Gravels (Less than 5% finesC) Gravels with Fines (More than 12% finesC) Clean Sands (Less than 5% finesH) Sands with Fines (More than 12% finesH) Gravels (More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve) Liquid Limit −oven dried Liquid Limit −not dried <0.75 Organic clay K L M N Organic silt K L M O Liquid Limit −oven dried Liquid Limit −not dried <0.75 Organic clay K L M P Organic silt K L M Q Particle Size Identification Boulders.............. over 12" Cobbles................ 3" to 12" Gravel Coarse............. 3/4" to 3" (19.00 mm to 75.00 mm) Fine................. No. 4 to 3/4" (4.75 mm to 19.00 mm) Sand Coarse.............. No. 10 to No. 4 (2.00 mm to 4.75 mm) Medium........... No. 40 to No. 10 (0.425 mm to 2.00 mm) Fine.................. No. 200 to No. 40 (0.075 mm to 0.425 mm) Silt........................ No. 200 (0.075 mm) to .005 mm Clay...................... < .005 mm Relative ProportionsL, M trace............................. 0 to 5% little.............................. 6 to 14% with.............................. ≥ 15% Inclusion Thicknesses lens............................... 0 to 1/8" seam............................. 1/8" to 1" layer.............................. over 1" Apparent Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils Very loose ..................... 0 to 4 BPF Loose ............................ 5 to 10 BPF Medium dense.............. 11 to 30 BPF Dense............................ 31 to 50 BPF Very dense.................... over 50 BPF A.Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve. B.If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. C. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay D.Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = 𝐷30 2 / (𝐷10 𝑥𝐷60) E.If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. F.If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. G. If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. H. Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay I.If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. J. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is CL-ML, silty clay. K.If soil contains 15 to < 30% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. L. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. M. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. N. PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above “A” line. O. PI < 4 or plots below “A” line. P. PI plots on or above “A” line. Q.PI plots below “A” line Laboratory Tests DD Dry Density,pcf OC Organic content, %PL Plastic limit, % WD Wet Density, pcf qp Pocket penetrometer strength LL Liquid limit, % P200 % Passing #200 sieve MC Moisture conent, %PI Plasticity Index, % Consistency of Blows Approximate Unconfined Cohesive Soils Per Foot Compressive Strength Very soft................... 0 to 1 BPF................... < 1/4 tsf Soft........................... 2 to 4 BPF................... 1/4 to 1/2 tsf Medium.................... 5 to 8 BPF .................. 1/2 to 1 tsf Stiff........................... 9 to 15 BPF................. 1 to 2 tsf Very Stiff................... 16 to 30 BPF............... 2 to 4 tsf Hard.......................... over 30 BPF................ > 4 tsf Drilling Notes: BPF: Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration test, also known as “N” value. The sampler was set 6 inches into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances were then counted for second and third 6-inch increments, and added to get BPF. Partial Penetration:If the sampler cannot be driven the full 12 inches beyond the initial 6-inch set, the number of blows for that partial penetration is shown as "No./X" (i.e., 50/2"). If the sampler cannot be advanced beyond the initial 6-inch set, the depth of penetration will be recorded in the Notes column as "No. to set X" (i.e., 50 to set 4"). WH: WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer and rods alone; driving not required. WR: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods alone; hammer weight and driving not required. WL: WL indicates the water level measured by the drillers either while drilling or following drilling. Moisture Content: Dry:Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch. Moist: Damp but no visible water. Wet: Visible free water, usually soil is below water table. 1/2018 Basswood Cir (EB) Kurvers Pt Rd North End Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed Chanhassen, MN GPR Results From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway (Dir) Basswood Cir (EB) - Kurvers Pt Rd to North End 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) 0 5 10 15 20 25 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) 0 5 10 15 20 25 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) Kurvers Pt Rd (Circle) (SB) South End North End Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed Chanhassen, MN GPR Results From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway (Dir) Kurvers Pt Rd (Circle) (SB) - South End to North End 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) 0 5 10 15 20 25 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) 0 5 10 15 20 25 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) Kurvers Pt Rd Cul-de-sac Hwy 101 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Kurvers Pt Rd - Cul-de-sac to Hwy 101 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway C-3ST-16 ST-17 0 5 10 15 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Kurvers Pt Rd (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Kurvers Pt Rd (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) ST-190 5 10 15 20 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Kurvers Pt Rd (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Kurvers Pt Rd (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Twin Maple Rd Kurvers Pt Rd Cul-de-sac Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Twin Maple Rd - Kurvers Pt Rd to Cul-de-sac City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway ST-180 10 20 30 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Twin Maple Rd (EB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 15 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Twin Maple Rd (WB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Twin Maple Rd (EB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 15 20 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Twin Maple Rd (WB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Willow View Curve (EB) Cul-de-sac Kurvers Point Rd Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed Chanhassen, MN GPR Results From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway (Dir) Willow View Curve (EB) - Cul-de-sac to Kurvers Point Rd ST-20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft)Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000 Depth (in.)Station (ft) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.) Choctaw Cir Cul-de-sac Hwy 101 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Choctaw Cir - Cul-de-sac to Hwy 101 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway ST-130 5 10 15 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Choctaw Cir (EB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 15 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Choctaw Cir (WB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) C-2ST-140 5 10 15 20 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Choctaw Cir (EB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 5 10 15 20 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Choctaw Cir (WB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Brule Cir Choctaw Cir Cul-de-sac Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Brule Cir - Choctaw Cir to Cul-de-sac City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway ST-150 10 20 30 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Brule Cir (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Brule Cir (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Brule Cir (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Brule Cir (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Minnewashta Pkwy TH 5 Hwy 7 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Minnewashta Pkwy - TH 5 to Hwy 7 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway ST-010 10 20 30 40 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) C-5ST-02 ST-030 10 20 30 40 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Minnewashta Pkwy TH 5 Hwy 7 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Minnewashta Pkwy - TH 5 to Hwy 7 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) ST-04 ST-050 10 20 30 40 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) C-10 10 20 30 40 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) ST-06 ST-07 ST-080 10 20 30 40 3,000 3,100 3,200 3,300 3,400 3,500 3,600 3,700 3,800 3,900 4,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 3,000 3,100 3,200 3,300 3,400 3,500 3,600 3,700 3,800 3,900 4,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Minnewashta Pkwy TH 5 Hwy 7 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Minnewashta Pkwy - TH 5 to Hwy 7 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) ST-090 10 20 30 40 4,000 4,100 4,200 4,300 4,400 4,500 4,600 4,700 4,800 4,900 5,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 4,000 4,100 4,200 4,300 4,400 4,500 4,600 4,700 4,800 4,900 5,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) C-4ST-100 10 20 30 40 5,000 5,100 5,200 5,300 5,400 5,500 5,600 5,700 5,800 5,900 6,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 5,000 5,100 5,200 5,300 5,400 5,500 5,600 5,700 5,800 5,900 6,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Minnewashta Pkwy TH 5 Hwy 7 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Minnewashta Pkwy - TH 5 to Hwy 7 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) ST-110 10 20 30 40 6,000 6,100 6,200 6,300 6,400 6,500 6,600 6,700 6,800 6,900 7,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 6,000 6,100 6,200 6,300 6,400 6,500 6,600 6,700 6,800 6,900 7,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) ST-120 10 20 30 40 7,000 7,100 7,200 7,300 7,400 7,500 7,600 7,700 7,800 7,900 8,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 7,000 7,100 7,200 7,300 7,400 7,500 7,600 7,700 7,800 7,900 8,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) Minnewashta Pkwy TH 5 Hwy 7 Note: stations are positive in the NB or EB direction; SB or WB scans have been reversed GPR Results: Minnewashta Pkwy - TH 5 to Hwy 7 City of Chanhassen From To B1804714 Location Project No. Roadway Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) 0 10 20 30 40 8,000 8,100 8,200 8,300 8,400 8,500 8,600 8,700 8,800 8,900 9,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 8,000 8,100 8,200 8,300 8,400 8,500 8,600 8,700 8,800 8,900 9,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 9,000 9,100 9,200 9,300 9,400 9,500 9,600 9,700 9,800 9,900 10,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (NB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) 0 10 20 30 40 9,000 9,100 9,200 9,300 9,400 9,500 9,600 9,700 9,800 9,900 10,000Depth (in.)Station (ft) Minnewashta Pkwy (SB) Bit Depth (in.)Agg Depth (in.)Core Hand Auger Bit (Boring)Agg (Boring) MnPAVE Design Summary MnPAVE 6.304 Simulation Input File: minnewashta.mpv Confidence Level for Preliminary Life Estimate = 70% Confidence and Reliability may not agree. Thickness and modulus are reduced when Confidence > 50%. Monte Carlo Reliability randomly selects values for each layer. Use Reliability for final design. Preliminary Life Estimate 20-Year Reliability (2,500 cycles) Fatigue FatigueRutting Rutting >50 years >50 years 100%100% Project Information District County City Metro Carver Chanhassen Project Number Route Reference Post B1804714 MSAS 111 from -- to -- Letting Date Construction Type 01/01/19 -- Designer Soils Engineer City of Chanhassen Braun Intertec Climate Information Seasons Location 5 44˚ 47’ Latitude, 93˚ 46’ Longitude Structural Information (Design Level: Basic) Layer Type Subtype Height (in.) 1a Hot-Mix Asphalt (Pb = 5.0%)PG58-34 (2360F 1/2")3.00 1b Hot-Mix Asphalt (Pb = 5.0%)PG58-28 (2360F 1/2")2.00 2 Aggregate Base MnDOT Class 5 12.00 3 Aggregate Subbase MnDOT Select Granular 24.00 4 Engineered Soil Clay Loam 12.00 5 Undisturbed Soil Clay Loam Traffic Information (Speed = 30 mph) Load Type First Year ESAL Growth Rate Total Repetitions ESAL 12,980 1.6% (simple)299,000 Notes Minnewashta Parkway TH 5 to the county line The Minnesota Department of Transportation makes no guarantee or warranty, either express or implied, with respect to the reuse of the data provided herewith, regardless of its format or means of its transmission. The user accepts the data "as is", and assumes all risks associated with its use. By accepting this data, the user agrees not to transmit this data or provide access to it or any part of it to another party unless the user shall include with the data a copy of this disclaimer. The Minnesota Department of Transportation assumes no responsibility, actual or consequential, for damage that results from any user’s reliance on this data. Printed Wednesday, August 01, 2018 at 15:44:45 CONSULTANTS • ENVIRONMENTAL • GEOTECHNICAL • MATERIALS • FORENSICS www.amengtest.com REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND PAVEMENT EVALUATION 2020 Pavement Improvements Chanhassen, Minnesota Report No. 28-20267 Date: March 11, 2020 Prepared for: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Page i 550 Cleveland Avenue North | Saint Paul, MN 55114 Phone (651) 659-9001 | (800) 972-6364 | Fax (651) 659-1379 | www.amengtest.com | AA/EEO This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc. March 11, 2020 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: Mr. Steve Ferraro, Construction Manager Re: Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements Chanhassen, Minnesota AET Report No. 28-20267 Dear Mr. Ferraro: American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) is pleased to present the results of our subsurface exploration program and pavement evaluation review for the 2020 Pavement Improvements project in Chanhassen, Minnesota. These services were performed in general accordance with our proposal dated December 11, 2019 and authorized on January 14, 2020. A draft report was submitted to the City of Chanhassen dated February 14, 2020 and has been revised to reflect discussions with the City of Chanhassen. We are submitting this report as an electronic pdf copy. Additional copies can be provided upon request. Please contact us if you have any questions about the report. Sincerely, American Engineering Testing, Inc. Krystle R. Staker Project Manager, Engineering Technician III Phone: (586) 850-9717 kstaker@amengtest.com CONSULTANTS • ENVIRONMENTAL • GEOTECHNICAL • MATERIALS • FORENSICS Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation Review 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Copyright 2020 American Engineering Testing, Inc. All Rights Reserved Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project. Page ii SIGNATURE PAGE Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Chanhassen American Engineering Testing, Inc. 7700 Market Boulevard 550 Cleveland Avenue North P.O. Box 147 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (651) 659-9001/www.amengtest.com Attn: Mr. Steve Ferraro, Construction Manager Authored by: Reviewed by: Krystle R. Staker Jacob O. Michalowski, PE Project Manager, Engineering Technician III Senior Engineer I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under Minnesota Statute Section 326.02 to 326.15 Name: Jacob O. Michalowski Date: March 11, 2020 License #: 54188 Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation Review 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Transmittal Letter............................................................................................................................. i Signature Page ................................................................................................................................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................ 1 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 1 4.0 PAVEMENT & SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING PROGRAM .......................... 3 4.1 Pavement Thickness Testing (GPR) ...................................................................................... 3 4.2 Subsurface Field Exploration ................................................................................................ 4 4.3 Laboratory Testing ................................................................................................................ 4 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................. 4 5.1 Surface Observations ............................................................................................................. 4 5.2 Pavement Thickness .............................................................................................................. 9 5.3 Subsurface Soils/Geology.................................................................................................... 11 5.4 Ground Water ...................................................................................................................... 12 5.5 Review of Soil Properties .................................................................................................... 12 6.0 PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENT METHODS ........................................................................ 13 6.1 Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 13 6.2 Pavement Section Thickness Requirements ........................................................................ 14 6.3 Full Depth Reclamation ....................................................................................................... 15 6.4 Resurfacing .......................................................................................................................... 16 6.5 Mill-and-Overlay ................................................................................................................. 16 6.6 Aggregate Base .................................................................................................................... 17 6.7 Bituminous Mixes................................................................................................................ 17 6.8 Texas Underseal .................................................................................................................. 18 6.9 Pavement Maintenance ........................................................................................................ 18 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................. 18 7.1 Potential Difficulties ............................................................................................................ 18 7.2 Observation and Testing ...................................................................................................... 19 8.0 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 19 Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation Review 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED STANDARD SHEETS Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction Bituminous Overlay Milling and Preparation FIGURES Figures 1 through 5 – Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Core and Soil Boring Locations APPENDIX A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing GPR Data Analysis Results APPENDIX B Pavement Core Log Photos Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thicknesses APPENDIX C Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Notes MnDOT Boring Log Descriptive Terminology AASHTO Soil Classification System Subsurface Boring Logs Materials Test Reports Table Summary of Results and Recommendations APPENDIX D Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 1 of 19 1.0 INTRODUCTION Pavement improvements are proposed for various neighborhood areas throughout Chanhassen, Minnesota. These neighborhood areas include Lake Lucy Road, Redwing Lane, Trappers Pass, and Marsh Drive. To assist in planning and design, the City of Chanhassen (City) has authorized American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) to conduct a subsurface exploration and pavement evaluation review to include bituminous pavement coring, soil borings, ground penetrating radar (GPR), and perform a geotechnical and pavement engineering review for the project. This report presents the results of these services and provides our engineering recommendations based on this data. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES AET's services were performed in accordance with our proposal to the City dated December 11, 2019 and authorized by the City on January 14, 2020. The authorized scope of services consisted of the following: • Perform ground penetrating radar (GPR) in both directions of travel on approximately 10 lane miles of roadways at a rate of 4 scans/foot. • Perform 130, four-inch diameter pavement cores and 48 flight auger soil borings to a depth of 10 feet. • Conduct soil laboratory testing to include sieve analyses and moisture content testing. • Perform a geotechnical engineering review based on the data obtained and preparation of this report. The services reported herein are intended for geotechnical purposes only. The scope is not intended to explore for the presence or extent of environmental contamination in the soil or groundwater; however, obvious contamination detected by us will be reported to you. 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION This project includes 32 roadway segments in various neighborhoods that are planned for rehabilitation as part of the 2020 pavement improvement program. Each of the roadways are generally residential streets that are currently posted at a 5-ton spring load limit. The City is considering multiple rehabilitation approaches to include full depth reclamation, stabilized full depth reclamation, mill-and-overlay, use of Texas underseal and/or full reconstruction for the roadways. We understand that if the rehabilitation is beyond a mill-and-overlay, the intent would be to meet a 7-ton pavement design. It is anticipated that the roadways will keep their existing grade and width. The roadway segments included in the project scope are indicated in Table 1: Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 2 of 19 Table 1.0 – Roadway Project Segments. Segment ID Area Road Start End 1 Lake Lucy Road Lake Lucy Rd Powers Blvd Nez Perce Dr 2 Nez Perce Dr Lake Lucy Rd End 3 Vineland Ct Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 4 Troendle Cir Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 5 Redwing Lane Redwing Lane Carver Beach Rd Kerber Blvd 6 Penamint Ln Carver Beach Rd Redwing Lane 7 Penamint Ct Penamint Ln Cul-de-sac 8 Trappers Pass (East & West) Near Mountain Blvd Pleasantview Rd ~500' N of Trappers Pass 9 Castle Ridge Near Mountain Blvd Vine Hill Rd 10 Cascade Pass Castle Ridge S Castle Ridge N 11 Cascade Ct Cascade Pass Cul-de-sac 12 Cascade Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 13 Shasta Cir E Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 14 Shasta Cir W Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 15 Olympic Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 16 Castle Ridge Ct Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 17 Mountain Way Near Mountain Blvd Oxbow Bend 18 Mountain View Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 19 Oxbow Bend Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend 20 Rojina Ln Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac 21 Summit Cir Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac 22 Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend (S) Near Mountain Blvd 23 Piedmont Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 24 Stag Horn Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 25 Trap Line Cir Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 26 Trap Line Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 27 Marsh Drive Hidden Ct Lake Dr E Cul-de-sac 28 Hidden Ln Marsh Dr Hidden Ct 29 Hidden Cir Hidden Ln Cul-de-sac 30 Marsh Drive Lake Dr E Dakota Ln 31 Sinnen Cir Marsh Dr Cul-de-sac 32 Dakota Ln Erie Cir Cul-de-sac As-builts were provided to us for a majority of the roadway segments and the pavement section generally consisted of 3 ½ inches of asphalt over 12 inches of crushed gravel base. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 3 of 19 Current AADT volumes for the roadways included in the project scope were not available. Low traffic volumes of less than 400 and between 400 and 1,000 ADT were assumed for pavement design, as these roadways generally service residential homes in neighborhoods. The above stated information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are appropriate. 4.0 PAVEMENT & SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING PROGRAM 4.1 Pavement Thickness Testing (GPR) The pavement section thickness testing program conducted for this project consisted of a high speed (air coupled) GPR antenna that collected material layer thickness data at a rate of four scans per foot. The data was collected using a 2 GHz antenna, which generally allows material layer measurements at depths of 18 to 20 inches with a resolution of less than about ½ inch. The GPR data collection is tied to GPS coordinates. The test data and details of the methods used appear in Appendix A. The GPR data was collected on January 28, 2020 according to SIR-30 processor settings established by GSSI RoadScan system. A calibration file, required for data post-processing, was collected prior to testing. Figures 1 through 5 shows the GPR scanning routes. The GPR interface identification was accomplished using RADAN 7.0, a proprietary software package included with the GSSI RoadScan system. The software includes tools to aid in delineating pavement layer transitions, and automatically calculates their depths from the pavement surface using the calibration file(s) collected prior to testing. The identified layer(s) were also compared to the pavement core and soil boring data (when available) to validate the accuracy of the layer thicknesses. The total depth of pavement is not always explicitly clear. Where gaps in clear identification of the pavement and base layer thicknesses are encountered, they are reported as a percent of the picking rate of the layer interface. A picking rate of 100 percent indicates the layer interfaces were visible in 100 percent of the scanned points. Factors influencing definition of radar scans include ambient electromagnetic interference, the presence of moisture, the presence of voids, and the similarity of material layer type between layers (e.g. gravel vs. gravelly sand). Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 4 of 19 4.2 Subsurface Field Exploration The subsurface exploration program conducted for the project consisted of 130, four-inch diameter pavement cores and 48 flight auger borings to a depth of 10-feet. The pavement cores were performed January 20, 2020 through January 23, 2020, and the soil borings were performed January 30, 2020 through February 6, 2020. The pavement cores and soil borings were performed within the drive lanes (inside and outside wheel paths) of the roadway. The number of borings and cores, approximate test locations, and soil boring depths were selected by the City. The locations were located in the field by AET personnel and the final locations were recorded with a hand-held GPS unit. Hand augers were not performed at the core locations due to frozen base conditions; therefore, physical aggregate base measurements were not obtained on roadway segments with only core locations. Adjacent roadway soil borings and as-built data were used to interpret possible aggregate base layers on these roadway segments within the GPR data. The approximate locations of the pavement cores and soil borings are illustrated in Figures 1 through 5. Reports containing the photographs and measurements of the pavement cores appear in Appendix B and the subsurface boring logs and details of the methods used appear in Appendix C. The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, and geologic description. 4.3 Laboratory Testing The laboratory test program included visual/manual classification of the soil samples according to the MnDOT Textural Classification System and the AASHTO soil designation symbol in parenthesis, moisture content, and sieve analysis testing. The moisture content and material finer than the #200 sieve are reported on the boring logs in Appendix C, adjacent to the samples they were performed on. The complete sieve analysis results are also attached in Appendix C following the subsurface boring logs. 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS 5.1 Surface Observations During the GPR survey, a digital video log (DVL) of each roadway was collected to review the roadway surface conditions and note major pavement distresses. 5.1.1 Lake Lucy Road Area The major pavement distresses identified along the roadways included within the Lake Lucy Road area consisted of high severity longitudinal cracking, medium to high severity transverse cracking, fatigue cracking, delamination of chip seal, deterioration of pavement in areas with fatigue cracking, and weathering. Areas around manhole covers exhibited cracking. Skin patches were Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 5 of 19 also observed on Troendle Circle. Several maintenance repairs have been made within this area that include patching and the application of chip seal and fog seal. Figure 5.1.1-1 Typical Distresses (Lake Lucy Rd. near Powers Blvd. Intersection). Figure 5.1.1-2 Typical Distresses (Nez Perce Dr. near Lake Lucy Rd. Intersection). 5.1.2 Redwing Lane Area The major pavement distresses identified along the roadways included within the Redwing Lane area consisted of low to high severity longitudinal and transverse cracking, fatigue and block cracking, delamination of chip seal, and weathering. Areas around manhole covers exhibited Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 6 of 19 cracking. Skin patches were also observed on Redwing Lane. Several maintenance repairs have been made within this area and include patching and the application of chip seal and fog seal. Figure 5.1.2-1 Typical Distresses (Penamint Ln. near Redwing Ln. Intersection). Figure 5.1.2-2 Typical Distresses (Redwing Ln. near Penamint Ln. Intersection). 5.1.3 Trappers Pass Area The major pavement distresses identified along the roadways included within the Trappers Pass area consisted of various degrees of severity longitudinal and transverse cracking (generally high severity), fatigue and block cracking, delamination of chip seal, skin patches, deterioration of Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 7 of 19 pavement in areas with fatigue cracking, and weathering. Areas around manhole covers exhibited cracking. Several maintenance repairs have been made within this area that include patching and the application of chip seal and fog seal. Figure 5.1.3-1 Typical Distresses (Trappers Pass at Stag Horn Ln. Intersection). Figure 5.1.3-2 Typical Distresses (Near Mountain Blvd. at Mountain Way Intersection). Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 8 of 19 Figure 5.1.3-3 Typical Distresses (Castle Ridge near Shasta Cir. W. Intersection). Figure 5.1.3-4 Typical Distresses (Mountain Way at Oxbow Bend Intersection). 5.1.4 Marsh Drive Area The major pavement distresses identified along the roadways included within the Marsh Drive area consisted of low to high severity longitudinal cracking (generally high), high severity transverse cracking, fatigue cracking, delamination of chip seal, skin patches, and weathering. Areas around manhole covers exhibited cracking. Several maintenance repairs have been made within this area and include patching, use of crack sealant, and the application of chip seal and fog seal. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 9 of 19 Figure 5.1.4-1 Typical Distresses (Marsh Dr. near Dakota Ln. Intersection). Figure 5.1.4-2 Typical Distresses (Dakota Ln. near Erie Cir. Intersection). 5.2 Pavement Thickness 5.2.1 GPR Results The GPR data generally show a clear interface between the bituminous and possible aggregate base, and generally show a clear interface between the possible aggregate base layer. A discernable aggregate base layer was not identified for Hidden Circle. The data plots identifying layer thicknesses, included in Appendix A, are data points collected at 3-inch spacing and averaged over 10 feet intervals. Gaps within the plotted GPR data are a result of interference due to snow and/or Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 10 of 19 ice coverage of the roadway or are a result of the identified layer exceeding the available viewing window of the GPR scan. Table 2.0 below shows the statistical results of the bituminous surface (“Surface”) and possible aggregate base layer (“Base”) thickness measurements by GPR along each roadway section. The 15th percentile represents the value at which 85% of the section has a pavement layer thickness that is greater than identified. This is the value we generally recommend using for pavement design purposes. Table 2.0 GPR Thickness Results (inches) Segment ID Roadway Termini Surface (inches) Base (inches) Begin End Avg CV 15th Avg CV 15th 1 Lake Lucy Rd Powers Blvd Nez Perce Dr 3.9 13% 3.3 11.4 9% 10.4 2 Nez Perce Dr Lake Lucy Rd End 4.9 20% 4.0 12.0 19% 9.3 3 Vineland Ct Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 5.1 18% 4.2 11.0 12% 9.5 4 Troendle Cir Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 4.3 11% 3.8 10.2 9% 9.4 5 Redwing Lane Carver Beach Rd Kerber Blvd 4.5 12% 4.0 10.7 17% 8.9 6 Penamint Ln Carver Beach Rd Redwing Lane 4.6 8% 4.3 7.9 24% 5.8 7 Penamint Ct Penamint Ln Cul-de-sac 4.5 8% 4.2 12.3 8% 11.3 8 Near Mountain Blvd Pleasantview Rd ~500' N of Trappers Pass 4.8 21% 3.8 10.6 18% 8.3 9 Castle Ridge Near Mountain Blvd Vine Hill Rd 4.2 12% 3.7 10.2 11% 9.1 10 Cascade Pass Castle Ridge S Castle Ridge N 4.3 12% 3.8 9.1 14% 7.9 11 Cascade Ct Cascade Pass Cul-de-sac 4.7 11% 4.2 10.1 11% 8.9 12 Cascade Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.7 14% 3.9 13.2 6% 12.4 13 Shasta Cir E Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.3 15% 3.7 9.4 19% 7.9 14 Shasta Cir W Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.8 19% 3.9 9.7 16% 8.1 15 Olympic Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.8 18% 3.9 5.3 23% 3.9 16 Castle Ridge Ct Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 5.2 20% 4.2 9.2 16% 8.0 17 Mountain Way Near Mountain Blvd Oxbow Bend 4.3 12% 3.8 9.8 21% 7.7 18 Mountain View Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 4.9 15% 4.2 8.6 11% 7.5 19 Oxbow Bend Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend 4.0 20% 3.2 9.7 14% 8.3 20 Rojina Ln Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac *GPR Data not collected due to snow coverage 21 Summit Cir Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac 4.7 18% 3.9 11.0 11% 9.7 22 Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend (S) Near Mountain Blvd 4.9 21% 3.8 9.9 17% 7.8 23 Piedmont Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 5.0 10% 4.6 9.0 13% 7.8 24 Stag Horn Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 4.6 17% 3.6 8.3 24% 6.1 25 Trap Line Cir Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 4.5 16% 3.7 9.1 16% 7.6 26 Trap Line Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 5.0 15% 4.3 9.2 15% 7.9 Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 11 of 19 Segment ID Roadway Termini Surface (inches) Base (inches) Begin End Avg CV 15th Avg CV 15th 27 Hidden Ct Lake Dr E Cul-de-sac 4.4 13% 3.8 10.7 12% 9.6 28 Hidden Ln Marsh Dr Hidden Ct 4.3 13% 3.7 10.2 11% 9.1 29 Hidden Cir Hidden Ln Cul-de-sac 4.7 20% 3.7 * * * 30 Marsh Drive Lake Dr E Dakota Ln 4.1 14% 3.5 10.7 13% 9.4 31 Sinnen Cir Marsh Dr Cul-de-sac 4.6 13% 4.0 10.8 16% 8.7 32 Dakota Ln Erie Cir Cul-de-sac 4.2 15% 3.5 10.7 31% 9.6 Note: Avg – Average; CV – Coefficient of Variation; 15th – 15th Percentile. *A discernable base layer was not identified in the GPR data. 5.2.2 Pavement Core and Soil Boring Results AET performed 130, four-inch diameter pavement cores (B-1 to B-48, C-1 to C-82) and 48 flight auger soil borings (B-1 to B-48). Bituminous pavement was encountered at each of the pavement core and soil boring locations. Crushed limestone base was encountered directly beneath the bituminous pavement at each soil boring location, except at soil boring locations B-7, B-8, B-10, and B-41, where a mixture of crushed limestone base and silty sand was encountered directly beneath the bituminous pavement. Sieve analysis tests were performed on select jar samples of the recovered base material and each classified as AASHTO designation A-1-a or A-1-b, which is typical of an aggregate base. However, the minus #200 content was higher than the typical MnDOT Aggregate Base material gradation specification, except for the base material encountered at boring location B-8, which meets MnDOT Class 5 specifications. Therefore, we refer to the base throughout this report as ‘possible aggregate base’ or simply ‘base’. Refer to the boring logs and sieve analysis test reports included in Appendix C for more detailed information regarding the base. A table of the encountered bituminous pavement thickness at each pavement core location and the base thickness at each soil boring location are included in Appendix B. At core locations within the Redwing Lane Area and segments deemed suitable for a mill-and-overlay, the visible lift thicknesses of the cores were measured and are shown on the pavement core log photos. 5.3 Subsurface Soils/Geology The subsurface soils and geology encountered at the soil boring locations are generally described in the following sections. Refer to the subsurface boring logs attached in Appendix C for specific information. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 12 of 19 5.3.1 Lake Lucy Road Area The underlying soils below the possible aggregate base consisted of predominantly fill, till, and alluvium soils at each boring location. The soils encountered were classified as silty clay loam, loam, plastic sandy loam, and slightly plastic sandy loam (A-6). 5.3.2 Redwing Lane Area The underlying soils below the possible aggregate base consisted of predominantly fill and till soils at each boring location. The soils encountered were classified as loam (A-6). 5.3.3 Trappers Pass Area The underlying soils below the possible aggregate base consisted of predominantly fill and till soils at each boring location. The soils generally encountered at each boring location were classified as loam, plastic sandy loam, and slightly plastic sandy loam (A-6). Borings B-18 and B- 36 encountered loamy sand and slightly plastic sandy loam (A-2-4), respectively. Boring B-39 encountered a mixture of loamy sand and plastic sandy loam (A-2-6), gravelly loamy sand (A-1- b), and plastic sandy loam (A-6). 5.3.4 Marsh Drive Area The underlying soils below the possible aggregate base consisted of predominantly fill and till soils at each boring location. The soils encountered were classified as silty clay loam, loam, and plastic sandy loam (A-6). 5.4 Ground Water Groundwater was not observed in any of the boring locations within the sampled depth, however the lack of a water level does not indicate that groundwater does not exist within this depth. In general, the fine grained soils at this site are slow draining and it may take an extended period of time for groundwater levels to stabilize within these soils. Piezometer installation, to more accurately determine groundwater levels, was not within our scope of services. Groundwater levels will fluctuate due to varying seasonal and annual rainfall and snow melt amounts and other factors. 5.5 Review of Soil Properties 5.5.1 Strength/Stability High strength/stability is needed from the upper portion of the subgrade to resist yielding from wheel loads. Although load intensity dissipates with depth, the more critical portion requiring high strength for wheel load resistance is normally considered the upper three feet of the subgrade (defined as the critical subgrade zone in this report). Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 13 of 19 The subgrade soils encountered within the critical subgrade zone were silty/clayey/loamy (A-6) soils, which can become unstable with construction traffic when wet. These soils are judged to have moderately low strength and stability. 5.5.2 Drainage and Frost Susceptibility Subgrade soils encountered within the upper 3 feet from the roadway surface were generally silty/clayey/loamy (A-6) soils, with the exception of borings B-18 and B-36. The loam, silty clay loam, slightly plastic and plastic sandy loam (A-6) soils have poor drainage characteristics and are highly frost susceptible. This results in increased periods of upper subgrade saturation, which leads to increased detrimental frost effects (heaving and thaw weakening). The loamy sand (A-2-4) soils, encountered at borings B-18 and B-36, possess fair drainage characteristics, and low to moderate frost susceptibility. 6.0 PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENT METHODS 6.1 Discussion We understand the City is considering different pavement rehabilitation approaches for each roadway segment, which include full depth reclamation (FDR), stabilized full depth reclamation (SFDR), mill-and-overlay, resurfacing, and full reconstruction. The use of a Texas Underseal is also under consideration to use in conjunction with a mill-and-overlay. The City provided the current estimated Overall Condition Index (OCI) ratings based on their pavement management system projections for the roadway. The condition range indicated by the OCI ratings are presented in Table 3.0 below for each project area. The general condition of the pavement cores varied from minimal to severe stripping. The age of the pavement is approaching 26 to 40 years. Table 3.0 – OCI Ratings. Area OCI Rating Lake Lucy Road Failed to Poor Redwing Lane Poor to Fair Trappers Pass Failed to Poor Marsh Drive Poor Based upon our review of the pavement condition and thickness, pavement cores, and soil borings, it is in our opinion that the rehabilitation approaches most suitable for these roadways include full depth reclamation or resurfacing. A full depth reclamation approach is preferred over resurfacing due to the variable and higher minus #200 contents of the base material encountered. A full reconstruction approach could be considered for all of the roadways as well, if significant utility work is needed. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 14 of 19 We have summarized the data collected and the proposed rehabilitation approach for each roadway segment into a table included in Appendix C, titled Table of Results and Recommendations. Rehabilitation of roadways is generally more cost effective than full reconstruction if significant utility repairs are not required, however the long-term pavement performance is not as great as would be realized if a full reconstruction were performed. It is important to consider overall cost, as well as the extension of life for the pavement when selecting a rehabilitation method. A full depth reclamation approach will typically have a higher initial cost than a mill-and-overlay or resurfacing approach, however the FDR approach provides an increased service life of the pavement, up to 20 years or more with maintenance. An FDR pavement section breaks up all of the cracking within the pavement layers so the new section will not experience reflective cracking like a mill-and-overlay approach will, the aggregate base layer is improved, and the extended life of the pavement is relatively greater. Resurfacing allows a new bituminous layer to be placed with minimal improvements to the base aggregate. In terms of extending pavement service life and cost, this approach is between an FDR approach and a mill-and-overlay approach. However, with a resurfacing approach, there is a risk of encountering soft areas during construction that may result in extra costs to repair that were not planned for. A mill-and-overlay is generally the least expensive rehabilitation approach presented in this report, however the life expectancy of the pavement is also the shortest. Mill-and-overlays are dependent on the remaining bituminous condition and existing subsurface, which vary the life expectancy and pose greater potential risks if the existing bituminous condition and existing subsurface conditions are poor. For definitions related to pavement construction and referenced in the following sections, please see the attached standard sheet entitled “Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction.” This report also references the 2018 MnDOT Standard Specifications for Construction (MnDOT Spec.). We have also included the standard sheets entitled “Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design” and “Bituminous Overlay Milling and Preparation.” 6.2 Pavement Section Thickness Requirements Current AADT volumes for the roadways included in the project scope were not available. Low traffic volumes of 400 to 1,000 ADT were assumed for pavement design, as these roadways generally service residential traffic. We also understand that these roadways currently have a 5- ton spring load limit. To evaluate pavement designs for each roadway, MnDOT’s “Flexible Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 15 of 19 Pavement Design Using Soil Factors” chart for a 7-ton design with a traffic volume of less than 400 and 400 to 1,000 ADT was utilized. The limiting subgrade soils encountered throughout each neighborhood area were A-6 soils and a soil factor of 100 was used to determine the minimum required gravel equivalency (GE). The minimum bituminous GE is 7 inches and the total required GE is 11.5 inches for traffic volumes less than 400 ADT. The minimum bituminous GE is 7 inches and the total required GE is 15 inches for traffic volumes between 400 and 1,000 ADT. We understand the City plans to pave back 4 inches of bituminous pavement in accordance with the City’s current standard section and this has been incorporated into the full depth reclamation pavement sections. The total GE calculated for roadway segments suitable for a full depth reclamation approach are included in the Table of Results and Recommendations in Appendix C. The total GE presented in this table does not include any remaining base after the reclamation process is complete due to the base material generally not meeting MnDOT specifications for Class 5 material. The total GE for roadway segments suitable for a mill-and-overlay are not calculated due to variations in the bituminous conditions and thicknesses; rather a range of extended life is presented in Section 6.5 of this report. 6.3 Full Depth Reclamation Full depth reclamation (FDR) involves pre-grinding the existing bituminous pavement and underlying base material with the intent to create a recycled aggregate base. A portion of this material is then removed to control grade before placement of new bituminous surfacing. This approach will remove the existing pavement distresses. FDR can be either non-stabilized or stabilized. In stabilized reclamation, a stabilizing additive, such as emulsified asphalt or cement is added to the reclaimed material, which stabilizes and strengthens the reclaimed aggregate base, which typically allows for thinner bituminous surfacing. These processes require that appropriate material types and thicknesses be in-place. Due to the anticipated low traffic volumes and spring load limit, it is in our opinion an FDR approach would be suitable for each of the roadway segments included in the project scope. The minimum required GE can be met or exceeded with an FDR approach, therefore a stabilized FDR is not needed for this project. We recommend the FDR be conducted in accordance with the applicable subsections of MnDOT Spec. 2215 Reclamation. We recommend the reclaimed FDR material placed on the roadway as aggregate base meet the requirements of MnDOT Spec. 3135 Modified Aggregate Bases. The “Table of Results and Recommendations” in Appendix C presents the recommended reclaim depth for each roadway segment. The reclaim depth presented is the maximum depth suitable; Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 16 of 19 however, the reclaim depth may need to be adjusted based on existing site conditions to reduce the risk of fully penetrating the base layer into the fine-grained subgrade soils. The GPR data should be reviewed prior to construction to ensure that underlying subgrade soils are not incorporated into the FDR material. This will require a thinner reclaim in some areas, however the total reclaim depth should be kept as close to the maximum reclaim depth as possible. This should be monitored during construction. Significantly reducing the reclaim depth for the entire roadway segment will negatively impact the total GE. The FDR approach will generally provide 18+ years of life to the pavement, provided proper maintenance is performed over that time span. 6.4 Resurfacing Resurfacing removes the existing bituminous pavement and leaves the existing aggregate base in place. After the bituminous pavement has been removed by milling, only surficial improvement to the base layer is possible. This option is appropriate to relatively thin bituminous pavements or to bituminous pavements in poor condition with sufficient aggregate base in good condition, such as is generally present at these sites; however, the gradation of the base material indicates that minus #200 content is high relative to typical aggregate bases. Resurfacing also requires an adequate and consistent thickness of the existing aggregate base layer, as well as a strong subgrade, such that the aggregate base layer can be improved by conditioning and recompacting. It may be necessary to add additional aggregate base on some roadway segments to maintain the existing grade of the roadway after the pavement has been milled. We recommend that the placement of additional aggregate base, conditioning, and recompacting of the aggregate base layer pass a test roll procedure before the placement of new bituminous pavement. A resurfacing approach may provide 12 to 18 years of life to the pavement structure, as the aggregate base is not being corrected or improved. 6.5 Mill-and-Overlay A mill-and-overlay removes the upper portion of the existing bituminous, but leaves the lower portion in place; hence, improvements to the base and subgrade layers are not possible. This approach requires a sufficient bituminous layer such that enough bituminous remains to prevent the paving equipment from breaking through into the base layer. This remaining bituminous thickness is typically considered to be at least 1½ inches; however, the required thickness also depends on the bituminous condition, as stripped or severely deteriorated bituminous pavement is not suitable. With the mill-and-overlay approach, cracks from the existing pavement will reappear in the new surface layer after a short time (reflective cracking). Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 17 of 19 This approach would only be beneficial for select roadway segments included in the project scope – Penamint Court, Cascade Court, Mountain View Court, Stag Horn Lane, and Sinnen Circle. These roadway segments have sufficient bituminous thickness and the pavement cores exhibited minimal to moderate stripping. The remaining roadway segments have either insufficient bituminous thickness, exhibited severe stripping throughout one or more of the pavement cores obtained from that segment, exhibited moderate to severe stripping in the lower lift(s) of the pavement core, or combination of all. If a mill-and-overlay approach were utilized on these roadways, there is a risk that significant preparation work after milling could be required or should be planned for in design. With this approach, the recommended mill-and-overlay depths are included in the “Table of Results and Recommendations” in Appendix C. We recommend using bituminous mix SPWEA340B. The extended life of the pavement will vary based upon the existing condition and on the amount of pre-overlay crack repair and post-overlay maintenance, which may be in the range of 6 to 12 years. The milled surface should be prepared according to MnDOT Spec. 2231 Bituminous Surface Reconditioning prior to the overlay. 