Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-10 Kimley & Horn Drainage Analysis ■ Kimley>>>Horn 2550 University Avenue W. Suite 238N St.Paul,MN 55114 To: City of Oak Park Heights and the Brown's Creek Watershed District From: Michael C. Brandt, P.E., Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: May 10, 2016 Subject: Retail Development Oak Park Heights, MN Drainage Analysis The proposed development consists of three new retail lots in Oak Park Heights, MN at 6000 Krueger Lane, located at the southwest corner of 60th Street North and Krueger Lane. This undeveloped property is sparsely wooded with an existing 1,725 SF one-story post-framed building.The property is bordered on the west by an existing Menards Pond called "Outlot B".The property is bordered on the north by 60th Street North and on the east by Krueger Lane. The property abuts the Menards parking lot along its south property line. The proposed development consists of three retail buildings, two located on the north side of the property, each being 6,000 SF and 6,600 SF in size. Additionally, a 20,600 SF building located on the south side of the existing parcel. The three buildings will be platted into separate lots, and there will be a remaining undeveloped outlot in the NE corner of the site. This outlot may be developed into a retail site at a later date, as it is under an easement restrictions that will expire in the future. Each lot has associated parking with each of the buildings as well. The Brown's Creek Watershed District has a stormwater treatment agreement between the City of Oak Park Heights and the City of Stillwater that incorporates this site under that TSMP Agreement. This agreement was set in place under the Watershed District's 2000 rules, and this project will have to provide increased rate and volume control to comply with the 2007 Watershed District rules. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has prepared a preliminary drainage analysis of the existing and proposed conditions through the assistance of HydroCAD Version 10. The site has been designed to comply with the TSMP Cooperative Agreement for the Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD) guidelines and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Design Guidelines. EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDITIONS Currently the site has one existing sub watershed areas going to the single wet detention pond, the Menards Pond, located to the west of the proposed western-most property line. This pond was designed as a wet detention pond and provides rate control and water quality treatment for a large area including the project site. A geotechnical report has been prepared by PSI. The report sampled 19 soil borings, with a summary of HSG B soils based on the boring findings and existing site soil conditions. The existing HydroCAD model is provided in the Appendix. PROPOSED DRAINAGE CONDITIONS AND INFILTRATION REQUIREMENTS The proposed site will be meeting requirements of the TSMP Cooperative Agreement (provided in the Appendix) for the Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD), additionally rate and volume control is 1 RECEIVED MAY 1 12016 Kimley>>>Horn provided onsite to comply with the differences in the 2000 and 2007 Browns Creek Watershed District Rules. Drainage from the site is designed to sheet flow from the parking lots into curb cuts into the regional pond. Approximately 50 % of the sites runoff is captured and treated prior to discharging into an infiltration based located on the east side of the project area. This infiltration basin will provide the required volume-control for the site Rate Control According to BCWD Rule 2.4.1, part (a) it is required that an applicant for a stormwater management permit must demonstrate to the District that the proposed land-altering activity will not increase peak stormwater flow from the site, as compared with the pre-settlement condition, for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 2, 10, or 100 years in the subwatershed drainage area of the site. • The Menard's Pond was initially designed to provide rate control for the contributing drainage area assuming a developed curve number of 92.This assumed contributing drainage area includes the property proposed in this proposal. Using HydroCAD Analysis,this proposed site satisfies a curve number of 92,as shown in the below and in the HydroCAD report. Total Impervious Area on Lots 1, 2,and 3 =74% NE Outlot A assumed impervious area =85 Weighted Curve Number for the site=92 • The proposed site demonstrates runoff rates as shown in the table below for the 2, 10, and 100 year rain event. This increase in rates is acceptable based off the coverage of the TSMP Cooperative Agreement. Pre-Developed Proposed (2000 Rules, Pre-Settlement Difference of Pre- Post Development Development(CN=92, CN=61,type B (2007 Rules, Development and (CN=92,allowable pervious areas CN=74 Reduciton Below soil) CN=57,type B soil) Pre-Settlement for Menards pond) for type C soil) Post-Development 2-Year 0.57 0.25 0.32 11.14 7.77 3.37 10-Year 2.72 1.84 0.88_ 18.05 12.34 5.71 100-Year 6.85 5.42 1.43 26.92 22.13 4.79 Volume Control According to BCWD Rule 2.4.1, part (b), an