6.6 Aggregate Base If new aggregate base is needed for pavement support, it should meet the gradation and quality requirements for Class 5, 5Q, or 6 per MnDOT Spec. 3138. Reclaimed material and any bituminous millings placed on the roadway as aggregate base should meet the requirements of MnDOT Spec. 3135 Modified Aggregate Bases. Aggregate base placement and compaction should be performed according to MnDOT Spec. 2211. All aggregate base material (including existing, imported, or reclaimed) should be tested for compaction using the Penetration Index Method per MnDOT Spec. 2211.3.D.2.c. 6.7 Bituminous Mixes The bituminous mixtures should meet the most current MnDOT Spec. 2360 (Plant-Mixed Asphalt Pavement) requirements. Compaction of all bituminous mixtures should be by the “Maximum Density Method.” We understand that the Standard City Detail Plate No. 5200 specifies the use of bituminous mix SPWEA340C for the upper lift and SPNWB330C for the lower lift of pavement. These bituminous mixes are suitable for use in the FDR and resurfacing pavement sections. Use of recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) in the bituminous mix is a cost saving measure that is often suggested. If used, we recommend a maximum of 20% RAP with the mixes presented Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 18 of 19 previously; however, there will be a higher probability of pavement thermal cracking when RAP is used. In addition, we recommend limiting RAP within the upper wear course to a maximum of 10% in order to reduce cracking. If bituminous mixes are utilized other than those recommended, a lower percentage of RAP may be needed. The bituminous pavement mixtures and placement should follow the City’s standard specification which references the MnDOT Spec. 2360. An “A” or “B” gradation could be interchanged for each lift. An “A” gradation generally provides a “finer” pavement surface. 6.8 Texas Underseal A Texas underseal may be beneficial for the City to use in conjunction with a mill-and-overlay. Texas underseals do not contribute to the required GE, however they have been shown to extend the life of the pavement. Texas underseals are applied to milled pavement prior to the bituminous overlay and act as an impervious membrane to help prevent the presence of excess moisture, which may help delay or reduce reflective cracking in mill-and-overlays. Generally, reflective cracking is observed on roadways with a mill-and-overlay 1-3 years after construction and roadways with a mill-and-overlay and Texas underseal exhibit reflective cracking 3-6 years after construction. If used, the underseal should meet MnDOT specification 2356 and be applied to the milled surface immediately prior to the overlay. 6.9 Pavement Maintenance Regardless of the improvement approach selected, all bituminous pavements require on-going maintenance to reach their design life. Even if placed and compacted properly over stable subgrade conditions, bituminous pavements typically experience cracking in 1 to 3 years, primarily due to temperature-related expansion and shrinkage. We recommend that a regularly scheduled maintenance program consisting of patching and sealing of cracks and local distressed areas be implemented. Seal coating of the pavement surface after 3 to 5 years also helps prolong the pavement life. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 Potential Difficulties 7.1.1 Water in Excavation Groundwater was not measured in any of our borings during the time of drilling; however, water may collect in the excavation bottoms during times of inclement weather or snow melt. To allow observation of the excavation bottom, and to reduce the potential for soil disturbance we recommend that all free-standing water within the excavations be removed prior to fill placement. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 19 of 19 7.1.2 Wet or Dry Soils The on-site materials may be wetter or drier of the “optimum” condition, making proper compaction of those materials difficult unless they are mechanically moisture conditioned to near the standard optimum water content. 7.1.3 Disturbance of Soils The on-site soils can become disturbed under construction traffic, especially if the soils are wet. If soils become disturbed, they should be subcut to the underlying undisturbed soils. The subcut soils can then be dried and recompacted back into place, or they should be removed and replaced with drier imported fill. 7.1.4 Cobbles and Boulders The soils at this site can include cobbles and boulders. This may make excavating procedures somewhat more difficult than normal if they are encountered. 7.2 Observation and Testing The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found at our test boring locations. Since subsurface conditions have the potential to vary greatly from our borings, we highly recommend an AET geotechnical engineer/technician provide observations to evaluate these potential changes. Materials testing should also be performed to document that project specifications have been satisfied. 8.0 LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of scope, budget, and schedule, we have endeavored to provide our services according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied, is intended. Important information regarding risk management and proper use of this report is given in Appendix D entitled “Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use”. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Standard Sheets Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction Bituminous Overlay Milling and Preparation 01REP019 (12/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. DEFINITIONS RELATING TO PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION TOP OF SUBGRADE Grade which contacts the bottom of the aggregate base layer. SAND SUBBASE Uniform thickness sand layer placed as the top of subgrade which is intended to improve the frost and drainage characteristics of the pavement system by better draining excess water in the base/subbase, by reducing and “bridging” frost heaving and by reducing spring thaw weakening effects. CRITICAL SUBGRADE ZONE The subgrade portion beneath and within three vertical feet of the top of subgrade. A sand subbase, if placed, would be considered the upper portion of the critical subgrade zone. GRANULAR BORROW Soils meeting Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2B1. This refers to granular soils which, of the portion passing the 1" sieve, contain less than 20% by weight passing the #200 sieve. SELECT GRANULAR BORROW Soils meeting Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2B2. This refers to granular soils which, of the portion passing the 1" sieve, contain less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. MODIFIED SELECT GRANULAR BORROW Clean, medium grained sands which, of the portion passing the 1" sieve, contain less than 5% by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by weight passing the #40 sieve. GEOTEXTILE STABILIZATION FABRIC Geotextile meeting Type V requirements defined in Mn/DOT Specification 3733. When using fabric, installation should also meet the requirements outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 3733. COMPACTION SUBCUT Construction of a uniform thickness subcut below a designated grade to provide uniformity and compaction within the subcut zone. Replacement fill can be the materials subcut, although the reused soils should be blended to a uniform soil condition and recompacted per the Specified Density Method (Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1). TEST ROLL A means of evaluating the near-surface stability of subgrade soils (usually non-granular). Suitability is determined by the depth of rutting or deflection caused by passage of heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck, over the test area. Yielding of less than 1" is normally considered acceptable, although engineering judgment may be applied depending on equipment used, soil conditions present, and/or pavement performance expectations. UNSTABLE SOILS Subgrade soils which do not pass a test roll. Unstable soils typically have water content exceeding the “standard optimum water content” defined in ASTM: D698 (Standard Proctor test). ORGANIC SOILS Soils which have sufficient organic content such that engineering properties/stability are affected. These soils are usually black to dark brown in color. Page 1 of 2 01REP020 (07/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BITUMINOUS OVERLAY MILLING AND PREPARATION COLD MILLING OPERATION Cold milling is generally conducted longitudinally along the pavement profile. The forward speed of the machine, rotational velocity of the rotating drum, spacing of the carbide bits, and grade control of the cutting head should be closely controlled to produce a uniform texture throughout the project. The longitudinal profile should be held as close as practical to the same tolerance as new construction, since the milled profile will have a significant impact upon the ride of the overlaid pavement, especially when only a single lift of overlay is placed. Normally, the recommended milling depth corresponds to the lift thickness of the original pavement. It is best to remove the entire layer as the bottom of the lift is typically where bonding and stripping issues occur. The depth of milling may require adjustment in the field to ensure that a full layer is removed and that portions of a layer are not left bonded to the underlying surface. Additionally, if there is a large amount of stripping present, the milling depth should be sufficiently deep to remove the stripped areas. This depth is typically determined by coring adjacent to cracks and looking at both the layer thickness and any evidence of stripping. The milling depth can be adjusted to remove areas with significant stripping present, or if the stripping is limited only to a few transverse cracks, a smaller milling machine can be brought in the remove additional material in these areas. Patching can be performed after the milling operation for cases where a minimal amount of stripping is present or in the areas where cracks are milled deeper than the remaining roadway. Please note that the milling depth should also take into consideration the original pavement depth that will remain after the milling operation. It is likely that the milling machine will break through the underlying pavement if there will be less than 1.5 inches of the original pavement remaining, thereby causing problems with the milling operation and overlay. PRE-OVERLAY PREPARATION It is recommended that a tack coat is applied between all bituminous layers and prior to placing any bituminous mixtures on the milled surface. The bituminous tack coat material should be applied at a uniform rate of 0.03 to 0.05 gal/yd2 between bituminous layers and 0.07 to 0.10 gal/yd2 on the milled bituminous surface prior to being overlaid. The application rates are for undiluted emulsions (as supplied from the refinery) or MC and RC liquid asphalts. The asphalt emulsion may be further diluted in the field in accordance with Mn/DOT Spec. 2357. Prior to overlaying, it is recommended that deteriorated cracks and wheel-path areas are air blasted and power swept to remove loose material. Air blasting should be completed with high pressure (minimum of 100 psi) equipment. Removal of material at some deteriorated locations may require the use of a small milling machine or handwork, in addition to the high pressure air blasting. Regardless of the patch depth, it is important to remove the entire existing deteriorated pavement. Depressions resulting after air blasting, sweeping, or milling operations that are greater than 1.5 inches in depth and width should be filled with a Bituminous Patching Mixture meeting Mn/DOT Spec. 2231 and compacted with a small vibratory or pneumatic roller. Depressions equal to or less than 1.5 inches in depth and width can be filled with the bituminous wear course mixture. Consideration should be given to allow traffic to drive over deteriorated joints/cracks, after backfilling (if there are a large number of these distressed locations) with the recommended bituminous mixtures and proper compaction, for a period of seven days prior to placement of the wear course mixture. The proposed seven-day delay period will permit traffic to apply additional compaction to the joint/crack backfill. If further compaction is not deemed necessary, then patching of depressions greater than 1.5 inches in depth and width can be completed ahead of the paver and compacted with a small vibratory or pneumatic roller. As previously stated, the smaller depressions will be filled in by the wearing course paving operations. If the pavement surface, after milling, is lower than the adjacent shoulders, the contractor (as directed by the Engineer), should construct outlet trenches and take other measures necessary to provide adequate surface drainage for the milled areas. It is recommended that a notch at least 1 inch deep be milled to allow the placement of 1 inch minimum bituminous wearing course at the ends of transitions. Page 2 of 2 01REP020 (07/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BITUMINOUS OVERLAY MILLING AND PREPARTION Please note that as this will be a bonded overlay (i.e., bonded to the milled surface), the amount of pre-overlay repair that must be performed on an existing pavement is critical to the performance of the overlay. Similarly, reflection crack control measures must be applied to these overlays, such as the selection of bituminous mixture and PG binder type. Depending upon the frequency of existing transverse cracks it may be prudent to select a bituminous mixture and PG binder that will crack at the existing frequency but be more resistant to degradation from environmental effects such as moisture. Other considerations include subdrainage, traffic, pavement widening, and shoulders. As a general rule, all the distress types in an existing pavement that are likely to affect the performance of an overlay within a few years should be repaired. The designer should also consider the tradeoffs between pre-overlay repair and the thickness and type of overlay selected. For instance, if the existing pavement is severely deteriorated, an overlay type that is less sensitive to existing pavement conditions may be more cost effective without extensive pre-overlay repair. BITUMINOUS PLACEMENT The bituminous mixture should meet the most current Mn/DOT Spec. 2360 (Plant-Mixed Asphalt Pavement: Combined 2360/2360 Gyratory/Marshall Design Specification) requirements. Compaction of all bituminous mixtures should be by the “Maximum Density Method”. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Figures Figures 1-5 – Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Core and Soil Boring Locations """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" " " "" " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" " """""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""" """"""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" @A @A @A @A @A @A @?@?@? @? @? @? @? C-7 C-6 C-5 C-4 C-3C-2C-1 B-6 B-5 B-4 B-3 B-2 B-1 Ne z P e r c e D r Lake Lucy RdPowers BlvdTroendle CirVineland Ct Treetop RdPeacefu l Ln Ho p i R dRedman AveSources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Testing Locations AET Project No. 28-20267 Lake Lucy Road AreaCarver County, MN015075 Feet ± File: 28-20267-1 Lake Lucy.mxd Date: 02/14/2020 AMERICANENGINEERINGTESTING, INC Figure 1Map Reference: Date: 02/14/2020 Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Test Locations Legend @?Pavement Core Location @A Boring/Pavement Core LocationBituminous Thickness "<3 in. "3-4 in. "4-5 in. "5-6 in. "6-7 in. "7-8 in. ">8 in. """ """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" @A @A @A @A @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? C-9 C-8 C-15 C-14 C-13 C-12 C-11 C-10 B-9B-8 B-7 B-10 Carver Beach Rd Redwing LnHighland DrKerber BlvdPowers BlvdChaparral LnNez Perce DrPenamint Ln Pena m i n t C t Nez P e r c e C t Forest RdChaparral CtCree Dr 68th St W Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Testing Locations AET Project No. 28-20267 Redwing Lane AreaCarver County, MN015075 Feet ± File: 28-20267-2 Redwing.mxd Date: 02/14/2020 AMERICANENGINEERINGTESTING, INC Figure 2Map Reference: Date: 02/14/2020 Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Test Locations Legend @?Pavement Core Location @A Boring/Pavement Core LocationBituminous Thickness "<3 in. "3-4 in. "4-5 in. "5-6 in. ">6 in. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @? @?@? @? @? @? @? @? @?@? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @?@? @? @? @? @? @? C-54 C-51 C-50 C-49 C-48 C-47 C-46 C-45 C-44 C-43 C-42 C-41 C-40 C-39 C-38 C-37 C-36 C-35 C-34 C-33 C-32 C-31 C-30 C-29 C-28 C-27 C-26C-25C-24 C-23 C-22 C-21 C-20 C-19 C-18C-17 C-16 B-25 B-24 B-23 B-22 B-21 B-20 B-19 B-18 B-17 B-16B-15 B-14 B-13 B-12 B-11 Pleasant View Rd Ca s t l e R i d g e W 192nd AveNe a r M o u n t a i n B l v d State Hwy 101Oxbow BendChanhassen RdC a s c a d e P a s s Mountain Way Trappers Pass Co Rd 62 Townline Rd Cascade Cir Ca s t l e R i d g e C t Timbe r H i l l R d Shasta Cir E Olympic Cir Shasta Cir W Casc a d e C t Pleasant View CirPiedmont Ct Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Testing Locations AET Project No. 28-20267 Trappers Pass EastCarver County, MN0200100 Feet ± File: 28-20267-3 Trappers E.mxd Date: 02/14/2020 AMERICANENGINEERINGTESTING, INC Figure 3Map Reference: Date: 02/14/2020 Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Test Locations Legend @?Pavement Core Location @A Boring/Pavement Core LocationBituminous Thickness "<3 in. "3-4 in. "4-5 in. "5-6 in. "6-7 in. ">7 in. """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""" """""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""" """"""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" "" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""" """" """ @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A@A @A @A @A @A @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @?@? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @?C-69 C-68 C-67 C-66 C-65 C-64 C-63 C-62 C-61 C-60 C-59 C-58 C-57 C-56 C-55 C-54 C-53 C-52 C-51 C-50 C-49 C-48 C-46 C-45 B-39 B-38 B-37 B-36 B-35 B-34 B-33 B-32 B-31 B-30 B-29 B-28 B-27 B-26 B-25 B-23 Oxbow BendTrappers Pass S u m m i t C i r Trapline L n P l e a s a n t V i e w R d Tim b e r H i l l R d Tr a p l i n e C i r Moun t a i n W a y Ind i a n H i l l R d Fox Hollo w D r St a g h o r n L n Oxbow Bend Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Testing Locations AET Project No. 28-20267 Trappers Pass WestCarver County, MN0200100 Feet ± File: 28-20267-4 Trappers W.mxd Date: 02/14/2020 AMERICANENGINEERINGTESTING, INC Figure 4Map Reference: Date: 02/14/2020 Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Test Locations Legend @?Pavement Core Location @A Boring/Pavement Core LocationBituminous Thickness "< 3 in. "3-4 in. "4-5 in. "5-6 in. "6-7 in. "> 7 in. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" "" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @? @?@? @? @? @?C-82 C-81 C-80 C-79C-78 C-77 C-76 C-75 C-74 C-73 C-72 C-71 C-70 B-48 B-47 B-46 B-45 B-44 B-43 B-42 B-41 B-40 Lake DrDakota LnMain StMa r s h D r Erie AveHidden CtHidden LnCheyenne AveState Hwy 5 Erie CirGrandview RdState Hwy 101Great Plains BlvdArboretum Blvd Pond Promenade Dakota AveSinnen Cir H i d d e n C i r Erie SprDakota Cir Cheyenne Spr 80th St N Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Testing Locations AET Project No. 28-20267 Marsh Drive AreaCarver County, MN0250125 Feet ± File: 28-20267-5 Marsh Drive.mxd Date: 02/14/2020 AMERICANENGINEERINGTESTING, INC Figure 5Map Reference: Date: 02/14/2020 Bituminous Thickness by GPR, Test Locations Legend @?Pavement Core Location @A Boring/Pavement Core LocationBituminous Thickness ">3 in. "3-4 in. "4-5 in. "5-6 in. ">6 in. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Page 2 of 19 Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing GPR Data Analysis Results Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 28-20267 Appendix A - Page 1 of 3 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. A.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The pavement structural conditions at the site were evaluated nondestructively using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR). The description of the equipment precedes the GPR Data and Analysis Results in this appendix. A.2 EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION A.2.1 GSSI GPR Test System The GPR test system owned by AET is a GSSI Roadscan System that consists of a bumper-mounted, 2 GHz air-coupled antenna and a SIR-30 control and data acquisition processor, featuring dual channels. The GPR processor, including a SIR-30 data acquisition system, wheel-mounted DMI (Distance Measuring Instrument), and a tough book with the SIR-30 Field Program constitutes the newest, most sophisticated GSSI Test System, which fulfills or exceeds all requirements to meet ASTM-4748, ASTM D-6087 Standards. Figure A1 provides a view of this equipment. Figure A1 GSSI 2 GHz air-coupled GPR Test System The GPR antenna emits a high frequency electromagnetic wave into the material under investigation. The reflected energy caused by changes in the electromagnetic properties within the material is detected by a receiver antenna and recorded for subsequent analysis. The 2 GHz air-coupled GPR is capable of collecting radar waveforms at more than 100 signals per second, allows for data to be collected at driving speeds along the longitudinal dimension of the pavements or bridge decks with the antennas fixed at the rear or in front of the vehicle. The antenna used for Roadscan is the Horn antenna Model 4105 (2 GHz). The 2 GHz antenna is the current antenna of choice for road survey because it combines excellent resolution with reasonable depth penetration (18-24 inches in pavement materials). The data collection is performed at normal driving speeds (45-55 mph), requiring no lane closures nor causing traffic congestion. At this peed the 2 GHz antenna is capable of collecting data at 1-foot interval (1 scan/foot). The data were collected at a rate of about 1 vertical scans per foot. Each vertical scan consisted of 512 samples and the record length in time of each scan was 12 nanoseconds. Filters used during acquisition were 300 MHz high pass and 5,000 MHz low pass. In a GPR test, the antenna is moved continuously across the test surface and the control unit collects data at a specified distance increment. In this way, the data collection rate is independent of the scan rate. Alternatively, scanning can be performed at a constant rate of time, regardless of the scan distance. Single point scans can be performed as well. Data is reviewed on-screen and in the field to identify reflections and ensure proper data collection parameters. Field testing is performed in accordance with the standard ASTM procedures as described in ASTM D 4695-96, “Standard Guide for General Pavement Deflection Measurements”. A.2.2 System Calibrations Horn antenna processing is used to get the velocity of the radar energy in the material by comparing the reflection strengths (amplitudes) from a pavement layer interface with a perfect reflector (a metal plate). The calibration scan is obtained with the horn antenna placed over a metal plate at the same elevation as a scan obtained over pavement . The same setting for data collection is used for metal plate calibration. Fifteen seconds are need for j umping up and down on the vehicle’s bumper to collect the full range of motion for the vehicle’s shocks . The filename of raw calibration file is recorded. Appendix A - Page 2 of 3 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Survey wheel is calibrated by laying out a long distance (> 50 feet) with tape measure. A.2.3 Linear Distance and Spatial Reference System Distance measuring instrument (DMI) is a trailer mounted two phase encoder system. When DMI is connected to the SIR-30 it provides for automatic display and recording distance information in both English and metric units with a 1 foot (0.3 meters) resolution and four percent accuracy when calibrated using provided procedure in the Field Program. Spatial reference system is a Trimble ProXH Global Positioning System (GPS) that consists of fully integrated receiver, antenna and battery unit with Trimble’s new H-Star™ technology to provide subfoot (30 cm) post processed accuracy. The External Patch antenna is added to the ProXH receiver for the position of the loading plate. The External Patch antenna can be conveniently elevated with the optional baseball cap to prevent any signal blockage. A.2.4 Camera Monitoring System A battery operated independent DC-1908E multi-functional digital camera with a SD card is used for easy positioning of the loading plate or of the pavement surface condition at the testing locations. A.3 SAMPLING METHODS At the project level, the testing interval is set at 12 scans per foot in the Outside Wheel Path (OWP) = 2.5 ft ± 0.25 ft (0.76 m ± 0.08 m) for nominal 12 ft (3.7 m) wide lanes at a survey speed of approximately 10 mph. Where a divided roadbed exists, surveys will be taken in both directions if the project will include improvements in both directions. If there is more than one lane in one direction the surveys will be taken in the outer driving lane (truck lane) versus the passing lane of the highway. GPR tests are performed at a constant lateral offset down the test section. When GPR tests are performed on bridge decks, multiple survey lines are followed transversely at 2-foot spacing between survey lines. At the network level, GPR tests on one scan per foot are set to be able to collect data on pavements at driving speeds, without statistically compromising the quality of the data collected. If GPR tests are for the in situ characterization of material GPR data will be collected at two scan per foot at slower driving speeds. A.4 QUALITY CONTROL (QC) AND QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) Beside the daily metal plate calibration the DMI is also calibrated monthly by driving the vehicle over a known distance to calculate the distance scale factor. The GPR will be monitored in real time in the data collection vehicle to minimize data errors. The GPR units will be identified with a unique number and that number will accompany all data reported from that unit as required in the QC/QA plan. Scheduled preventive maintenance ensures proper equipment operation and helps identify potential problems that can be corrected to avoid poor quality or missing data that results if the equipment malfunctions while on site. The routine and major maintenance procedures established by the LTPP are adopted and any maintenance has been done at the end of the day after the testing is complete and become part of the routine performed at the end of each test/travel day and on days when no other work is scheduled. To insure quality data, the GPR assessments only took place on dry pavement surfaces, and data was collected in each wheel path. A.5 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS A.5.1 Data Editing Field acquisition is seldom so routine that no errors, omissions or data redundancy occur. Data editing encompasses issues such as data re-organization, data file merging, data header or background information updates, repositioning and inclusion of elevation information with the data. A.5.2 Basic Processing Basic data processing addresses some of the fundamental manipulations applied to data to make a more acceptable product for initial interpretation and data evaluation. In most instances this type of processing is already applied in real-time to generate the real-time display. The advantage of post survey processing is that the basic processing can be done more systematically and non-causal operators to remove or enhance certain features can be applied. The Reflection Picking procedure is used to eliminate unwanted noise, detects significant reflections, and records the corresponding time and depth. It uses antenna calibration file data to calculate the radar signal velocity within the pavement. Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 28-20267 Appendix A - Page 3 of 3 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. A.5.3 Advance Processing Advanced data processing addresses the types of processing which require a certain amount of operator bias to be applied and which will result in data which are significantly different from the raw information which were input to the processing. A.5.4 Data Interpretation The EZ Tracker Layer Interpretation procedure uses the output from the first step to map structural layers and calculate the corresponding velocities and depths. A.6 TEST LIMITATIONS A.6.1 Test Methods The data derived through the testing program have been used to develop our opinions about the pavement conditions at your site. However, because no testing program can reveal totally what is in the subsurface, conditions between test locations and at other times, may differ from conditions described in this report. The testing we conducted identified pavement conditions only at those points where we measured pavement thicknesses and observed pavement surface conditions. Depending on the sampling methods and sampling frequency, every location may not be tested, and some anomalies which are present in the pavement may not be noted on the testing results. If conditions encountered during construction differ from those indicated by our testing, it may be necessary to alter our conclusions and recommendations, or to modify construction procedures, and the cost of construction may be affected. A.6.2 Test Standards Pavement testing is done in general conformance with the described procedures. Compliance with any other standards referenced within the specified standard is neither inferred nor implied. A.7 SUPPORTING TEST METHODS A.7.1 Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) If the pavement layer moduli and subgrade soil strength are desired the deflection data are collected using a Dynatest 8000 FWD Test System that consists of a Dynatest 8002 trailer and a third generation control and data acquisition unit developed in 2003, called the Dynatest Compact15, featuring fifteen (15) deflection channels. The new generation FWD, including a Compact15 System and a standard PC with the FwdWin field Program constitutes the newest, most sophisticated Dynatest FWD Test System, which fulfills or exceeds all requirements to meet ASTM-4694, ASTM D-4695 Standards. The system provides continuous data at pre-set spacing. A.7.2 Soil Boring/Coring Field Exploration If both pavement thicknesses and subgrade soil types and conditions are desired the shallow coring/boring and sampling is used. The limited number of coring/boring is necessary to verify the GPR layer thickness data. A.7.3 Pavement Surface Condition Survey The type and severity of pavement distress influence the deflection response for a pavement. Therefore, GPR operators record any distress located from about 1 ft (0.3 m) in front of vehicle to about 30 ft (9 m) ahead. This information is recorded in the FWD file using the comment line in the field program immediately following the test Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 28-20267 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S01 BP 3.9 15%3.3 2.9 3.9 12%3.5 2.8 From:To:Nez Perce Dr Base 11.5 10%10.4 7.2 11.2 8%10.4 8.4 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Powers Blvd Lake Lucy Road WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-3 B-1 C-1C-2 B-2 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S02 BP 5.0 22%4.0 3.4 4.9 18%4.1 2.7 From:To:Lake Lucy Rd Base 11.5 19%9.2 5.8 12.4 19%10.2 5.7 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Cul-de-Sac Nez Perce Dr SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-6 B-5 C-4 B-3 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S03 BP 5.0 19%4.2 3.4 5.2 18%4.4 3.8 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 11.1 13%9.3 7.9 10.9 10%9.7 7.7 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Nez Perce Dr Vineland Ct EB WB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey EB BP WB BP EB Base WB Base Pavement Cores C-5 B-4 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S04 BP 4.2 9%3.8 3.6 4.4 12%3.9 3.4 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 10.4 9%9.5 8.8 10.1 9%9.3 7.8 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Nez Perce Dr Troendle Cir SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-7 B-6 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S05 BP 4.5 12%3.9 3.5 4.6 11%4.1 3.5 From:To:Kerber Blvd Base 11.0 16%9.0 6.2 10.4 17%8.7 5.3 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Carver Beach Rd Redwing Ln SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-8 B-7 C-9C-10 B-8 C-11 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S06 BP 4.6 7%4.3 3.8 4.6 8%4.3 3.8 From:To:Redwing Ln Base 7.5 24%5.4 3.9 8.2 23%6.6 3.6 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Carver Beach Rd Penamint Ln SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-13 B-9 C-12 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S07 BP 4.5 8%4.2 3.9 4.5 8%4.1 3.7 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 12.2 9%10.9 10.1 12.3 7%11.4 10.4 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Penamint Ln Penamint Ct SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-14 C-15 B-10 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S08 BP 4.7 23%3.7 3.0 4.8 18%4.1 3.4 From:To:500' N of Trappers Pass Base 11.3 18%8.8 7.1 9.8 16%8.2 5.8 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Pleasantview Rd Near Mountain Blvd NB SB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey NB BP SB BP NB Base SB Base Pavement Cores C-16 C-41 C-40C-38 C-37 B-22B-21B-20 C-36 B-11 C-44 C-43 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S09 BP 4.2 10%3.8 3.4 4.2 14%3.6 3.2 From:To:Vine Hill Rd Base 10.2 11%9.0 7.8 10.2 10%9.2 7.1 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Near Mountain Blvd Castle Ridge NB SB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey NB BP SB BP NB Base SB Base Pavement Cores C-17 C-32 B-19 C-35 C-29 C-28 C-33 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S10 BP 4.2 12%3.7 3.0 4.4 11%3.9 3.3 From:To:Castle Ridge N Intersection Base 9.1 18%7.3 5.7 9.1 10%8.3 6.7 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge S Intersection Cascade Pass SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-26 C-22 C-23 B-13B-14 C-25 B-15 C-21 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S11 BP 4.8 12%4.2 3.9 4.7 11%4.2 3.6 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 10.1 11%9.1 7.2 10.1 11%8.8 8.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Cascade Pass Cascade Ct WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-24 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S12 BP 4.4 12%3.9 3.4 4.9 14%4.0 3.8 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 13.1 6%12.1 11.1 13.2 5%12.6 11.6 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge S Intersection Cascade Cir WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores B-16 C-27 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S13 BP 4.1 15%3.5 3.1 4.5 13%4.0 3.5 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 8.9 13%7.9 6.2 9.9 21%7.9 6.7 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge Shasta Cir E WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores B-18 C-31 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S14 BP 4.7 23%3.6 3.1 4.8 14%4.3 4.0 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 9.4 16%7.7 6.3 10.0 15%8.5 6.5 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge Shasta Cir W WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-30 B-17 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S15 BP 4.6 23%3.3 3.0 5.0 11%4.4 4.0 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 5.5 25%3.9 3.1 5.0 19%4.0 3.5 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge Olympic Cir EB WB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey EB BP WB BP EB Base WB Base Pavement Cores C-34 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S16 BP 5.0 19%4.0 3.6 5.3 21%4.3 3.7 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 9.2 11%8.4 6.5 9.1 20%7.5 4.9 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Castle Ridge Castle Ridge Ct WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-20 C-18 C-19 B-12 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S17 BP 4.3 14%3.7 3.3 4.4 9%4.0 3.6 From:To:Oxbox Bend Base 10.2 19%8.5 4.7 9.4 23%7.1 3.7 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Near Mountain Blvd Mountain Way WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores B-24 C-48C-47 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S18 BP 5.1 9%4.6 4.3 5.0 10%4.5 4.0 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 9.7 9%8.9 7.4 8.2 11%7.1 6.8 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Near Mountain Blvd Mountain View Ct WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-39 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S19 BP 3.9 21%3.2 2.4 4.0 19%3.2 2.4 From:To:Oxbow Bend (clockwise loop)Base 9.8 13%8.4 6.5 9.7 15%8.1 5.5 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement CoresOxbowBend Loop*Graph split into two sections at Oxbow Bend Loop marking. The next two pages include each section. * American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S19 BP 4.5 19%3.6 2.6 4.4 16%3.6 2.8 From:To:Oxbow Bend (clockwise loop)Base 10.0 16%8.4 6.5 10.2 16%8.3 6.4 Oxbow Bend Trappers Pass GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Layer WB EB -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-49 B-34B-28 C-53 B-27 C-51 B-26 C-50 B-25 C-60 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S19 BP 3.6 17%3.0 2.4 3.8 19%3.1 2.4 From:To:Oxbow Bend (clockwise loop)Base 9.6 11%8.4 6.5 9.4 13%8.1 5.5 Oxbow Bend Oxbow Bend (clockwise loop) GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Layer WB EB -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2130 2630 3130 3630 4130 4630 5130 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores B-36 C-64 B-35 C-63 C-62 C-61 B-39 C-69 C-68 B-38 C-65 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S21 BP 4.6 17%3.7 3.2 4.8 20%3.9 3.3 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 10.6 10%9.6 8.2 11.3 11%10.0 7.3 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Oxbow Bend Summit Cir SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-66 B-37 C-67 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S22 BP 4.8 19%3.9 3.2 4.9 24%3.7 2.8 From:To:Oxbow Bend (S)Base 10.4 13%8.9 6.8 9.3 21%7.4 5.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Near Mountain Blvd Trappers Pass SW NE Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SW BP NE BP SW Base NE Base Pavement Cores C-45 C-59 B-33B-32B-29 C-54C-46 B-23 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S23 BP 4.8 11%4.3 3.9 5.0 18%4.1 3.5 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 9.0 7%8.4 7.5 8.3 13%7.1 6.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Near Mountain Blvd Piedmont Ct EB WB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey EB BP WB BP EB Base WB Base Pavement Cores C-42 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S24 BP 4.1 15%3.6 3.2 5.0 14%4.4 3.5 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 8.8 23%6.9 5.5 7.8 24%5.6 4.6 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Trappers Pass Stag Horn Ln NB SB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey NB BP SB BP NB Base SB Base Pavement Cores C-58 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S25 BP 4.4 19%3.6 3.3 4.5 14%4.0 3.4 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 8.0 11%7.3 6.1 10.2 12%8.9 7.9 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Trappers Pass Trap Line Cir EB WB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey EB BP WB BP EB Base WB Base Pavement Cores B-30 C-55 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S26 BP 4.7 14%4.1 3.7 5.3 12%4.5 4.0 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 9.2 18%7.6 3.3 9.1 13%8.1 6.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Trappers Pass Trap Line Lane WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-56 B-31 C-57 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S27 BP 4.2 14%3.7 3.2 4.5 13%3.9 3.4 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 11.2 8%10.2 8.8 10.3 14%9.1 6.0 *Gaps in data are due to snow and/or ice coverage of roadway GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Lake Dr E Hidden Ct SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores B-40 B-41 C-71C-70 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S28 BP 4.1 11%3.7 3.0 4.4 13%3.7 3.1 From:To:Hidden Ct Base 10.6 9%9.6 8.4 9.7 11%8.8 8.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Marsh Dr Hidden Ln EB WB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00 1000.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey EB BP WB BP EB Base WB Base Pavement Cores C-72 B-42 C-74 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S29 BP 4.9 18%3.9 3.4 4.5 21%3.2 2.8 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base #DIV/0!#DIV/0!#NUM!0.0 #DIV/0!#DIV/0!#NUM!0.0 *A discernable possible aggregate base layer was not identified in the GPR data. GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Hidden Ln Hidden Cir SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 450.00 500.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores C-73 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S30 BP 4.2 13%3.6 3.1 4.1 15%3.4 2.9 From:To:Dakota Ln Base 10.8 14%9.3 7.9 10.7 11%9.6 8.2 *Gaps in the possible base layer are due to the layer exceeding the collection viewing window. GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Lake Dr E Marsh Dr SB NB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey SB BP NB BP SB Base NB Base Pavement Cores B-43 B-46B-44 C-77C-76C-75 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S31 BP 4.7 13%4.1 3.6 4.6 13%3.9 3.7 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 11.2 14%9.6 7.2 10.5 18%8.3 6.5 *Gaps in the possible base layer are due to the layer exceeding the available viewing window. GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Marsh Dr Sinnen Cir WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 450.00 500.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores B-45 American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 Units:inches Project:Date:2/24/20 AET Job No.:28-20267 Test Date:1/28/20 Average CV 15th Min.Average CV 15th Min. Road:Section/Grid:S32 BP 4.3 16%3.6 2.5 4.0 13%3.5 3.1 From:To:Cul-de-sac Base 11.4 9%10.4 9.1 11.1 18%8.8 6.1 *Gaps in the bituminous surface layer are due to snow and/or ice coverage and gaps in the possible base layer are due to the layer exceeding the collection viewing window. GENERAL INFORMATION: GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUMMARY STATISTICS 2020 Pavement Improvements Erie Cir Dakota Ln WB EB Layer -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 Depth (in)GPR Distance (ft) Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey WB BP EB BP WB Base EB Base Pavement Cores C-79 B-47 C-78 C-80 C-81C-82 B-48 Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Appendix B Pavement Core Log Photos Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thickness 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 1 Core ID:B-1 Condition: Road:Lake Lucy Road Segment ID:S01 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:C-1 Condition: Road:Lake Lucy Road Segment ID:S01 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal stripping throughout core. Bottom-up crack visible in core. Minimal stripping throughout core. Bottom-up crack visible in core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 2 Core ID:C-2 Condition: Road:Lake Lucy Road Segment ID:S01 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:B-2 Condition: Road:Lake Lucy Road Segment ID:S01 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping and crack throughout core. Moderate stripping and crack throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 3 Core ID:C-3 Condition: Road:Lake Lucy Road Segment ID:S01 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:B-3 Condition: Road:Nez Perce Drive Segment ID:S02 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 4 Core ID:C-4 Condition: Road:Nez Perce Drive Segment ID:S02 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:B-5 Condition: Road:Nez Perce Drive Segment ID:S02 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 5 Core ID:C-6 Condition: Road:Nez Perce Drive Segment ID:S02 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:C-5 Condition: Road:Vineland Court Segment ID:S03 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Severe stripping in upper portion of core and moderate stripping in lower portion of core. Core broken at 1.5-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 6 Core ID:B-4 Condition: Road:Vineland Court Segment ID:S03 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:C-7 Condition: Road:Troendle Circle Segment ID:S04 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. Minimal to moderate stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 7 Core ID:B-6 Condition: Road:Troendle Circle Segment ID:S04 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Core ID:C-7 Condition: Road:Troendle Circle Segment ID:S04 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Minimal stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. Minimal stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 8 Condition:Core ID: C-8 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Total Height:4.3" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:1.7" Lift 2:2.6" Condition:Core ID: B-7 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Total Height:6.6"Lift 2:2.8" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:1.2"Lift 3:2.6" Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 9 Condition:Core ID: C-9 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Total Height:4.25" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.25" Lift 2:2.00" Condition:Core ID: C-10 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Total Height:4.25" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.25" Lift 2:2.00" Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 10 Condition:Core ID: B-8 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Total Height:4.1" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.0" Lift 2:2.1" Condition:Core ID: C-11 Road: Redwing Lane Segment ID:S05 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Total Height:4.2" Lift 1:2.5" Lift 2:1.7" Minimal stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of Minimal to moderate stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 11 Core ID:C-12 Condition: Road:Penamint Lane Segment ID:S06 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Total Height:4.25" Lift 1:2.1" Core ID:B-9 Condition: Road:Penamint Lane Segment ID:S06 Total Height:2.3" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.3" Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Bottom portion of core appears broken during the coring operation. Moderate stripping and crack throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 12 Core ID:C-13 Condition: Road:Penamint Lane Segment ID:S06 Date Cored:1/20/2020 Total Height:4.4"Lift 2:2.0" Lift 1:2.3" Core ID:C-14 Condition: Road:Penamint Court Segment ID:S07 Total Height:4.3" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.0" Lift 2:2.3" Moderate stripping throughout core. Moderate stripping throughout core increasing in severity with depth. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 13 Core ID:B-10 Condition: Road:Penamint Court Segment ID:S07 Total Height:4.5" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.1" Lift 2:2.4" Core ID:C-15 Condition: Road:Penamint Court Segment ID:S07 Total Height:4.25" Date Cored:1/20/2020 Lift 1:2.25" Lift 2:2.00" Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 14 Core ID:C-16 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:B-11 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Upper portion of core generally solid, severe stripping in lower portion of core. Upper portion of core generally solid, moderate stripping in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 15 Core ID:C-36 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:B-20 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate stripping throughout entire core. Severe stripping and crack throughout core. Core broken at 3.5-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 16 Core ID:C-37 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-38 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 17 Core ID:B-21 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-40 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Severe stripping and crack throughout core. Moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 18 Core ID:C-41 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:B-22 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 19 Core ID:C-43 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-44 Condition: Road:Near Mountain Boulevard Segment ID:S08 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal stripping in upper portion of core, becoming moderate in lower portion of core. Moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 20 Core ID:C-17 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-35 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping in upper portion of core, moderate stripping in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 21 Core ID:B-19 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-33 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 22 Core ID:C-32 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-29 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping and crack throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 23 Core ID:C-28 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Road Segment ID:S09 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-21 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Moderate stripping throughout core. Bottom-up crack visible in core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 24 Core ID:B-13 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-22 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2.5- inches. Severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 25 Core ID:C-23 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:B-14 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate stripping throughout core. Moderate stripping in upper portion of core becoming severe in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 26 Core ID:C-25 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:B-15 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Moderate to severe stripping and crack throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 27 Core ID:C-26 Condition: Road:Cascade Pass Segment ID:S10 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-24 Condition: Road:Cascade Court Segment ID:S11 Total Height:4.3" Date Cored:1/21/2020 Lift 1:2.1" Lift 2:2.2" Upper portion of the core generally solid. Moderate stripping in lower portion of core. Minimal stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 28 Core ID:B-16 Condition: Road:Cascade Circle Segment ID:S12 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-27 Condition: Road:Cascade Circle Segment ID:S12 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping in upper portion of core. Generally solid throughout lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 29 Core ID:B-17 Condition: Road:Shasta Circle W Segment ID:S13 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-30 Condition: Road:Shasta Circle W Segment ID:S13 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 30 Core ID:B-18 Condition: Road:Shasta Circle E Segment ID:S14 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-31 Condition: Road:Shasta Circle E Segment ID:S14 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Moderate to severe stripping and crack throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 31 Core ID:C-34 Condition: Road:Olympic Circle Segment ID:S15 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-20 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Court Segment ID:S16 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 32 Core ID:B-12 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Court Segment ID:S16 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-19 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Court Segment ID:S16 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core, increasing in severity with depth. Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 33 Core ID:C-18 Condition: Road:Castle Ridge Court Segment ID:S16 Date Cored:1/21/2020 Core ID:C-47 Condition: Road:Mountain Way Segment ID:S17 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Moderate stripping throughout core. Bottom-up crack visible in core. Severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 34 Core ID:B-24 Condition: Road:Mountain Way Segment ID:S17 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-48 Condition: Road:Mountain Way Segment ID:S17 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Minimal stripping in upper portion of core, becoming moderate to severe in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 35 Core ID:C-39 Condition: Road:Mountain View Court Segment ID:S18 Total Height:5.4" Date Cored:1/21/2020 Lift 1:2.7" Lift 2:2.7" Core ID:C-49 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 36 Core ID:B-25 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-50 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 0.75- inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 37 Core ID:B-26 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-51 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 38 Core ID:B-27 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-53 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core generally solid. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 39 Core ID:B-28 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-34 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken in several areas. Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken in several areas. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 40 Core ID:C-60 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-61 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 41 Core ID:C-62 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-63 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2.75-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 42 Core ID:B-35 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-64 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2.75-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 43 Core ID:B-36 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-65 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core generally solid. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 44 Core ID:B-38 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-68 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 45 Core ID:C-69 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-39 Condition: Road:Oxbow Bend Segment ID:S19 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 1.5- inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 46 Core ID:C-52 Condition: Road:Rojina Lane Segment ID:S20 Total Height:4.3" Date Cored:1/22/2020 Lift 1:2.1" Lift 2:2.2" Core ID:C-66 Condition: Road:Summit Circle Segment ID:S21 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 47 Core ID:B-37 Condition: Road:Summit Circle Segment ID:S21 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-67 Condition: Road:Summit Circle Segment ID:S21 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to severe stripping throughout core, increasing in severity with depth. Core broken at 2.25-inches. Core generally solid. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 48 Core ID:C-59 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-33 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Moderate stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2.25- inches. Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 2-inches. Vertical crack in lower portion of core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 49 Core ID:B-32 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-29 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 3-inches. Moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 50 Core ID:C-54 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-46 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 51 Core ID:B-23 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-45 Condition: Road:Trappers Pass Segment ID:S22 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 52 Core ID:C-42 Condition: Road:Piedmont Court Segment ID:S23 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-58 Condition: Road:Stag Horn Lane Segment ID:S24 Total Height:5.5" Date Cored:1/22/2020 Lift 1:2.7" Lift 2:2.8" Severe stripping throughout core. Upper portion of core broken. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 53 Core ID:B-30 Condition: Road:Trap Line Circle Segment ID:S25 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:C-55 Condition: Road:Trap Line Circle Segment ID:S25 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Bottom-up crack and horizontal crack at 1.75-inches visible in core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 54 Core ID:C-56 Condition: Road:Trap Line Lane Segment ID:S26 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-31 Condition: Road:Trap Line Lane Segment ID:S26 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Moderate to severe stripping throughout core. Severe stripping and crack throughout core. Core broken at 0.75-inches. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 55 Core ID:C-57 Condition: Road:Trap Line Lane Segment ID:S26 Date Cored:1/22/2020 Core ID:B-40 Condition: Road:Hidden Court Segment ID:S27 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal stripping in upper portion of core becoming moderate to severe in lower portion of core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 56 Core ID:C-70 Condition: Road:Hidden Court Segment ID:S27 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:B-41 Condition: Road:Hidden Court Segment ID:S27 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 57 Core ID:C-71 Condition: Road:Hidden Court Segment ID:S27 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:C-72 Condition: Road:Hidden Lane Segment ID:S28 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Intact core unrecoverable. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 58 Core ID:B-42 Condition: Road:Hidden Lane Segment ID:S28 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:C-74 Condition: Road:Hidden Lane Segment ID:S28 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 59 Core ID:C-73 Condition: Road:Hidden Circle Segment ID:S29 Total Height:3.9" Date Cored:1/23/2020 Lift 1:1.9" Lift 2:2.0" Core ID:B-43 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 60 Core ID:C-75 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:B-44 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 61 Core ID:C-76 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:C-77 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 62 Core ID:B-46 Condition: Road:Marsh Drive Segment ID:S30 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:B-45 Condition: Road:Sinnen Circle Segment ID:S31 Total Height:4.8" Date Cored:1/23/2020 Lift 1:2.4" Lift 2:2.4" Severe stripping throughout core, much of it is crumbling. Core broken at 0.5-inches. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 63 Core ID:C-78 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:B-47 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. Severe stripping throughout core. Core broken at 1.25- inches. Bottom portion of core cracked. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 64 Core ID:C-79 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:C-80 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal stripping throughout core. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 65 Core ID:C-81 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Core ID:B-48 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Severe stripping throughout core, much of core broken in pieces. Core broken at 1-inch. Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 City of Chanhassen 2020 Pavement Improvements 66 Core ID:C-82 Condition: Road:Dakota Lane Segment ID:S32 Date Cored:1/23/2020 Minimal to moderate stripping throughout core. 28-20267 Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thickness 1 Area Segment ID Road ID Recovered Core Core Downhole Measurement Lane B-1 3.6 3.5 11 WB between wheel paths 44.884014 -93.548697 C-1 4.25 4 WB outside wheel path 44.883840 -93.547760 C-2 4.2 3.75 WB inside wheel path 44.883808 -93.546500 B-2 4.25 3.75 10.5 EB between wheel paths 44.883779 -93.545740 C-3 2.8 3 WB outside wheel path 44.883793 -93.544835 B-3 4.1 3.5 12 NB outside wheel path 44.884246 -93.544328 C-4 5.25 5.25 SB outside wheel path 44.884830 -93.544470 B-5 6.25 5.5 9.5 Lane center 44.885495 -93.544355 C-6 5.2 5 EB inside wheel path 44.885916 -93.545026 C-5 4.25 4 WB outside wheel path 44.885134 -93.543796 B-4 4.5 4.5 12 Cul-de-sac near east curb 44.884727 -93.542979 C-7 3.9 3.75 SB inside wheel path 44.885392 -93.545679 B-6 4.15 4 11 Cul-de-sac near east curb 44.884766 -93.545553 C-11 4.2 4.25 Lane center 44.881055 -93.547432 B-8 4.1 4 13 SB inside wheel path 44.880720 -93.547470 C-10 4.25 4.25 NB between wheel paths 44.880090 -93.547330 C-9 4.25 4 SB outside wheel path 44.879497 -93.546623 B-7 6.6 6.25 6 NB between wheel paths 44.879010 -93.546190 C-8 4.3 4 SB inside wheel path 44.878387 -93.546193 C-12 4.25 4 Lane center 44.880084 -93.546293 B-9 2.3*4.5 6 NB outside wheel path 44.880662 -93.545460 C-13 4.4 4 NB inside wheel path 44.881030 -93.545460 C-14 4.3 4.5 SE B inside wheel path 44.879887 -93.545416 B-10 4.5 4.5 14 NW B between wheel paths 44.879751 -93.544979 C-15 4.25 4.5 Cul-de-sac center 44.879437 -93.544231 C-16 4 4 NB inside wheel path 44.887889 -93.523261 B-11 4.3 4 15.5 SB outside wheel path 44.888049 -93.523611 C-36 5.4 5.25 Lane center 44.888326 -93.524488 B-20 5.7 5 9 SB outside wheel path 44.888260 -93.525001 C-37 5 4.75 NB outside wheel path 44.888440 -93.525517 C-38 4.5 4.75 SB between wheel paths 44.888959 -93.525969 B-21 3.4 3 16.5 NB outside wheel path 44.889324 -93.526235 C-40 3.7 3.5 SB outside wheel path 44.889549 -93.526689 C-41 4.8 4.5 NB between wheel paths 44.889845 -93.527116 B-22 5 5 11 SB outside wheel path 44.890364 -93.527178 C-43 8.8 8.5 Lane center 44.890689 -93.526872 C-44 3.6 4 SB between wheel paths 44.891221 -93.526931 LongitudeApproximate Location Trappers Pass Latitude 8 Near Mountain Blvd Red Wing Lane 5 Red Wing Lane 6 Penamint Ln 7 Penamint Ct Bituminous Thickness Measurements, (in)Base Thickness Measurement, (in) Lake Lucy Road 1 Lake Lucy Rd 2 Nez Perce Dr 3 Vineland Ct 4 Troendle Cir 28-20267 Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thickness 2 Area Segment ID Road ID Recovered Core Core Downhole Measurement Lane LongitudeApproximate Location Latitude Bituminous Thickness Measurements, (in)Base Thickness Measurement, (in) C-17 4.2 4 Lane center 44.888517 -93.523758 C-35 6 5.5 SB between wheel paths 44.889008 -93.522970 B-19 4.2 3.75 12 NB between wheel paths 44.889234 -93.522402 C-33 2.7 3 SB between wheel paths 44.889593 -93.522361 C-32 4.4 4.5 NB outside wheel path 44.889935 -93.522309 C-29 4.4 4 SB inside wheel path 44.890650 -93.522820 C-28 4.5 4.75 NB between wheel paths 44.891247 -93.523053 C-21 4.5 4.5 SB inside wheel path 44.889042 -93.523721 B-13 4.4 4.5 8.5 NB between wheel paths 44.889442 -93.524109 C-22 1.8 2 SB outside wheel path 44.889731 -93.524483 C-23 4.6 4.25 NB inside wheel path 44.890119 -93.524780 B-14 4.3 4.5 8.5 SB outside wheel path 44.890489 -93.524910 C-25 4.7 4.5 EB between wheel paths 44.890938 -93.524337 B-15 4 4 9.5 WB between wheel paths 44.890968 -93.523784 C-26 4.5 3 EB inside wheel path 44.890844 -93.523303 11 Cascade Ct C-24 4.3 4 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.890886 -93.525276 B-16 4.4 4.25 19.75 WB outside wheel path 44.891004 -93.522585 C-27 6.7 6 Cul-de-sac center 44.891036 -93.521537 B-18 3.5 3.5 8.5 WB inside wheel path 44.890242 -93.522009 C-31 5.7 5.5 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.890148 -93.521613 B-17 5 4.75 15 EB between wheel paths 44.890095 -93.522759 C-30 4.5 4.5 Cul-de-sac near center 44.889978 -93.523155 15 Olympic Cir C-34 5.7 5 Cul-de-sac near east curb 44.889424 -93.521381 C-20 4.1 4 WB outside wheel path 44.888543 -93.523008 B-12 5.2 5.25 9.5 EB outside wheel path 44.888236 -93.522545 C-19 4 4 WB inside wheel path 44.888194 -93.521942 C-18 5.3 5.5 Cul-de-sac near west curb 44.888500 -93.521700 C-47 3.3 3.5 WB inside wheel path 44.888261 -93.526305 B-24 4 4.5 8.5 EB outside wheel path 44.888199 -93.527112 C-48 4.3 4.5 WB between wheel paths 44.888216 -93.528069 18 Mountain View Ct C-39 5.4 5.75 Cul-de-sac near north curb 44.889242 -93.527018 C-49 3.5 4 SB inside wheel path 44.889392 -93.528631 B-25 4.2 4.25 8 NB outside wheel path 44.889041 -93.528712 C-50 4.5 4.5 SB inside wheel path 44.888691 -93.528751 B-26 4.5 6 11 NB outside wheel path 44.888041 -93.528992 C-51 5.1 5.25 SB between wheel paths 44.887681 -93.529413 B-27 4.5 4.5 11 EB outside wheel path 44.887342 -93.530289 C-53 4.2 4 WB inside wheel path 44.887546 -93.531175 B-28 4.8 4.75 9 EB outside wheel path 44.887817 -93.531840 B-34 3.5 5.75 10 WB between wheel paths 44.887922 -93.532861 Oxbow Bend19 12 Trappers Pass Cascade Cir 13 Shasta Cir E 14 Shasta Cir W 16 Castle Ridge Ct 17 Mountain Way 9 Castle Ridge Rd 10 Cascade Pass 28-20267 Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thickness 3 Area Segment ID Road ID Recovered Core Core Downhole Measurement Lane LongitudeApproximate Location Latitude Bituminous Thickness Measurements, (in)Base Thickness Measurement, (in) C-60 4.2 4 EB inside wheel path 44.887791 -93.533385 C-61 4.3 4.5 SB inside wheel path 44.887607 -93.534156 C-62 3.7 3.75 NB inside wheel path 44.886984 -93.534671 C-63 4.8 4.5 NB between wheel paths 44.887147 -93.535413 B-35 3.7 4 10 SB outside wheel path 44.887878 -93.535878 C-64 3.7 3.75 NB inside wheel path 44.888610 -93.536490 B-36 3.3 3.5 12.5 SB outside wheel path 44.889295 -93.536828 C-65 3.5 3.75 EB inside wheel path 44.889582 -93.536107 B-38 3.7 4 11.5 WB between wheel paths 44.889609 -93.534816 C-68 5 5 SB inside wheel path 44.889195 -93.534288 C-69 3.4 3.5 NB inside wheel path 44.888615 -93.534116 B-39 3.8 3.5 15.5 SB outside wheel path 44.888068 -93.534166 20 Rojina Ln C-52 4.3 4.25 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.887119 -93.530909 C-66 4 4 SB inside wheel path 44.889334 -93.535578 B-37 3.3 4 11 NB between wheel paths 44.888964 -93.535749 C-67 5.4 5.5 Cul-de-sac near west curb 44.888281 -93.535192 C-59 4.6 4.75 SB inside wheel path 44.888275 -93.532195 B-33 4 4 13 NB between wheel paths 44.888674 -93.531906 B-32 5.6 6 11 SB outside wheel path 44.889372 -93.531231 B-29 4.2 8 12.5 EB outside wheel path 44.889881 -93.530520 C-54 4.6 5 WB inside wheel path 44.889882 -93.529347 C-46 4 4 EB outside wheel path 44.889811 -93.528497 B-23 4.2 4.25 20.25 WB outside wheel path 44.889948 -93.528191 C-45 4.2 4 EB inside wheel path 44.889984 -93.527722 23 Piedmont Ct C-42 3.4 4.5 Cul-de-sac near west of center 44.890045 -93.526822 24 Stag Horn Ln C-58 5.5 5.5 Cul-de-sac center 44.888874 -93.532425 B-30 3.6 3.75 10 WB outside wheel path 44.889337 -93.530556 C-55 4.9 5 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.888895 -93.530229 C-56 5.5 5.5 EB inside wheel path 44.889812 -93.531528 B-31 3.9 3.75 8 WB between wheel paths 44.889996 -93.532104 C-57 6.2 6 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.889864 -93.532878 B-40 3.5 3.5 13.5 SB outside wheel path 44.858599 -93.526785 C-70 3.9 4 NB inside wheel path 44.857656 -93.526582 B-41 3.5 4 13.5 SB outside wheel path 44.856879 -93.526645 C-71 4 4.5 Cul-de-sac near south curb 44.856030 -93.526739 C-74 3.6 3.5 WB outside wheel path 44.857255 -93.529203 B-42 3.6 4 11 EB outside wheel path 44.857681 -93.528034 C-72 *5 EB between wheel paths 44.858021 -93.527224 29 Hidden Cir C-73 3.9 4 Cul-de-sac center 44.857071 -93.527794 Trappers Pass 19 Oxbow Bend Marsh Drive 25 Trap Line Cir 26 Trap Line Ln 27 Hidden Ct 28 Hidden Ln 21 Summit Cir 22 Trappers Pass 28-20267 Table Summary of Bituminous and Base Thickness 4 Area Segment ID Road ID Recovered Core Core Downhole Measurement Lane LongitudeApproximate Location Latitude Bituminous Thickness Measurements, (in)Base Thickness Measurement, (in) B-43 5.1 5 8.5 SB outside wheel path 44.857335 -93.530114 C-75 4.3 4 NB inside wheel path 44.856695 -93.529881 B-44 3.7 4 10 SB between wheel paths 44.856223 -93.529205 C-76 3.8 4 NB inside wheel path 44.855913 -93.528451 C-77 3.7 4 SB outside wheel path 44.855235 -93.528094 B-46 2.7 3.5 9.5 NB outside wheel path 44.854899 -93.527817 31 Sinnen Cir B-45 4.8 5 9 Cul-de-sac south of center 44.855300 -93.529100 C-82 4.1 4 WB inside wheel path 44.855346 -93.526092 B-48 4.2 4.5 12 NB outside wheel path 44.854800 -93.526550 C-81 3.1*4 SB outside wheel path 44.854502 -93.526689 C-80 4.4 4.5 EB inside wheel path 44.854284 -93.527372 C-79 4 4 Lane center 44.854460 -93.528045 B-47 2.8 3.5 11.5 EB between wheel paths 44.854445 -93.528646 C-78 2.6*6 Cul-de-sac near west curb 44.854402 -93.529313 *An accurate measurement could not be obtained due to deterioration of the pavement core. Marsh Drive 30 Marsh Drive 32 Dakota Ln Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Appendix C Subsurface Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Notes MnDOT Boring Log Descriptive Terminology AASHTO Soil Classification Subsurface Boring Logs Materials Test Reports Table Summary of Results and Recommendations Appendix C Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing AET No. 28-20267 Appendix C - Page 1 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. C.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling and sampling 48 flight auger soil borings and 130 pavement cores. The locations of the borings and cores appear on Figures 1 through 5, preceding the Subsurface Boring Logs in this appendix. C.2 SAMPLING METHODS C.2.1 Split-Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to N60 Values Standard penetration (split-spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM: D1586 with one primary modification. The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped from a height of 30 inches. The sampler is driven a total of 18 inches into the soil. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value. Our method uses a modified hammer weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod. In the past, standard penetration N-value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy transferred to the split-spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of its potential energy due to the friction inherent in this system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N60 blow count. The most recent drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and subsequently results in lower N-values than the traditional N60 values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we can determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100%. Therefore, the intent of AET’s hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. The current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N-values, stating that N-values of 100% or more have been observed. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that the accuracy deviation of the N-values using this method is significantly better than the standard ASTM Method. C.2.2 Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SU) Sample types described as “DS” or “SU” on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger. Because the auger disturbs the samples, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate. C.2.3 Sampling Limitations Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present in the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs. Determining the thickness of “topsoil” layers is usually limited, due to variations in topsoil definition, sample recovery, and other factors. Visual-manual description often relies on color for determination, and transitioning changes can account for significant variation in thickness judgment. Accordingly, the topsoil thickness presented on the logs should not be the sole basis for calculating topsoil stripping depths and volumes. If more accurate information is needed relating to thickness and topsoil quality definition, alternate methods of sample retrieval and testing should be employed. C.3 CLASSIFICATION METHODS Soil descriptions shown on the boring logs are based on the Mn/DOT Textural Classification System. Soil descriptions on the boring logs are visual manual judgements, unless laboratory classification tests have been performed. Charts are attached which provide information on the Mn/DOT system, the descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs. Visual-manual judgement of the AASHTO Soil Group is also noted as a part of the soil description. A chart presenting details of the AASHTO Soil Classification System is also attached. The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional origin of each soil layer is interpreted primarily by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development can sometimes aid this judgment. Appendix C Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 28-20267 Appendix C - Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. C.4 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under “Water Level Measurements” on the logs:  Date and Time of measurement  Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement  Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement  Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole  Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is encountered  Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This is possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include: permeability of each soil layer in profile, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings, presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing. C.5 LABORATORY TEST METHODS C.5.1 Sieve Analysis of Soils (through #200 Sieve) Conducted per AET Procedure 01-LAB-040, which is performed in general accordance with ASTM D6913, Method A. C.5.2 Water Content Tests Conducted per AET Procedure 01-LAB-010, which is performed in general accordance with ASTM D2216 and AASHTO T265. C.6 TEST STANDARD LIMITATIONS Field and laboratory testing is done in general conformance with the described procedures. Compliance with any other standards referenced within the specified standard is neither inferred nor implied. C.7 SAMPLE STORAGE Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30 days. 01REP052C (7/11) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS Symbol Definition Symbol Definition AR: Sample of material obtained from cuttings blown out the top of the borehole during air rotary procedure. B, H, N: Size of flush-joint casing CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in inches COT: Clean-out tube DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry DR: Driller (initials) DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights DP: Direct push drilling; a 2.125 inch OD outer casing with an inner 1½ inch ID plastic tube is driven continuously into the ground. FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in inches HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter in inches LG: Field logger (initials) MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of samples and for the ground water level symbols N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in blows per foot (see notes) NQ: NQ wireline core barrel PQ: PQ wireline core barrel RDA: Rotary drilling with compressed air and roller or drag bit. RDF: Rotary drilling with drilling fluid and roller or drag bit REC: In split-spoon (see notes), direct push and thin-walled tube sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample. In rock coring, the length of core recovered (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered. SS: Standard split-spoon sampler (steel; 1.5" is inside diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated otherwise SU Spin-up sample from hollow stem auger TW: Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter in inches WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside the borehole after “falling” through drilling fluid WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and hammer WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel ▼: Water level directly measured in boring : Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test DEN: Dry density, pcf DST: Direct shear test E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf HYD: Hydrometer analysis LL: Liquid Limit, % LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf OC: Organic Content, % PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field; L - Laboratory PL: Plastic Limit, % qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approximate) qc: Static cone bearing pressure, tsf qu: Unconfined compressive strength, psf R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cms RQD: Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length as a percent of total core run) SA: Sieve analysis TRX: Triaxial compression test VSR: Vane shear strength, remolded (field), psf VSU: Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight %-200: Percent of material finer than #200 sieve STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES (Calibrated Hammer Weight) The standard penetration test consists of driving a split-spoon sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in ASTM: D1586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0.1' below the slash. The length of sample recovered, as shown on the “REC” column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N column. The disparity is because the N-value is recorded below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in ASTM: D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even extend more than 18"). Vane Shear Test Washed Sample (Collected during plug drilling) Augered Plug Drilled Split Tube Sample (SPT N60 2 in. spilt tube with liners) Thin Wall Sample (3 in. Shelby Tube) Core Drilled (NV Core Barrel unless otherwise noted) Continuous Soil Sample Augered & Jetted Jetted Augered & Plug Drilled WS PD CS A/J Jet A/P Index Sheet No. 3.0 March 2003 G:\geotech\Public\Forms\INDEX30.doc Minnesota Department of Transportation Geotechnical Section Boring Log Descriptive Terminology (English Units) USER NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS -Additional information available in Geotechnical Manual. This boring was made by ordinary and conventional methods and with care deemed adequate for the Department's design purposes. Since this boring was not taken to gather information relating to the construction of the project, the data noted in the field and recorded may not necessarily be the same as that which a contractor would desire. While the Department believes that the information as to the conditions and materials reported is accurate, it does not warrant that the information is necessarily complete. This information has been edited or abridged and may not reveal all the information which might be useful or of interest to the contractor. Consequently, the Department will make available at its offices, the field logs relating to this boring. Since subsurface conditions outside each borehole are unknown, and soil, rock and water conditions cannot be relied upon to be consistent or uniform, no warrant is made that conditions adjacent to this boring will necessarily be the same as or similar to those shown on this log. Furthermore, the Department will not be responsible for any interpretations, assumptions, projections or interpolations made by contractors, or other users of this log. Water levels recorded on this log should be used with discretion since the use of drilling fluids in borings may seriously distort the true field conditions. Also, water levels in cohesive soils often take extended periods of time to reach equilibrium and thus reflect their true field level. Water levels can be expected to vary both seasonally and yearly. The absence of notations on this log regarding water does not necessarily mean that this boring was dry or that the contractor will not encounter subsurface water during the course of construction. WATER MEASUREMENT AB .........................After Bailing AC .........................After Completion AF .........................After Flushing w/C .......................with Casing w/M.......................with Mud WSD......................While Sampling/Drilling w/AUG ..................with Hollow Stem Auger MISCELLANEOUS NA .........................Not Applicable w/..........................with w/o........................with out sat.........................saturated DRILLING OPERATIONS AUG ..................Augered CD .....................Core Drilled DBD...................Disturbed by Drilling DBJ ...................Disturbed by Jetting PD.....................Plug Drilled ST......................Split Tube (SPT test) TW .....................Thinwall (Shelby Tube) WS ....................Wash Sample NSR...................No Sample Retrieved WH ....................Weight of Hammer WR ....................Weight of Rod Mud...................Drilling Fluids in Sample CS .....................Continuous Sample SOIL/CORE TESTS SPT N60 ..............ASTM D1586 Modified Blows per foot with 140 lb. hammer and a standard energy of 210 ft-lbs. This energy represents 60% of the potential energy of the system and is the average energy provided by a Rope & Cathead system. MC ....................Moisture Content COH ..................Cohesion ?........................Sample Density LL......................Liquid Limit PI ......................Plasticity Index F .......................Phi Angle REC...................Percent Core Recovered RQD ..................Rock Quality Description (Percent of total core interval consisting of unbroken pieces 4 inches or longer) ACL ...................Average Core Length (Average length of core that is greater than 4 inches long) Core Breaks .....Number of natural core breaks per 2-foot interval. DISCONTINUITY SPACING Fractures Distance Bedding Very Close .........<2 inches.............Very Thin Close .................2-12 inches..........Thin Mod. Close........12-36 inches........Medium Wide..................>36 inches...........Thick DRILLING SYMBOLS RELATIVE DENSITY Compactness - Granular Soils BPF very loose ....................................0-4 loose ...........................................5-10 medium dense ............................11-24 dense ..........................................25-50 very dense...................................>50 Consistency - Cohesive Soils BPF very soft.......................................0-1 soft..............................................2-4 firm..............................................5-8 stiff..............................................9-15 very stiff.......................................16-30 hard.............................................31-60 very hard .....................................> 60 COLOR blk...................Black wht............White grn ..................Green brn ............Brown orng ................Orange yel .............Yellow dk ....................Dark lt................Light IOS..................Iron Oxide Stained GRAIN SIZE /PLASTICITY VF .............Very Fine pl.............Plastic F................Fine slpl..........Slightly Cr ..............Coarse Plastic SOIL/ROCK TERMS C ...............Clay Lmst........Limestone L................Loam Sst ..........Sandstone S ...............Sand Dolo ........Dolostone Si ..............Silt wx...........weathered G ...............Gravel (No. 10 Sieve to 3 inches) Bldr ...........Boulder (over 3 inches) T................till (unsorted, nonstratified glacial deposits) Mn/DOT Triangular Textural Soil Classification System 100% 100% C 908070605040302010 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 (plastic) (slightly plastic) SC SCL CL LSL Si SiC SiCL LS S Si 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 100 % % Sand % Clay % A-7 A-7-5 A-7-6 Sieve Analysis, Percent passing: No. 10 (2.00 mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 max.. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . No. 40 (0.425 mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 max.50 max.51 min.. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . No. 200 (0.075 mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 max.25 max.10 max.35 max.35 max.35 max.35 max.36 min.36 min.36 min.36 min. Characteristics of Fraction Passing No. 40 (0.425 mm) Liquid limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .40 max.41 min.40 max.41 min.40 max.41 min.40 max.41 min. Plasticity index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .N.P.10 max.10 max.11 min.11 min.10 max.10 max.11 min.11 min. General Ratings as Subgrade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definitions of Gravel, Sand and Silt-Clay 01CLS022 (07/11)AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. The term "silty" is applied to fine material having plasticity index of 10 or less and the term "clayey" is applied to fine material having plasticity index of 11 or greater. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures GRAVEL - Material passing sieve with 3-in. square openings and retained on the No. 10 sieve. COARSE SAND - Material passing the No. 10 sieve and retained on the No. 40 sieve. FINE SAND - Material passing the No. 40 sieve and retained on the No. 200 sieve. COMBINED SILT AND CLAY - Material passing the No. 200 sieve Excellent to Good Group A-8 soils are organic clays or peat with organic content >5%. BOULDERS (retained on 3-in. sieve) should be excluded from the portion of the sample to which the classificaiton is applied, but the percentage of such material, if any, in the sample should be recorded. (35% or less passing No. 200 sieve)(More than 35% passing No. 200 sieve) General Classification A-4 A-5 The terms "gravel", "coarse sand", "fine sand" and "silt-clay", as determinable from the minimum test data required in this classification arrangement and as used in subsequent word descriptions are defined as follows: Granular Materials Silt-Clay Materials A-1 A-2 A-2-6 A-2-7 . . . . 6 max. Fine Sand Silty or Clayey Gravel and Sand Silty Soils Clayey Soils Plasticity index of A-7-5 subgroup is equal to or less than LL minus 30. Plasticity index of A-7-6 subgroup is greater than LL minus 30. A-3 A-2-4 A-2-5 Stone Fragments, Gravel and Sand Fair to Poor A-6 The placing of A-3 before A-2 is necessary in the "left to right elimination process" and does not indicate superiority of A-3 over A-2. Usual Types of Significant Constituent Materials A-1-a A-1-b Group Classification -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 15 35 0 2 4 6 8 1012 1416 18 203040 506070 80 1020304050607080100140180 LIQUID LIMIT PLAS TI CI T Y I N D E X PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVEPARTIAL GROUP INDEXGROUP INDEX CHART Group Index (GI) = (F-35) [0.2+0.005 (LL-40) ] + 0.01 (F-15) (PI-10) where F = % Passing No. 200 sieve, LL = Liquid Limit, and PI = Plasticity Index. When working with A-2-6 and A-2-7 subgroups the Partial Group Index (PGI) is determined from the PI only. When the combined Partial Group Indices are negative, the Group Index should be reported as zero.A-2-6 and A-2-782% Passing No. 200 sieve LL = 38 PI = 21 PGI = 8.9 for LL PGI = 7.4 for PI GI = 16 Then:Example: 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Sub- G r o u p A-7-5 Sub-G roupA-7 -6 A-7A-5 A-4 A-6 PI = LL - 30PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index Ranges for the A-4, A-5, A-6 and A-7 SubgroupsLiquid Limit 7 17 18 21 19 3.5" Bituminous pavement 11.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) A MIXTURE OF LOAM AND PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 3.5', A-6, fill LOAM, grayish brown, moist, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, a little dark brown, moist, laminations of loamy sand, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.3 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-1 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Lake Lucy Road Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.548697 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.884014 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 17 18 18 19 4.25" Bituminous pavement 10.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, dark brown and brown, frozen to 3.5', A-6, fill LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, wet, A-2-4, alluvium Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.3 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-2 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Lake Lucy Road Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.545740 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.883779 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 18.2 8 20 20 18 21 4" Bituminous pavement 12" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, dark brown, gray and brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.3 10.0 B-3 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Nez Perce Drive Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.544328 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.884246 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 17 20 25 24 4.5" Bituminous pavement 12.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray and brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.4 5.0 10.0 B-4 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Vineland Court Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.542979 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.884727 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 17 16 17 21 6.25" Bituminous pavement 9.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little loam, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.5 1.3 2.5 7.5 10.0 B-5 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Nez Perce Drive Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.544355 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.885495 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 19.9 6 28 21 20 19 4.25" Bituminous pavement 10.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) SILTY CLAY LOAM, gray, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little gray, frozen to 3' then moist, laminations of loamy sand, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, a little gray, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.2 2.5 5.0 10.0 B-6 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Troendle Circle Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/3/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.545553 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.884766 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 18 14 17 19 6.5" Bituminous pavement 6.5" MIXTURE OF CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE AND LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then damp, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little grayish brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.5 1.1 5.0 10.0 B-7 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Redwing Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/31/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.546190 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.879010 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 18 17 18 18 4" Bituminous pavement 12.75" MIXTURE OF CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE AND LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till LOAM, brown, a little grayish brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-8 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Redwing Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/31/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.547470 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.880720 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 9.9 7 16 19 19 26 4.75" Bituminous pavement 6" MIXTURE OF CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE AND LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, a little gray, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little gray and dark brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 0.9 5.0 10.0 B-9 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Penamint Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/31/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.545460 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.880662 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 17 17 19 21 4.5" Bituminous pavement 14" MIXTURE OF CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE AND LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, a little dark brown, frozen to 3.5' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.5 5.0 10.0 B-10 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Penamint Court Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/31/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.544979 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.879751 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 14.7 6 18 20 19 18 4.25" Bituminous pavement 15.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.6 2.5 10.0 B-11 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Near Mountain Blvd. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.523611 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888049 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 12.8 5 18 17 19 21 5.25" Bituminous pavement 8.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, brown and dark brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.1 7.5 10.0 B-12 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Castle Ridge Court Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.522545 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888236 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 20 21 19 19 4.5" Bituminous pavement 8" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown and grayish brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little light gray, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.0 2.5 5.0 10.0 B-13 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Cascade Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.524109 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889442 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 5 16 16 17 16 4.25" Bituminous pavement 8.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) A MIXTURE OF LOAM AND PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 2.5' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little light gray and dark brown, moist, laminations of loamy sand, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.0 7.5 10.0 B-14 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Cascade Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.524910 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.890489 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 8 20 15 16 20 4" Bituminous pavement 10" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, brown, frozen to 2.5' then damp, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little light brown, moist, laminations of silty loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.2 7.5 10.0 B-15 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Cascade Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.523784 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.890968 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 19.9 6 8 12 16 19 4.5" Bituminous pavement 15.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, brown, frozen to 3.5' then damp, A-2-4, fill LOAM, brown, moist to wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.7 5.0 10.0 B-16 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Cascade Circle Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.522585 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.891004 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 18 21 15 21 5" Bituminous pavement 14.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) A MIXTURE OF LOAM AND PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown and light brown, frozen, A-2-6, fill LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, till or fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, damp, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6 till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.6 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-17 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Shasta Circle West Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.522759 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.890095 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 10 9 11 14 3.5" Bituminous pavement 9.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAMY SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, brown, frozen to 3' then damp, A-2-4, fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.1 10.0 B-18 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Shasta Circle East Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.522009 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.890242 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 8 19 15 14 17 4.25" Bituminous pavement 12.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 2.5', A-6, fill LOAM, a little loamy sand, brown, moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little gray and dark brown, moist, laminations of loamy sand and silty loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.4 2.5 7.5 10.0 B-19 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Castle Ridge Road Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.522402 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889234 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 9 27 18 23 24 5.75" Bituminous pavement 7.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray, frozen, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, gray and dark brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, gray, wet, A-6, till PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brownish gray, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.5 1.1 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-20 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Near Mountain Blvd. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/4/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.525001 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888260 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 16 16 17 18 3.5" Bituminous pavement 17" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to moist, A-6, till, possible fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.7 2.5 10.0 B-21 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Near Mountain Blvd. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.526235 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889324 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 5 23 19 19 18 5" Bituminous pavement 10.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.5 2.5 10.0 B-22 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Near Mountain Blvd. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.527178 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.890364 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 17.1 9 18 19 21 4.25" Bituminous pavement 19.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, moist, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, moist to wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 2.0 5.0 10.0 B-23 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trappers Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.528191 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889948 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 24 20 20 21 4.5" Bituminous pavement 7.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray to brown, frozen to 3' to moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.0 5.0 10.0 B-24 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Mountain Way Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.527112 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888199 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 20 18 16 16 4.25" Bituminous pavement 7.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown to gray, frozen to 2.5' to moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.0 10.0 B-25 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.528712 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889041 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 23.4 5 25 22 22 20 4.5" Bituminous pavement 10.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, trace roots, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.3 5.0 10.0 B-26 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.528992 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888041 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 22 17 21 22 4.5" Bituminous pavement 10.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.3 5.0 10.0 B-27 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.530289 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.887342 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 18 22 22 31 4.75" Bituminous pavement 8.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, frozen, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, wet, A-6, fill LOAM, gray, wet, A-6, til Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.1 2.5 7.5 10.0 B-28 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.531840 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.887817 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 11.3 8 26 22 23 22 6.5" Bituminous pavement 12.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray to brown, frozen to 3' then wet, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.5 1.6 5.0 10.0 B-29 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trappers Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.530520 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889881 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 23 19 20 18 3.5" Bituminous pavement 10.