applicant for a stormwater management permit must demonstrate to the District that the proposed land-altering activity will not increase stormwater flow volume from the site, as compared with the pre-settlement condition, for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 2 years, or 5 years within a landlocked basin or a subwatershed draining to a landlocked basin. • The TSMP Agreement indicates conformance with the District's 2000 Rules for volume control, but the 2007 Rules increased the standards. Due to this slight increase,the proposed project must provide volume control to meet the difference between the 2000 and 2007 standards. The required infiltration volume is the difference between the 1.5 year event runoff volume from pre-development conditions with 5% impervious surface, and the 2-year event runoff volume from the pre-settlement site-conditions. For this proposed site, the 2 Kimley>>>Horn required infiltration volume is 1,743 cubic feet (0.04 acre-feet) of storage which is being met by the eastern Infiltration Pond. Requirement Required Infiltration Difference between Pre- Rate Reduction Volume to Provide Development&Pre- Provided below 2000 0.76 ac-ft. Settlement Rate Development Condition 2007 0.72 ac-ft. 1,743 cubic feet 16,106 cubic feet • Because this submittal for stormwater permit is taking place post-2007, this submittal must also meet the MPCA Water Quality Volume requirement of 1.0" over new impervious area. The infiltration rate used for the Hydrologic Soil Group C soils is 0.45"/hour for the 48 hour event. The Infiltration Pond is designed to meet this 1.8' infiltration depth requirement. The MPCA required storage volume • The proposed Infiltration Pond will provide 16,106 cubic feet of storage.The pond is designed with an outlet control structure to outlet water above the infiltration depth, and discharge this to the Menard's Pond. • Soil borings from the Geotechnical Report of PSI indicate conditions suitable for infiltration with primarily Hydrologic Soil Group B soils. While no soil borings were taken from the exact proposed Infiltration Pond location, borings surrounding the area produced sands and silty sands. • The proposed development will route approximately 2.39 acres to the Infiltration Pond. This will consist of the two northern retail buildings,the major parking lot located at the southeast of the property,and the drive-thru area and associated parking. Pollutant Loading According to BCWD Rule 2.4.1, part (c), an applicant for a stormwater management permit must demonstrate to the District that the proposed land-alterations will not increase annual phosphorous loading at the downgradient property boundary, as compared to the pre-development conditions. • The existing Menard's Pond was designed to meet the water quality standards of the District's 2000 Rules. The 2007 Rules involved a change in the water quality standards; thus, this project must provide water quality treatment to meet the difference in the two standards. Under the 2007 Rules, the phosphorus removal standards require removal efficiency is 84% in order to meet the no increase in phosphorus load standard.The Menard's Pond was shown in the Long Lake Management Study to provide 36% phosphorus removal, therefore the site must provide an additional 48% removal onsite. • A P8 Model was created in order to analyze the phosphorus loading created onsite. Under proposed conditions, the proposed development is expected to produce 7.71 lbs. of phosphorous offsite if the water is not treated onsite. The project proposes to utilize the infiltration pond and proposed stormwater system onsite in order to remove the required 48% of phosphorus loads onsite. The results of the P8 model are provided in an Appendix at the rear of this report and are summarized in the table below. 3 Kimley>>)Horn Variable OVERALL Infiltration Basin P0% 47.3 90 P10% 54.1 99.5 P30% 54.4 100 P50% 54.4 100 P80% 54.4 100 TSS 54.3 99.9 TP 52.3 97.1 TKN 51.6 96.1 The results of the P8 analysis show the proposed site exceeds the required 48 % reduction in Phosphorous loading by provide a Phosphorous reduction of 52.3 %. Lake/Wetland Bounce According to BCWD Rule 2.4.1, part(d), an applicant for a stormwater management permit must demonstrate to the District that the proposed land-altering activity will not increase the bounce in water level or duration of inundation,for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 2, 10, or 100 years in the subwatershed in which the site is located,for any downstream lake or wetland beyond the limit specified. • The Menard's Pond is expected to attenuate any changes in bounce or duration of inundation that may have otherwise resulted from this project. Erosion Control According to BCWD Rule 3.2, all persons performing land disturbance activities involving more than 50 cubic yards of earth or removal of vegetative cover on 5,000 square feet or land shall submit an erosion control plan to the District, and obtain a permit from the District approving the erosion control plan. • The applicable Erosion Control Phase I and Phase II Plans are being submitted with the Civil Site Plans in order to address the land disturbing activities proposed for this site. Lake,Stream,and Wetland Buffer Requirements According to BCWD Rule 4.0, buffer zone widths are dictated by the presence of a stream ort tributary of Brown's Creek and by the quality of lakes or wetlands on the development site. • Rule 4.0 does not apply to this project. Rule 5.0—Shoreline and Streambank Alterations According to BCWD Rule 5.0, no person shall construct or install a shoreline or streambank improvement below the ordinary high water mark of a waterbody without first obtaining a District permit. 4 Kimley>>)Horn • Rule 5.0 does not apply to this project. Watercourse and Basin Crossings According to BCWD Rule 6.2, no person shall use the beds of any waterbody within the District for the placement of roads, highways,and utilities without first securing a permit from the District. • Rule 6.0 does not apply to this project. Floodplain and Drainage Alterations According to BCWD Rule 7.2, no person shall alter or fill land below the 100-year flood elevation of any waterbody, wetland, or stormwater management basin, or place fill in a landlocked basin without first obtaining a permit from the District. No person shall alter stormwater flows at a property boundary by changing land contours, diverting or obstructing surface or channel flow, or creating a basin outlet, without first obtaining a permit from the District. • This proposed development does not propose any floodplain fill below the 924.2 ft. high water mark of the Menard's Pond. The proposed finished floor elevations of the building onsite are 929.0 ft., 928.5 ft., and 928.5 ft., which are greater than 2.0 ft. above the high water level of the adjacent Menard's Pond. The Civil Site Plan and Grading Plan shall indicate that Outlot A shall be consistent with this regulation, with a finished floor elevation for the future proposed building greater than or equal to 926.2 ft. The proposed HydroCAD model is provided in the attached Appendix. Please contact me at(651)643-0428 if you have any questions. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ///09, Michael C. Brandt, P.E. 5 Kimley>»Horn Appendices Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 1. Pre-Development HydroCAD Model Analysis 8 Pre- Developed Subca Reach 'on. Routing Diagram for Pre-Development Prepared by{enter your company name here}, Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pre-Development Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 5.147 61 Type B per 2000 BCWD Rules (DA-1) 5.147 61 TOTAL AREA Pre-Development Type II 24-hr 1.5-Year Rainfall=2.60" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pape 3 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.23" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=61 Runoff=0.38 cfs 0.097 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.097 af Average Runoff Depth=0.23" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Development Type 1124-hr 1.5-Year Rainfall=2.60" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD©10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff = 0.38 cfs @ 12.51 hrs, Volume= 0.097 af, Depth= 0.23" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 1.5-Year Rainfall=2.60" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 61 Type B per 2000 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Pre-Development Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.29" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=61 Runoff=0.57 cfs 0.125 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.125 af Average Runoff Depth=0.29" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Development Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD©10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff = 0.57 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 0.125 af, Depth= 0.29" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 61 Type B per 2000 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Pre-Development Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15II Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.89" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=61 Runoff=2.72 cfs 0.382 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.382 af Average Runoff Depth=0.89" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Development Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff = 2.72 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 0.382 af, Depth= 0.89" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area (ac) CN Description * 5.147 61 Type B per 2000 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Pre-Development Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.94" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=61 Runoff=6.85 cfs 0.832 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.832 af Average Runoff Depth= 1.94" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00%Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Development Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 sin 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-Developed Runoff = 6.85 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 0.832 af, Depth= 1.94" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 61 Type B per 2000 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 