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray, frozen to moist, A-6, fill LOAM, gray, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.2 5.0 10.0 B-30 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trap Line Circle Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.530556 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889337 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 20 20 19 21 4" Bituminous pavement 8" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, gray, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown to gray, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.0 2.5 10.0 B-31 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trap Line Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.532104 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889996 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 24.9 9 29 21 19 19 5.5" Bituminous pavement 10" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little loamy sand, dark gray, a little brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.5 1.3 2.5 10.0 B-32 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trappers Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.531231 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889372 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 24 19 25 21 4" Bituminous pavement 13" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, frozen to 2' then moist, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, moist to wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 2.5 10.0 B-33 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Trappers Pass Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/5/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.531906 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888674 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 8 17 17 17 16 4" Bituminous pavement 10" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.2 2.5 10.0 B-34 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.532861 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.887922 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 11 17 15 15 3.75" Bituminous pavement 9.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) MIXTURE OF LOAMY SAND AND PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen, A-2-4, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.1 2.5 10.0 B-35 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.535878 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.887878 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 11 11 11 13 3.5" Bituminous pavement 13" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen to 3' then moist, A-2-4, fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 10.0 B-36 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.536828 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889295 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 6 19 18 20 18 3.5" Bituminous pavement 11.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, a little gray, frozen to moist, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.3 5.0 10.0 B-37 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Summit Circle Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.535749 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888964 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 23.6 7 19 18 17 17 3.75" Bituminous pavement 12.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) MIXTURE OF PLASTIC SANDY LOAM AND LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, frozen to 3.5' to moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 2.5 10.0 B-38 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.534816 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.889609 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 7 12 8 24 20 3.75" Bituminous pavement 15.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) MIXTURE OF LOAMY SAND AND PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, frozen, A-2-6, fill GRAVELLY LOAMY SAND, brown, frozen to 3.5' to moist, A-1-b, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little loamy sand, brown, wet, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, brown, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.5 2.5 6.5 7.5 10.0 B-39 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Oxbow Bend Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 2/6/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.534166 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.888068 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 24.7 5 22 17 23 23 3.5" Bituminous pavement 13.75" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) SILTY CLAY LOAM, dark brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, brown, dark brown and gray, damp, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little gray, wet, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, a little light grayish brown, wet, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 B-40 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Hidden Court Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.526785 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.858599 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 5 16 16 15 18 3.5" Bituminous pavement 13" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill MIXTURE OF PLASTIC SANDY LOAM AND LOAM, brown, damp, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, damp, A-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.4 2.5 5.0 10.0 B-41 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Hidden Court Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.526645 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.856879 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 19.2 5 16 17 21 20 3.5" Bituminous pavement 12" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 17" then moist, brown, A-6, fill LOAM, brown, a little dark brown, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.3 5.0 10.0 B-42 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Hidden Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.528034 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.857681 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 8 21 21 19 20 5" Bituminous pavement 8" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, fill LOAM, a little gravel, brown, moist, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.1 2.5 10.0 B-43 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Marsh Drive Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.530114 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.857335 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 4 20 19 20 20 3.75" Bituminous pavement 10.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 2.5' then damp, A-6, till or fill LOAM, grayish brown, a little dark brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.2 7.5 10.0 B-44 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Marsh Drive Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.529205 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.856223 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 19.1 6 27 22 27 22 4.75" Bituminous pavement 8.25" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) SILTY CLAY LOAM, brown, frozen, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown to grayish brown, a little dark brown, wet, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till LOAM, grayish brown, a little dark brown, wet, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.1 2.5 7.5 10.0 B-45 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Sinnen Circle Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.529100 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.855300 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 4 18 20 21 22 3.5" Bituminous pavement 9.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 2.5' then moist, A-6, till or fill LOAM, grayish brown to brown, a little dark brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.3 1.1 5.0 10.0 B-46 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Marsh Drive Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.527817 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.854899 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 20 21 22 22 4.5" Bituminous pavement 11.5" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, brown, frozen to 2.5' then moist, A-6, till or fill LOAM, brown, a little dark brown, moist, laminations of silt loam, A-6, till Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.3 7.5 10.0 B-47 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Dakota Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.528646 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.854445 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code 4 20 19 17 26 4.25" Bituminous pavement 12" CRUSHED LIMESTONE BASE, light brown, frozen, A-1-b, fill (possible aggregate base) LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, brown, gray and dark brown, frozen to 2.5' then damp, A-6, fill PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, gray, wet, A-2-6, till or fill Bottom of Hole - 10' Groundwater not observed while drilling. 0.4 1.4 7.5 10.0 B-48 2020 Pavement Improvements Ground Elevation (Surveyed)Dakota Lane Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. CP20-05 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Drill Machine 1 1/30/20(ft.) Location Hammer SHEET 1 of 1 CME Automatic Calibrated Completed Drilling Longitude (West)=-93.526550 Co. Coordinate: X= Y= , , ft. LT Latitude (North)=44.854800 UNIQUE NUMBER Depth COH Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 2/26/20 Breaks Or Remarks Elev. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. - Mn/DOT TEMPLATE SUBSURFACE BORING LOG (%)(ft) (pcf)N SPT Lithology(%) U.S. Customary Units Other Tests 5 10 X:\01-GEO\01-GEO FOLDERS\GINTW\1 GINT PROJECTS\28-20267 MNDOT.GPJRockDEPTH(psf) MC (%) Classification or Member 60 FormationREC ACL SoilDrillingOperationRQD Core Index Sheet Code % Passing No. 200 = 16.7 Particle Size Distribution 65No.4 (4.75mm)49No.10 (2.0mm)39No.20 (850µm) 853/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)92½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 18.2No.200 (75µm) 33No.40 (425µm)24No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S1Sample ID 2/3/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Lake Lucy Rd.General Location Depth: 4.5" - 15"Location B-2Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S1Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S1 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 55No.4 (4.75mm)43No.10 (2.0mm)37No.20 (850µm) 693/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)82½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 19.9No.200 (75µm) 32No.40 (425µm)24No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S2Sample ID 2/3/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Nez Perce Dr.General Location Depth: 6" - 15.5"Location B-5Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S2Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S2 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 47No.4 (4.75mm)32No.10 (2.0mm)24No.20 (850µm) 803/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)90½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 9.9No.200 (75µm) 19No.40 (425µm)13No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-aMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S3Sample ID 1/31/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Redwing Ln.General Location Depth: 3.75" - 16.75"Location B-8Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S3Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S3 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 63No.4 (4.75mm)44No.10 (2.0mm)35No.20 (850µm) 903/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)97½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 14.7No.200 (75µm) 28No.40 (425µm)19No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-aMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S4Sample ID 1/31/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Penamint Ct.General Location Depth: 4.5" - 18.5"Location B-10Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S4Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S4 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 59No.4 (4.75mm)43No.10 (2.0mm)34No.20 (850µm) 793/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)89½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 12.8No.200 (75µm) 27No.40 (425µm)17No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-aMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S5Sample ID 2/4/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Near Mountain Blvd.General Location Depth: 4" - 19.5"Location B-11Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S5Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S5 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 62No.4 (4.75mm)46No.10 (2.0mm)38No.20 (850µm) 823/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)87½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 19.9No.200 (75µm) 33No.40 (425µm)24No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S6Sample ID 2/4/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Cascade PassGeneral Location Depth: 4.5" - 14"Location B-15Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S6Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S6 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 64No.4 (4.75mm)47No.10 (2.0mm)37No.20 (850µm) 813/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)91½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 17.1No.200 (75µm) 31No.40 (425µm)22No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S7Sample ID 2/5/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Near Mountain Blvd.General Location Depth: 4.5" - 17.5"Location B-22Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S7Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S7 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 77No.4 (4.75mm)59No.10 (2.0mm)48No.20 (850µm) 923/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)99½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 23.4No.200 (75µm) 42No.40 (425µm)30No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S8Sample ID 2/5/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Oxbow BendGeneral Location Depth: 4" - 12"Location B-25Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S8Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S8 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 48No.4 (4.75mm)36No.10 (2.0mm)29No.20 (850µm) 753/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)88½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 11.3No.200 (75µm) 24No.40 (425µm)16No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-aMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S9Sample ID 2/5/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Oxbow BendGeneral Location Depth: 4" - 13"Location B-28Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S9Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S9 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 76No.4 (4.75mm)59No.10 (2.0mm)49No.20 (850µm) 953/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)98½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 24.9No.200 (75µm) 43No.40 (425µm)31No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S10Sample ID 2/5/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Trap Line Ln.General Location Depth: 4" - 12"Location B-31Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S10Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S10 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 75No.4 (4.75mm)58No.10 (2.0mm)47No.20 (850µm) 933/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)96½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 23.6No.200 (75µm) 40No.40 (425µm)30No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S11Sample ID 2/6/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Summit Cir.General Location Depth: 4" - 15"Location B-37Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S11Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S11 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 69No.4 (4.75mm)54No.10 (2.0mm)44No.20 (850µm) 863/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)91½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 24.7No.200 (75µm) 39No.40 (425µm)31No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S12Sample ID 2/6/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Oxbow BendGeneral Location Depth: 3.5" - 18.5"Location B-39Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S12Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S12 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 65No.4 (4.75mm)47No.10 (2.0mm)37No.20 (850µm) 883/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)95½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 19.2No.200 (75µm) 31No.40 (425µm)24No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S13Sample ID 1/30/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Hidden Ct.General Location Depth: 3" - 16.5"Location B-41Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S13Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S13 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 66No.4 (4.75mm)50No.10 (2.0mm)41No.20 (850µm) 923/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)98½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 19.1No.200 (75µm) 35No.40 (425µm)25No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S14Sample ID 1/30/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Marsh Dr.General Location Depth: 4" - 14"Location B-44Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S14Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S14 N/AComments Particle Size Distribution 58No.4 (4.75mm)43No.10 (2.0mm)36No.20 (850µm) 823/8in (9.5mm) 100¾in (19.0mm)95½in (12.5mm) % PassingSieve Size Method:AASHTO T 27, AASHTO T 11 Limits 16.7No.200 (75µm) 31No.40 (425µm)22No.100 (150µm) Date Tested:2/13/2020 On-siteSourceGravelly slightly plastic sandy loam (crushed limestone); A-1-bMaterial Sample Details 20-01734-S15Sample ID 1/30/2020Date Sampled GradationSpecificationSampled By American Engineering TestingSampling Method Dakota Ln.General Location Depth: 4.5" - 16.25"Location B-48Field Sample ID 2/11/2020Date Submitted ResultOther Test Results MethodDescription Limits Tested By:Vincent Lubbers American Engineering Testing, Inc.St. Paul Albertville550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301(651) 659-9001 (763) 428-5573Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 www.amengtest.comReport No: MAT:20-01734-S15Issue No: 1 Project:2020 Pavement Improvements; CP 20-05 Client:This document shall not bereproduced, except in full,without written approvalfrom American EngineeringTesting, Inc. Reviewed By: 2/14/2020Date of Issue: CC: Krystle Staker CHANHASSEN, CITY OF Chanhassen MNJob No:28-20267 Material Test Report Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:20-01734-S15 N/AComments Segment ID Area Road Start End Average Bituminous Thickness (in.) Average Base Thickness (in.) Average Bituminous Core Thickness (in.) Average Base Thickness (in.)Base Material Subgrade Material Longitudinal Transverse Fatigue Cracking Block Cracking Delamination Weathering Skin Patches Fog Seal Patches Crack Sealant Recommended Rehabilitation Method GE Approximate Length (ft.) 1 Lake Lucy Rd Powers Blvd Nez Perce Dr 3.9 11.4 3.7 10.75 Crushed Limestone Base A-6, A-2-4 high medium X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 1390 2 Nez Perce Dr Lake Lucy Rd End 4.9 12 5.2 10.75 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 1270 3 Vineland Ct Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 5.1 11 4.4 12 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 475 4 Troendle Cir Nez Perce Dr Cul-de-sac 4.3 10.2 4 11 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 500 5 Red Wing Lane Carver Beach Rd Kerber Blvd 4.5 10.7 4.6 9.5 Mixture of Crushed Limestone Base and Silty Sand A-6 high high X X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 1300 6 Penamint Ln Carver Beach Rd Red Wing Lane 4.6 7.9 4.3 6 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X 8" FDR, 4" Bit 13 730 7 Penamint Ct Penamint Ln Cul-de-sac 4.5 12.3 4.4 14 Mixture of Crushed Limestone Base and Silty Sand A-6 low high X X X X X 2.5" M&O 560 8 Near Mountain Blvd Pleasantview Rd ~500' N of Trappers Pass 4.8 10.6 4.9 13 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 medium to high medium X X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 1960 9 Castle Ridge Near Mountain Blvd Vine Hill Rd 4.2 10.2 4.3 12 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high low to medium X X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 1420 10 Cascade Pass Castle Ridge S Castle Ridge N 4.3 9.1 4.1 8.8 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high low X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 1280 11 Cascade Ct Cascade Pass Cul-de-sac 4.7 10.1 4.3 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**medium medium X X X X X X 2" M&O 190 12 Cascade Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.7 13.2 5.6 19.75 Crushed Limestone Base A-2-4, A-6 medium medium X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 420 13 Shasta Cir E Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.3 9.4 4.6 8.5 Crushed Limestone Base A-2-4 high high X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 260 14 Shasta Cir W Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.8 9.7 4.75 15 Crushed Limestone Base A-2-6, A-6 high high X X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 240 15 Olympic Cir Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 4.8 5.3 5.7 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**high high X X X X X 8" FDR, 4" Bit 240 16 Castle Ridge Ct Castle Ridge S Cul-de-sac 5.2 9.2 4.7 9.5 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high medium X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 680 17 Mountain Way Near Mountain Blvd Oxbow Bend 4.3 9.8 3.9 8.5 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 800 18 Mountain View Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 4.9 8.6 5.4 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**low high X X X X X X 2.5" M&O 200 19 Oxbow Bend Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend 4.0 9.7 4.1 10.7 Crushed Limestone Base A-2-4, A-2-6, A-1-b, A-6 high high X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 4390 20 Rojina Ln Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac 4.3 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**2" M&O 115 21 Summit Cir Oxbow Bend Cul-de-sac 4.7 11 4.2 11 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 625 22 Trappers Pass Oxbow Bend (S)Near Mountain Blvd 4.9 9.9 4.3 14.2 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 625 23 Piedmont Ct Near Mountain Blvd Cul-de-sac 5.0 9.0 3.4 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**medium X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 150 24 Stag Horn Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 4.6 8.3 5.5 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**high high X X X X X 2" M&O 170 25 Trap Line Cir Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 4.5 9.1 4.25 10 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 375 26 Trap Line Ln Trappers Pass Cul-de-sac 5.0 9.2 5.2 8 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X 10" FDR, 4" Bit 15 550 27 Hidden Ct Lake Dr E Cul-de-sac 4.4 10.7 3.7 13.5 Crushed Limestone Base, Mixture of Crushed Limestone Base and Silty Sand A-6 high high X X X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 1125 28 Hidden Ln Marsh Dr Hidden Ct 4.3 10.2 3.7 11 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 high high X X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 950 29 Hidden Cir Hidden Ln Cul-de-sac 4.7 *3.9 12**Class 5 Gravel (Modified) 100% Crushed**high X X X X X X 2" M&O 260 30 Marsh Drive Lake Dr E Dakota Ln 4.1 10.7 3.9 9.3 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 low high X X X X X X X 12" FDR, 4" Bit 17 1350 31 Sinnen Cir Marsh Dr Cul-de-sac 4.6 10.8 4.8 9 Crushed Limestone Base A-6 low high X X X X X X 2.5" M&O 300 32 Dakota Ln Erie Cir Cul-de-sac 4.2 10.7 3.5 11.75 Crushed Limestone Base A-6, A-2-6 high high X X X X X X X 12" FDR†, 4" Bit 17 1300 *A layer of aggregate base was not discernable in the GPR scan **Soil borings were not performed at these locations. Thickness and material type references the standard City pavement section constructed. See GPR data measurements for additional details. †Review GPR, there are areas that base is thinner and the reclaim depth may need to be adjusted. Maintenance Lake Lucy Road Red Wing Lane Trappers Pass Marsh Drive GPR Results Pavement Coring/Soil Boring Results Surface Condition Notes GPR not collected due to snow coverage Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Pavement Evaluation 2020 Pavement Improvements; Chanhassen, MN AMERICAN March 11, 2020 ENGINEERING Report No. 28-20267 TESTING, INC. Appendix D Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Appendix D Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Report No. 28-20267 Appendix D - Page 1 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. D.1 REFERENCE This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks relating to subsurface problems which are caused by construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. This information was developed and provided by ASFE1, of which, we are a member firm. D.2 RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION D.2.1 Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the Client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one, not even you, should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. D.2.2 Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. D.2.3 A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typically factors include: Clients goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was:  not prepared for you,  not prepared for your project,  not prepared for the specific site explored, or  completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect:  the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse,  elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure,  composition of the design team, or  project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes, even minor ones, and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. D.2.4 Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. 1 ASFE, 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733: www.asfe.org Appendix D Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Report No. 28-20267 Appendix D – Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC D.2.5 Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identified subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. D.2.6 A Report’s Recommendations Are Not Final Do not over rely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. D.2.7 A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members’ misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team’s plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. D.2.8 Do Not Redraw the Engineer’s Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognizes that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. D.2.9 Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In the letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. D.2.10 Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some owners, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their report. Sometimes labeled “limitations” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. D.2.11 Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenvironmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Award Consultant Contract for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design and Construction Administration Services Project Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.5. Prepared By Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator File No: SWMP 18D PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves entering into a consultant contract with WSB for a not­to­exceed amount of $55,858 for design and construction administration services for the 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance and Construction Project.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. DISCUSSION The City of Chanhassen has approximately 250 publicly maintained stormwater ponds that are used for treatment and storage.Each year, the City is required to inventory and maintain a certain number of these ponds per our MS4 permit requirements. Staff prepared a Stormwater Pond Maintenance Plan and presented this to Council in the fall of 2020 which prioritized the ponds that should be addressed.  The Council, through the Utility Rate Study and 2021 CIP, increased the annual budget for stormwater pond cleanouts.  As such, the City is in need of design and construction administration services for our 2021 pond maintenance program. In order to deliver these projects, the City put together a Request for Proposal (RFP) which included four main tasks: Task 1 ­ Preparation of Pond Feasibility Memorandums Task 2 ­ Preliminary Design, Final Design, and Permitting Task 3 ­ Bidding Task 4 ­ Construction Administration The City would like to perform maintenance on as many ponds as budget allows.  The budget for 2021 is $650,000.  This is full project costs, not just construction costs. Upon preparing the Pond Feasibility Memorandums for each pond listed in the RFP, it will be determined which, if not all, of the ponds can be cleaned out within the available budget. Staff sent an RFP to four qualified firms. All four returned responsive proposals. A scoring matrix was created to evaluate each proposal, based on Completeness of Proposal, Firm and Key Personnel, Resources, Schedule, and Fee. The resulting scoring (0­10), along with total fee is shown below. The overall scoring matrix is also attached to the staff report. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, January 11, 2021SubjectAward Consultant Contract for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design and ConstructionAdministration Services ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.5.Prepared By Matt Unmacht, Water ResourcesCoordinator File No: SWMP 18DPROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves entering into a consultant contract with WSB for a not­to­exceed amount of $55,858for design and construction administration services for the 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance and ConstructionProject.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.DISCUSSIONThe City of Chanhassen has approximately 250 publicly maintained stormwater ponds that are used for treatment andstorage.Each year, the City is required to inventory and maintain a certain number of these ponds per our MS4permit requirements. Staff prepared a Stormwater Pond Maintenance Plan and presented this to Council in the fall of2020 which prioritized the ponds that should be addressed.  The Council, through the Utility Rate Study and 2021CIP, increased the annual budget for stormwater pond cleanouts.  As such, the City is in need of design andconstruction administration services for our 2021 pond maintenance program.In order to deliver these projects, the City put together a Request for Proposal (RFP) which included four main tasks:Task 1 ­ Preparation of Pond Feasibility MemorandumsTask 2 ­ Preliminary Design, Final Design, and PermittingTask 3 ­ BiddingTask 4 ­ Construction AdministrationThe City would like to perform maintenance on as many ponds as budget allows.  The budget for 2021 is $650,000. This is full project costs, not just construction costs. Upon preparing the Pond Feasibility Memorandums for eachpond listed in the RFP, it will be determined which, if not all, of the ponds can be cleaned out within the availablebudget.Staff sent an RFP to four qualified firms. All four returned responsive proposals. A scoring matrix was created toevaluate each proposal, based on Completeness of Proposal, Firm and Key Personnel, Resources, Schedule, and Fee. The resulting scoring (0­10), along with total fee is shown below. The overall scoring matrix is also attached to the staff report. Firm Score Fee EOR 6.3 $123,218 HTPO 7.3 $83,195 Stantec 6.8 $103,500 WSB 9.4 $55,858 WSB had the highest score and lowest fee.  They have successfully performed work for the City many times.  This contract is for the engineering design and construction services for the entire project, from feasibility through construction administration. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding the contract to WSB for an amount not­to­exceed $55,858. ATTACHMENTS: Firm Evaluation Agreement 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design Services Firm Completeness of proposal Firm and Key Personnel Resources Schedule Overall Score 10%15%15%10%100% (1-10)(1-10)(1-10)(1-10)(10 pts max) EOR 8.5 8.0 10.0 4.5 123,218$ 4.5 6.3 HTPO 9.5 7.5 7.5 7.0 83,195$ 6.7 7.3 Stantec 7.5 8.5 10.0 6.0 103,500$ 5.4 6.8 WSB 10.0 7.0 9.5 9.0 55,858$ 10.0 9.4 Fee 50% (1-10) 1 201749v1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 11th day of January, 2021, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and WSB, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Consultant"). IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. The City retains Consultant for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design and Construction Administration Services. 2. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The following documents shall be referred to as the "Contract Documents," all of which shall be taken together as a whole as the contract between the parties as if they were set verbatim and in full herein: A. This Professional Services Agreement; B. Request for proposals – email dated December 10, 2020; C. Insurance Certificate; D. Consultant’s December 21, 2020 proposal for 2021 Stormwater Pond Maintenance Design and Construction Admin Services (“Proposal”). In the event of conflict among the provisions of the Contract Documents, the order in which they are listed above shall control in resolving any such conflicts, with Contract Document “A” having the first priority and Contract Document “D” having the last priority. 3. COMPENSATION. Consultant shall be paid by the City for the services described in the Proposal a not to exceed fee of Fifty Five Thousand-Eight Hundred and Fifty-Eight Dollars ($55,858.00), inclusive of expenses. Services performed directly by Consultant shall be paid at an hourly rate in accordance with the Proposal, subject to the not to exceed fee. The not to exceed fees and expenses shall not be adjusted if the estimated hours to perform a task, the number of required meetings, or any other estimate or assumption is exceeded. Consultant shall bill the City as the work progresses. Payment shall be made by the City within thirty-five (35) days of receipt of an invoice. 4. DOCUMENT OWNERSHIP. All reports, plans, models, diagrams, analyses, and information generated in connection with performance of this Agreement shall be the property of the City. The City may use the information for its purposes. 2 201749v1 5. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders, regardless of amount, must be approved in advance and in writing by the City. No payment will be due or made for work done in advance of such approval. 6. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS. In providing services hereunder, Consultant shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provisions of services to be provided. 7. STANDARD OF CARE. Consultant shall exercise the same degree of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of the services as is ordinarily possessed and exercised by a professional consultant under similar circumstances. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is included in this Agreement. City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies in the accuracy of Consultant’s services. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees, of and from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, including costs and attorney's fees, arising out of or by reason of the execution or performance of the services provided for herein and further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder. 9. INSURANCE. Consultant shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect Consultant from claims under the Worker’s Compensation Acts, automobile liability, and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the performance of services under this Agreement. Such insurance shall be written for amounts not less than: Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 each occurrence/aggregate Automobile Liability $2,000,000 combined single limit Professional Liability $2,000,000 each occurrence/aggregate The City shall be named as an additional insured on the general liability policy on a primary and non- contributory basis. Before commencing work, the Consultant shall provide the City a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance coverage in a form acceptable to City. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The City hereby retains Consultant as an independent contractor upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant is not an employee of the City and is free to contract with other entities as provided herein. Consultant shall be responsible for selecting the means and methods of performing the work. Consultant shall furnish any and all supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary for Consultant’s performance under this Agreement. City and Consultant agree that Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant's agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Consultant shall be exclusively responsible under this Agreement for Consultant’s own FICA payments, workers compensation payments, unemployment compensation payments, 3 201749v1 withholding amounts, and/or self-employment taxes if any such payments, amounts, or taxes are required to be paid by law or regulation. 11. SUBCONTRACTORS. Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided under this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. Consultant shall comply with Minnesota Statutes § 471.425. Consultant must pay subcontractors for all undisputed services provided by subcontractors within ten (10) days of Consultant’s receipt of payment from City. Consultant must pay interest of one and five-tenths percent (1.5%) per month or any part of a month to subcontractors on any undisputed amount not paid on time to subcontractors. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) or more is Ten Dollars ($10.00). 12. CONTROLLING LAW/VENUE. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event of litigation, the exclusive venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Carver County Minnesota. 13. MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT. Consultant must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity. In the event Consultant receives a request to release data, Consultant must immediately notify City. City will give Consultant instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold City, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from Consultant’s officers’, agents’, city’s, partners’, employees’, volunteers’, assignees’ or subcontractors’ unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. 14. COPYRIGHT. Consultant shall defend actions or claims charging infringement of any copyright or software license by reason of the use or adoption of any software, designs, drawings or specifications supplied by it, and it shall hold harmless the City from loss or damage resulting therefrom. 15. PATENTED DEVICES, MATERIALS AND PROCESSES. If the Contract requires, or the Consultant desires, the use of any design, devise, material or process covered by letters, patent or copyright, trademark or trade name, the Consultant shall provide for such use by suitable legal agreement with the patentee or owner and a copy of said agreement shall be filed with the City. If no such agreement is made or filed as noted, the Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all claims for infringement by reason of the use of any such patented designed, device, material or process, or any trademark or trade name or copyright in connection with the services agreed to be performed under the Contract, and shall indemnify and 4 201749v1 defend the City for any costs, liability, expenses and attorney's fees that result from any such infringement. 16. RECORDS. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records of hours worked and expenses involved in the performance of services. 17. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, or any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 18. WAIVER. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 20. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated by the City for any reason or for convenience upon written notice to the Consultant. In the event of termination, the City shall be obligated to the Consultant for payment of amounts due and owing including payment for services performed or furnished to the date and time of termination. Dated: _______________, 20__. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: _____________________________________________ Elise Ryan, Mayor BY: _____________________________________________ Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Dated: _______________, 20__. _______________________ BY: _____________________________________________ Its CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Approve Partial Release of Development Contract for Chanhassen West Business Park Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: F.6. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2005­23 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the partial release from the Development Contract for Lot 1, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY The property owner has requested that the property be released from the Development Contract for Lot 1, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park. BACKGROUND The City of Chanhassen and Volk­Minger Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, entered into a Development Contract for Chanhassen West Business Park dated October 10, 2005, recorded October 13, 2005 as Carver County Document No. A426223; was amended by Addendum “A” to the Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract dated November 16, 2005, recorded November 28, 2005 as Carver County Document No. A429887; and also amended by Addendum “B” to the Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract dated August 14, 2006, recorded September 13, 2006 as Carver County Document No. A449656. DISCUSSION All requirements of the Development Contract have been met as to the property and there is no longer a need to have the Development Contract recorded against the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the partial release from the Development Contract for Lot 1, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park. ATTACHMENTS: Partial Release of Development Contract 1 213160v1 (reserved for recording information) PARTIAL RELEASE OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT PARTIAL RELEASE OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT granted this _____ day of __________________, 2021, by the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”). WHEREAS, the City and VOLK-MINGER PROPERTIES, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, have entered into a Development Contract for Chanhassen West Business Park dated October 10, 2005, recorded October 13, 2005 as Carver County Document No. A426223; amended by Addendum “A” to Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract dated November 16, 2005, recorded November 28, 2005 as Carver County Document No. A429887; and amended by Addendum “B” to Chanhassen West Business Park Development Contract dated August 14, 2006, recorded September 13, 2006 as Carver County Document No. A449656 (collectively “Development Contracts”); and WHEREAS, the City has been requested to release and discharge the property legally described on Exhibit “A” (“Propert y”) from the Development Contracts; WHEREAS, all requirements of the Development Contracts have been met as to the Property and there is no longer a need to have the Development Contracts recorded against the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota: The Property is hereby released and discharged from the Development Contracts. 2 213160v1 ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________, 2021. CITY OF CHANHASSEN By: _____________________________________ Elise Ryan , Mayor (SEAL) And_____________________________________ Heather Johnston, Interim City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ____________, 2021, by Elise Ryan and Heather Johnston, respectively the Mayor and the Interim City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ___________________________________ Notary Public DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, #290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 AMP 3 213160v1 EXHIBIT “A” TO PARTIAL RELEASE OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT That part of the East Half (E 1/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE l/4), Section 16, Township 116, Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 915.41 feet, westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 feet, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. ALSO That part of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of the County State Aid No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Said property being subject to easements for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and County State Aid Highway 18, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. Excepting from the first parcel described above the following: All that part of the South 150.00 feet of the north 1065.41 feet of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway 19, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Appoint City Council Member ­ Oath of Office Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: H.1. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No:  SUMMARY The City Council interviewed eight applicants for the City Council position vacated by Council Member Julia Coleman: Mark von Oven Susan Kibler Bala Chintaginjala Jerry McDonald Scot Lacek Ryan Soller Wilma Ruppert Cheryl Ayotte The Council will make an appointment based on the applications and interviews conducted on January 7 and 11, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Oath of Office CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Approve a Request for a Rezoning and a Four­Lot Subdivision (Deer Haven) with Variances Located at 6480 Yosemite Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: H.2. Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case #2020­22 PROPOSED MOTION Chanhassen City Council approves: The Zoning Ordinance rezoning the property from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single­Family Residential (RSF), and The preliminary plat to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide direct access to the four lots and a variance to use the 33­foot right­of­way and 24­foot street section subject to the Conditions of Approval in the staff report, And Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. SUMMARY A request for the rezoning of property from Rural Residential (RR) to Single­Family Residential (RSF) and subdivision of 2.8 acres into four single­family lots and one outlot with variances for public right­of­way width, local street width, and the use of a private street. BACKGROUND The property is not part of any recorded subdivision, Registered Land Survey or other approved plat. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 1, 2020 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 5 for and 1 against with one member recusing himself from the review and discussion on a motion recommending approval of the rezoning and subdivision with variances for a private street and a reduced public street. The verbatim minutes for the December 1, 2020 Planning Commission meeting are attached in the Consent agenda of this packet. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, January 11, 2021SubjectApprove a Request for a Rezoning and a Four­Lot Subdivision (Deer Haven) with VariancesLocated at 6480 YosemiteSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: H.2.Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case #2020­22PROPOSED MOTIONChanhassen City Council approves:The Zoning Ordinance rezoning the property from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single­Family Residential(RSF), andThe preliminary plat to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide directaccess to the four lots and a variance to use the 33­foot right­of­way and 24­foot street section subject to theConditions of Approval in the staff report,AndAdoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYA request for the rezoning of property from Rural Residential (RR) to Single­Family Residential (RSF) and subdivisionof 2.8 acres into four single­family lots and one outlot with variances for public right­of­way width, local street width,and the use of a private street.BACKGROUNDThe property is not part of any recorded subdivision, Registered Land Survey or other approved plat.DISCUSSIONThe Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 1, 2020 to review the proposed development. ThePlanning Commission voted 5 for and 1 against with one member recusing himself from the review and discussion on amotion recommending approval of the rezoning and subdivision with variances for a private street and a reduced public street. The verbatim minutes for the December 1, 2020 Planning Commission meeting are attached in the Consent agenda of this packet. The one vote against the project was due to concern about a smaller street servicing the homes and whether there was a need for a full­sized public street to provide access to additional properties. There are no other properties that would access the private street. The private street will provide an acceptable turnaround for a fire vehicle or even garbage trucks servicing the properties. The use of a public street would only increase the amount of impervious surface and widen the grading limits, but would provide little utility for the city. Finally, the transition from a 24­foot street to a 31­foot street segment would not make sense from a practical standpoint. A neighbor reached out with inquiries regarding how stormwater would be dealt with in association with the proposed Deer Haven subdivision. The neighbor had concerns that this would result in more stormwater being routed to the existing wetland to the north. Staff informed the neighbor that in order for the subdivision to meet city ordinances and requirements of the Watershed District, there would have to be no net increase in volume or rate from proposed conditions to the pre­existing conditions. As currently proposed, all preliminary modeling and reporting showed that meeting these requirements were attainable for the site and the approaches proposed were feasible. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single­Family Residential (RSF), and Subdivision approval with a Variance to create four lots and one outlot subject to the Conditions of Approval of the staff report, and adoption of the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Finding of Fact and Recommendation ­ Signed Rezoning Ordinance Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Staff Report Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Findings of Fact & Development Review Application Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Preliminary Plat and Plan Sheets: Cover, Existing Conditions, Demo Plan, Site Plan, Grading & Drainge, SWPPP(1) Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Plan Sheets: SWPPP(2), Utility Plan, Civil Details Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Plan Sheets: Tree Canopy Plan, Landscape Plan, Landscape Details Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments from December 1, 2020 ­ Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COLTNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE' Application of Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld - Planning Case No .2020-22' Deer Haven Addition. Request for Rezoning from Rual Residential District, RR, to Single-Family Residential Disnict, RSF, Subdivision Approval creating four lots and one outlot with a Variance for a public street cross section and right-of-way width, and a Variance for the use ofa private street located at 6480 Yosemite. On December 1,2020, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld for a single-family residential development. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT l The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District, RR' 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential - Low Density uses. 3. The legal description ofthe property is: 4, REZONING FINDINGS The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects ofthe proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: 1 That part ofthe Southeast Quarter ofthe Northeast Quarter ofSection 3, Township I 16, Range 23, Carver Counry, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast comer ofsaid Southeast Quarter ofthe Northeast Quarter; thence Southerly along the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to a point 660 feet North of the Southeast comer ofsaid Southeast Quarter ofthe Northeast Quarter; thence Westerly parallel with the South line Southeast Quarter ofthe Northeast Quarter a distance of 281.07 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distance 198.0 feet Westerly from the point ofbeginning; thence Easterly along said No(h line 198.0 feet to the point ofbeginning, except the North 50.0 feet thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. Records of Carver County, Minnesota. a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. c d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. ST'BDIVISIONFI}{DINGS e. The proposed subdivision will not cause sigrificant environmental damage subject to compliance with conditions of approval; f. The proposed zubdivision will not conllict with easements of record, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements; g. The proposed subdivision is not prematue. A suMivision is premature if any of the following exists: l) tack of adequate stormwater drainage. 2) tack of adequate roads. 3) tack ofadequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) [,ack of adequate oflsite public improvements or support systems. 2 e a. The proposed suMivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance and meets all ofthe requirements of the "RSF" Single-Family Residential District; b. The proposed suMivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the City's Comprehensive Plan; c. The physical characteristics ofthe site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed suMivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, sreets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the subdivision ordinance; 6. VARIANCE FINDINGS WITH A SUBDIVISION a. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience by providing reasonable access to four properties while reducing potential impacts to the natural features on the site and within existing ofF site right-of-way; b. The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions ofthe land including trees; a public street is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties within the development and the existing right-of-way and sunounding development preclude additional public right-of-way out to Yosemite; c. The condition or conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property hcause ofthe previously stated conditions of the property; d. The granting ofa variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent ofsubdivision regulations, the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan since it will reduce potentially sigrrificant impacts on the site and within the neighborhood. 7. The planning rcport #2020-22 dated December l, 2020, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed Preliminary Plat approval for four lots and one outlot, variances for public street cross-section and right-of-way with a Variance for the use ofa private street for a single-family detached subdivision subject to the conditions ofthe staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this l't day of December,2l2}. CHANHASS PLANNING o SSION BY: Steven Weick,rrnan g:\plEr\2020 pl8ming 6€s\2G22 6480 yosetnfte avoue (d€e. havefl) sub\fndings of fel & r.co.nrnerddioi docx 3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single-Family Residential District (RSF), for property within the Deer Haven residential development, with the following legal description: Lots 1 through 4, Block 1, and Outlot A, Deer Haven Addition, Carver County, Minnesota. Section 2. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2021, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ______________________________) PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday,December 1,2020 Subject Consider a Request for the Rezoning of Property and Subdivision of a Four-Lot Subdivision Deer Haven)with Variances Located at 6480 Yosemite Avenue Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:C.2. Prepared By Bob Generous,Senior Planner File No:Planning Case 2020-22 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning from Rural Residential District RR) to Single-Family Residential RSF),and Subdivision approval to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide direct access to the four lots and a variance to use the 33-foot right-of-way and 24-foot street section subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report And Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting the rezoning of property from Rural Residential RR)to Single-Family Residential RSF) and subdivision of 2.8 acres into four single-family lots and one outlot with variances for public right-of-way width, local street width,and the use of a private street. APPLICANT Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Excelsior,MN 55331 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:Rural Residential District,RR LAND USE:Residential Low Density ACREAGE:2.8 acres DENSITY:1.43 dwelling units per net acre APPLICATION REGULATIONS PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,December 1,2020SubjectConsideraRequest for the Rezoning of Property and Subdivision of a Four-Lot Subdivision(Deer Haven)with Variances Located at 6480 YosemiteAvenueSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:C.2.Prepared By Bob Generous,Senior Planner File No:Planning Case 2020-22PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning from Rural Residential District RR)to Single-Family Residential RSF),and Subdivision approval to create four lots and one outlot with a variancefortheuseofaprivatestreettoprovidedirectaccesstothefourlotsandavariancetousethe33-foot right-of-wayand24-foot street section subject to the conditions of approval in the staffreportAndAdoptionoftheFindingsofFactandRecommendation.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingthe rezoning of property from Rural Residential RR)to Single-Family Residential RSF)and subdivision of 2.8 acres into four single-family lots and one outlot with variances for public right-of-way width,local street width,and the use of a private street.APPLICANTKennethAshfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Excelsior,MN55331SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:Rural Residential District,RRLANDUSE:Residential LowDensityACREAGE:2.8 acresDENSITY:1.43 dwelling units per net acre APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 18,Subdivisions Chapter 20,Article II,Division 2.Amendments Chapter 20,Article XII,RSF Single-Family Residential District BACKGROUND The house was built in 2003.The property is not part of any recorded subdivision,Registered Land Survey or other approved plat. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the rezoning from Rural Residential District RR)to Single- Family Residential RSF),and Subdivision approval with a Variance to create four lots and one outlot subject to the conditions of approval in the attached)staff report,and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Application Preliminary Plat Full Plan Set Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: December 1, 2020 CC DATE: January 11, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 13, 2021 CASE #: PC 2020-22 BY: RG, EH, JR, JS, MU SUMMARY OF REQUEST: A request for the rezoning of property from Rural Residential (RR) to Single-Family Residential RSF) and subdivision of 2.8 acres into four single-family lots and one outlot with variances for public right-of-way width, local street width and the use of a private street. LOCATION: Southeast of the cul-de-sac for Wood Duck Lane and west of Yosemite Avenue 6480 Yosemite Avenue). APPLICANT: Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Excelsior, MN 55331 PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential, RR 2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density, net density 1.2 – 4.0 units per acre ACREAGE: 2.8 acres DENSITY: Net units per acre LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving Rezonings because the city is acting in its legislative or policy-making capacity. A rezoning must be consistent with the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The city’s discretion in approving or denying a Preliminary Plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi-judicial decision. PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single Family Residential (RSF), and Subdivision approval to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide direct access to the four lots and a variance to use the 33-foot right-of-way and 24-foot street section subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report And Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 2 The City’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Subdivision Ordinances for variances. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting the rezoning of property from Rural Residential (RR) to Single- Family Residential (RSF) and subdivision of 2.8 acres into four single-family lots and one outlot with variances for public right-of-way width, local street width and the use of a private street. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Chapter 20, Article II, Division 2. Amendments Chapter 20, Article XII, RSF Single-Family Residential District BACKGROUND The house was built in 2003. The property is not part of any recorded subdivision, Registered Land Survey or other approved plat. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is 2.81 acres and currently has an existing single-family residence that is being proposed to remain with the development of the subdivision. The applicant provided an Existing Conditions Survey which is used to supplement all construction plans and designs that is generally in conformance with the requirements of Sec. 18-40. However, required information that was not provided includes: location of buildings and easements to a distance 150 feet beyond the subdivision boundaries; topographic data 100 feet beyond the property boundary, with associated contours; boundary lines of adjoining platted or subdivided land, within 150 feet, identified by name and ownership, etc. In order to show the proper extents, the scale of the survey may need to be increased, which is also typical of all construction plans provided. The applicant shall submit an updated survey upon submittal of final plat and final construction plans illustrating all the requirements of Sec. 18- 40. Furthermore, an accurate soils report indicating soil conditions, permeability and slope shall be provided upon submittal of final plat (Sec. 18-40.(2)h.). The soils report shall include boring logs for key areas including along the proposed alignment of the private street and near areas proposed for stormwater infiltration. SITE CONSTRAINTS Wetland Protection Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 3 There is not a wetland located on the property. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs on the property. Though there is a small area of steep slopes, it does not meet the City’s definition of a bluff. Shoreland Management The property is not located within a shoreland protection district. Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a floodplain. SURROUNDING ZONING AND USES The properties to the north, south, and east of the proposed development are zoned Single-Family Residential District, RSF. The property to the west of these development is zoned Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD-R, Pheasant Hills. REZONING The existing zoning of the property, Rural Residential, is not consistent with the land use designation of the property, Residential Low Density. The Comprehensive Plan allows less intensive land uses to remain in place. However, any approval by the City for development of the property must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The following zoning districts are consistent with a Residential Low Density land use: Low-density residential areas can be either zoned RSF (Residential Single Family), R-4 (Mixed Low Density), RLM (Residential Low and Medium Density), or PUD-R (Planned Unit Development Residential). The proposed rezoning to Single-Family Residential District (RSF) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation. The RSF district is the most appropriate zoning district to rezone this property since it is the same zoning as the surrounding residential properties and permits only single-family homes. While the R-4 district permits single-family homes, it also permits twin homes which would be inconsistent with the surrounding development. The RLM district permits single-family homes, as well as twin homes, townhouses and attached housing. But the RLM district also requires that large areas of upland are preserved or created as permanent open space to balance the higher hard surface coverage permitted on the individual lots. Finally, the PUD-R district can be created for a single-family subdivision, but the ordinance requires that the minimum development size be five acres. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 4 The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide a full range of housing opportunities. Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following housing goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: A balanced housing supply with housing available for people of all income levels. A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life-cycle. Staff is recommending the rezoning to RSF be approved. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The applicant is requesting subdivision review to create a four lot single-family residential development. Access will be a public street within existing city right-of-way out to Yosemite and a private street from this street in to the development. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 5 PRELIMINARY PLAT RIGHT-OF-WAY, STREETS AND EASEMENTS In April 1985, 16.5 feet of right-of-way was dedicated for Tacoma Trail (easterly end of Wood Duck Lane) with the Stoddart Addition. In April 1987, 16.5 feet of right-of-way was dedicated for Wood Duck Lane with the Pheasant Hills 4th Addition. A total of 31 feet of right-of-way was dedicated for the road connection to Yosemite. As part of Pheasant Hills 4th Addition, 50 feet of right-of-way for Wood Duck Lane was dedicated to the north of the project site. The property being proposed to be subdivided (6480 Yosemite Avenue) is currently served by an approximate 10-foot wide private driveway had from Yosemite Avenue which extends through unimproved right-of-way (Tacoma Trail). The applicant is proposing to remove the driveway and extend a public street from Yosemite Avenue within the unimproved Tacoma Trail right-of-way and construct a private street to serve all four lots within the proposed subdivision, see image below. A small rectangle of public roadway easement is required to be obtained from the property owner due north of this subdivision in order to construct the public street (see image below). Obtaining this Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 6 easement is a requirement of the applicant, and a draft easement document has been created and reviewed by the city attorney. The property owner to the north has been engaged and had their own attorney review the easement. Official recording of this easement is a subject condition of the preliminary plat. Staff finds that the use of a private street is in general accordance with City’s Code of Ordinances Ordinances), Sec. 18-57. While public right-of-way is abutting and adjacent to the property being developed, the prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible to construct a standard width public street in accordance with current Ordinances due to the inadequate existing width of the unimproved right-of-way (33 feet wide). Conversely, if the applicant was to extend the public street from the end of Wood Duck Lane, which does have adequate right-of-way width, it would further exacerbate a non-conforming cul-de-sac length which is already approximately 1100 feet in length. As such, the applicant is requesting a variance from the standard right-of-way and street width outlined in Sec. 18-57. The variance request is to build a 24-foot wide public street within the existing 33-foot wide right-of-way. Additionally, as there are no other properties that take direct access to the proposed street, coupled with the street width variance, it is proposed to adopt a resolution prohibiting parking along this portion of the proposed public street. Engineering and Public Works staff have evaluated the alternatives and finds that the proposed variance to extend a public street within the unimproved portion of Tacoma Trail right-of-way is the most practicable and adequate alternative due to the existing constraints. The applicant will be required to supply with the final plat submittal cross-section details for the public street, account for public drainage, and the design of an adequate turn-around at the end of the public street. Lastly, updated construction plans shall indicate the locations of proposed street lights in accordance with Sec. 18-78.(b)(7) for review and approval by the City Engineer. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 7 As the proposed development will have common sections of the private street that will serve two units or more with a density of less than four units per acre, the private street shall: be built to a seven-ton design, paved to be a width of 20 feet, utilize a maximum grade of ten percent, and provide a turnaround area acceptable to the fire marshal based upon guidelines provided by applicable fire codes and ordinances. It is recommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and the declarations address the maintenance responsibilities and associated costs of repairs for the private street. The applicant shall submit a street name for the private street for city review and approval. Private streets serving up to four lots may be permitted in residential developments with a density of less than four units per acre if the criteria in variance Section 18-22 are met and upon consideration of the following: 1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to constrict a public street. In making this determination, the City may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 8 2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to provide a street system consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3) The use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the City's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. The use of the private street meets the criteria specified in City Code since it is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties, would create an excessive amount of hardcover with minimal public benefit and would require even more environmental impacts. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS The preliminary plat provided illustrates mostly typical public drainage and utility easements (D&U) along the proposed subdivision’s lot lines with five-foot D&U along the side lot lines and 10-foot D&U along the front and rear lot lines. There is a portion of D&U abutting the front lot lines of Lots 1 and 2 along with the northeast corner of Lot 3 that extends eight additional feet (a total of 18 feet wide) in order to provide proper widths to maintain the sanitary sewer. The applicant has proposed the creation of Outlot A to cover the private street along with portions of undevelopable land abutting the street to the east. Outlot A is being proposed to be encumbered in its entirety with a D&U. While public water main and sanitary sewer main will be located within the Outlot, it is not necessary to encumber the entire Outlot in D&U as private improvements such as stormwater features will be located on Outlot A. The applicant shall update the final plat to include D&U within Outlot A only over the public utilities as required for adequate maintenance, repair and replacement. The widths shall be ten feet from the center of each utilities pipe on both sides. The location of the water main and sanitary sewer main is discussed later on in section “Sanitary Sewer and Water Mains”. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The portion of the site which accommodates the three new homes generally slopes gradually to the north, while the portion of the site with the existing home proposed to remain has steep slopes with gradient to the south. Grading for the development is being proposed over two phases; the first phase will grade areas associated with the public and private streets, the public utilities, the stormwater basins and the area where sanitary sewer will be extended from the west through unimproved right- of-way; the second phase was shown on the preliminary plans to illustrate feasibility and provides custom graded walkout lots. It appears drainage will be routed away from building pads and through backyards of the future lots via a swale which then directs overland flow towards a proposed stormwater basin on the most northern lot (Lot 1), while the front yards and road will sheet drain to the stormwater basin on the east side of the private street (northeast corner of Outlot A). However, drainage arrows were not provided on the preliminary plans and will be required upon submittal of final plat and final construction plans. Additionally, all requirements of grading plans as outlined under Sec. 18-40.(4)d. will be required upon submittal of final plat and final construction plans, including the appropriate scale, lowest floor elevations of buildings (proposed and existing), emergency overflow routes, stockpile locations, etc. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 9 Lastly, no geotechnical report was provided to indicate that the in-situ soils are suitable for building foundations, public and private street designs, stormwater infiltration, or utility support and will need to be provided along with the final plat submittal. All recommendations from the geotechnical report shall be adhered to, and a geotechnical engineering firm shall be on site during grading operations as required to ensure the City’s Standard Specifications and Detail Plates are adhered to along with any Minnesota Building Code requirements. If groundwater is encountered during grading the grades shall be adjusted to maintain a 3 foot separation from the bottom floor elevation and adhering to the recommendations of the soil engineer on site. Changes to grades shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. RETAINING WALLS The applicant is proposing three retaining walls within the subdivision to accommodate potential walkout designs for the custom graded lots, as discussed above in “Grading and Drainage”. The height of any retaining wall is measured from the top of the wall to the bottom of the footing (not to the top of grade). The plans did not indicate the height of the walls and shall be updated accordingly upon submittal of final plat and final construction plans, however it does appear that at least one will have a height greater than four (4) feet. Walls over 4 feet in height shall be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer and shall be constructed of a durable material (smooth face concrete, masonry/mortared, railroad ties and timber are prohibited). EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL As proposed it appears the development will not exceed one (1) acre of land disturbance and will, therefore, not be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). However, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in accordance with Ordinances shall be submitted for the grading operations of the subdivision as more than 5,000 square feet of land is being disturbed. The applicant has provided an ESCP along with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and while overall the plan appears feasible, it is deficient as it does not include all the requirements listed under Sec. 19-145.(a)(2) such as the requirement that drainage boundaries and direction of drainage pre- and post-development be indicated. As such, the applicant shall update the ESCP and resubmit for review and approval with the submission of the final construction plans. As disturbance limits were near one acre, if this increases or is determined to be one acre or more, the applicant will be required to obtain the NPDES Construction Permit. SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAINS The proposed subdivision has access to a 12” PVC public water main that is located within abutting unimproved right-of-way north of the property (Wood Duck Lane), however no public sanitary sewer main abuts the development. As such, the developer will be required to extend the sanitary sewer main located 150 feet west (Wood Duck Lane cul-de-sac) of the development’s northwest Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 10 property corner in order to serve the site. Based on the preliminary plans, the applicant is proposing to extend both of these public utilities into the subdivision to serve the newly created lots, as seen below. The proposed alignments of the extended public utilities are in general conformance with City Standards and Specifications. However, the applicant is proposing an 8” PVC water main, while the City Standard Specifications allow for a minimum 6” main where feasible. If a 6” main will supply adequate fire flows and pressures to the newly formed subdivision, the main shall be downsized accordingly. All newly installed public utilities will be required to adhere to the City of Chanhassen’s Standard Specifications and Detail Plates, which will be the governing specifications for said improvements. Upon acceptance by City Council the sanitary sewer and water mains will become publicly owned and maintained. The existing home’s water service lateral is proposed to be abandoned and tied into the newly proposed water main, which is beneficial to the water quality for the subdivision as the newly created extension dead-ends, however the existing home’s sanitary sewer service is proposed to remain. As the preliminary plans indicate that the existing home’s sanitary sewer service, which extends to the west between 1671 and 1681 Pintail Circle, may be located outside the prescribed easements, the applicant will be required to either expand the easement area to encompass the lateral in its entirety, or, verify that the existing alignment is in fact within the easement, or, connect the existing home to the newly extend sanitary sewer. Updated plans shall be provided illustrating the approach taken. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 11 While generally the preliminary utility plans provided do appear feasible, profile views were not provided in order to conduct a complete review, e.g. checking for conflicts with other utilities or reviewing cover of mains to meet City standards. The applicant will be required to provide updated utility plans upon submittal of the final plat and final construction plans that include profile views. Lastly, prior to commencement of any utility work, a copy of all required permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be provided to the City which shall include but is not limited to the Minnesota Department of Health, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Article VII, Chapter 19 of City Code describes the required stormwater management development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site plans, subdivisions and water management features.” These standards include abstraction of 1.0 inch of runoff from the new impervious surfaces created by the project and water quality treatment resulting in the removal of 90% total suspended solids (TSS) and 60% total phosphorous (TP). The applicant will need to work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and the City in order to meet all the requirements. General 1. MCWD has notified the City that the development triggers MCWD Stormwater Management rules because the parcel is being split into 3 or more lots and increasing impervious surface. Applicant will be required to obtain a permit through MCWD. Water Quality 1. Page 1 of the hydrology report states “Soils information is assumed to be mostly D soils, based on the area and the wetland to the north. Filtration will be used to reduce runoff rates, and volumes.” Soil borings should be provided to confirm the web soil survey data is correct and to confirm infiltration is not feasible. If soil borings show infiltration is feasible, infiltration should be used to meet stormwater management requirements. This would also allow for smaller basins. a. If infiltration cannot be used, an abstraction analysis must be provided according to MCWD Stormwater Management Rule 3(c)(2)(i). 2. Applicant should include information on how pretreatment will be provided for the proposed biofiltration basins in the hydrology report (i.e. vegetated filter strips). Rate Control 1. Outlet pipe slopes in HydroCAD should be updated to be consistent with what is shown in the plans. 2. If a biofiltration basin continues to be proposed, applicant should route exfiltration downstream instead of it being discarded in HydroCAD. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 12 Volume Control 1. Based on the impervious areas included in the hydrology report and according to MCWD Stormwater Rule 5(c), (and shown in Table 4 in Section 11) the site: a. is greater than 1 acre b. is disturbing less than 40% of the site c. is increasing the existing impervious surface by more than 50% Therefore, the MCWD rules state that the entire site’s impervious surface (18,142 sf) must be accounted for in calculations for water quality, rate control, and volume control. Currently the applicant is providing calculations for only the additional impervious surface. Applicant should confirm proposed impervious area as noted previously and confirm which MCWD requirements apply based on Table 4 in Section 11 of MCWD Rule N. 2. Water quality volume credit is given at a 0.5 rate for filtration basins according to MCWD Volume Abstraction Credit Schedule (Appendix A of MCWD Rule N). With the 0.5 factor applied the proposed basins do not provide the required water quality volume. Applicant should update the subsequent water quality volume calculations with the 0.5 credit rate applied and provide updated HydroCAD stage/storage data (shown at the outlet elevation to confirm water quality volume) for both ponds. Filtration Basin Design 1. If a biofiltration basin continues to be used, applicant should update the MIDS calculations to reflect a filtration basin with underdrain to get accurate modeling results. 2. Provide an operation and maintenance plan that identifies the maintenance schedule and responsible party. This should include information on how the system will be cleaned out. Flood Elevation 1. The City of Chanhassen requires low floor elevations to maintain at least three feet of freeboard to adjacent ponding areas HWL and floodplains. Per the submitted report, the NW filtration basin (2P) has a 100-year HWL of 1026.49’. Applicant should include the low opening and low floor elevations for the proposed buildings and make sure the elevation allows for three feet of freeboard above the basins. Civil Plans 1. Applicant is showing grading and utility work north of the parcel boundary. Applicant must show easements on plans for all improvements outside of property limits. 2. Easements must be shown for on-site storm sewer and around ponding areas if public. 3. Operations and Maintenance Plan to include maintenance schedule and entity responsible for maintenance must be provided for any private utility or pond. 4. Proposed draintile should be shown in the plans tying to the overflow structure. Applicant should include draintile size, slope, inverts and cleanout locations. 5. Update detail to reflect filtration bioretention basin instead of infiltration basin (depending on outcome of soil borings). 6. Provide details for silt fence and rock construction entrance. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 13 7. FES must have energy dissipation with appropriately sized and quantity of rip rap. Show rip rap detail on the plans. 8. The proposed area included in SWPPP note #3 site data in the full plan set doesn’t match the proposed impervious area listed in the hydrology report. Applicant should confirm impervious areas and update plans/hydrology report as needed. 9. Emergency overflow elevations and location should be included on the plans for both basins. 10. Storm sewer must be 12” minimum per city requirements. 11. Add inlet protection to the eastern catch basin on Yosemite Avenue near the construction entrance. 12. Two lines of silt fence should be placed adjacent to the wetland. 13. The NW basin is shown within 15’ of the adjacent building. Applicant may want to consider adjusting the design to provide further separation between the pond and structure. Staff requests that the applicant address each of the comments above and provide a written response by restating each comment and stating how each comment was addressed and include supporting documentation. Please feel free to reach out with any questions. WETLANDS AND BUFFERS One wetland was identified and delineated on and near the property. The wetland is classified as Type 1, seasonally flooded basin. 0.03 acres of the wetland exist on the subject property, however initial plans show that none of this area is anticipated to be impacted by the project. If any wetland impacts are proposed going forward a wetland replacement plan would need to be approved through the Wetland Conservation Act permitting process. On additional area was investigated as part of the wetland delineation. The area, in the southeast corner of the lot, was determined to be upland. The on-site TEP review concurred with this determination. STORMWATER UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGES Section 4-30 of City Code sets out the fees associated with surface water management. A water quality and water quantity fee are collected with a subdivision. These fees are based on land use type and are intended to reflect the fact that the more intense the development type, the greater the degradation of surface water. This fee will be applied to the new lots of record being created. The fees will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time; 2020 rates are $8,490.00 per acre. ASSESSMENTS Water and sewer partial hookups are due at the time of final plat. The partial hookup fees will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time; 2020 rates for partial hookup fees are $691.00 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,392.00 per unit for water. The remaining partial hookups fees are due with the building permit. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 14 Fees Based on the proposal, the following fees would be collected with the development contract: a) Administration Fee: if the improvement costs are less than $500,000, 3% of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs are between $500,000 and $1,000,000, 2% of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs exceed $1,000,000, 2.5% of the first 1,000,000 plus 1.5% of the remainder. b) Surface Water Management Fee: $8,490.00 per acre. c) A portion of the water hook-up charge: $2,392.00/unit d) A portion of the sanitary sewer hook-up charge: $691.00/unit e) Park Dedication Fee: $17,400.00 f) GIS fees: $25 for the plat plus $10 per parcel g) Final plat process (review and recording of Plat and DC): $450.00 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The applicant for the Deer Haven Addition has submitted tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations. They are as follows: Total upland area (excluding ROW) 3.45 ac. or 150,257 SF Baseline canopy coverage 39% or 59,059 SF Minimum canopy coverage required 30% or 45,077 SF Proposed tree preservation 30% or 45,786 SF The developer appears to meet minimum canopy coverage for the site, but will need to verify calculations before final approval. The tree preservation plan shows trees to be preserved within the grading limits which is not feasible as shown. This is especially true of the grouping of trees located at the rear of lot 3. None of the trees are in good health and will have significant grade changes throughout their root zones. The applicant will need to revise the grading limits to preserve trees or update the tree preservation plan to reflect tree removal within the grading limits. A minimum of one tree is required to be planted in the front yard of each new home as required by ordinance. No buffer yards are required as all neighboring properties have the same land use. The applicant has proposed trees to be planted in Outlot A. PARKS AND RECREATION The quality and number of recreational facilities in a community directly contributes to its quality of life. For this reason, the City of Chanhassen places a strong emphasis on parks and open space. As the City of Chanhassen has developed and increased in population, more pressure and attention has been given to providing recreational opportunities for our residents. Increased leisure time, health awareness, greater mobility, and high disposable incomes have all contributed to the increased demand for recreational activities. The challenge of the next century will be to provide facilities for a growing and diverse population. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 15 Parks can be defined as public areas that provide active or passive-oriented recreational facilities. A significant characteristic of parkland is its accessibility to its users. Open space is any parcel that is not used for buildings or other structures and is left in a natural state. Parks and open space perform diverse functions such as: meeting physical and psychological needs, enhancing and protecting the resource base, enhancing real estate values, and providing a positive impact on economic development. Parks The goal of neighborhood parks is to provide informal recreational opportunities close to where people live. The City’s Comprehensive Park Plan calls for a neighborhood park to be located within one-half mile of every residence in the city. The Deer Haven Addition is located within one-half mile of both Curry Farms Park and Pheasant Hill Park. These two neighborhood park locations offer ample amenities for those residing in the Deer Haven Addition. Trails The City’s goal is to maintain a comprehensive and easily navigable trail and sidewalk system that connects neighborhoods to park and recreation facilities, schools, community destinations and other communities. No trail or sidewalk facilities are located in the vicinity of this development. Park and Trail Conditions of Approval Full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction are to be collected. The park fees shall be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. At today’s rate, these fees would total $5,800 (3 lots x $5,800 per lot) for three new lots without charging the existing home. MISCELLANEOUS The road width proposed of 24 feet would require No Parking Fire Lane signs on both sides. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 16 Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. If any soil corrections are done on the property, a final grading plan and soil report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits will be issued. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Width ft.) Depth ft.) Hard Cover sq. ft. Notes Code 15,000 100* 125 25 / 3,750 *Property access via a private street 1 15,148 112 152 25/3,787 Front lot line east, corner lot 2 15,079 100 151 25/3,769 Front lot line east 3 18,012 102 140 25/4,503 Front lot line east 4 47,843 241 178 25/11,960 Front lot line east A 26,297 Private street, 0.6 acres Total 122,379 2.81 acres Setbacks (ft.): 30 - front, 10 - side, 30 - rear Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 17 VARIANCE The hardship is not a mere inconvenience by providing reasonable access to four properties while reducing potential impacts to the natural features on the site and within existing off-site right-of- way; The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the land including trees; a public street is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties within the development and the existing right-of-way and surrounding development preclude additional public right-of-way out to Yosemite; The condition or conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property because of the previously stated conditions of the property; The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of subdivision regulations, the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan since it will reduce potentially significant impacts on the site and within the neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single-Family Residential (RSF), and Subdivision approval with a Variance to create four lots and one outlot subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: REZONING: 1. Contingent on final plat approval. SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES: Building: 1. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 2. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 4. If any soil corrections are done on the property, a final grading plan and soil report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits will be issued. Engineering: 1. The applicant shall provide an updated existing conditions survey in conformance with the requirements of Sec. 18-40, which shall include (but not limited to): location of buildings and Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 18 easements to a distance 150 feet beyond the subdivision boundaries; topographic data 100 feet beyond the property boundary, with associated contours; boundary lines of adjoining platted or subdivided land, within 150 feet, identified by name and ownership, etc. 2. An accurate geotechnical report indicating soil conditions, permeability and slope shall be provided upon submittal of final plat (Sec. 18-40.(2)h.). The soil report shall include boring logs for key areas including along the proposed alignment of the private street and near areas proposed for stormwater infiltration. 3. A roadway easement from PID 254150012 is required in order to construct the public street. The easement shall be reviewed and approved by the City and shall be recorded either prior to or concurrently with the final plat. 4. The applicant shall supply cross-section details and plans for the public street, account for public drainage, and the design of an adequate turn-around at the end of the public street. 5. The applicant shall provide the locations of proposed street lights for review and approval by the City Engineer. 6. The applicant shall update the final plat to include drainage and utility easements within Outlot A only over the public utilities (not the entire Outlot) as required for adequate maintenance, repair and replacement. 7. Drainage arrows throughout the construction limits shall be shown upon submittal of final plat and final construction plans. 8. The applicant shall provide updated grading plans in conformance with the requirements of Sec. 18-40.(4)d. which shall include (but not limited to): the appropriate scale, lowest floor elevations of buildings (proposed and existing), emergency overflow routes, stockpile locations, etc. 9. The applicant shall update the erosion and sediment control plan in conformance with the requirements listed under Sec. 19-145.(a)(2) and resubmitted for review and approval with the submission of the final construction plans. 10. If a 6” main will supply adequate fire flows and pressures to the newly formed subdivision, the main shall be downsized accordingly. 11. Upon acceptance by City Council the sanitary sewer and water mains will become publicly owned and maintained. 12. As the preliminary plans indicate that the existing home’s sanitary sewer service, which extends to the west between 1671 and 1681 Pintail Circle, may be located outside the prescribed easements, the applicant will be required to either expand the easement area to encompass the lateral in its entirety, or, verify that the existing alignment is in fact within the easement, or, connect the existing home to the newly extend sanitary sewer. Updated plans shall be provided illustrating the approach taken for review and approval by the City. Planning Commission Deer Haven December 1, 2020 Page 19 13. The applicant shall provide updated utility plans upon submittal of the final plat and final construction plans that include profile views for review and approval by the City. Environmental Resources: 1. The applicant shall verify tree removal within the grading limits and revise tree preservation calculations before final approval. Trees shown within grading limits may not be counted as preserved. 2. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any grading activities. Fire: 1. The road width proposed of 24 feet would require No Parking Fire Lane signs on both sides. 2. The private road will need to follow City of Chanhassen Code for Private Roads – including a turnaround for emergency vehicles. 3. The applicant shall submit a street name for the private street for city review and approval. Parks: 1. Full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected. The park fees shall be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. Planning: 1. The front lot line for Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be the easterly property line. 2. An access and maintenance agreement for the private street shall be recorded with the plat. And adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation. ATTACHMENTS Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Application Preliminary Plat Full Plan Set Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2020 planning cases\20-22 6480 yosemite avenue (deer haven) sub\staff report deer haven.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld – Planning Case No. 2020-22, Deer Haven Addition. Request for Rezoning from Rural Residential District, RR, to Single-Family Residential District, RSF, Subdivision Approval creating four lots and one outlot with a Variance for a public street cross section and right-of-way width, and a Variance for the use of a private street located at 6480 Yosemite. On December 1, 2020, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld for a single-family residential development. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District, RR. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential – Low Density uses. 3. The legal description of the property is: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Southerly along the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to a point 660 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Westerly parallel with the South line Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 281.07 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distance 198.0 feet Westerly from the point of beginning; thence Easterly along said North line 198.0 feet to the point of beginning, except the North 50.0 feet thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. Records of Carver County, Minnesota. 4. REZONING FINDINGS The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: 2 a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. c. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. SUBDIVISION FINDINGS a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance and meets all of the requirements of the “RSF” Single-Family Residential District; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the City's Comprehensive Plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the subdivision ordinance; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage subject to compliance with conditions of approval; f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements; g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate stormwater drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 3 6. VARIANCE FINDINGS WITH A SUBDIVISION a. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience by providing reasonable access to four properties while reducing potential impacts to the natural features on the site and within existing off- site right-of-way; b. The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the land including trees; a public street is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties within the development and the existing right-of-way and surrounding development preclude additional public right-of-way out to Yosemite; c. The condition or conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property because of the previously stated conditions of the property; d. The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of subdivision regulations, the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan since it will reduce potentially significant impacts on the site and within the neighborhood. 7. The planning report #2020-22 dated December 1, 2020, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed Preliminary Plat approval for four lots and one outlot, variances for public street cross-section and right-of-way with a Variance for the use of a private street for a single-family detached subdivision subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 1st day of December, 2020. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2020 planning cases\20-22 6480 yosemite avenue (deer haven) sub\findings of fact & recommendation.docx PC,sotro- >\ COMMUN]TY DEVELOPMENT DEPART ENT Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (9521227 -1110 SubmittalDale CITY OT CIIAI'IIIASSIN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PC Dale t t I fz ISO cc oate: [4 rc{ I-}D 6ooay Revie* Dare: f J f S/)O Section l: Application Type (check allthat apply) ReIe.lo the apprqdale Applicdbn ChecUist br tquiBd subnittal inlod6t*tn that must ac.onFqny this aPncdtion) Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... $600EMinorMUSAlineforfailingon-site sewers ..... $100 E Subdivision (SUB) E Create 3lots or less E Conditional Use Permit (CUP) D Single-Family Residence . D At others........ Planned Unil Development (PUO) .................. $750 Minor Amendment to existing PUD................. $100 All Others.............. ............. $500 Sign Plan Review................................................... $150 Site Plan Review (SPR) D Administrative. ................... $1OOECommercial/lnduslrial Disticts'...................... S50O Plus $'10 per 1,000 square teet of building area:( thousand square feet) lnclude number of qxililg employees: _ lnclude number of ,row emDbve€s D Residential Oistacts-......................------- SSOO Plus $5 per dwelling unit ( units) Create over 3 lots .( lots) Metes & Bounds (2 lots)........... Consolidate Lots... Lot Line 4djustment........................ Finar Prat.........................................::..:::..:.... .. lncludes $450 escrow for attomey costs)' Additional escrow may be requied for other applicataons through lhe develop.nent contract. E Wetland Atteration Permit (WAP) E Single-Family Residence............................... $150EAtlotners........ ................. $275 fl Zoning Appeal ......................-. $1OO D Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. $500 llglE: Whcn muldpl. .pplicallonr are proc.r.Gd concln ntly, lhe .ppfopriatc tce sh.ll be charged for each .pplicatlon. 200 325 425 325 425 a trtrtrau a tr D lnterim Use Permit (lUP) E ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence Att otners........ Rezoning (REZ) tr! Z E Notification Sign (city to insra and remove) ........................ E Property Owners' List within 5OO' (city to generate afler pre-apptication m€€ting) addresses) @ Escrow for Recording Documents (ched( all that apply) ...........................................-...................... $SO per document- ! conoitionat u;'p";t - - ['rlir"ri, u.";#ir iJ iii" Fran egr""r"ntEVacation [t Variance ! Wetland AlerationPermitEMetes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) ! Easements 1_ easements) ! Deeds rorAl FEE: $2,466'00 Section 2: Required lnformation Property Address or Location Parcet #: 250033500 Total Acreage: Present Zoning Legal Des$iptio n : coRN sEl/4 NEt/4 TH WLy PARALLEL W|TH S L|NE SE1/4 NE. 2.U Select One Present Land Use Desig Existing Use of Property Requested Zoning Select One nation. Residential Low Den{ll Requested Land Use Desig nation. Residential Low Densityp Residential CITY OFTHAilIIASSEN Echeck box if separate narrative is attached Ocir6 3oo per lot Vacation of Easements/Right-ot-way (VAC)........ $300 Additional reco.ding fe6 may apply) E Vanance (VAR).................................................... $2OO 3 per address Description of Proposal Four lot subdivision and development plan 6,480 Yosemite Wetlands Present? E Yes Z ruo CHA,'JHASSEI,J pLAj'lllll'Jc DEPI Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicanl, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of lhe deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name Contact Phone: City/State/Zip Email: Cell: Fax'. DateSignature PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, aulhorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep m)rsetf informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I furlher understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are lrue and conect. Kenneth Ashfeld and Barbara Bersie-Ashfeld KenAshfeldName 80 Yosemite Phone 46.3 -.19,1- b?31 City/State/Zip Email: Excelsior, MN 55331 Cell 12--s hfeld mapleg Fax: ./b 3-111q-,8 10t12t20Signature Todd McLouth (Loucks Associates)Contact: Phone: Todd McLouth Name Address 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 7b3 -q1b - L7 z City/Statezip Email: Maple Grove/MN/553369 Todd McLouth <TMcLouth@loucksinc.com> b l? - ?_o7 - 2?8 (o Who should receive copies of staff reports?*Other Contact lnformation: fl Property Owrer Ma: E Applicant Ma: Engineer Via: E otner Ma: Email ! Mailed Paper copy Email ! Mailed Paper Copy Email f] Mailed Paper copy Email E Mailed Paper Copy Name Tom Goodrum Address 7200 Hemlock Lane Suite 300 city/state/zip: Email: Tom Maple Grove. MN 55369 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Com device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city plete all necessary form ftelds, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital copy to the city for Processing PRINT FORM This application must be completed in applicable City ordinanc,e provisions. and confer with the Planning Departm requirements and fees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within '15 business days of application submittal written notice ot application deficiencies shall be mailed to the aPplicant within 15 business days of application. refe direbnfoarmotiandnansccomedarequvaplemandstUpanrby no ktisthCteaicatintiothtoaethStcaftpnpAppproapplling ca b e (auordcnnaacednndteelTnenStheprocedetoapplpecifi Z Goodrum <TGoodrum@loucksinc.com> Address: Contact: Address: Date: PROJECT ENGINEER (if aPPlicable) Cell: Fax: Section 4: Notification lnformation SAVE FORM SUBMIT FORM CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 10: 43 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ SURVEY\_dwg Sheet Files\S20327-P- PlatOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN 6480 YOSEMITE AVE, CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE,CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 N PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 OF 1 10/14/ 20 PRELIMINARY PLAT ISSUED 11/06/20 REVISED LOTS 11/09/ 20 REVISED EASEMENTS SITE License No.Date I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of VICINITY MAP Field Crew Max L. Stanislowski - PLS 48988 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No.Minnesota.20327 MS NL MS MA 10/14/20 Per Schedule A of the herein referenced Title Commitment File No: 2164018-14405)That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows:Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Southerly along the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to a point 660 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Westerly parallel with the South line Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 281.07 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distance 198.0 feet Westerly from the point of beginning; thence Easterly along siad North line 198. 0 feet to the point of beginning, except the North 50.0 feet thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. Records of Carver County, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION LIGHT POLE POWER POLE CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE EXISTING BUILDING RETAINING WALL ELECTRIC METER GAS METER CONIFEROUS TREE PINE DECIDUOUS TREE GUY WIRE ADDRESS POST ELM BOXELDER APPLE HACKBERRY WALNUT ELEV @ THRESHOLD RECORD DOCUMENT SET 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED " LS 48988" FOUND OPEN IRON MONUMENT FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT FOUND STONE TOP NUT HYDRANT SERVICE CLEANOUT WOOD FENCE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE BITUMINOUS ASH MAPLE HAND HOLE SPRUCE CURB STOP MAPPED SANITARY SEWER GENERAL NOTES SURVEYOR:Loucks 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55330 763-424-5505 1.Prepared October 13, 2020.2.The address, if disclosed in documents provided to or obtained by the surveyor, or observed while conducting the fieldwork is 6840 Yosemite Ave.3.The Gross land area is 122,379 +/- square feet or 2.81 +/- acres.4. The bearings for this survey are based on the Carver County Coordinate System NAD 83 (1986 Adjust).5.Benchmark: MnDOT GALPIN MNDT RESET Elevation = 951.47 (NAVD88)Site Benchmark: T.N.H. on the east side of Yosemite Ave and 150.0± feet south of the driveway entrance to the subject property.Elevation = 1027.88 (NAVD88)6.We have shown underground utilities on and/or serving the surveyed property per Gopher State One-Call Ticket Nos. 202402368, 202402364. The following utilities and municipalities were notified:City of Chanhassen ( 952) 227-1300 Centurylink (800) 778-9140 Mediacom (952) 443-2840 Center Point Energy (612) 321-4421 Xcel Energy (800) 895-4999 i.Utility operators do not consistently respond to locate requests through the Gopher State One Call service for surveying purposes such as this. Those utility operators that do respond, often will not locate utilities from their main line to the customer's structure or facility. They consider those utilities private” installations that are outside their jurisdiction. These “private” utilities on the surveyed property or adjoining properties, may not be located since most operators will not mark such "private" utilities. A private utility locator may be contacted to investigate these utilities further, if requested by the client.ii.Maps provided by those notified above, either along with a field location or in lieu of such a location, are very often inaccurate or inconclusive.EXTREME CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED BEFORE AN EXCAVATION TAKES PLACE ON OR NEAR THIS SITE. BEFORE DIGGING, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE AT 811 or (651) 454-0002.6.Trees shown hereon are 8 inch diameter at breast height or greater. Other trees, less than 8 inches, may be on site but are not shown hereon.7. Terms and Conditions of Easement Agreement dated June 27, 1994, August 25, 1995, as Document No. 184214.Shown hereon along the west side of the property.8. Terms and Conditions of Easement Agreement dated June 27, 1994, August 25, 1995, as Document No. 184215.Shown hereon along the west side of the property.9.The field work was completed on September 15, 2020.10.The sanitary sewer line appears to be outside of the easement at the SE corner of Lot 6, Block 3, PHEASANT HILLS 4TH ADDITION OWNER/DEVELOPER: Ken Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Ave.Chanhassen, MN 55331 612-581-8716 Current Zoning: "RR" (Rural Residential District)Any zoning classification, setback requirements, height and floor space area restrictions, and parking requirements, shown hereon, was researched to the best of our ability and is open to interpretation. Per the City of Chanhassen Zoning Map and City Code, on October 12, 2020, information for the subject property is as follows: Current Zoning: "RR" (Rural Residential District) Proposed Zoning "RSF" (Rural Single Family District)Current Setbacks:Proposed Setbacks:Front 50 feet Front 30 feet Side 10 feet Side 10 feet Rear 50 feet Rear 30 feet Height 3 stories or 35 feet Height 3 stories or 35 feet ZONING INFORMATION Areas Lot 1, Block 1 = 15,148 +/- square feet or 0.35 +/- acres Lot 2, Block 1 = 15,079 +/- square feet or 0.35 +/- acres Lot 3, Block 1 = 18,012 +/- square feet or 0.41 +/- acres Lot 4, Block 1 = 47, 843 +/- square feet or 1.10 +/- acres OUTLOT A = 26,297 +/- square feet or 0.60 +/- acres Total Plat Area = 122,379 +/- square feet or 2. 81 +/- acres SITE DATA BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 10: 54 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C0-1 - COVER SHEETOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11- 09-20 11- 09-20PRELI MI N A R Y COVER SHEET C0- 1 CHANHASSEN, MN SWPP PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SHEET INDEX C0- 1 COVER SHEET C1-1 C1- 2 C3-2 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL:OWNER CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.KEN ASHFELD MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 CONTACTS CIVIL ENGINEER LOUCKS 7200 HEMLOCK LANE SUITE 300 TEL: 763-424- 5505 TODD MCLOUTH, PE PROJECT AREA DEER HAVEN PRELIMINARY SITE, GRADING, UTILITY, LANDSCAPE & PLATSWPPNOTES & DETAILSC3- 3DEMOLITIONPLAN C2-1SITEPLAN C3-1GRADING PLANYOSEMITEAVE NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 12: 41 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C1-1 - EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Todd W. McLouth - PEProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedBy Loucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11- 09-20 11-09- 20PRELI MI N A R Y EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS GENERAL NOTES DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED Per Schedule A of the herein referenced Title Commitment File No: 2164018-14405)That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 116, Range 23,Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Southerly along the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to a point 660 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Westerly parallel with the South line Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 281.07 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distance 198.0 feet Westerly from the point of beginning; thence Easterly along siad North line 198.0 feet to the point of beginning,except the North 50.0 feet thereof, Carver County, Minnesota.Records of Carver County, Minnesota.1.The address, if disclosed in documents provided to or obtained by the surveyor, or observed while conducting the fieldwork is 6840 Yosemite Ave.2.The Gross land area is 122,379 +/- square feet or 2. 81 +/- acres.3.The bearings for this survey are based on the Carver County Coordinate System NAD 83 (1986 Adjust).4.Benchmark: MnDOT GALPIN MNDT RESET Elevation = 951.47 (NAVD88)Site Benchmark: T.N.H. on the east side of Yosemite Ave and 150.0± feet south of the driveway entrance to the subject property. Elevation = 1027.88 (NAVD88)5.We have shown underground utilities on and/ or serving the surveyed property per Gopher State One- Call Ticket Nos. 202402368, 202402364. The following utilities and municipalities were notified:City of Chanhassen (952) 227-1300 Centurylink 800) 778-9140 Mediacom (952) 443-2840 Center Point Energy 612) 321-4421 Xcel Energy (800) 895-4999 i.Utility operators do not consistently respond to locate requests through the Gopher State One Call service for surveying purposes such as this. Those utility operators that do respond,often will not locate utilities from their main line to the customer's structure or facility. They consider those utilities “private” installations that are outside their jurisdiction. These private” utilities on the surveyed property or adjoining properties, may not be located since most operators will not mark such " private" utilities. A private utility locator may be contacted to investigate these utilities further, if requested by the client. ii.Maps provided by those notified above, either along with a field location or in lieu of such a location, are very often inaccurate or inconclusive. EXTREME CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED BEFORE AN EXCAVATION TAKES PLACE ON OR NEAR THIS SITE. BEFORE DIGGING, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOTIFY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE AT 811 or (651) 454- 0002.6.Trees shown hereon are 8 inch diameter at breast height or greater. Other trees, less than 8 inches, may be on site but are not shown hereon.7.Terms and Conditions of Easement Agreement dated June 27, 1994, August 25, 1995, as Document No. 184214.Shown hereon along the west side of the property.8.Terms and Conditions of Easement Agreement dated June 27, 1994, August 25, 1995, as Document No. 184215. Shown hereon along the west side of the property.9.The field work was completed on September 15, 2020.10.The sanitary sewer line appears to be outside of the easement at the SE corner of Lot 6, Block 3,PHEASANT HILLS 4TH ADDITION TOLL REMOVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY REMOVE EXISTING TREE, TYP. REPLACE EX. PAVEMENT FOR UTILITY INSTALLATION REPLACE EX. CURB FOR UTILITY INSTALLATION REMOVE EX. RETAINING WALL NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 11: 29 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C1-2 - DEMOLITION PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y DEMOLITION PLAN C1-2 TOLL FREE: 1- 800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. DEMOLITION LEGEND REMOVE EXISTING CURB & GUTTER, RETAINING WALLS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, WOOD FENCE,BILLBOARDS, ETC.REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVING,SIDEWALKS, ISLANDS, ETC.REMOVE EXISTING STORM, SEWER, OR WATER STRUCTURE.REMOVE EXISTING TREE 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND/OR RELOCATE EXISTING PRIVATE UTILITIES AS NECESSARY. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ACTIVITIES WITH UTILITY COMPANIES.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL.3.CONTRACTOR TO CLEAR AND GRUB EXISTING VEGETATION WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS, STRIP TOP SOIL, AND STOCKPILE ON-SITE. REFER TO GRADING PLAN AND SWPPP FOR SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.4.CLEAR AND GRUB AND REMOVE ALL TREES, VEGETATION AND SITE DEBRIS PRIOR TO GRADING. ALL REMOVED MATERIAL SHALL BE HAULED FROM THE SITE DAILY.EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY ESTABLISHED UPON REMOVAL. SEE THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP).5.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SITE SURFACE FEATURES WITHIN REMOVAL LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVALS ARE TO BE MADE TO A VERTICAL SAW CUT OR TO A NEAT MILLED EDGE.7.CONCRETE PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER AND OTHER POURED CONCRETE ITEMS ARE TO BE REMOVED TO AN EXISTING EXPANSION OR CONTRACTION JOINT. SAW CUT AS NECESSARY FOR A NEAT EDGE OF REMOVAL.8.ALL REMOVAL ITEMS SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE IN A MANNER MEETING ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.9.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF ALL SIGNS, MAILBOXES, ETC.10.ANY DAMAGE TO ITEMS NOT NOTED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF 1046 1038 1046 1040.5 FBWO 1040.5 1032.5 FBWO FBWO 1036 1036 1028 REPLACE EX. PAVEMENT & CURB FOR SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION 20.0 30.0 5.0 10.0 150.8 30.0 60.0 60.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 BITUMINOUS DRIVE R28' R26' R28' R45' R65' CENTER BIT. DRIVE ON EXISTING CURB CUT 24.0 100.0 STORM POND 60.1 BOUNDARY LINE EDGE OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE STORM POND POSSIBLE FUTURE RETAINING WALL NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 12: 45 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C2-1 - SITE PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y SITE PLAN C2-1 TOLL FREE: 1- 800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.1.ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER THE DETAIL SHEET(S)AND STATE/LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS.2.ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE PROVIDED PER CURRENT ADA STANDARDS AND LOCAL/STATE REQUIREMENTS.3.ALL CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.4.ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.TYPICAL FULL SIZED PARKING STALL IS 9' X 18' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6. ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 5.0' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. SEE SITE ELECTRICAL PLAN FOR SITE LIGHTING.8.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR BUILDING SETBACKS.SITE NOTES 1.MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND WORK.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROJECT.4.THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.5.IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS.6.THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTORS SAFETY MEASURES IN, OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.7.BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS AND THE DETAILS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL SHEET( S) OF THE PROJECT PLANS.8.ALL CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, APPLICATIONS AND FEES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.9.ALL ENTRANCES AND CONNECTIONS TO CITY STREETS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PERMITS AND NOTIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED.10.ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES MUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE ALL SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES.11.ADJUST ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TO THE PROPOSED GRADES WHERE DISTURBED AND COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE UTILITY OWNERS. STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.12.EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY LOUCKS ASSOCIATES, TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DATED 11/30/16.13.SUBGRADE PREPARATION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2112. THE TOP 3 FEET SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 100% OF THE STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY.14.AGGREGATE BASE SHALL BE MNDOT 2211 CLASS 5. COMPACTION SHALL BE BY THE QUALITY COMPACTION METHOD.15.PLANT MIXED BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2360 WITH MIX DESIGN AS SHOWN ON THE DETAILS. COMPACTION SHALL BE BY THE ORDINARY COMPACTION METHOD.16.CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2531. CURING SHALL BE BY THE MEMBRANE CURING METHOD. EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 200 FEET AT ALL FIXED OBJECTS. CONTRACTIONS JOINTS EVERY 10 FEET.17.CONCRETE WALK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2521. CURING SHALL BE BY THE MEMBRANE CURING METHOD. EXPANSION JOINTS AT ALL FIVES OBJECTS. CONTRACTION JLINTS EVERY 5 FEET.18. WORKING HOURS ARE 7 AM - 7 PM (MONDAY - FRIDAY) AND 9 AM - 7 PM ( SATURDAY.) A 48 HOUR NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR SATURDAY WORK.19.THE CONTRACTOR MUST HAVE A CITY LICENSE.20. A CITY 1020.10 EX.1020.80 EX. 1021.00 1021.40 1023.201022.60 1022.201022.60 1023.001023.40 1033.20 1032.80 1038.70 1038.30 1043.50 1043.10 1030104010221024 1026 1028103210341036103810421044 1044 1042103010301030102410241026102610261028102810281028 10321032 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4444444444441030 1024 1026 1028 8888881046 1038 1046 1040.5 FBWO 1040.5 1032.5 FBWO FBWO 1036 1036 1028104410421040103810361038 1040 103410321044 104210401040 1038 10361034 1032 10301034 1032 1030 10281034BASIN 1 BOTTOM-1024.0 HWL-1026.15 NWL-DRY BASIN 2 BOTTOM-1024.0 HWL-1026.49 NWL-DRY NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 1: 57 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C3-1 - GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Todd W. McLouth - PEProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedBy Loucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y GRADING &DRAINAGE PLAN C3-1 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. SPOT ELEVATIONS REPRESENT FINISHED SURFACE GRADES, GUTTER/FLOW LINE, FACE OF BUILDING,OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2.CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.16 FEET. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.3.ALL DISTURBED UNPAVED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES OF TOP SOIL AND SEED/MULCH OR SOD. THESE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED/MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED.4.FOR SITE RETAINING WALLS "TW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT TOP FACE OF WALL (NOT TOP OF WALL), "GW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT WALL GRADE TRANSITION, AND "BW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT BOTTOM FACE OF WALL (NOT BOTTOM OF BURIED WALL COURSES).5.STREETS MUST BE CLEANED AND SWEPT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION,WITHIN 24 HOURS, WHENEVER TRACKING OF SEDIMENTS OCCURS AND BEFORE SITES ARE LEFT IDLE FOR WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS. A REGULAR SWEEPING SCHEDULE MUST BE ESTABLISHED.6.DUST MUST BE ADEQUATELY CONTROLLED.7.SEE SWPPP FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS.8.SEE UTILITY PLANS FOR WATER, STORM AND SANITARY SEWER INFORMATION.9. SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND BITUMINOUS TAPER LOCATIONS.10.SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR FINAL SITE 1020.10 EX.1020.80 EX. 1021.00 1021.40 1023.201022.60 1022.201022.60 1023.001023.40 1033.20 1032.80 1038.70 1038.30 1043.50 1043.10 1030104010221024 1026 1028103210341036103810421044 1044 1042103010301030102410241026102610261028102810281028 10321032 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4444444441030 1024 1026 1028 8888881046 1038 1046 1040.5 FBWO 1040.5 1032.5 FBWO FBWO 1036 1036 1028 SILT FENCE SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PAD INLET PROTECTION INLET PROTECTION INLET PROTECTION INLET PROTECTION NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 1: 12 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C3-2 - SWPP PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN C3-2 TOLL FREE: 1- 800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE EROSION CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 11: 37 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C3-3 - SWPPP NOTES & DETAILSOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Todd W. McLouth - PEProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedBy Loucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES &DETAILS C3-3 1.THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL CONSIST OF CONSTRUCTING A ROAD WITH NO CURB AND GUTTER FOR A FOUR LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHERE A DRIVEWAY CURRENTLY IS. With THE ROAD, UTILITIES FOR FUTURE LOTS AND STORMWATER TREATMENT WILL BE ADDED 2.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.INSTALL VEHICLE TRACKING BMP 2.INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND SITE 3. INSTALL PROTECTIVE FENCE AROUND FILTRATION AREAS 4.CLEAR AND GRUB SITE 5. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL 6.REMOVE PAVEMENTS 7.ROUGH GRADE SITE 8.IMPORT CLEAN FILL FOR REPLACEMENT AND BALANCE 9.INSTALL UTILITIES 7.INSTALL PAVEMENTS 8.FINAL GRADE SITE 7.CONSTRUCT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BASINS 8. INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND BASINS 9.REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASINS 10. CONSTRUCT FILTRATION TRENCHES 11.SEED AND MULCH 12.WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED,REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.3.SITE DATA:AREA OF DISTURBANCE:0.9± AC PRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA:0.130 AC POST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA:0.21 AC GENERAL SOIL TYPE:LOAM 4.THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH FLAGS,STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.5.ALL DISTURBED GROUND LEFT INACTIVE FOR SEVEN (7) OR MORE DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SEEDING OR SODDING (ONLY AVAILABLE PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 15) OR BY MULCHING OR COVERING OR OTHER EQUIVALENT CONTROL MEASURE.6.ON SLOPES 3:1 OR GREATER MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES, SLOPE LENGTHS CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN 75 FEET.DENOTES SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. ALL 3:1 SLOPES TO BE STABILIZED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 7.ALL STORM DRAINS AND INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED UNTIL ALL SOURCES OF POTENTIAL DISCHARGE ARE STABILIZED.8.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROL AND CAN NOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS OR STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS.TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SILT, CLAY, OR ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ARE EXEPMT EX: CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCK PILES,DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES.9.SEDIMENT LADEN WATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN WHENEVER POSSIBLE. IF NOT POSSIBLE, IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMP'S.10.SOLID WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.11.EXTERNAL WASHING OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE, RUNOFF MUST BE PROPERLY CONTAINED.12.NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.13.THE OWNER WHO SIGNS THE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION IS A PERMITTEE AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT.THE OPERATOR (CONTRACTOR) WHO SIGNS THE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION IS A PERMITTEE FOR ALL APPLICABLE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 6-24 OF THE NPDES PERMIT AND IS JOINTLY RESPONSIBLE WITH THE OWNER FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PERMIT.14.TERMINATION OF COVERAGE-PERMITTEE( S) WISHING TO TERMINATE COVERAGE MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) TO THE MPCA. ALL PERMITTEE( S) MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET:A.FINAL STABILIZATION, PER NPDES PERMIT SECTION 13 HAS BEEN ACHIEVED ON ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE FOR WHICH THE PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE.B. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AS DESCRIBED IN THE PERMIT.15. INSPECTIONS A.INITIAL INSPECTION FOLLOWING SILT FENCE INSTALLATION BY CITY REPRESENTATIVE IS REQUIRED.B.EXPOSED SOIL AREAS: ONCE EVERY 7 DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A 0.5" OVER 24 HOUR RAIN EVENT. C. STABILIZED AREAS: ONCE EVERY 30 DAYS D.FROZEN GROUND: AS SOON AS RUNOFF OCCURS OR PRIOR TO RESUMING CONSTRUCTION.E.INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR 3 YEARS AFTER FILING OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION AND MUST INCLUDE: DATE AND TIME OF ACTION, NAME OF PERSON(S) CONDUCTING WORK, FINDING OF INSPECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION, DATE AND AMOUNT OF RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 0. 5 INCHES IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. 16. MINIMUM MAINTENANCE A.SILT FENCE TO BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, SUPPLEMENTED WHEN NONFUNCTIONAL, OR 1/3 FULL; WITHIN 24 HOURS B.SEDIMENT BASINS DRAINED AND SEDIMENT REMOVED WHEN REACHES 1/2 STORAGE VOLUME. REMOVAL MUST BE COMPLETE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF DISCOVERY.C. SEDIMENT REMOVED FROM SURFACE WATERS WITHIN (7)SEVEN DAYS D.CONSTRUCTION SITE EXITS INSPECTED, TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITH 24 HOURS. E.PROVIDE COPIES OF EROSION INSPECTION RESULTS TO CITY ENGINEER FOR ALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 12" IN 24 HOURS 17.THE SWPPP, INCLUDING ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BY THE PERMITTEE(S) WHO HAVE OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE SITE.18.OWNER MUST KEEP RECORDS OF ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT, THE SWPPP, ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE, PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS, AND REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR THREE YEARS AFTER FILING NPDES NOTICE OF TERMINATION.19.SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED WHEN:A. THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS THAT HAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON DISCHARGE B.INSPECTIONS INDICATE THAT THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE AND DISCHARGE IS EXCEEDING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.C.THE BMP'S IN THE SWPPP ARE NOT CONTROLLING POLLUTANTS IN DISCHARGES OR IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT.20.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA A.CONCRETE WASH-OUT IS NOT ALLOWED ON-SITE.21. IN THE EVENT OF ENCOUNTERING A WELL OR SPRING DURING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO CEASE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND NOTIFY ENGINEER.22.PIPE OULTETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER.23.FINAL STABILIZATION FINAL STABILIZATION REQUIRES THAT ALL SOIL DISTURBING ACVTIVITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND THAT DISTURBED AREAS ARE STABILIZED BY A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER WITH 70% OF THE EXPECTED FINAL DENSITY, AND THAT ALL PERMANENT PAVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. ALL TEMPORARY BMP'S SHALL BE REMOVED, DITCHES STABILIZED, AND SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM PERMANENT CONVEYANCES AND SEDIMENTATION BASINS IN ORDER TO RETURN THE POND TO DESIGN CAPACITY.24. TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS A.THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND MADE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO DISTURBANCE OF 10 OR MORE ACRES DRAINING TO A COMMON LOCATION. B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO RUNOFF LEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE OR ENTERING SURFACE WATERS WHEN 10 OR MORE ACRES OF DISTURBED SOILS DRAIN TO A COMMON LOCATION. THE BASIN MUST PROVIDE 3,600 CUBIC FEET OF STORAGE BELOW THE OUTLET PER ACRE DRAINED. IF HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ARE AVAILABLE, THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN MUST PROVIDE A STORAGE VOLUME EQUIVALENT TO THE 2-YEAR, 24-HOUR STORM, BUT IN NO CASE LESS THAN 1800 CUBIC FEET PER ACRE DRAINED. THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND MADE OPERATIONAL CONCURRENT WITH THE START OF SOIL DISTURBANCE UP GRADIENT OF THE POND. THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT SHORT CIRCUITING. THE OUTFALL SHALL BE DESIGNED TO REMOVE FLOATABLE DEBRIS,ALLOW FOR COMPLETE DRAWDOWN OF THE POND FOR MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES, AND HAVE ENERGY DISSIPATION. THE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY SHALL BE STABILIZED.C.TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS SHALL BE SITUATED OUTSIDE OF SURFACE WATERS AND ANY REQUIRED BUFFER ZONE, AND MUST BE DESIGNED TO AVOID DRAINING WETLANDS, UNLESS THE IMPACT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS PERMIT.D.EXCESSIVE SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER THAT IS NOT PROPERLY FILTERED WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO DISCHARGE FROM SITE.25.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING A. TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING SHALL BE DISCHARGED TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. THE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT BASIN MAY DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS IF THE BASIN WATER HAS BEEN VISUALLY CHECKED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED IN THE BASIN AND THAT THE NUISANCE CONDITIONS WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. DISCHARGE POINTS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND PROPER VELOCITY DISSIPATION PROVIDED.B.ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES MUST BE DISCHARGED IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE NUISANCE CONDITIONS,EROSION IN THE RECEIVING CHANNELS OR ON DOWN SLOPE PROPERTIES, OR INUNDATION IN WETLANDS CAUSING SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE WETLAND.C.IF FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATERS ARE USED, THE BACKWASH WATER SHALL BE HAULED AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURNED TO THE BEGINING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, OR INCORPORATED INTO SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION. BACKWASH WATER MAY BE DISCHARGED TO SANITARY SEWER IF PERMISSION IS GRANTED BY THE SANITARY SEWER AUTHORITY.26.POLLUTION PREVENTION A.BUILDING PRODUCTS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO LEACH POLLUTANTS MUST BE UNDER COVER TO PREVENT DISCHARGE OR PROTECTED BY AN EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.B.PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES, INSECTICIDES, FERTILIZERS, TREATMENT CHEMICALS, AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS MUST BE UNDER COVER.C.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE MUST BE PROTECTED TO PREVENT VANDALISM.D.SOLID WASTE MUST BE STORED, COLLECTED AND DISPOSED OF IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH 7035.E.PORTABLE TOILETS MUST BE POSITIONED SO THAT THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT BE TIPPED OR KNOCKED OVER. SANITARY WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH 7041.F.DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS, INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADED SHALL BE PREVENTED USING DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS. SUPPLIES SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS.27. DESIGN CALCULATIONS TEMPORARY & PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT ARE DESIGNED TO MEET MPCA GENERAL & SPECIAL WATER REQUIREMENTS. CALCULATIONS ARE PART OF THE HYDROLOGY REPORT, WHICH IS TO BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE SWPP DOCUMENTS. SEE HYDROLOGY REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.28.GENERAL STORMWATER DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ALL REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN SECTIONS 5- 7, 14, 16-19, 21, 24 OF THE PERMIT FOR DESIGN OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND DISCHARGE HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS SWPP. THESE INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO:A.THE EXPECTED AMOUNT, FREQUENCY, INTENSITY, AND DURATION PRECIPITATION.B.THE NATURE OF STORMWATER RUNOFF AND RUN-ON AT THE SITE. C.PEAK FLOW RATES AND STORWATER VOLUMES TO MINIMIZE EROSION AT OUTLETS AND DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL AND STREAM BANK EROSION. D.THE RANGE OF SOIL PARTICLE SIZES EXPECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE SITE.29.CONSTRUCTION OF FILTRATION BASINS A. NO HEAVY TRAFFIC ON FILTRATION AREAS. CONSTRUCTION TO BE DONE WITH MINIMAL COMPACTION TO FILTRATION AREAS. IF COMPACTION IS ENCOUNTERED, BASIN SOILS FOR THE FIRST & MUST BE REMOVED & RELAID.B. INFILTRATION SYSTEMS MUST NOT BE EXCAVATED TO FINAL GRADE UNTIL THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAD BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND FULLY STABILIZED UNLESS RIGOROUS EROSIN PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE PROVIDED( SECTION 16.4).C.WHEN AN INFILTRATION SYSTEM IS EXCAVATED TO FINAL GRADE (OR WITHIN THREE (3) FEET OF FINAL GRADE), THE PERMITTEE(S) MUST EMPLOY RIGOROUS EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G., DIVERSION BERMS) TO KEEP SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF COMPLETELY AWAY FROM THE INFILTRATION AREA. THE AREA MUST BE STAKED OFF AND MARKED SO THAT HEAVY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES OR EQUIPMENT WILL NOT COMPACT THE SOIL IN THE PROPOSED INFILTRATION AREA.D.TO PREVENT CLOGGING OF THE INFILTRATION OR FILTRATION SYSTEM, THE PERMITTEE(S) MUST USE A PRETREATMENT DEVICE SUCH AS A VEGETATED FILTER STRIP, SMALL SEDIMENTATION BASIN, OR WATER QUALITY INLET (E. G., GRIT CHAMBER) TO SETTLE PARTICULATES BEFORE THE STORMWATER DISCHARGES INTO THE INFILTRATION OF FILTRATION SYSTEM.30.POST CONSTRUCTION THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME THAT MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE BY THE PROJECT'S PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DESCRIBED IN SECTION 15 SHALL BE ONE (1) INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE PROJECT. SEE SECTION 15. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON INFILTRATION DESIGN, PROHIBITIONS AND APPROPRIATE SITE CONDITIONS.31.RESPONSIBILITIES A. THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY A CONTRACTOR WHO WILL OVERSEE THE SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION AND THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE:B.THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY THE A PERSON WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM:32.TRAINING REQEMENTS THE PERMITTES(S) SHALL ENSURE THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS IDENTIFIED IN THIS PART HAVE BEEN TRIANED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS PERMIT'S TRAINING REQUIREMENTS.1. WHO MUST BE TRAINED:A. INDIVIDUAL(S) PREPARING THE SWPPP FOR THE PROJECT B. INDIVIDUAL(S) OVERSEEING IMPLEMENTATION OF, REVISING, AND/OR AMENDING THE SWPPP AND INDIVIDUALS(S) PERFORMING INSPECTIONS FOR THE PROJECT. ONE OF THESE INDIVDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY THE MPCA.C. INDIVIDUAL(S) PERFORMING OR SUPERVISING THE INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF BMPS. AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL ON A PROJECT MUST BE TRAINED IN THES JOB DUTIES.2.TRAINING CONTENT: THE CONTENT AND EXTENT OF TRAINING MUST BE COMMENSURATE WITH THE INDIVIDUAL'S JOB DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITH REGARD TO ACTIVITIES COVERED UNDER THIS PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT. AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE PERMITTED PROJECT SITE (OR AVAVILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITE IN 72 HOURS) MUST BE TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN SECTION 21.2B AND SECTION 21.2C.33.THE PERMITTEE(S) SHALL ENSURE THAT THE INDIVIDUALS ARE TRAINED BY LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL AGENCIES, PROFESSIONAL OR OTHER ENTITIES WITH EXPERTISE IN EROSION PREVENTION, SEDIMENT CONTROL, PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND THE MINNESOTA NPDES/SDS CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT. AN UPDATE REFESHER- TREINING MUST BE ATTENDED EVERY THREE (3) YEARS STARTING THREE (3) YEARS FROM THE ISSUANCE DATE OF THIS PERMIT.33.LIST OF CONTACTS MPCA 24HR. HAZARDOUS SPILL HOTLINE: 651- 649-5457 OF 80420798 DESCRIPTION UNIT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WASHOUT EA SILT FENCE (STANDARD) LF EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY INLET PROTECTION EA QUANTITY 1 NOT ALLOWED 2,300 4 SEEDING AC 1.2±NAME OF WATER BODY TYPE OF WATER BODY SPECIAL WATER IMAIRED WATER TYPE OF SPECIAL WATER CHRISTMAS LAKE LAKE NO NO TITLE NAME OWNERKEN ASHFELD COMPANY PHONE NUMBER PROJECT MANAGER TODD MCLOUTH LOUCKS 763-496-6742 ENGINEER SWPPP VAL ANDERSON 763-496-6728LOUCKS CONTRACTOR SITE 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 444444444444888888 CB RIM: 1025.2 INV: 1021.99 FES INV: 1021.25 62'-12 RCP @ 0.5%MH RIM: 1029.0 INV: 1021.56 61'-10 PVC @ 0.7% 65'-8 PVC @ 0.7% CB RIM: 1025.2 INV: 1022.02 CONNECT TO EX. SANI. MH RIM: 1032.42 INV: 1022.00 80 LF - 8" PVC @ 0.40% SANI. MH 1 RIM: 1033.0 INV: 1022.32 233 LF - 8" PVC @ 0.40% SANI. MH 2 RIM: 1030.5 INV: 1023.25 239 LF - 8" PVC @ 0.40% SANI. MH 3 RIM: 1043.0 INV: 1024.21 CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE RELOCATION OF TELEPHONE & ELECTRIC AS NECESSARY NEW WATER SERVICE TO EX. HOUSE HYDRANT W/GATE VALVE 8" PVC WATERMAIN SANITARY SEWER & WATER SERVICE, TYP. WET-TAP CONNECTION W/8" GATE VALVE BASIN 1 BOTTOM: 1024.0 HWL: 1026.15 BASIN 2 BOTTOM: 1024.0 HWL: 1026.49 NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 1: 17 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C4-1 - UTILITY PLANOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y UTILITY PLAN C4-1 TOLL FREE: 1- 800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.1. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS,THE MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE,THE LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT , AND THE STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), 2013 EDITION.2.ALL UTILITY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION AND THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.3.ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR WORK IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES.4. ALL STORM SEWER , SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICES SHALL TERMINATE 5' FROM THE BUILDING FACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.ALL NEW WATERMAIN AND SERVICES MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 7.5 FEET OF COVER. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD ADJUST WATERMAIN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND SERVICES AS REQUIRED. INSULATION OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE 7.5 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH CAN NOT BE ATTAINED.7.ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. PROPOSED PIPE MATERIALS:WATERMAIN CL 52 DIP 8" DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER PVC SDR 35 & SCH 40 8" DIAMETER WATER SERVICE COPPER TYPE K/HDPE 1" DIAMETER SANITARY SERVICE PVC SCH 40 4" DIAMETER STORM SEWER PVC 8" TO 10" DIAMETER STORM SEWER RCP 12" DIAMETER 9.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.2820 10.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT (SEE MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715. 0700). APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES.11.HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) STORM DRAINS MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA RULES,PART 4715.0540:a.PIPES 4-INCH TO 10-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252.b.PIPES 12-INCH TO 60-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM F2306.c.ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM D3212.d.WATER-TIGHT JOINTS MUST BE USED AT ALL CONNECTIONS INCLUDING STRUCTURES.12. CONTRACTOR AND MANHOLE FABRICATOR SHALL SUMP (LOWER) ALL STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN CASTINGS WITHIN PAVED AREAS 0.16 FEET OR 2-INCHES BELOW THE RIM ELEVATION DEPICTED ON THE UTILITY PLAN.13.ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE ALL SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED AUTHORITY OF OF THE CITY.14.THE CITY SHALL OPERATE ALL GATE VALVES.15.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING MANHOLES SHALL BE MADE BY CORE DRILLING THE MANHOLE AT THE PROPOSED INVERT ELEVATIONS AND INSTALLING A RUBBER BOOT. GROUT IN THE BOOT AND AN INVERT FOR THE NEW SEWER LINE.16.PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ON THE PLAN INCLUDE THE APRON SECTION. 17.WATERMAIN PIPE SHALL BE DIP CLASS 52, INSTALLED WITH 7.5 FEET OF COVER TO TOP PIPE.FITTINGS SHALL BE COMPACT TYPE. PIPE AND FITTINGS SHALL HAVE A CEMENT MORTAR LINING.CONDUCTIVITY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY WELDED STRAPS ACROSS EACH JOIN.T 18.TRENCH COMPACTION SHALL BE 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY IN THE AREA FROM THE PIPE ZONE TO WITHIN 3 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 11: 38 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C8-1 - CIVIL DETAILSOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11- 09-20 11-09- 20PRELI MI N A R Y CIVIL DETAILS C8-1 2" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPWEA240B TACK COAT, MN/DOT 2357 2" BIT. NON- WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPNWB230B 6" AGG. BASE, CLASS 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 24" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D STANDARD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V, MN/ DOT 3733.2 DRAWN 12/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.2031LOUCKS FLOW SECTION A-A SECTION B-B NOTES: VARIABLE THICKNESS HDPE ADJUSTING RINGS AS REQUIRED. MIN. OF 4" ADJUSTMENT AND MAX. OF 12" ADJUSTMENT. USE LARGER ADJUSTMENT RINGS TO MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF JOINTS. INCLUDE ONE 2" RING IMMEDIATELY UNDER THE CASTING. USE TAPERED RINGS TO MATCH CASTING TO STREET GRADE. APPLY BUTYL SEALANT BETWEEN ALL THE JOINTS.CONCRETE RINGS SET IN A MORTAR BED ARE ACCEPTABLE.ADJUST CASTING TO 14" -12" BELOW FINISHED GRADE, TYPICAL FOR ALL CASTINGS IN PAVEMENT NOTE: ALL CONNECTIONS THROUGH MH SHALL HAVE A RUBBER BOOT. ANY FIELD ADDED OPENING FOR PIPE SHALL BE CORE DRILLED AND AN ELASTOMERIC RUBBER BOOT INSTALLED. OFF ROAD MARKERM H INSTALL WHEN M.H. IS PLACED OUTSIDE OF THE ROADWAY.BENCH SLOPE STANDARD SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE MANHOLE CASTING AND COVER, NEENAH R-1642 OR APPROVED EQUAL WITH TWO (2) CONCEALED PICK HOLES.1.WHERE WATER MAY STAND, TOP OF MH SHALL BE 2 FEET ABOVE GROUND,AND/OR 2 FEET ABOVE THE 100 YEAR STORM WATER LEVEL.2.ON MANHOLES 8' DEEP AND GREATER A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH (1'-4") PRECAST SECTION SHALL BE PLACED IMMEDIATELY BELOW CONE SECTION.3.WHEN MANHOLE DEPTH IS LESS THAN 8',A TOP SLAB SHALL BE USED IN PLACE OF THE CONE. TOP SLAB SHALL BE SUITABLE FOR AASHTO HS20 HIGHWAY LOADINGS. THE SLAB SHALL BE SET ON A MORTAR BED.4.ALL JOINTS BETWEEN SECTIONS SHALL HAVE RUBBER O-RING GASKETS. 5.MINIMUM BASE SLAB THICKNESS, 6" TO 14' DEPTH. INCREASE THICKNESS 1" FOR EACH 4' OF DEPTH GREATER THAN 14'.STEPS 16" O. C. ON DOWNSTREAM SIDE.EXTRUDED ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED COPOLYMER PLASTIC.20" TO SPRING LINE MAX.)SLOPE 2"/FOOT 7"27"48"4'1'-4" A B B A AS NEEDEDDRAWN 2/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4000LOUCKS NOTE:GRANULAR MATERIALS FURNISHED FOR USE IN FOUNDATION, BEDDING, ENCASEMENT, OR BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:FOUNDATION MATERIALS SHALL HAVE 100% PASSING THE 1 1/2" SIEVE AND A MAXIMUM OF 10%PASSING THE No. 4 SIEVE. NOT LESS THAN 50% OF THE MATERIAL RETAINED BY THE No. 4 SIEVE SHALL HAVE ONE (1) OR MORE CRUSHED FACES. HARD, DURABLE CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY ROCK MAY BE USED FOR FOUNDATION MATERIALS.BEDDING AND ENCASEMENT MATERIALS FOR FLEXIBLE PIPE SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MNDOT SPECIFICATION 3149. 2B1, GRANULAR BORROW, EXCEPT THAT 100% SHALL PASS THE ONE INCH (1") SIEVE.BACKFILL MATERIALS SHALL CONSIST OF SUITABLE EXISTING TRENCH MATERIALS, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. SUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE DEFINED AS A MINERAL SOIL FREE OF FOREIGN MATERIALS (RUBBISH, ORGANICS & DEBRIS), FROZEN CLUMPS, OVERSIZE STONE, ROCK, CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS CHUNKS, AND OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIALS THAT MAY DAMAGE PIPE, PREVENT THOROUGH COMPACTION, OR INCREASE THE RISKS OF SETTLEMENT. PLASTIC PIPE BEDDING PLASTIC PIPE 18"18" PIPE WIDTH ENCASEMENT BEDDING FOUNDATION MAY NOT BE REQUIRED)12" 6"BACKFILL COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH DRAWN 2/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4008LOUCKS 2" X2" or 4"X4" AT END OF SERVICE.5' MEDIUM DUTY, (1.25 POUNDS/FOOT) STEEL FENCE POST EXPOXY-RESIN COATED, PAINTED OR GALVANIZED INSTALLED TO 6" BELOW FINISHED GRADE.SERVICE PIPE SHALL BE 4" OR 6", AS SPECIFIED USE THE SAME PIPE MATERIAL FROM THE WYE AT THE MAIN TO THE CAP AT THE END OF THE SERVICE.USE A " QWIKSEAL" ADAPTOR FROM FERNCO OR APPROVED EQUAL WHEN CONNECTING TO AN EXISTING SEWER LINE.SEWER SERVICE CONNECTION UP TO 14' DEPTH MINIMUM 2%GRADE 10' MIN. DEPTH OR AS SPECIFIED 45° BEND AT WYE 5' RISER STUB PLUG WYEPROPERTYLINE FLOWWYE IN A 10 O'CLOCK POSITION 45° BEND AT PL 5' RISER STUB PLUG PROPERTYLINE45° BEND AT PL NOTE:SEE DETAIL 4007 FOR TRACER WIRE, WHEN REQUIRED.DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4004LOUCKS MAXIMUM4.0' DEPTH27" OR 30"6"5"MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS IS 6"MANHOLE STEPS, NEENAH R1981J OR EQUAL, 16" ON CENTER AS APPROVED BY OSHA.TOP OF BARREL SECTION BELOW TOP SLAB TO HAVE FLAT TOP EDGE SEALED WITH 2 BEADS OF RAMNEK OR EQUAL.6" PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SLAB WITH 4 BARS AT 5" O.C. EACH WAY AND 2-#4 BARS AT ALL SIDES OF OPENING.NEENAH R-3067 OR EQUAL 27"/30" CATCH BASIN DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4303LOUCKS 24" MAX. 6"MAX. L"SIZE OF PIPE "L"21" TO 42"6"48" TO 72"12"MIN.TIE THE LAST 3 JOINTS ON INLET AND OUTLET PIPES.TRASH GUARD RCP APRON RIPRAP REQUIRED: SEE STD. PLATE 4308 OR 4309 USE 2 TIE BOLT FASTENERS PER JOINT INSTALLED AT 60 DEG FROM TOP OR BOTTOM OF PIPE.USE 5/ 8" TIE FOR PIPE SIZES 12" TO 27". USE 3/ 4" TIE FOR PIPE SIZES 30" TO 66".USE 1" TIE FOR PIPE SIZES OVER 72".TRASH GUARDS WILL BE REQUIRED ON 24" OR LARGER PIPE. SEE 4308-4309 FOR RIPRAP DETAIL PROVIDE 3 CLIPS TO FASTEN TRASH GUARD TO F. E. S. GALVANIZE AFTER FABRICATION. DRAWN 2/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4306LOUCKS SECTION A- A PLAN SECTION B- B DIA.2'2'1 4 LDIA. B B AA RIPRAP 48 15 42 36 30 24 18 12 20 8 10 12 14 18 16 8 48 22-28 30-40 26 5 6 8 12 22 14 5 IV IV III III III III IV III III MINIMUM RIPRAP REQUIRED GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE IV EXTEND 1' UNDER APRON RIP-RAP OUT FROM THE APRON SHALL NOT BE HIGHER THAN THE APRON INVERT.RANDOM / HAND PLACED RIPRAP 1' (12"-27" DIA. PIPE)1.5' (30" AND LARGER PIPE)GEOTEXTILE FABRIC,TYPE IV NOTE: ONE CUBIC YARD IS APPROXIMATELY 1. 