2. Pre-Development HydroCAD Model Analysis 9 DA... 1 Pre-settlement Subca Reach "on. MI Routing Diagram for Pre-Settlement Prepared by{enter your company name here}, Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pre-Settlement Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pape 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 5.147 57 Type B per 2007 BCWD Rules (DA-1) 5.147 57 TOTAL AREA Pre-Settlement Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.19" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=57 Runoff=0.25 cfs 0.081 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.081 af Average Runoff Depth=0.19" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00%Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Settlement Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 12.59 hrs, Volume= 0.081 af, Depth= 0.19" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 57 Type B per 2007 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Pre-Settlement Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.68" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=57 Runoff=1.84 cfs 0.294 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.294 af Average Runoff Depth=0.68" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Settlement Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 6 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff = 1.84 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 0.294 af, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area (ac) CN Description * 5.147 57 Type B per 2007 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Pre-Settlement Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.62" Flow Length=374' Tc=37.9 min CN=57 Runoff=5.42 cfs 0.693 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.693 af Average Runoff Depth= 1.62" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Pre-Settlement Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Pre-settlement Runoff = 5.42 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 0.693 af, Depth= 1.62" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 57 Type B per 2007 BCWD Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 34.7 200 0.0040 0.10 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.80" 3.2 174 0.0172 0.92 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 37.9 374 Total Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 3. Post-Development HydroCAD Model Analysis 10 DA- 1 Post- Development SubCa Reach "on. Routing Diagram for Post-Development Prepared by{enter your company name here}, Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Post-Development Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 5.147 92 Menards Allowable CN per 2000 Rules (DA-1) 5.147 92 TOTAL AREA Post-Development Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.97" Tc=20.0 min CN=92 Runoff=11.14 cfs 0.846 of Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.846 of Average Runoff Depth=1.97" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Post-Development Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff = 11.14 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.846 af, Depth= 1.97" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 92 Menards Allowable CN per 2000 Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Post-Development Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.26" Tc=20.0 min CN=92 Runoff=18.05 cfs 1.399 of Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=1.399 of Average Runoff Depth=3.26" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00%Impervious=0.000 ac Post-Development Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff = 18.05 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 1.399 af, Depth= 3.26" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 92 Menards Allowable CN per 2000 Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Post-Development Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff Area=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.97" Tc=20.0 min CN=92 Runoff=26.92 cfs 2.132 of Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=2.132 of Average Runoff Depth=4.97" 100.00% Pervious=5.147 ac 0.00% Impervious=0.000 ac Post-Development Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Post-Development Runoff = 26.92 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 2.132 af, Depth= 4.97" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(ac) CN Description * 5.147 92 Menards Allowable CN per 2000 Rules 5.147 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 4. Proposed Drainage HydroCAD Model Analysis 11 — --vo ------- ----- — ––—–---z N _ --'------..-:.-'-_-_----T.=------7-= \,.- --- -__1, ,.--_- -- _,_ ------------ ----------=----=7--3.:T-7----:17----::::-_- ----'-----'-±-_-=-----=_L----_Ill--, -----"--M-lid - \ t 1-1--j — ---- -7\—i 1-1\----)----e 37-,----,_=7,-___:_-_,:7-_, ------.-- „ e! Ili vL,.„„:-----lt—.---_,---- - ———- H \ 1 01 ------ ----- — ---- I i 1 r---- r-p>,-_--,-_-_,_ ___,_ \-- -— 7 , n I ill(I \ i___ I , -- 1 i/II 1 , ,_.„ ,L, 7 42 DA . /—\ 1 I I I 'I 1 f 1 , ‘!= Northwest Ogilrheal N-, ," i \ 1 ,00000000 '9 V \ V\V I a I 1._. — 1 1 ( \ 11 1 II \ J 1=1' 1 HI \ ,_—o.--' ..--•.--•z--, \ \ Mena.Pond \ -,,-,,,. ^—''—.'—',—. •--''—''—''---. IN 1 "r — 1 77 ' I ---. I i's,' ll II \\\i;11\ li . \ p-r„:, kw is„\ , _ .10 INIIISIW ' 1 0 \ ,1 \\\\ \ \ \\\ \ \\ \ 0 \ \\ \ ---_ -- ——• --II' .A , 0 \ \ , \ / 1 41 C-'----)— - ---- _ 7\ ,, , _/\ _„ ,_ _ _, _ 7 I: —__ (new Rea.) Su bca) Reach ( on. till Routing Diagram for Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Prepared by{enter your company name here}, Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 1.319 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (DA-1, DA-2, DA-3, DA-4, DA-5, DA-6) 3.828 98 Impervious (DA-1, DA-2, DA-3, DA-4, DA-5, DA-6) 5.147 92 TOTAL AREA Proposed Drai nage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff Area=30.529 sf 80.73% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.23" Tc=10.0 min CN=93 Runoff=2.12 cfs 0.130 af Subcatchment DA-2: Runoff Area=65.817 sf 61.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.88" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=3.90 cfs 0.237 af Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Runoff Area=81.675 sf 76.52% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.15" Tc=7.0 min CN=92 Runoff=6.05 cfs 0.336 of Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff Area=22.735 sf 83.94% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.28" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=1.78 cfs 0.099 of Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff Area=22.391 sf 85.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.30" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=1.77 cfs 0.099 of Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff Area=1,053 sf 85.47% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.31" Tc=7.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.08 cfs 0.005 af Reach 7R: Menard's Pond Inflow=7.77 cfs 0.471 af Outflow=7.77 cfs 0.471 af Reach 9R: Offsite-North Inflow=1.78 cfs 0.099 af Outflow=1.78 cfs 0.099 af Reach 10R: (new Reach) Inflow=0.08 cfs 0.005 af Outflow=0.08 cfs 0.005 af Pond 6P: Storm Pond Peak Elev=922.78' Storage=12.945 cf Inflow=7.82 cfs 0.435 af Discarded=0.10 cfs 0.435 af Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=0.10 cfs 0.435 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=0.906 af Average Runoff Depth=2.11" 25.62% Pervious= 1.319 ac 74.38% Impervious=3.828 ac Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff = 2.12 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.130 af, Depth= 2.23" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 5,884 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 24,645 98 Impervious 30,529 93 Weighted Average 5,884 19.27% Pervious Area 24,645 80.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-2: Southwest/Parking/Building Runoff = 3.90 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.237 af, Depth= 1.88" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(sf) CN Description 25,224 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 40,593 98 Impervious 65,817 89 Weighted Average 25,224 38.32% Pervious Area 40,593 61.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Retail Runoff = 6.05 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.336 af, Depth= 2.15" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 62,500 98 Impervious 19,175 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 81,675 92 Weighted Average 19,175 23.48% Pervious Area 62,500 76.52% Impervious Area Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff = 1.78 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.099 af, Depth= 2.28" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Impervious 3,651 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,735 94 Weighted Average 3,651 16.06% Pervious Area 19,084 83.94% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff = 1.77 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.099 af, Depth= 2.30" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q,Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area(sf) CN Description 19,032 98 Impervious 3,359 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,391 94 Weighted Average 3,359 15.00% Pervious Area 19,032 85.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff = 0.08 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.005 af, Depth= 2.31" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Area(sf) CN Description 900 98 Impervious 153 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 1,053 95 Weighted Average 153 14.53% Pervious Area 900 85.47% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 7R: Menard's Pond [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 5.147 ac, 74.38% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.10" for 2-Year event Inflow = 7.77 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.471 af Outflow = 7.77 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.471 af, Atten= 0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 9R: Offsite-North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.522 ac, 83.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.28" for 2-Year event Inflow = 1.78 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.099 af Outflow = 1.78 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.099 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 10R: (new Reach) [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.024 ac, 85.