4 TONS. RIPRAP 1' ( 12"- 27" DIA. PIPE) 1. 5' (30" AND LARGER PIPE)6" GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL 32-40 32 5 7 10 13 27 17 5 CMP/HDPE QUANTITY C. Y.) RCP QUANTITY C. Y.) DIA. OF PIPE (IN.)L ( FT.) CLASS 6" GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL DRAWN 2/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4308LOUCKS CONCRETE PIPE BEDDING RCP PIPE 18" 18"PIPE WIDTH COMPACTED SAND OR 3 4"TO 1- 1 2" CLEAR ROCK ( AS DIRECTED) COMPACTED SUBGRADE 6" COMPACTED BACKFILL EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH RCP PIPE 18"18" PIPE WIDTH SHAPE BOTTOM CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 11 /09 / 2020 11: 39 AMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\ C8-1 - CIVIL DETAILSOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 11-09-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8- 1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Todd W. McLouth - PE ProjectLeadDrawnByCheckedByLoucks Project No. 20383 20327 TWM TRG TWM 11-09-20 11-09-20PRELI MI N A R Y CIVIL DETAILS C8-2 NOTES:6" HUB WITH THREADED PVC PLUG - DO NOT GLUE CASTING MAY BE REQUIRED SEE SPECIFICATIONS END OF LINE CLEANOUT IN LINE CLEANOUT PVC LONG SWEEP BEND SCH. 40 2.5' VARIES 2. 5'VARIES ONE PIECE 6" PVC SCH. 40 CLEANOUT RISER DRAINTILE CLEAN-OUT STRUCTURE 6. 0'4.0'6. 0'4.0'10' GREEN ENAMEL U- CHANNEL FENCE POST W/ TOP 6 INCHES WRAPPED WITH 3M SCOTCHLITE REFLECTIVE TAPE OR EQUAL. DRAWN 2/ 2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4315LOUCKS COPPER WATER SERVICE CONNECTION MIN. 7'-5"1" CORPORATION STOP WATERMAIN CONCRETE BLOCK SUPPORT CRIMPTED END OF 1- FT PIGTAIL WATER SERVICE 1" TYPE " K" COPPER CURB STOP AND BOX ADJUST TO 1" BELOW FINISH GRADE)STEEL FENCE POST 4' ABOVE GRADE PAINTED BLUE) VARIABLEVARIABLE VARIABLE VARIABLE CL PL NOTE: FOR SERVICES LARGER THAN 1", A TAPPING SLEEVE IS REQUIRED. ROCKWELL TYPE 230, FULL CIRCLE,WITH TAP THREADED FOR APPROPRIATE SIZE COPPER CORPORATION STOP, OR EQUAL.NOTE:1.CURB BOX SHALL HAVE A STATIONARY ROD.2.CURB BOX SHALL EXTEND FROM 78" TO 90".3.SERVICE SHALL BE BEDDED IN GRANULAR BORROW.4.FOR CURB BOX IN PAVEMENT, USE FORD TYPE A CASTING & COVER.DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4603LOUCKS NOTE:GRANULAR MATERIALS FURNISHED FOR USE IN FOUNDATION, BEDDING, ENCASEMENT, OR BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:FOUNDATION MATERIALS SHALL HAVE 100% PASSING THE 1 1/2" SIEVE AND A MAXIMUM OF 10%PASSING THE No. 4 SIEVE. NOT LESS THAN 50% OF THE MATERIAL RETAINED BY THE No. 4 SIEVE SHALL HAVE ONE (1) OR MORE CRUSHED FACES. HARD, DURABLE CRUSHED CARBONATE QUARRY ROCK MAY BE USED FOR FOUNDATION MATERIALS.ROCK BEDDING MATERIALS SHALL BE 3/4" TO 1- 1/2" CLEAR ROCK. IF IN-SITU MATERIAL UNDER ROCK BEDDING IS UNSTABLE, USE AS MUCH ROCK AS NECESSARY TO STABILIZE. DUCTILE IRON PIPE BEDDING D. I. P.PIPE 18" 18" PIPE WIDTH 12" 4"EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH D.I. P. PIPE 18"18"PIPE WIDTH 12" 4"EXCAVATED TRENCH WIDTH SAND BEDDING ROCK BEDDING DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4615LOUCKS GRASS PRE-TREATMENT STRIP UNDISTURBED, UNCOMPACTED INSITU SOIL - INFILTRATION RATES GREATER THAN 1"/ HOUR 3" SHREDDED WOOD MULCH MnDOT TYPE 6)SUGGESTED MIN. PLANTING MEDIUM DEPTH 30" WITH A WELL BLENDED MIXTURE ( BY VOLUME):50-60% HOMOGENOUS CONSTRUCTION SAND 20- 30% ORGANIC LEAF COMPOST 20-30% NATIVE TOPSOIL PLANT MATERIAL TOLERANT OF INUNDATION AND DROUGHT. NATIVE PLANTS RECOMMENDED. 3H:1L MAX.30"DDEPTH REQUIRED TO DRAIN PRACTICE IN 48 HOURS OR LESS,NOT TO EXCEED 18".RIBBON CURB PAVEMENT LOUCKS BIORETENTION BASIN DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO.4315LOUCKS SUGGESTED CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING (NOTE TO DESIGNER: EDIT AS NEEDED TO MEET PROJECT REQUIREMENTS)1.INSTALL APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THE PRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES, ESPECIALLY AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT. 4.INSTALL ALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, NATURAL GAS, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC, ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINAL GRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.ROUGH GRADE THE SITE. IF BIORETENTION AREAS ARE BEING USED AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS DURING CONSTRUCTION, LEAVE A MINIMUM OF 1 FEET OF COVER OVER THE PRACTICE TO PROTECT THE UNDERLYING SOILS FROM CLOGGING.6.COMPLETE, STABILIZE, AND VEGETATE ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.7.CONSTRUCT AND VEGETATE BIORETENTION DEVICE FOLLOWING STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA. ENSURE THAT CRITICAL ELEVATIONS, SUCH AS UNDERDRAIN INVERT, TOP OF MEDIA, TOP OF MULCH, AND INVERT OF OVERFLOW STRUCTURE (IF PRESENT) ARE CORRECT.8.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES (NOTE TO DESIGNER: EDIT AS NEEDED TO MEET PROJECT REQUIREMENTS)1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION.2.SEE MINNESOTA STORMWATER MANUAL FOR SUBGRADE PREPARATION.MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS: BIOFILTRATION SOIL MIX 888888 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 10 /15 / 2020 3: 26 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ LANDSCAPE\_dwg Sheet Files\ L20327 L1-1 Landscape PlanOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 10-16-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Gregory A. Johnson - LAProject Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. 24610 20327 TWM GAJ TWM 10-16-20 10-16-20NSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 TREE CANOPY PLAN L1-1 TREE CANOPY COVERAGE EXISTING CANOPY COVERAGE TREE CANOPY LEGEND PROPOSED CANOPY COVERAGE TO REMAIN NET SITE AREA OUTLOT ' A' AND PRIVATE ROAD EXISTING CANOPY COVERAGE REQUIRED MINIMUM CANOPY COVERAGE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) PROPOSED CANOPY COVERAGE TO REMAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROPOSED CANOPY COVERAGE AND REQUIRED CANOPY COVERAGE = D-C A B C D E DESCRIPTION % SQUARE FEET ACRES TREE CANOPY CALCULATION 59,059 100%1. 34 45,786 122, 379 27,878 0. 64 2.81 39%30% TOTAL AREA150,2573.4545,077 1.03 30. 5%1. 05 709 ADDITIONAL CANOPY REQUIRED - 0 SITE BO U N D A R Y SITE BOUNDARY SITE BOUNDARYSITE BOUNDARY1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 31 323033 34 35 36 37 38 39 454044 4146 48 50 47 49 42 43 51 52 53 58 34 54 56 59 55 57 SIGNIFICANT TREE TABLE DISPOSITIONSPECIESDIAM / HT 2 TREE # MAPLE 1 ELM 3 4 5 6 7 8 23" 9 OAK 10 12 15" 11 15" 13 14 19" 15 16 17 15" 18 19 20 22 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 42 41 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 52 51 53 54 55 56 SPRUCE PINE 16" SAVED SAVED 57 58 59 PINE ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH ASH MAPLE MAPLE MAPLE MAPLE OAK OAK OAK OAK OAK APPLE WALNUT WALNUT WALNUT WALNUT WALNUT WALNUT ELM ELM WALNUT PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE PINE SAVED SAVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED SAVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED REMOVED 21. 5" 17. 5" 19. 5" 11" 19" 17. 5" 17.5" 17.5" 17.5" 13"13" 13"13" 18.5" 10"10" 10"10" 10"10" 12"12" 12" 13. 5" 13. 5" 13. 5" 13. 5" 15. 5" 15.5" 15.5" 11. 5"11. 5" 11.5" 17" 17" 17" 25" 25" 8888881AB 1 AB 1 AB 2 BS 2 CH 3 WP 3 RB DECIDUOUS TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT CAL AB 3 AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE Acer freemanii `Autumn Blaze`B & B 2.5"Cal RB 3 RIVER BIRCH Betula nigra B & B CH 2 COMMON HACKBERRY Celtis occidentalis B & B 2.5"Cal EVERGREEN TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT CAL BS 2 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE Picea glauca `Densata`B & B WP 3 WHITE PINE Pinus strobus B & B 6` MIN. HGT. PLANT SCHEDULE GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID. HE SHALL INSPECT SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. VERIFY LAYOUT AND ANY DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN AND/OR INTENT OF THE PROJECT'S LAYOUT. ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SITE ELEMENTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. ANY DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALIGNMENT AND LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GRADE UTILITIES AND PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PROTECTION FOR SAME BEFORE CONSTRUCTION / MATERIAL INSTALLATION BEGINS (MINIMUM 10' - 0" CLEARANCE). ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHALL BE LAID SO THAT TRENCHES DO NOT CUT THROUGH ROOT SYSTEMS OF ANY EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. EXISTING CONTOURS, TRAILS, VEGETATION, CURB/GUTTER AND OTHER EXISTING ELEMENTS BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF SAME. THE ALIGNMENT AND GRADES OF THE PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS AND/OR ROADWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LOCALIZED TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS AND TO MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL AND GRADING. ANY CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 10 /15 / 2020 3: 32 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ LANDSCAPE\_dwg Sheet Files\ L20327 L1-1 Landscape PlanOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 10-16-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Gregory A. Johnson - LA Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. 24610 20327 TWM GAJ TWM 10-16-20 10-16-20 LANDSCAPE PLAN L2-1 Gopher State One Call THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS,PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTORSHALLREPAIRORREPLACETHEABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. WARNING SITE BO U N D A R Y SITE BOUNDARY SITE BOUNDARYSITE BOUNDARYNSCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 LANDSCAPE PLAN GROUNDCOVER LEGEND SOD / TOPSOIL - SEE NOTES MNDOT NATIVE SEED LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL COMPLETE GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. WHERE SOD/SEED ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD/SEED SHALL BE HELD 1" BELOW SURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC. SEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING OTHER THAN THOSE AREAS NOTED TO RECEIVE SOD. MULCH FOR TURF SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE TYPE 5 WOOD FIBER HYDROMULCH CONFORMING WITH MNDOT 3884. MULCH FOR SEEDED AREAS WITH SLOPES 15% OR GREATER SHALL BE MNDOT CATEGORY 1, STRAW RD 1S BLANKET CONFORMING WITH MNDOT 3885. SOD ALL DESIGNATED AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING. SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, THE SOD SHALL BE STAKED TO THE GROUND. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL SHRUBS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 5 CANES AT THE SPECIFIED MINIMUM SHRUB HEIGHT OR WIDTH. ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL HAVE NO V-CROTCHES AND SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 3' ABOVE ROOT BALL. STREET AND BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 5' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. ANY CONIFEROUS TREE PREVIOUSLY PRUNED FOR CHRISTMAS TREE SALES SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL BE FULL FORM, NATURAL TO THE SPECIES, WITHOUT PRUNING. PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER PLANT SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF A BID AND/OR QUOTATION. ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED AND STAKED AS SHOWN ON PLAN. ADJUSTMENTS IN LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS MAY BE NEEDED IN FIELD. SHOULD AN ADJUSTMENT BE ADVISED, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FERTILIZED UPON INSTALLATION WITH A 27-3-3 SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER MIXED IN WITH THE PLANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. PLANTS MAY BE TREATED FOR SUMMER AND FALL INSTALLATION WITH AN APPLICATION OF GRANULAR 27-3-3 AT 6 OZ PER 2.5" CALIPER PER TREE AND 3 OZ PER SHRUB WITH AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION OF 27-3-3 THE FOLLOWING SPRING IN THE TREE SAUCER. ALL PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER PLANTING DETAILS. REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELS FROM PLANTS. WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE CORRUGATED PVC PIPING 1" GREATER IN CALIPER THAN THE TREE BEING PROTECTED OR QUALITY, HEAVY, WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12-1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING AFTER 5-1. MULCH SHALL BE CLEAN SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH UNIFORM PIECE SIZE. ALL TREES NOT IN PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 4" DEEP MULCH WITH NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK. SPREAD GRANULAR PRE EMERGENT HERBICIDE (PREEN OR EQUAL) PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER ALL MULCHED AREAS. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS CONCERNED OR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOIL CONDITIONS OR ANY OTHER SITE CONDITION WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR GUARANTEE, HE MUST BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PROCUREMENT AND/OR INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION OF ALL LANDSCAPE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ON-GOING MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM INCLUDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO, PRUNING, FERTILIZATION AND DISEASE/PEST CONTROL. CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH ONE CALENDAR YEAR BEGINNING ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION AND SEED/SOD PLACEMENT IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE 15. FALL SODDING IS GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 - NOVEMBER 1. FALL SEEDING FROM AUGUST 15 - SEPTEMBER 15; DORMANT SEEDING IN THE FALL SHALL NOT OCCUR PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1. FALL CONIFEROUS PLANTING MAY OCCUR FROM AUGUST 15 - OCTOBER 1 AND DECIDUOUS PLANTING FROM THE FIRST FROST UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. PLANTING OUTSIDE THESE DATES IS NOT RECOMMENDED. ANY ADJUSTMENT MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PROTECT ALL EXISTING OAKS ON SITE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN. IF EXISTING OAKS ARE DAMAGED IN ANY MANNER, ABOVE OR BELOW GROUND IN THE ROOT SYSTEM, AN ASPHALTIC TREE PRUNING PAINT SHOULD BE APPLIED IMMEDIATELY AFTER WOUNDING. OAKS ARE NOT TO BE PRUNED, REMOVED OR TRANSPLANTED BETWEEN APRIL 15 AND JULY 1. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF THESE DATES ARE UNAVOIDABLE. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH TO HIS SATISFACTION THAT SOIL AND COMPACTION CONDITIONS ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE AT AND AROUND THE BUILDING SITE. CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING LOUCKS Coniferous Tree Planting.dwgSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES. PRUNE ANY DAMAGED BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. 16"x2" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE STRAP SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE BACKFILL WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL WOOD STAKE (OPTIONAL) EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. ROOT BALL SET ON UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. MULCH - 4" DEEP - SEE NOTES OR SPECS. MULCH MUST NOT BE IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK. 2LOUCKS Deciduous Tree Planting.dwgSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2x ROOT BALL WIDTH CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN WOOD STAKE (OPTIONAL) MULCH - 4" DEEP. NO MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK - SEE NOTES OR SPECS. ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH OR JUST ABOVE GRADE. SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE TREE WRAP TO FIRST BRANCH 16"x2" POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE STRAP WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. CUT BACK WIRE BASKET PRUNE DAMAGED AND CROSSING BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD PRACTICES BACKFILL WITH IN SITU TOPSOIL DECIDUOUS TREEPLANTING1 CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 10 /15 / 2020 3: 33 PMW:\ 2020\20327\ CADD DATA\ LANDSCAPE\_dwg Sheet Files\ L20327 L1-1 Landscape PlanOUCKSL QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS CADD QUALIFICATION DEER HAVEN CHANHASSEN, MN KEN ASHFELD 6480 YOSEMITE AVE.CHANHASSEN, MN 55331 10-16-20 PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL C0-1 COVER SHEET C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1-2 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLAN C3-1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C3-2 SWPP PLAN C3-3 SWPP NOTES & DETAILS C4-1 UTILITY PLAN C8-1 DETAIL SHEET L1- 1 TREE CANOPY PLAN L2-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L3-1 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No.Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Gregory A. Johnson - LA Project Lead Drawn By Checked CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss COUNTYOFCARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on November 19,2020,the duly qualified and acting Deputy clerk of the city of chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy ofthe attached notice ofa Public Hearing to consider a Request for the Rezoning of Property fron Rural Residential (RR) to single-Family Residential (RSF) and Subdivision of 2.8 Acres into Four Single-Family Lots and One Outlot with Variances Located Southeast of the Cul-de-Sac for Wood Duck Lane and West of Yosemite Avenue, Planning Case No. 2020-22 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records ofthe County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Kim Meuwissen, Deputy Subscribed and swom to before me thisEa day of lt)i"*-.'-ol-<,'^, Seal) JEAI{ M SIECXUI{G ttotaryPlnbffrxoIthtrEpttrtl, Ea 4 2020. Notary Public Subject Aaea This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a suNey and is not intended to be used as one ihis map is a compilaton of recods.anfomation and data located in various oty, county state and federal offces and other sources rcgardang the area shown, ancl is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not wanant that the Geog€Phic lnformation System (G lS) Data used lo prepare this map are enor free. and the city does not rcPresent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational,tracking or any other purpose requiring exactin!measurement oI distance or direction o. precision in ltle depiction of geographic featules.The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to stitutas 5loo.o:. Suto.21 (2000), and the user of thas map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, a nd expressly u/alves all claims. and agrces to debnd.indemnify. and hold harmle$ the City Irom any and all daims brought by Ljser. its employees or agents. or third Partres wlich adse out of the useis access or use of data provaded Thas map is nenher a legally recorded map not a survey and is not intended to be used as one This map is a comprlation of aecords infomaton and data located an various oty state and federal offices and olher sources regarding the area shown. and as to b€ used ior rebrence purPoses only. The City does not wanant that the Geog€phic lnformalion Syslem (G lS) Data used to Prepare this maP ale enor free, and the CIY does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigattonal trackrng or any other DuDOSe rcquiring exacting measurement of distrance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic teatures.The precedi ng disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesotra Statutes Y66.03, Subd.21 (2000). and ihe user of this map acknowledges lhat the City shall not be liable for any damages and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend . andemnify. and hold harmless the City from any and all claims bought TAX-NAilEr TAX-ADD-Lltr TAX_ADD_L2) cNext RecordnITAX-NAMEP TAX-ADD-L1tr TAX-ADD-L2)D Subiect Area by user, its employees use of data provided. or agents, or third Parties which anse out ofthe useis access or IL-it-IIII 1 I l L r-r,- Il -] Ex I rad sT,;^r r d-'.o J t:; t:1-r 7(- t 1 E I\ x t i-J ni-l'-.r,rl i 5 o f Vt .c oo ^ rO' ; d O. -c ! FF9; A.Q-ld3ei itEE: 9 r!E65Oko -*t;o6gIHAE o, IE I o ESEHe5',^s; EP:AEE'c = o. ,, EEIEE 9(/)F(J C O-r N d) S o o E 9. E o E o 9 o cotooE l ro(! oo. oo o ao) q) Co oE Eo 9 0) Eo o)o o- E o o) E(! o 0)E o) i oq) E o o o) o ! lo.C o fou o o c q) oo, Elooo-o- o(! o) F (! o)9 cr oatl(\I o.: *Al sHl!Ell., orl 5^BEl eg 5l EEI Etll3d'El i.s il 6:l o,o Eo E o, a0).coo.c F.-o o E0)cNNoooo.9 0)o !E!(!ctroo)r! co o) o (! o, o oooo-c q)o 1CoCo)o o.oo !-o) C oo col o o- E o o.c) o o oo o) E to aoco E-c F c tD E E r! ao o oE C t q) t0 eo.c'ic o)o q) oo, tl, Eo)d a) 6 itioo-c (!E- o:, o o o Fo C t) co o- oo o N G o o ooE c a)E E 9l l EI clol 5l cl NlEI 9tot G) 9l( Dlcloldt ol o Co 4) Eo o oo Eo aoi, E o,6 9 E Eoo o c 0) o Eq) o @ ct ., o9trtroo t, =(,E ooo Et.o o. a! eto-J 9clt d, .= REf= lll.C H Io E 9 o) rD E( En 6 6 Ioc t a) ccoY iio o 6 E s e 9 F cioo l- o C. loar.E EAE6) o5o- q(5= D' IDEJO ooCIo o- m o ooF- F. o Eo o o 0)c o)Eo q) loLLc0)o,) C o) E )(') c€ U)o a,) E o o) Eooo a !trotr0) o o(E (! o o o coEo o0) oco 6too q o o - c q) cl! Jo)=t .;ro. of o E eooE o oC E c CLLoa ooo o !d too- eo-oC G' oo o oo oo)c o o)o o!!-! EcoN t (!foc,F a; Ei: ca, o, oo o i!(, oJ E EEI E 9 at!! 3 e E6n E t e E z E E 8 e 9 9 n 3 E e I 6 p E 3 q o! coo)o o)oco(, o) o) E 0) co. c,;o) co o o)Eo olocc! orl) o oooofcoq) o C o E 0)ooEco) q)Ep Cc)Co o o oao)Eacc C EoEo) a o uJz B IDE i, a, t 9r.o.: oi.9atE LE. 9oEo C'o- . ErE GII l!. 9d OE28 ot! o Itlc oo B.ELOGI,' a, .= E. eE 9(JdEs-! OE EEEo- ooa! Eo. co tl, E r* Hil€E; ESXEiX --= - (!> - 9, > oEaqaEp iE#5E 1P cES EIg E Ep ct 5 L=tt Ql- o IloSlEE6 > Elq E -8., El U, oF..ilg P c'69lot! q a, Eg€ Ef! 21-c c E 6 gl :E 6a6logo.: El;3 e E 6P 8;E 5 0 Q=) 9 r,- 0) al! EN C O > o). c q) H; do ; vl o- t -o c: EE:A-Q orQ oi c irEEi 6;.q 6!E EEEHB c a *oE 6o>o^ ElEE=Eb;S:. E e E,P E€ F()(L 6; oc! c o og oIo oo5.C 0ra l 9-o'Eq tttCoo a360 o< Nl o.r *ol sHl 4Ar=l BEl EE EI E€I E 8!l d'qllsil 6!l c oo 1o(! Co o,) o o) o- o) oE otc oo( Dloo) o) E (!co eo- q) a o, o!(! o) oo Eo E(,(, E 9o 9. E Eo C' c so. ooEoo).c . c o ofo o o)] o {! tOE q)o Eo o cr) coc c oo E o) tr(! q) r! oo o). c o o o)c fo o o oo ID c(! o, o- E o. o(! D F ca .. o9Egoo o=O'Efooo gtsoo'Eo_(! eto-J o) g od) G- o od) oa a) E ID oY iio o lll6oCIo o. 2d) c) o ooF. l'- q) o Eo o foo I fc o,) E a)c o o oo)LLco_ qEo)c o a,) E€a lo oo oo EoxoEuoo) E oo q) o a Co)! N o) p ococcoo)E o o c(! o C,9 GJo)d olo o)!ofEo c o(! 2 ooQ)E o)oIL U)Boonlcco.oooo oo,oc')c o.c ac o).> o. c oN E q)!. I, F E G id F c6 o oo o GIoJ E F PE o- oO f.- o! o) F ooc o) o C o= c)oo.) E o C o.)-oE c e o rl)- c o = co o)oo oGoao,0) E!co o) Do E c o)o o)l!co EEq) co)C( E q) o q) oo-l ElcccEo)o. c. a - 0) lrJozo = g e I 9g EEI t a E 3 a E Iq n a i q 9 6 E E3 c E E 9I E a q c p E 5 T 3 E P E E EE 9&p ;E8as e I p Es E E E -s E€ I E i E E E 6 E E I d@ q e E E a 6 g I 9 6 E E E E E. E a E E I 9II a a I 6 I 9 E EE E E E E E Eq I 9E E e E 8. E E E e g e q a 9 E 3EI e E E E E at3eq 6 E ! p3 E 5 I 3a E3E t q 3E E 9,E 6E e Ep a 6 9 a oo o ti o oo- G q o Ec(! o,) oo ao ooNoN c)- o E 0)o It)o o o o e 55. 9crt 6r .= d,f= eCtr! .E tg odoioooooooNoooooooQooooooqC)oooooiooooooooo.. l.rd <r dN i Hrr@HNorEooHoo -aiN -F.cr(D6 a66t + r.i;6566.{r,,6;5SEEEEEsEsEESEEEEECIAEE6'6E8EE8EE8B835XE[i8XEEr.n F. .n n r^ F F. F F \o F. F- 6 l( i |< l<,n l; i\i ;\i ;! 6 6 N 6 6:- E ! I E E B G 3 b + 3 s E E I A I E I E + 3 3 3 3 E E E E B B B B s Ei I E E B B I H E=., r! v! ur 6 u' 6 !^ .^ 4 !.' {t 1.I^ Ln (^ r^ 6 '.6 'h 6 4 In 6 (n.^ !^ 6 6 6,; r^ 6 6hNNN^i6i-.iAi ^ i N 6i.i.i - ii - F.i ai - - 6i .i.i ^ i J (r e =^o e=^ = ==E=83= E;;E;;;;=gE;E=39i!ES!=ii;i;iI;=EEEEEEEEa=BEH=HH=HHEHEE*H+e**HEerEicggggggEIEEEEEEEEddoHooHoHHdc, o d o d o d i o HH..rooHoi- S,4.^ 1-'b lo F F. oo e 6 6 b n n n N N 6.n 6 (j ci i- cj ;. NHHiii-;-;;rHH d ; ; ; iri !b (o @ 6 \6 ,n 6 zl6 o F aF 6 9z^; E9 gci 9 z z z. zzgz*Zz E E E E E a E a a E a E i t a E E i ; a ; E i E EE E EE E g I E E E E I I E I- j q H Q <) H o H H !-{ O o H Q n o d H O H H-.oo!-lctHaE { q q q q q G q ts q 3 3 3 B 3 E 3 5 b 3 3 6 F R i i N N s F N H H re * g i. " 6 .'i +'; F H i i i i i;;;;;;.r H,-.r -i r{;;;;;: i i a a -o.J33 33 3 g g3B3 g 333 3 8 g I I I p - ^ F. 6 '< 6 5 ,< ii6ornS ,F FE+F E ao6 d66d6;"iEESSEBBBIEBBBBBBBB6iLiinHidHid,-, i !-r n!r n!r!in,r id,l H.1 i* .r.i i JIJ**Jf IIf f f f.n m.,t r' ..; o i,i..;yi i,i iyi id iyi ivi i', iij .n.n 6 di j E H fi fi H # S n E I g S g s s s ggXJ 'n !^ l,) tr,6 !^ !n .r1 ur '/ 1 .^ 6 !^ ur !r) ,r .^ lrj 6 L4t,4 14,4,4 r^ rn t^ZZ i iri h .a !^ 6 rrilrits =,/'.^ 6 rng) L^ I^ !^ !^ 6 rn L^ ln ui ' ri ti lri 6tn !'i 6!i 6 ii ,i i A h l^ ar,ri l; 6oz, z ? 7 7 7 7 Z ZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZ Z Z Z Z--'.ZZZZZZZZ R';' 5 5 5 E 5 6 5 5 5 6 5 E 6 6 E E 6 6 E 6 6 6 6 6 E E E E E ss E A E E E E E E E E? 9 _.q q q q 4 44q4q q a 4 - - tr A 6 a a d 6 6 ; 6 6 6 6 6; ; i b ; ; ; ; a ; ; ; i'E H x x x x * * x x x x x x * * x x x * * ; * x * x * ; x x ; * x x x * * * * EEr E e=tuE=Igsi;e;EsEEEEEEEEg;leEEsiisEiEsEEsE rrzl\l,a^,Az EE=E!==EE33a:"=i=i'I5*BEA;= EgEr;aEE U^ - r'lqoo 'rttzc 9^ J\.ra,tototororo\^ dtor dl ur5555 Gr-6P-OPOOOo---x45!iooooo SEigEEEEE o14i===== 6-lcFir'iFiFidi a'rordro\6in6o6rr!555s PiPoP<)oo>>>><<<<= 441=9BHvH al -ata)r;6mmr 3=,5 o2I c 6z 2 r19za Oz f, F t!=nnnnn a -r-nvuu!4!4aaPE3F33.e z2zzz 2Z720UrUUUususEtsHEHEEi*,b,b io ,b{!!- oo oo S .o o' 3r 2' u'3sz 6=(, gd. nu(n(n(rRRREg;8SSu6uuur61(,(.u8A888838t 6ooooo(roo CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject City Council Resignation Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: K.1. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No:  SUMMARY Attached is correspondence from Council Member Julia Coleman resigning her position as City Council Member, effective January 4, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Council Member Vacancy CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject Review of Claims Paid 01­11­2021 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: K.2. Prepared By Kelly Strey, Interim Finance Director File No:  SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on January 11, 2021: Check Numbers Amounts 174634 – 174785 $1,620,341.14 ACH Payments $1,383,763.58 Total All Claims $3,004,104.72 ATTACHMENTS: Check Summary Check Summary ACH Check Detail Check Detail ACH Accounts Payable User: Printed: dwashburn 1/4/2021 9:30 AM Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount ABCCLE ABC Cleaning, LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 150.00174634 ASPEQU Aspen Equipment 12/10/2020 0.00 5,435.04174635 BENPRO BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 12/10/2020 0.00 305.00174636 BRYROC BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 12/10/2020 0.00 392.68174637 BurkChar Charlie Burke 12/10/2020 0.00 205.49174638 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 0.00 3,869.60174639 CenLin CenturyLink 12/10/2020 0.00 64.00174640 CROCOL CROWN COLLEGE 12/10/2020 0.00 350.00174641 CUBFOO CUB FOODS 12/10/2020 0.00 98.22174642 CUTABO CUT ABOVE INC 12/10/2020 0.00 7,100.00174643 DCBra DC Braun Company Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 2,500.00174644 DELTOO DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/10/2020 0.00 26.67174645 DPCIND DPC Industries, Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 3,393.72174646 ferwat Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/10/2020 0.00 1,056.03174647 FRAINC FRANEK INCORPORATED 12/10/2020 0.00 6,050.00174648 GarBui Gardner Builders Minneapolis, LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 3,500.00174649 GRABAR GRAYBAR 12/10/2020 0.00 621.70174650 HarJos Joshua Hargrove 12/10/2020 0.00 208.94174651 HENCOU HENNEPIN COUNTY 12/10/2020 0.00 4.48174652 JAGCOM Jaguar Communications Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 53.60174653 JoneDavi David Jones 12/10/2020 0.00 100.00174654 LamSon Lametti & Sons Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 451,574.22174655 LANNRYAN Ryan Lannon 12/10/2020 0.00 135.99174656 MetGar Metro Garage Door Company 12/10/2020 0.00 463.88174657 METCO2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 12/10/2020 0.00 205,291.66174658 MINRUR MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSN 12/10/2020 0.00 300.00174659 NORPOW NORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIP CO 12/10/2020 0.00 2,571.61174660 PILDRY PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 12/10/2020 0.00 442.43174661 Pollar Pollard Water 12/10/2020 0.00 2,091.32174662 QUAFIR Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 1,000.00174663 RaySig Mary Kathleen Raymond 12/10/2020 0.00 150.00174664 ROERBRIA BRIAN ROERICK 12/10/2020 0.00 284.94174665 ShaMde SMSC Organics Recycling Facility 12/10/2020 0.00 151.04174666 Southwes Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 12/10/2020 0.00 866.00174667 SOUSUB Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 0.00 864.82174668 THERJODI Jodi Theriault 12/10/2020 0.00 1,704.66174669 TMSJOH TMS JOHNSON, INC 12/10/2020 0.00 195.00174670 TWIHAR TWIN CITY HARDWARE 12/10/2020 0.00 233.25174671 WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 1,274.43174672 UB*02106 SUE ADLER 12/17/2020 0.00 6.41174673 AE2SCON AE2S CONSTRUCTION LLC 12/17/2020 VOID 5,100.17 0.00174674 AirHeat Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 12/17/2020 0.00 114.00174675 ALLEPRIN Allegra Print & Imaging 12/17/2020 0.00 40.00174676 UB*02105 SUSAN APPLEGATE 12/17/2020 0.00 84.02174677 ARAMAR ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 12/17/2020 0.00 565.50174678 ASPMIL ASPEN MILLS 12/17/2020 0.00 56.95174679 UB*02111 ATTORNEYS TITLE GROUP 12/17/2020 0.00 41.68174680 Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/4/2021 9:30 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount BCATRA BCA 12/17/2020 0.00 120.00174681 UB*02117 PETER & DEANNA BRANDT 12/17/2020 0.00 79.64174682 UB*02108 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 0.00 66.72174683 UB*02114 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 0.00 10.89174684 CarLic CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 12/17/2020 0.00 1,900.62174685 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 0.00 1,181.01174686 DEMCON DEM-CON LANDFILL 12/17/2020 0.00 79.05174687 UB*02109 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 12/17/2020 0.00 55.86174688 EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 12/17/2020 0.00 882.50174689 EscFir Escape Fire Protection LLC 12/17/2020 0.00 29.95174690 UB*02116 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 0.00 44.14174691 UB*02107 EXECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 0.00 83.65174692 UB*02115 PERRY & MICHELLE FERIS 12/17/2020 0.00 21.92174693 gonhom GONYEA HOMES 12/17/2020 0.00 54.00174694 GREMEA GREEN MEADOWS INC 12/17/2020 0.00 220.00174695 HEINROBE ROBERT HEINEN 12/17/2020 0.00 107.36174696 HENCOU HENNEPIN COUNTY 12/17/2020 0.00 1,600.00174697 HERLAN HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 12/17/2020 0.00 408.00174698 Intereum Intereum, Inc.12/17/2020 0.00 2,458.15174699 KENGRA KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 12/17/2020 0.00 132.00174700 KUSCON KUSSKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 12/17/2020 0.00 50,955.00174701 LANNRYAN Ryan Lannon 12/17/2020 0.00 276.93174702 MacCen MacPhail Center for Music 12/17/2020 0.00 965.00174703 MILWIN Milbank Winwater Works 12/17/2020 0.00 6,452.32174704 MNSaf Minnesota Safety Council 12/17/2020 0.00 234.00174705 MinuPre Minuteman Press 12/17/2020 0.00 81.00174706 NEWSIG NEWMAN SIGNS INC 12/17/2020 0.00 170.63174707 OttTrav Travis Ott 12/17/2020 0.00 285.75174708 PitBow Pitney Bowes Inc.12/17/2020 0.00 105.00174709 RaySig Mary Kathleen Raymond 12/17/2020 0.00 70.00174710 UB*02104 RESULTS TITLE 12/17/2020 0.00 22.37174711 SABIDEAN DEAN SABINSKE 12/17/2020 0.00 145.93174712 Schmigre Greg Schmieg 12/17/2020 0.00 325.74174713 UB*02102 HAE SEOK 12/17/2020 0.00 14.54174714 SHEWIL SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/17/2020 0.00 372.53174715 ShaMde SMSC Organics Recycling Facility 12/17/2020 0.00 3,333.88174716 UB*02112 NICHOLAS & NICOLE STORM 12/17/2020 0.00 52.76174717 TesTec Tessco Technologies 12/17/2020 0.00 275.66174718 TheMus The Mustard Seed, Inc.12/17/2020 0.00 245.00174719 TIMLAN TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC.12/17/2020 0.00 540.56174720 TobMic Michael Tobin 12/17/2020 0.00 250.00174721 UB*02113 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 12/17/2020 0.00 90.29174722 TriExt Trinity Exteriors, Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 130.08174723 TWIHAR TWIN CITY HARDWARE 12/17/2020 0.00 5,410.00174724 UB*02103 GEORGE VAN ALSTINE 12/17/2020 0.00 95.50174725 WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 291.65174726 WatInMot Water In Motion, Inc.12/17/2020 0.00 12,000.00174727 UB*02110 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 12/17/2020 0.00 35.76174728 WIDCON WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 12/17/2020 0.00 68,031.57174729 WINGRICH RICHARD WING 12/17/2020 0.00 100.00174730 DoaJen Jennifer Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen 12/17/2020 0.00 381.00174731 BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 12/23/2020 0.00 291.75174732 BowRya Ryan & Kristen Bowlds 12/23/2020 0.00 250.00174733 BRESTIM TIM BRESNAHAN 12/23/2020 0.00 425.00174734 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/23/2020 0.00 728.71174735 CenLin CenturyLink 12/23/2020 0.00 60.16174736 CORMAI CORE & MAIN LP 12/23/2020 0.00 2,024.00174737 Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/4/2021 9:30 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount CroDav David & AnnMarie Crosser 12/23/2020 0.00 250.00174738 DELTOO DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/23/2020 0.00 772.70174739 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/23/2020 0.00 125.53174740 ferwat Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/23/2020 0.00 7,491.97174741 HeaPar HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 0.00 63,133.24174742 HopSpo Hopkins Sports Camps LLC 12/23/2020 0.00 636.00174743 IndSig Indigo Signs 12/23/2020 0.00 2,184.00174744 K2Ele K2 Electrical Services Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 1,699.00174745 KarChe Karl Chevrolet, Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 28,394.14174746 LotPri Lotus Print Group, Inc.12/23/2020 0.00 904.00174747 MBEInc MBE Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 1,144.00174748 MINFIR CERTIFICATION BOARD MINNESOTA FIRE SERVICE12/23/2020 0.00 120.00174749 MNSaf Minnesota Safety Council 12/23/2020 0.00 74.00174750 MNTRAN MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 12/23/2020 0.00 1,625.51174751 OlsMark Mark Olson 12/23/2020 0.00 250.00174752 PowCoa Powder Coating Technologies 12/23/2020 0.00 1,653.00174753 SABIDEAN DEAN SABINSKE 12/23/2020 0.00 279.07174754 SCONEL SCOTT NELSON COACHING INC 12/23/2020 0.00 375.00174755 SOULOC SOUTHWEST LOCK & KEY 12/23/2020 0.00 159.50174756 THECON THEIS CONSTRUCTION CO 12/23/2020 0.00 41,906.98174757 VCACha VCA Chanhassen Animal Hospital 12/23/2020 0.00 887.01174758 WilDou Douglas & Sandra Wilder 12/23/2020 0.00 2,500.00174759 BCATRA BCA 12/30/2020 0.00 60.00174760 BRYROC BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 12/30/2020 0.00 807.64174761 BurkChar Charlie Burke 12/30/2020 0.00 76.72174762 CustFir Customized Fire Rescue Training Inc 12/30/2020 0.00 1,370.00174763 CUTABO CUT ABOVE INC 12/30/2020 0.00 1,200.00174764 DELTOO DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/30/2020 0.00 27.13174765 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/30/2020 0.00 304.95174766 GRABAR GRAYBAR 12/30/2020 0.00 69.66174767 INDSCH INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 12/30/2020 0.00 5,277.08174768 Loc49 IUOE Local #49 12/30/2020 0.00 700.00174769 JMSCUST JMS Custom Homes LLC 12/30/2020 0.00 2,500.00174770 LamSon Lametti & Sons Inc 12/30/2020 0.00 144,512.86174771 LENCHE LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 12/30/2020 0.00 2,386.51174772 MACZPATR PATRICK MACZKO 12/30/2020 0.00 410.19174773 METCO2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 12/30/2020 0.00 2,660.00174774 NCPERS MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 0.00 96.00174775 MNPOL MN Pollution Control Agency 12/30/2020 0.00 45.00174776 MusoJose Joseph Musolf 12/30/2020 0.00 179.97174777 POST POSTMASTER 12/30/2020 0.00 629.74174778 SchBro Scherer Bros Lumber Co 12/30/2020 0.00 30.06174779 SHEWIL SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/30/2020 0.00 49.31174780 SMHEN SM HENTGES & SONS 12/30/2020 0.00 412,792.87174781 STAMIN STATE OF MINNESOTA 12/30/2020 0.00 82.00174782 TayEle Taylor Electric Company, LLC 12/30/2020 0.00 8,220.00174783 VALRIC VALLEY-RICH CO INC 12/30/2020 0.00 6,537.28174784 WIDCON WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 12/30/2020 0.00 1,707.01174785 Report Total (152 checks): 1,620,341.14 5,100.17 Page 3AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/4/2021 9:30 AM) Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User:dwashburn Printed: 1/4/2021 9:32 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH ALEAIR ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 12/10/2020 0.00 72.67 ACH AMEENG AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/10/2020 0.00 32,901.57 ACH BOYTRU Boyer Ford Trucks 12/10/2020 0.00 175.43 ACH BROAWA BROADWAY AWARDS 12/10/2020 0.00 84.72 ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 4,272.06 ACH COMINT COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 12/10/2020 0.00 80.00 ACH CRYINF Crystal Infosystems LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 245.95 ACH ELEPUM ELECTRIC PUMP INC 12/10/2020 0.00 2,213.53 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 12/10/2020 0.00 108.78 ACH GeaWas Gear Wash, LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 2,881.19 ACH GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 12/10/2020 0.00 369.90 ACH IMPPOR IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 12/10/2020 0.00 10,262.60 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/10/2020 0.00 60,083.31 ACH LARSDALE DALE LARSEN 12/10/2020 0.00 65.20 ACH LYMLUM LYMAN LUMBER 12/10/2020 0.00 1,720.11 ACH Marco Marco Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 1,112.54 ACH MasEle Master Electric Co. Inc. 12/10/2020 0.00 330.00 ACH MatTri Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 12/10/2020 0.00 331.19 ACH MERACE MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 0.00 1,042.93 ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/10/2020 0.00 830.00 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 0.00 15,494.24 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 12/10/2020 0.00 163.65 ACH OREAUT O'Reilly Automotive Inc 12/10/2020 0.00 176.40 ACH PARCON PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 12/10/2020 0.00 2,689.00 ACH POMTIR POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 12/10/2020 0.00 1,045.52 ACH PRALAW PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN 12/10/2020 0.00 14.05 ACH PREMRM PRECISE MRM LLC 12/10/2020 0.00 201.66 ACH SanCre Sand Creek EAP, LLC. 12/10/2020 0.00 3,500.00 ACH SUBCHE SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 12/10/2020 0.00 47.74 ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 12/10/2020 0.00 321.26 ACH WarLit Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 12/10/2020 0.00 229.50 ACH WatCon Water Conservation Services, Inc. 12/10/2020 0.00 496.40 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/10/2020 0.00 1,207.49 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 12/10/2020 0.00 18,359.28 ACH AdvEng Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 1,920.00 ACH BENEXT BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 12/17/2020 0.00 131.44 ACH carcou Carver County 12/17/2020 0.00 508,633.28 ACH CarGra CarteGraph Systems 12/17/2020 0.00 36,886.16 ACH ColEng Collins Engineers Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 2,200.00 ACH COMINT COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 12/17/2020 0.00 7,136.00 ACH EMEAUT EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC 12/17/2020 0.00 48.72 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 12/17/2020 0.00 107.53 ACH HANTHO HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 12/17/2020 0.00 934.00 ACH INDLAN Indoor Landscapes Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 187.00 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/17/2020 0.00 14.58 ACH MADGAL MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 12/17/2020 0.00 90.00 ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/17/2020 0.00 990.00 ACH MINGER MINGER CONSTRUCTION 12/17/2020 0.00 10,920.00 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 12/17/2020 0.00 50.00 Page 1 of 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH MUNCOD MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 12/17/2020 0.00 350.00 ACH PedTay Taylor Pederson 12/17/2020 0.00 1,238.25 ACH PotMN Potentia MN Solar 12/17/2020 0.00 6,930.39 ACH PreWat Premium Waters, Inc 12/17/2020 0.00 3.00 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 12/17/2020 0.00 597.00 ACH RBMSER RBM SERVICES INC 12/17/2020 0.00 7,266.10 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 12/17/2020 0.00 30.40 ACH USABLU USA BLUE BOOK 12/17/2020 0.00 1,392.30 ACH WAYTEK WAYTEK INC 12/17/2020 0.00 117.34 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/17/2020 0.00 1,323.49 ACH AdvEng Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 5,100.17 ACH AMESOL AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 12/23/2020 0.00 1,083.97 ACH Avesis Fidelity Security Life 12/23/2020 0.00 230.42 ACH BOLMEN BOLTON & MENK INC 12/23/2020 0.00 1,719.50 ACH BRAINT BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 12/23/2020 0.00 7,433.00 ACH CAMKNU CAMPBELL KNUTSON 12/23/2020 0.00 13,464.00 ACH carcou Carver County 12/23/2020 0.00 250.00 ACH DelDen Delta Dental 12/23/2020 0.00 2,646.85 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 12/23/2020 0.00 482.89 ACH GeaWas Gear Wash, LLC 12/23/2020 0.00 2,900.97 ACH HANTHO HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 12/23/2020 0.00 577.50 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/23/2020 0.00 120.52 ACH JOHSUP JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 12/23/2020 0.00 619.31 ACH kidplu Kidd Plumbing Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 2,494.50 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/23/2020 0.00 46,792.27 ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 12/23/2020 0.00 24,601.50 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 12/23/2020 0.00 4,410.01 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/23/2020 0.00 379.45 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 12/23/2020 0.00 151.96 ACH OPG-3 OPG-3, Inc 12/23/2020 0.00 9,808.15 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 12/23/2020 0.00 297.44 ACH SNATOO SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 12/23/2020 0.00 1,100.51 ACH SPRPCS SPRINT PCS 12/23/2020 0.00 103.44 ACH TWISEE TWIN CITY SEED CO. 12/23/2020 0.00 241.00 ACH VALPAV VALLEY PAVING INC 12/23/2020 0.00 395,390.14 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/23/2020 0.00 264.94 ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC 12/23/2020 0.00 297.88 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 0.00 13,693.92 ACH AFLAC American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 12/30/2020 0.00 39.78 ACH AMEENG AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/30/2020 0.00 719.90 ACH CARSWC CARVER SWCD 12/30/2020 0.00 220.00 ACH ColLif Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 12/30/2020 0.00 99.16 ACH DALCO DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 12/30/2020 0.00 151.72 ACH EMEAUT EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC 12/30/2020 0.00 24.36 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 0.00 2,052.34 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/30/2020 0.00 78.18 ACH KATFUE KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 12/30/2020 0.00 13,682.89 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 0.00 28,798.71 ACH PedrChri Christine Lea Pedretti 12/30/2020 0.00 604.50 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 12/30/2020 0.00 1,636.80 ACH SafFas Safe-Fast, Inc. 12/30/2020 0.00 69.95 ACH STACONLL Sta Con LLC 12/30/2020 0.00 37,236.50 ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 0.00 3,101.75 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 0.00 5,775.93 ACH ZEEMED ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 12/30/2020 0.00 188.05 Report Total:0.00 1,383,763.58 Page 2 of 2 Accounts Payable Check Detail-Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM Name Check Da Account Description Amount ABC Cleaning, LLC 12/10/2020 101-1170-4300 Cleaning 90.00 ABC Cleaning, LLC 12/10/2020 101-1190-4300 Cleaning 60.00 ABC Cleaning, LLC 150.00 ADLER SUE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.41 ADLER SUE 6.41 Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 12/17/2020 101-1250-3305 Permit Refund 114.00 Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 114.00 Allegra Print & Imaging 12/17/2020 101-1180-4110 Chan Voting Precints Map 40.00 Allegra Print & Imaging 40.00 APPLEGATE SUSAN 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 78.76 APPLEGATE SUSAN 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.38 APPLEGATE SUSAN 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.25 APPLEGATE SUSAN 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.63 APPLEGATE SUSAN 84.02 ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 12/17/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 480.20 ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 12/17/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 85.30 ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 565.50 Aspen Equipment 12/10/2020 700-7025-4704 Equipment 2,885.50 Aspen Equipment 12/10/2020 101-1550-4120 Return -335.96 Aspen Equipment 12/10/2020 701-7025-4704 Equipment 2,885.50 Aspen Equipment 5,435.04 ASPEN MILLS 12/17/2020 101-1220-4240 Uniform 56.95 ASPEN MILLS 56.95 ATTORNEYS TITLE GROUP 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 41.68 ATTORNEYS TITLE GROUP 41.68 BCA 12/17/2020 101-1120-4300 Background investigations 120.00 BCA 12/30/2020 101-1120-4300 Criminal Background Investigation 60.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 1 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount BCA 180.00 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 12/10/2020 101-1550-4300 Fall Clean up 305.00 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 305.00 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 12/23/2020 101-1170-4510 Return -51.30 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 12/23/2020 101-1170-4510 Supplies 175.65 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 12/23/2020 101-1370-4510 Supplies 167.40 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 291.75 Bowlds Ryan & Kristen 12/23/2020 815-8202-2024 Erosion Control - 9170 Eagle Court 250.00 Bowlds Ryan & Kristen 250.00 BRANDT PETER & DEANNA 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 79.64 BRANDT PETER & DEANNA 79.64 BRESNAHAN TIM 12/23/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance - Tim Bresnahan 164.25 BRESNAHAN TIM 12/23/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance - Tim Bresnahan 260.75 BRESNAHAN TIM 425.00 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 12/10/2020 720-7025-4290 Materials 392.68 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 12/30/2020 720-7025-4290 Materials 807.64 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 1,200.32 Burke Charlie 12/10/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance - Charlie Burke 205.49 Burke Charlie 12/30/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance - Charlie Burke 76.72 Burke Charlie 282.21 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.37 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 31.86 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.10 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.39 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.67 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.76 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.90 BURNET TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.56 BURNET TITLE 77.61 CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 12/17/2020 400-4120-4704 License & Registration - #133 1,900.62 CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 1,900.62 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 34.46 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 5.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 101-1170-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 731.11 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 20.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 101-1550-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 199.39 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 9.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 2 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 101-1190-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 1,540.42 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 20.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 700-7019-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 320.59 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 9.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 700-7043-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 960.63 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 20.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 605-6502-4300 Monthly Gas Charge 44.35 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 5.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 101-1370-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 851.87 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 106.49 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 701-0000-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 106.48 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 20.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 700-7043-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 17.06 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 5.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 701-0000-4320 Monthly Gas Charge 19.76 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/17/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Gas Charge 5.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/23/2020 101-1220-4320 Monthly Service 475.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/23/2020 101-1530-4320 Monthly Service 156.42 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/23/2020 101-1171-4320 Monthly Service 64.61 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 32.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 5,779.32 CenturyLink 12/10/2020 700-0000-4310 Monthly Charge 32.00 CenturyLink 12/10/2020 701-0000-4310 Monthly Charge 32.00 CenturyLink 12/23/2020 700-7043-4310 Monthly Services 60.16 CenturyLink 124.16 CORE & MAIN LP 12/23/2020 700-7019-4150 Materials 2,024.00 CORE & MAIN LP 2,024.00 Crosser David & AnnMarie 12/23/2020 815-8202-2024 Erosion Control - 7016 Dakota Circle 250.00 Crosser David & AnnMarie 250.00 CROWN COLLEGE 12/10/2020 101-1220-4370 EMT/EMR Refresher Training 350.00 CROWN COLLEGE 350.00 CUB FOODS 12/10/2020 101-1220-4350 Supplies 71.32 CUB FOODS 12/10/2020 101-1220-4290 Supplies 26.90 CUB FOODS 98.22 Customized Fire Rescue Training Inc 12/30/2020 101-1220-4370 Ana Fatturi Training 1,370.00 Customized Fire Rescue Training Inc 1,370.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/10/2020 720-7202-4300 Rec Center Tree Removal 1,800.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/10/2020 720-7202-4300 Bandimere Tree Removal 1,600.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/10/2020 720-0000-4300 Tree Removal 200.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/10/2020 720-7202-4300 Tree Work 3,500.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/30/2020 720-7202-4300 City Tree Removal 600.00 CUT ABOVE INC 12/30/2020 720-7202-4300 City Tree Removal 600.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 3 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount CUT ABOVE INC 8,300.00 DC Braun Company Inc 12/10/2020 701-0000-4553 Repairs 2,500.00 DC Braun Company Inc 2,500.00 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/10/2020 101-1370-4260 Tools 26.67 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/23/2020 101-1370-4705 Equipment 772.70 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1370-4260 Parts 27.13 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 826.50 DEM-CON LANDFILL 12/17/2020 701-0000-4350 Waste Disposal 79.05 DEM-CON LANDFILL 79.05 DPC Industries, Inc 12/10/2020 700-7019-4160 Chemicals 3,393.72 DPC Industries, Inc 3,393.72 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 26.05 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 24.54 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.41 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.86 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 55.86 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 12/17/2020 700-0000-4300 2020 Utility Rate Study 294.17 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 12/17/2020 701-0000-4300 2020 Utility Rate Study 294.17 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 12/17/2020 720-0000-4300 2020 Utility Rate Study 294.16 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 882.50 Escape Fire Protection LLC 12/17/2020 101-0000-2033 Overpayment on Permit 2020-04593 29.95 Escape Fire Protection LLC 29.95 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 15.19 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.28 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.73 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.94 EXCECUTIVE TITLE 44.14 EXECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 26.04 EXECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 45.84 EXECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.86 EXECUTIVE TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.91 EXECUTIVE TITLE 83.65 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/23/2020 101-1320-4140 Supplies 125.53 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4140 Supplies 251.06 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1320-4140 Supplies 125.53 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Return -71.64 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 4 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 430.48 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/10/2020 700-0000-4550 Materials 766.19 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/10/2020 700-0000-4260 Tools 289.84 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/23/2020 700-0000-4250 Equipment 7,401.06 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12/23/2020 700-0000-4530 Equipment 90.91 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 8,548.00 FERIS PERRY & MICHELLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.67 FERIS PERRY & MICHELLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.73 FERIS PERRY & MICHELLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.95 FERIS PERRY & MICHELLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.57 FERIS PERRY & MICHELLE 21.92 FRANEK INCORPORATED 12/10/2020 700-0000-4552 Professional Services 6,050.00 FRANEK INCORPORATED 6,050.00 Gardner Builders Minneapolis, LLC 12/10/2020 400-4148-4706 Project 20-1086 3,500.00 Gardner Builders Minneapolis, LLC 3,500.00 GONYEA HOMES 12/17/2020 101-0000-2033 Overpayment on Permit 2020-04174 54.00 GONYEA HOMES 54.00 GRAYBAR 12/10/2020 101-1350-4120 Supplies 621.70 GRAYBAR 12/30/2020 101-1550-4150 Materials 69.66 GRAYBAR 691.36 GREEN MEADOWS INC 12/17/2020 101-1550-1193 Snow Plowing 220.00 GREEN MEADOWS INC 220.00 Hargrove Joshua 12/10/2020 101-1550-4240 Clothing Allowance 208.94 Hargrove Joshua 208.94 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 101-0000-2012 January Insurance 17,978.35 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 101-0000-2012 January Insurance -633.04 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 210-0000-2012 January Insurance 633.04 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 701-0000-2012 January Insurance 4,746.33 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 720-0000-2012 January Insurance 2,151.66 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 700-0000-2012 January Insurance 2,706.24 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 701-0000-2012 January Insurance 1,440.16 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 720-0000-2012 January Insurance 1,297.73 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 101-1130-4040 January Insurance 118.70 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 101-0000-2012 January Insurance 25,930.55 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 101-0000-2012 January Insurance 1,582.10 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 210-0000-2012 January Insurance 395.53 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 700-0000-2012 January Insurance 4,746.33 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 700-0000-4040 January Insurance 15.83 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 5 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 701-0000-4040 January Insurance 15.83 HealthPartners, Inc.12/23/2020 720-0000-4040 January Insurance 7.90 HealthPartners, Inc. 63,133.24 HEINEN ROBERT 12/17/2020 101-1550-4120 Tools 107.36 HEINEN ROBERT 107.36 HENNEPIN COUNTY 12/10/2020 101-1550-4300 Notices 4.48 HENNEPIN COUNTY 12/17/2020 101-1150-4300 Contract Services 2020 Assessment 1,600.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY 1,604.48 HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 12/17/2020 101-1320-4150 Materials 204.00 HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 12/17/2020 720-7025-4290 Materials 204.00 HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 408.00 Hopkins Sports Camps LLC 12/23/2020 101-1731-3636 Cheerleading Camp and Flag Football Camp 636.00 Hopkins Sports Camps LLC 636.00 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 12/30/2020 101-1530-4320 Utilities - Oct 2020 - Dec 2020 5,277.08 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 5,277.08 Indigo Signs 12/23/2020 101-1550-4150 Letters 2,184.00 Indigo Signs 2,184.00 Intereum, Inc.12/17/2020 400-4148-4706 Lobby Adds 2,458.15 Intereum, Inc. 2,458.15 IUOE Local #49 12/30/2020 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 Local 49 dues 421.56 IUOE Local #49 12/30/2020 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 Local 49 dues 196.87 IUOE Local #49 12/30/2020 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 Local 49 dues 81.57 IUOE Local #49 700.00 Jaguar Communications Inc 12/10/2020 700-7043-4310 Monthly Phone Charge 53.60 Jaguar Communications Inc 53.60 JMS Custom Homes LLC 12/30/2020 815-8226-2024 Permit #2019-00976 - 7520 Fawn Hill 2,500.00 JMS Custom Homes LLC 2,500.00 Jones David 12/10/2020 101-1560-4300 Speaker 100.00 Jones David 100.00 K2 Electrical Services Inc 12/23/2020 101-1550-4300 Professional Services 368.00 K2 Electrical Services Inc 12/23/2020 101-1550-4300 Professional Services 1,331.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 6 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount K2 Electrical Services Inc 1,699.00 Karl Chevrolet, Inc 12/23/2020 400-4120-4704 Truck 28,394.14 Karl Chevrolet, Inc 28,394.14 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 12/17/2020 605-6502-4300 CR 101 Project 132.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 132.00 KUSSKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 12/17/2020 720-7025-4751 Professional Services 50,955.00 KUSSKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 50,955.00 Lametti & Sons Inc 12/10/2020 601-6043-4751 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab 451,574.22 Lametti & Sons Inc 12/30/2020 601-6043-4751 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab 144,512.86 Lametti & Sons Inc 596,087.08 Lannon Ryan 12/10/2020 101-1550-4240 Clothing Allowance 135.99 Lannon Ryan 12/17/2020 101-1550-4240 Clothing Allowance 276.93 Lannon Ryan 412.92 LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 12/30/2020 700-0000-4520 Vehicle Repair 2,386.51 LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 2,386.51 Lotus Print Group, Inc.12/23/2020 101-1220-4290 Materials 904.00 Lotus Print Group, Inc. 904.00 MacPhail Center for Music 12/17/2020 101-1565-4300 Memory Cafe/Class Speaker Fees 965.00 MacPhail Center for Music 965.00 MACZKO PATRICK 12/30/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 249.99 MACZKO PATRICK 12/30/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 160.20 MACZKO PATRICK 410.19 MBE Inc 12/23/2020 720-7025-4290 Dump Fee's 600.00 MBE Inc 12/23/2020 720-7025-4290 Dump Fee's 544.00 MBE Inc 1,144.00 Metro Garage Door Company 12/10/2020 101-1220-4510 Door Repair 316.57 Metro Garage Door Company 12/10/2020 101-1550-4300 Service work 147.31 Metro Garage Door Company 463.88 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 12/10/2020 701-0000-4509 Waste Water 205,291.66 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 12/30/2020 720-0000-4300 Monitoring 2,660.00 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 207,951.66 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 7 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Milbank Winwater Works 12/17/2020 700-0000-4250 Parts 6,452.32 Milbank Winwater Works 6,452.32 MINNESOTA FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD12/23/2020 101-1220-4300 Certification Exam - Ana Fatturi 120.00 MINNESOTA FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD 120.00 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSN 12/10/2020 700-0000-4360 Membership 300.00 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSN 300.00 Minnesota Safety Council 12/23/2020 101-1560-4300 Drivers Class - Senior Center 36.00 Minnesota Safety Council 12/23/2020 101-1560-4300 Drivers Class - Senior Center 38.00 Minnesota Safety Council 12/17/2020 101-1560-4300 DDC 4hr Class 234.00 Minnesota Safety Council 308.00 Minuteman Press 12/17/2020 101-1170-4110 Business Cards 27.00 Minuteman Press 12/17/2020 101-1170-4110 Business Cards 54.00 Minuteman Press 81.00 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 12/23/2020 605-6502-4752 Professional Services 1,625.51 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 1,625.51 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 NCPERS-Life Insurance 62.43 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 210-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 NCPERS-Life Insurance 3.96 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 NCPERS-Life Insurance 13.65 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 NCPERS-Life Insurance 13.55 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 12/30/2020 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.01.2021 NCPERS-Life Insurance 2.41 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 96.00 MN Pollution Control Agency 12/30/2020 701-0000-4370 Chadwick Syverson - Training 45.00 MN Pollution Control Agency 45.00 Musolf Joseph 12/30/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 179.97 Musolf Joseph 179.97 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 12/17/2020 101-1320-4560 Signs 248.75 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 12/17/2020 101-1320-4560 Parts Return -424.20 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 12/17/2020 101-1320-4560 Signs 346.08 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 170.63 NORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIP CO 12/10/2020 700-0000-4550 Supplies 2,571.61 NORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIP CO 2,571.61 Olson Mark 12/23/2020 815-8202-2024 Erosion Control - 861 Pontiac Lane 250.00 Olson Mark 250.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 8 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Ott Travis 12/17/2020 101-1538-4300 Tae Kwon Do instruction 270.01 Ott Travis 12/17/2020 101-1539-4300 Tae Kwon Do instruction 15.74 Ott Travis 285.75 PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 12/10/2020 101-1220-4300 Chan Fire Dept uniform cleaning 442.43 PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 442.43 Pitney Bowes Inc.12/17/2020 101-1120-4410 Postage Machine Rental 105.00 Pitney Bowes Inc. 105.00 Pollard Water 12/10/2020 701-0000-4160 Chemicals 2,091.32 Pollard Water 2,091.32 POSTMASTER 12/30/2020 700-0000-4330 Permit #14 314.87 POSTMASTER 12/30/2020 701-0000-4330 Permit #14 314.87 POSTMASTER 629.74 Powder Coating Technologies 12/23/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 1,653.00 Powder Coating Technologies 1,653.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 12/10/2020 101-1370-4350 October 2020 Cleaning 800.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 12/10/2020 700-0000-4350 October 2020 Cleaning 100.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 12/10/2020 701-0000-4350 October 2020 Cleaning 100.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 1,000.00 Raymond Mary Kathleen 12/10/2020 101-1170-4510 Sign Repair 150.00 Raymond Mary Kathleen 12/17/2020 101-1170-4300 Re-affix Letters 70.00 Raymond Mary Kathleen 220.00 RESULTS TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.71 RESULTS TITLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.18 RESULTS TITLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.92 RESULTS TITLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.56 RESULTS TITLE 22.37 ROERICK BRIAN 12/10/2020 101-1370-4240 Clothing Allowance 284.94 ROERICK BRIAN 284.94 SABINSKE DEAN 12/17/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 42.96 SABINSKE DEAN 12/17/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 102.97 SABINSKE DEAN 12/23/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance 139.95 SABINSKE DEAN 12/23/2020 101-1320-4240 Clothing Allowance - Dean Sabinske 139.12 SABINSKE DEAN 425.00 Scherer Bros Lumber Co 12/30/2020 101-0000-2033 Overpayment refund 30.06 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 9 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Scherer Bros Lumber Co 30.06 Schmieg Greg 12/17/2020 101-1370-4240 Clothing Allowance 325.74 Schmieg Greg 325.74 SCOTT NELSON COACHING INC 12/23/2020 101-1220-4370 Training 375.00 SCOTT NELSON COACHING INC 375.00 SEOK HAE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.54 SEOK HAE 14.54 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/17/2020 700-0000-4510 Supplies 43.34 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/17/2020 700-0000-4150 Materials 15.63 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/17/2020 701-0000-4150 Paint 313.56 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 12/30/2020 700-7043-4150 Materials 49.31 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 421.84 SM HENTGES & SONS 12/30/2020 605-6502-4751 CSAH 101 Improvement Project 412,792.87 SM HENTGES & SONS 412,792.87 SMSC Organics Recycling Facility 12/10/2020 101-1320-4150 Yardwaste 151.04 SMSC Organics Recycling Facility 12/17/2020 101-1320-4150 Recycling 3,333.88 SMSC Organics Recycling Facility 3,484.92 SOUTHWEST LOCK & KEY 12/23/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 159.50 SOUTHWEST LOCK & KEY 159.50 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 12/10/2020 101-1110-4360 Membership 866.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 866.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 454.32 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 33.95 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 40.74 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1310-4340 Notices 33.95 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 37.35 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 30.56 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1410-4340 Notices 33.95 Southwest Suburban Publishing 12/10/2020 101-1600-4340 Notices 200.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 864.82 STATE OF MINNESOTA 12/30/2020 101-1320-4140 Inspection Decals 82.00 STATE OF MINNESOTA 82.00 STORM NICHOLAS & NICOLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.35 STORM NICHOLAS & NICOLE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 32.04 STORM NICHOLAS & NICOLE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.15 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 10 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount STORM NICHOLAS & NICOLE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.22 STORM NICHOLAS & NICOLE 52.76 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 12/30/2020 101-1350-4565 Service 6,135.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 12/30/2020 101-1350-4565 Service 2,085.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 8,220.00 Tessco Technologies 12/17/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 275.66 Tessco Technologies 275.66 The Mustard Seed, Inc.12/17/2020 101-1550-4150 Materials 245.00 The Mustard Seed, Inc. 245.00 THEIS CONSTRUCTION CO 12/23/2020 401-0000-4706 Lake Ann Park 40,000.00 THEIS CONSTRUCTION CO 12/23/2020 101-1550-4300 Lake Ann Park 1,906.98 THEIS CONSTRUCTION CO 41,906.98 Theriault Jodi 12/10/2020 700-0000-4552 Service work 1,347.55 Theriault Jodi 12/10/2020 700-0000-4552 Service work 357.11 Theriault Jodi 1,704.66 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC.12/17/2020 101-1550-4150 Materials 540.56 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC. 540.56 TMS JOHNSON, INC 12/10/2020 700-7019-4530 Parts 195.00 TMS JOHNSON, INC 195.00 Tobin Michael 12/17/2020 815-8202-2024 Escrow Release - Permit 2020-01579 250.00 Tobin Michael 250.00 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 34.70 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 49.29 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.28 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.02 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 90.29 Trinity Exteriors, Inc 12/17/2020 101-1250-3301 Permit Refund 130.08 Trinity Exteriors, Inc 130.08 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 12/10/2020 701-0000-4510 Materials 233.25 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 12/17/2020 700-7019-4530 Supplies 5,410.00 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 5,643.25 VALLEY-RICH CO INC 12/30/2020 700-0000-4552 Equipment 6,537.28 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 11 of 12 Name Check Da Account Description Amount VALLEY-RICH CO INC 6,537.28 VAN ALSTINE GEORGE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 29.07 VAN ALSTINE GEORGE 12/17/2020 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 40.48 VAN ALSTINE GEORGE 12/17/2020 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.73 VAN ALSTINE GEORGE 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.22 VAN ALSTINE GEORGE 95.50 VCA Chanhassen Animal Hospital 12/23/2020 101-1260-4300 Vet Services 887.01 VCA Chanhassen Animal Hospital 887.01 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1170-4350 Monthly Service 205.66 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1190-4350 Monthly Service 270.59 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1220-4350 Monthly Service 77.97 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1550-4350 Monthly Service 477.99 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1370-4350 Monthly Service 169.48 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 700-0000-4350 Monthly Service 21.18 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 701-0000-4350 Monthly Service 21.18 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/10/2020 101-1220-4350 Monthly Service 30.38 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 12/17/2020 101-1550-4300 Lake Ann Disposal 291.65 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 1,566.08 Water In Motion, Inc.12/17/2020 720-7204-4300 Irrigation Assessments 2020 12,000.00 Water In Motion, Inc. 12,000.00 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 12/17/2020 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.76 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 35.76 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 12/17/2020 700-7025-4751 Lake Lucy Ln/Powers Blvd 68,031.57 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 12/30/2020 700-7025-4751 Lake Lucy/Powers Blvd Watermain 1,707.01 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 69,738.58 Wilder Douglas & Sandra 12/23/2020 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 10340 Heidi Lane 2,500.00 Wilder Douglas & Sandra 2,500.00 WING RICHARD 12/17/2020 101-1220-4350 Station 2 cleaning 100.00 WING RICHARD 100.00 Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 12/17/2020 101-1538-4300 Kwan Tae Kwon Do Classes 360.01 Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 12/17/2020 101-1539-4300 Kwan Tae Kwon Do Classes 20.99 Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 381.00 1,620,341.14 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (01/04/2021 - 9:37 AM)Page 12 of 12 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM Name Check Da Account Description Amount Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 12/17/2020 700-0000-4300 AWIA Compliance 1,920.00 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 12/23/2020 700-7019-4300 Oct 31 - Nov 27 - Professional Services 2,152.25 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 12/23/2020 701-0000-4300 Oct 31 - Nov 27 - Professional Services 2,947.92 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 7,020.17 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 12/10/2020 101-1220-4120 Supplies 72.67 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 72.67 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/10/2020 605-6502-4300 CSAH 101 29,571.93 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/10/2020 605-6503-4300 CSAH 101 3,329.64 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/30/2020 605-6502-4300 CSAH 101 Project 647.05 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 12/30/2020 605-6503-4300 CSAH 101 Project 72.85 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 33,621.47 American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 12/30/2020 101-0000-2008 December Insurance 39.78 American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 39.78 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 12/23/2020 700-0000-4340 Utility Bills 541.98 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 12/23/2020 701-0000-4340 Utility Bills 541.99 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 1,083.97 BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 12/17/2020 101-1220-4300 Monthly Service 36.34 BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 12/17/2020 101-0000-2012 Monthly Service 95.10 BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 131.44 BOLTON & MENK INC 12/23/2020 601-6045-4300 Professional Services 1,719.50 BOLTON & MENK INC 1,719.50 Boyer Ford Trucks 12/10/2020 700-0000-4140 Supplies 30.13 Boyer Ford Trucks 12/10/2020 101-1320-4140 Supplies 145.30 Boyer Ford Trucks 175.43 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 12/23/2020 601-6043-4300 Professional Services 7,433.00 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 7,433.00 BROADWAY AWARDS 12/10/2020 101-1110-4375 Promotional Item 84.72 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 1 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount BROADWAY AWARDS 84.72 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 12/23/2020 101-1140-4302 Legal Services 13,464.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 13,464.00 CarteGraph Systems 12/17/2020 400-4117-4703 Cartegraph OMS Annual Maintenance 9,221.54 CarteGraph Systems 12/17/2020 701-7025-4703 Cartegraph OMS Annual Maintenance 9,221.54 CarteGraph Systems 12/17/2020 720-7025-4703 Cartegraph OMS Annual Maintenance 9,221.54 CarteGraph Systems 12/17/2020 700-7025-4703 Cartegraph OMS Annual Maintenance 9,221.54 CarteGraph Systems 36,886.16 Carver County 12/17/2020 101-1160-4320 CarverLink Internet 540.00 Carver County 12/17/2020 700-7043-4320 Carver Fiber 500.00 Carver County 12/17/2020 101-1180-4300 Ballots 9,847.00 Carver County 12/17/2020 410-0000-4710 TH5 Arboretum Trail 497,746.28 Carver County 12/23/2020 101-1210-4300 Background check - Liquor License 250.00 Carver County 508,883.28 CARVER SWCD 12/30/2020 400-0000-1155 Bluff at Lake Lucy 220.00 CARVER SWCD 220.00 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 101-1220-4320 Solar Credit 71.73 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Solar Credit 1,871.50 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 101-1540-4320 Solar Credit 210.43 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 101-1550-4320 Solar Credit 223.96 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 101-1600-4320 Solar Credit 17.19 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 700-0000-4320 Solar Credit 65.39 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 700-7019-4320 Solar Credit 1,052.91 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 12/10/2020 701-0000-4320 Solar Credit 758.95 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 4,272.06 Collins Engineers Inc 12/17/2020 101-1310-4300 Bridge Inspections 2,200.00 Collins Engineers Inc 2,200.00 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 12/30/2020 101-0000-2008 December Insurance 60.72 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 12/30/2020 700-0000-2008 December Insurance 19.22 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 12/30/2020 701-0000-2008 December Insurance 19.22 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 99.16 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.12/10/2020 101-1160-4220 SSL Certificate Renewal 80.00 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.12/17/2020 101-1160-4220 Compellent SC4020 Storage Array Annual Maintenance 7,136.00 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 7,216.00 Crystal Infosystems LLC 12/10/2020 101-1170-4110 Toner 245.95 Crystal Infosystems LLC 245.95 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.12/30/2020 101-1370-4150 Materials 151.72 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 2 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 151.72 Delta Dental 12/23/2020 101-0000-2013 Monthly Services 1,832.22 Delta Dental 12/23/2020 101-0000-2013 Monthly Services 30.20 Delta Dental 12/23/2020 700-0000-2013 Monthly Services 341.38 Delta Dental 12/23/2020 701-0000-2013 Monthly Services 280.98 Delta Dental 12/23/2020 720-0000-2013 Monthly Services 162.07 Delta Dental 2,646.85 ELECTRIC PUMP INC 12/10/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 2,213.53 ELECTRIC PUMP INC 2,213.53 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC 12/17/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 48.72 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 24.36 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC 73.08 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/10/2020 101-1370-4260 Tools 108.78 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/17/2020 101-1320-4240 Gloves 107.53 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/23/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 42.50 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/23/2020 700-0000-4550 Supplies 130.31 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/23/2020 700-0000-4550 Supplies 310.08 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1320-4240 Gloves 129.26 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 172.29 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 477.68 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 43.51 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 105.62 FASTENAL COMPANY 12/30/2020 700-0000-4140 Supplies 1,123.98 FASTENAL COMPANY 2,751.54 Fidelity Security Life 12/23/2020 101-0000-2007 Jan 2021 Service 177.83 Fidelity Security Life 12/23/2020 700-0000-2007 Jan 2021 Service 21.74 Fidelity Security Life 12/23/2020 701-0000-2007 Jan 2021 Service 21.72 Fidelity Security Life 12/23/2020 720-0000-2007 Jan 2021 Service 9.13 Fidelity Security Life 230.42 Gear Wash, LLC 12/10/2020 101-1220-4530 Equipment Cleaning 2,881.19 Gear Wash, LLC 12/23/2020 101-1220-4530 Equipment 2,900.97 Gear Wash, LLC 5,782.16 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 12/10/2020 400-0000-4300 Service calls 369.90 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 369.90 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 12/17/2020 720-7025-4300 Stone Creek Topography 934.00 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 12/23/2020 400-0000-1155 Lotus Woods Development 577.50 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 1,511.50 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4400 Portable Restrooms 4,693.80 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 3 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4300 Portable Restrooms 4,693.80 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4400 Portable Restrooms 875.00 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 10,262.60 Indoor Landscapes Inc 12/17/2020 101-1170-4300 December Plant Service 187.00 Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/17/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 14.58 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/23/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 40.81 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/23/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 79.71 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 12/30/2020 101-1170-4110 Office Supplies 78.18 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 213.28 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 12/23/2020 101-1370-4530 Parts 22.92 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 12/23/2020 101-1370-4530 Parts 596.39 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 619.31 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 12/30/2020 101-1370-4170 Oil 13,682.89 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 13,682.89 Kidd Plumbing Inc 12/23/2020 101-1190-4530 Repairs 435.00 Kidd Plumbing Inc 12/23/2020 101-1190-4530 Repairs 2,059.50 Kidd Plumbing Inc 2,494.50 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/10/2020 601-6043-4300 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab 46,889.31 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/10/2020 400-0000-1155 Private Dev Field Observation 13,194.00 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/23/2020 605-6502-4300 TH 101 Reconstruction 42,056.89 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/23/2020 605-6503-4300 TH 101 Reconstruction 4,735.38 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 601-6043-4300 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab 28,798.71 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 135,674.29 LARSEN DALE 12/10/2020 101-1320-4150 Materials 65.20 LARSEN DALE 65.20 LYMAN LUMBER 12/10/2020 101-1550-4120 Materials 1,720.11 LYMAN LUMBER 1,720.11 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 12/17/2020 101-1140-4302 Professional Services 90.00 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 90.00 Marco Inc 12/10/2020 101-1170-4410 Rental 825.04 Marco Inc 12/10/2020 700-0000-4410 Rental 115.00 Marco Inc 12/10/2020 701-0000-4410 Rental 115.00 Marco Inc 12/10/2020 720-0000-4410 Rental 57.50 Marco Inc 1,112.54 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 4 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Master Electric Co. Inc.12/10/2020 101-1370-4510 Service work 330.00 Master Electric Co. Inc. 330.00 Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc.12/10/2020 101-1370-4170 Supplies 331.19 Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 331.19 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1220-4120 Supplies 77.34 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1220-4290 Supplies 221.34 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1220-4350 Cleaning Supplies 21.21 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1320-4120 Supplies 53.08 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1320-4140 Supplies 7.72 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1320-4150 Materials 15.98 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1320-4560 Supplies 8.99 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1530-4150 Materials 5.03 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 38.65 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4150 Materials 209.98 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 101-1550-4560 Materials 23.37 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 700-0000-4150 Materials 44.95 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 700-7019-4150 Materials 2.51 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 700-7043-4150 Materials 49.88 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 700-7043-4550 Materials 99.96 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 12/10/2020 701-0000-4510 Supplies 162.94 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 1,042.93 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 12/23/2020 101-1250-3816 November Services -248.50 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 12/23/2020 701-0000-2023 November Services 24,850.00 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 24,601.50 MINGER CONSTRUCTION 12/17/2020 720-7025-4751 2020 Drainage Improvements 10,920.00 MINGER CONSTRUCTION 10,920.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 12/17/2020 101-1370-4300 Parts 50.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 12/23/2020 101-1250-3818 November -90.08 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 12/23/2020 101-0000-2022 November 4,500.09 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 4,460.01 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Electricity Charge 14,425.40 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1600-4320 Monthly Electricity Charge 32.61 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Electricity Charge 120.72 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 701-0000-4320 Monthly Electricity Charge 470.36 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 605-6502-4300 Monthly Electricity Charge 70.34 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 98.08 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 24.80 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 29.35 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 222.58 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 251.75 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 127.70 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 15,873.69 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 5 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 12/17/2020 101-1160-4300 City Code Hosting - Admin Fee 350.00 MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 350.00 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 12/10/2020 101-1220-4140 Supplies 163.65 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 12/23/2020 101-1220-4140 Supplies 11.14 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 12/23/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 140.82 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 315.61 OPG-3, Inc 12/23/2020 400-4124-4703 Laserfiche Forms Portal Add On 9,808.15 OPG-3, Inc 9,808.15 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 12/10/2020 700-0000-4120 Supplies 176.40 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 176.40 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 12/10/2020 700-0000-4552 Service Work 2,689.00 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 2,689.00 Pederson Taylor 12/17/2020 101-1538-4300 Kwan Tae Kwon Do Classes 1,169.98 Pederson Taylor 12/17/2020 101-1539-4300 Kwan Tae Kwon Do Classes 68.27 Pederson Taylor 1,238.25 Pedretti Christine Lea 12/30/2020 101-1539-4300 Instructor 604.50 Pedretti Christine Lea 604.50 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 12/10/2020 101-1260-4140 Supplies 526.44 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 12/10/2020 700-0000-4140 Supplies 519.08 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 1,045.52 Potentia MN Solar 12/17/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Solar Charge 1,619.27 Potentia MN Solar 12/17/2020 101-1190-4320 Monthly Solar Charge 2,982.43 Potentia MN Solar 12/17/2020 101-1170-4320 Monthly Solar Charge 2,328.69 Potentia MN Solar 6,930.39 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN 12/10/2020 101-1320-4120 Supplies 14.05 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN 14.05 PRECISE MRM LLC 12/10/2020 101-1320-4310 2020-10 Subscription 201.66 PRECISE MRM LLC 201.66 Premium Waters, Inc 12/17/2020 101-1550-4120 Monthly Service 3.00 Premium Waters, Inc 3.00 Pro-Tec Design, Inc.12/30/2020 400-4126-4703 Milestone Cameras 1,036.64 Pro-Tec Design, Inc.12/30/2020 700-0000-4705 Milestone Cameras 600.16 Pro-Tec Design, Inc.12/17/2020 400-4117-4703 HID Mobile Credentials License 597.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 6 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Pro-Tec Design, Inc.12/23/2020 700-0000-4705 X-Protect Camera License LS24 297.44 Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 2,531.24 RBM SERVICES INC 12/17/2020 101-1170-4350 Nightly Janitoral/Sanitzing 3,690.87 RBM SERVICES INC 12/17/2020 101-1190-4350 Nightly Janitoral/Sanitzing 3,575.23 RBM SERVICES INC 7,266.10 Safe-Fast, Inc.12/30/2020 101-1550-4120 Supplies 69.95 Safe-Fast, Inc. 69.95 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1120-4040 Employee Assistance Program 131.27 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1130-4040 Employee Assistance Program 83.43 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1160-4040 Employee Assistance Program 43.76 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1250-4040 Employee Assistance Program 204.19 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1310-4040 Employee Assistance Program 172.39 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1320-4040 Employee Assistance Program 269.82 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1370-4040 Employee Assistance Program 86.05 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1520-4040 Employee Assistance Program 58.34 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1530-4040 Employee Assistance Program 29.17 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1560-4040 Employee Assistance Program 29.17 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1600-4040 Employee Assistance Program 52.51 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1700-4040 Employee Assistance Program 5.83 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1550-4040 Employee Assistance Program 240.65 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1420-4040 Employee Assistance Program 132.72 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1430-4040 Employee Assistance Program 7.29 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 210-0000-4040 Employee Assistance Program 36.46 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 720-7201-4040 Employee Assistance Program 14.59 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 720-7202-4040 Employee Assistance Program 14.59 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1170-4040 Employee Assistance Program 29.17 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1220-4040 Employee Assistance Program 58.34 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1260-4040 Employee Assistance Program 58.34 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 701-0000-4040 Employee Assistance Program 160.58 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 700-0000-4040 Employee Assistance Program 218.92 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 720-0000-4040 Employee Assistance Program 79.34 Sand Creek EAP, LLC.12/10/2020 101-1220-4483 Employee Assistance Program 1,283.08 Sand Creek EAP, LLC. 3,500.00 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 12/23/2020 101-1370-4260 Tools 785.11 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 12/23/2020 101-1370-4260 Tools 74.48 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 12/23/2020 101-1370-4260 Tools 240.92 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 1,100.51 SPRINT PCS 12/23/2020 700-0000-4310 Monthly Service 51.72 SPRINT PCS 12/23/2020 701-0000-4310 Monthly Service 51.72 SPRINT PCS 103.44 Sta Con LLC 12/30/2020 701-7025-4751 Parts 37,236.50 Sta Con LLC 37,236.50 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 7 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 12/10/2020 700-0000-4140 Supplies 47.74 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 47.74 SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/10/2020 700-7043-4530 Annual Fire Alarm Inspection 310.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/10/2020 700-7043-4530 Annual Inspection of Preaction Detection System 320.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/10/2020 700-7019-4530 Annual Fire Alarm Inspection 200.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/17/2020 700-7043-4530 Annual Sprinkler Inspection 600.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/17/2020 700-7019-4530 Annual Sprinkler Inspection 390.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 1,820.00 TWIN CITY SEED CO.12/23/2020 720-7025-4290 Materials 241.00 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 241.00 UNITED WAY 12/17/2020 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00418.12.2020 United Way 30.40 UNITED WAY 30.40 USA BLUE BOOK 12/17/2020 700-7043-4550 Chemicals 1,392.30 USA BLUE BOOK 1,392.30 VALLEY PAVING INC 12/23/2020 601-6045-4751 Powers Blvd & Lake Lucy Ped Improvements 395,390.14 VALLEY PAVING INC 395,390.14 VERIZON WIRELESS 12/10/2020 700-0000-4310 Monthly Service 160.63 VERIZON WIRELESS 12/10/2020 701-0000-4310 Monthly Service 160.63 VERIZON WIRELESS 321.26 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc.12/10/2020 101-1320-4120 Supplies 229.50 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 229.50 Water Conservation Services, Inc.12/10/2020 700-0000-4552 Service Work 496.40 Water Conservation Services, Inc. 496.40 WAYTEK INC 12/17/2020 101-1220-4140 Parts 117.34 WAYTEK INC 117.34 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/10/2020 700-0000-4550 Materials 1,127.49 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/10/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 80.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/17/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 858.95 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/17/2020 101-1550-4300 Materials 464.54 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/23/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 208.94 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 12/23/2020 701-0000-4551 Materials 56.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 2,795.92 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 720-0000-4300 Water Resources Support Services 1,406.75 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 601-6039-4300 Lake Drive East Street Improvement 555.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 101-1160-4300 Datafi Subsciption 570.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 8 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 12/30/2020 720-0000-4300 Datafi Subsciption 570.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 3,101.75 WW GRAINGER INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4150 Materials 39.38 WW GRAINGER INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4150 Materials 92.17 WW GRAINGER INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4150 Materials 166.33 WW GRAINGER INC 297.88 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/10/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 17,967.28 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/10/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 392.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 700-7043-4320 Monthly Service 4,585.47 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 290.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 5.08 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1600-4320 Monthly Service -11.17 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1600-4320 Monthly Service 16.95 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 11.42 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 11.32 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Service 23.85 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 9.32 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 580.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Service 1,918.02 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 700-7019-4320 Monthly Service 3,464.42 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 290.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 44.99 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 28.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1350-4320 Monthly Service 163.30 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 28.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 101-1600-4320 Monthly Service 11.29 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 14.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Service 2,099.66 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/23/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 40.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 701-0000-4320 Monthly Service 1,980.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Service -184.45 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 398.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1170-4320 Monthly Service -204.36 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1190-4320 Monthly Service -336.34 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1220-4320 Monthly Service 950.42 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1370-4320 Monthly Service 1,412.44 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1171-4320 Monthly Service 22.15 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 700-0000-4320 Monthly Service 176.55 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 701-0000-4320 Monthly Service 176.55 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 688.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1540-4320 Monthly Service 175.54 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1600-4320 Monthly Service 44.32 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 101-1550-4320 Monthly Service 89.11 XCEL ENERGY INC 12/30/2020 601-0000-3080 Monthly Service 388.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 9 of 10 Name Check Da Account Description Amount XCEL ENERGY INC 37,829.13 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 12/30/2020 101-1370-4120 Supplies 94.03 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 12/30/2020 101-1320-4120 Supplies 94.02 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 188.05 1,383,763.58 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (01/04/2021 - 9:38 AM)Page 10 of 10 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, January 11, 2021 Subject On­Line Building Permit Informational Flyer Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: K.3. Prepared By Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director File No:  ATTACHMENTS: Flyer CITY OF CHANHASSEN FOR CONTRACTORS Visit the "Contractor Learning Cented' for more BS&A Online lnformatlon and detailed !.t.' i. a3l.s !..':_::. 1cl S.,rcr -raa$t l€rtL41' 600@-& to2r&!!lo rG22-t0it7r{L Il 'I STEP 2: Enter Permit Details Choose the permit type, input the work description and pick the Basic Usage (if applicable). +A pply for a Permit StGp 2: Ent.r Pcrmit D.t ilt B* I!. !?. ol Fnr ft, rGttan ri6 ro Alr frrd,r Lrd-J'.tl Eard.$it tlr Et b !. th... rral* .i.. ,1:,..i;r:':- -.,. l l#r-Blisn lau tersat{I covE DI walkthroughs / Hil Permits Online STEP 1: setect a Property You can search by Address, Parcel Number, or Orvner Name. .t cFl 1\ ^.I I ) $ :\It- Frs r s.L.i . Po6rv 0+ Apply for a Permit fl "!llt: "'' ""' Stlp 1: 5.1.d . Ptop.rty NOTICE: Prior to applying for a permit online you must register through BS&A online at (hft ps://bsaonline.com/?uid=2782). You will need to create a user namo and password. lf you have previously created an online account through BS&A you may use the same user name and password you already have. Once you have created a user name and password you will need a web pin to complete your online registration for the City of Chanhassen. To obtain your web pin please contact the building department at:o 952-227-1180o bldosuooor@ci.chanhassen.mn.us STEP 3: enter Appticant lnfo Verify your contact information and choose the parties to receive e-mail notifications when the permit's status changes. 0r+ Co.lra(tor Apph..r on lor Pe'mir &D riiprr..rr!a.rar.-ir4a-aoi.i-ia* .Fb4d\r...*lr:dr5 3t , 3. lrrlr Appli.nr lnlqturio. bf,*.bd!d6 .i.,.l-I ulrld (dad l.rdman 0 rr br i rrnt ll. r.'!a !e o.i. xa. ir I r Fd E klr b. lr.aB Ennt tr STEP 4t Estimate Fees Locate the fees needed for the permit and enter the quantity. Applying for Permit Online FoR coNrRAcroRs STEP 5i Attachments Some permit types may allow, or even require an attachment. While not applicable for all applications, this can be used to submit any relevant plans or images for the permit. Successful Permit Application You will receive a summary confirmation screen at the end of the permit application indicating a successful application. ldr4 !eriit &t@iliib Efilrti4.&ortl!l*r-l- !a! Contractor Application for PermitS!bhil . p.rmii ippli..rion onlin. StGp 5: Add Att dlm.nts I Fi lx -, flr,6 ddrrtiE rhr il !r..qdrd t,. +.uc.,F Prna (rqird pe. d@r,!Ets d oth.r ltry-n drrCr) .Lt ,l. lotar St lo to5. F, d'fuL, rn fi.dr ttEn lo F, .t?brio.t P- io& ll FrA lo rtnn nqitd d.. d6r.t5tt Fr.pdotbr m, b. Ar,rd or &id, Lfl!.b€@:ron.Qn l!I!i.6-dIlaE at c tLlE !0d lI50 t!6 Apply lor a Permit trtadi Fd pamd l€ | poltblc Note nal lic be ar9.op.sr.. idi,*Er{t t C Make a Payment on lnvoices I Prope(y m-@-0 0O0{m N.n* & Addr6! lotorrnaUon , trtiB. tr$a, ira( tYrrH ar- tEacirrr tol}'tf & aaoorfrD&a raaaiF, Pay Invoi(es on lhis Properly cn .l $. bo 6' bor6 o. rh. p9ro $6.rd ltr Lr. a.r ra b!to.. tu<rd ikdnrF. xooElt ,64 ,@@. ,.ra Online Payments Once your application has been processed, you can pay your invoice(s) online from the "View My Activit/ Screen. When you have chosen the invoice(s) to pay, you will be redirec{ed to the municipality's third party payment website. An-rrsrB Stlp /a: E5tim.t. Fcc3 Iold lrdr'l.d 116!trls.0O Once your application has been processed, you can pay your invoice(s) online from the "Mew My Activit/ Screen.