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.31" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.08 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.005 af Outflow = 0.08 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.005 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 6P: Storm Pond Inflow Area= 2.389 ac, 78.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.18" for 2-Year event Inflow = 7.82 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.435 af Outflow = 0.10 cfs @ 18.75 hrs, Volume= 0.435 af, Atten= 99%, Lag=406.5 min Discarded = 0.10 cfs @ 18.75 hrs, Volume= 0.435 af Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Proposed Drai nage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Peak Elev= 922.78' @ 18.75 hrs Surf.Area= 9,598 sf Storage= 12,945 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 1,230.7 min calculated for 0.434 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det.time= 1,230.9 min ( 1,996.0- 765.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 921.30' 37,525 cf Custom Stage Data(Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 921.30 7,990 353.0 0 0 7,990 922.00 8,697 365.0 5,839 5,839 8,720 923.00 9,865 385.0 9,275 15,114 9,971 923.10 9,987 387.0 993 16,106 10,100 924.00 11,187 407.0 9,523 25,629 11,413 925.00 12,619 429.0 11,896 37,525 12,936 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.90' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 180.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 920.90'/920.00' S= 0.0050'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends&connections, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 923.10' 48.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Discarded 921.30' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.10 cfs @ 18.75 hrs HW=922.78' (Free Discharge) t—3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.10 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=921.30' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.48 cfs potential flow) L2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff Area=30.529 sf 80.73% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.49" Tc=10.0 min CN=93 Runoff=3.29 cfs 0.204 af Subcatchment DA-2: Runoff Area=65.817 sf 61.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.07" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=6.35 cfs 0.386 of Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Runoff Area=81.675 sf 76.52% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.40" Tc=7.0 min CN=92 Runoff=9.48 cfs 0.531 af Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff Area=22.735 sf 83.94% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.56" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=2.75 cfs 0.155 of Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff Area=22.391 sf 85.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.58" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=2.72 cfs 0.154 of Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff Area=1,053 sf 85.47% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.59" Tc=7.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.13 cfs 0.007 of Reach 7R: Menard's Pond Inflow=12.34 cfs 0.902 af Outflow=12.34 cfs 0.902 af Reach 9R: Offsite-North Inflow=2.75 cfs 0.155 af Outflow=2.75 cfs 0.155 af Reach 10R: (new Reach) Inflow=0.13 cfs 0.007 af Outflow=0.13 cfs 0.007 af Pond 6P: Storm Pond Peak Elev=923.18' Storage=16.926 cf Inflow=12.20 cfs 0.684 af Discarded=0.11 cfs 0.531 af Primary=0.97 cfs 0.150 af Outflow=1.07 cfs 0.681 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=1.436 af Average Runoff Depth=3.35" 25.62% Pervious=1.319 ac 74.38% Impervious=3.828 ac Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff = 3.29 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.204 af, Depth= 3.49" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area(sf) CN Description 5,884 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 24,645 98 Impervious 30,529 93 Weighted Average 5,884 19.27% Pervious Area 24,645 80.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-2: Southwest/Parking/Building Runoff = 6.35 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.386 af, Depth= 3.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area (sf) CN Description 25,224 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 40,593 98 Impervious 65,817 89 Weighted Average 25,224 38.32% Pervious Area 40,593 61.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Retail Runoff = 9.48 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.531 af, Depth= 3.40" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area (sf) CN Description 62,500 98 Impervious 19,175 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 81,675 92 Weighted Average 19,175 23.48% Pervious Area 62,500 76.52% Impervious Area Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff = 2.75 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.155 af, Depth= 3.56" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area(sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Impervious 3,651 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,735 94 Weighted Average 3,651 16.06% Pervious Area 19,084 83.94% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff = 2.72 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.154 af, Depth= 3.58" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Area(sf) CN Description 19,032 98 Impervious 3,359 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,391 94 Weighted Average 3,359 15.00% Pervious Area 19,032 85.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff = 0.13 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth= 3.59" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Area(sf) CN Description 900 98 Impervious 153 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 1,053 95 Weighted Average 153 14.53% Pervious Area 900 85.47% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 7R: Menard's Pond [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 5.147 ac, 74.38% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.10" for 10-Year event Inflow = 12.34 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.902 of Outflow = 12.34 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.902 af, Atten= 0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 9R: Offsite-North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.522 ac, 83.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.56" for 10-Year event Inflow = 2.75 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.155 of Outflow = 2.75 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.155 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 10R: (new Reach) [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.024 ac, 85.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.59" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.007 of Outflow = 0.13 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 6P: Storm Pond Inflow Area= 2.389 ac, 78.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.44" for 10-Year event Inflow = 12.20 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.684 af Outflow = 1.07 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.681 af, Atten= 91%, Lag= 29.9 min Discarded = 0.11 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.531 af Primary = 0.97 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.150 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.15" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Peak Elev= 923.18' @ 12.48 hrs Surf.Area= 10,093 sf Storage= 16,926 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 1,160.9 min calculated for 0.681 of(100% of inflow) 1 Center-of-Mass det.time= 1,158.3 min ( 1,916.9-758.6) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 921.30' 37,525 cf Custom Stage Data(Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 921.30 7,990 353.0 0 0 7,990 1 922.00 8,697 365.0 5,839 5,839 8,720 923.00 9,865 385.0 9,275 15,114 9,971 923.10 9,987 387.0 993 16,106 10,100 924.00 11,187 407.0 9,523 25,629 11,413 925.00 12,619 429.0 11,896 37,525 12,936 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.90' 12.0" Round Culvert I L= 180.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 920.90'/920.00' S= 0.0050'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends&connections, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 923.10' 48.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Discarded 921.30' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 12.48 hrs HW=923.18' (Free Discharge) t3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.11 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.96 cfs @ 12.48 hrs HW=923.18' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.96 cfs of 3.48 cfs potential flow) L2=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.96 cfs @ 0.93 fps) Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD 10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff Area=30.529 sf 80.73% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.17" Tc=10.0 min CN=93 Runoff=4.84 cfs 0.302 of Subcatchment DA-2: Runoff Area=65.817 sf 61.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.68" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=9.67 cfs 0.589 of Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Runoff Area=81.675 sf 76.52% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.06" Tc=7.0 min CN=92 Runoff=14.02 cfs 0.791 af Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff Area=22.735 sf 83.94% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.25" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=4.01 cfs 0.228 af Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff Area=22.391 sf 85.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.28" Tc=7.0 min CN=94 Runoff=3.97 cfs 0.226 of Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff Area=1,053 sf 85.47% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.29" Tc=7.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.19 cfs 0.011 of Reach 7R: Menard's Pond Inflow=22.13 cfs 1.602 af Outflow=22.13 cfs 1.602 af Reach 9R: Offsite-North Inflow=4.01 cfs 0.228 af Outflow=4.01 cfs 0.228 af Reach 10R: (new Reach) Inflow=0.19 cfs 0.011 af Outflow=0.19 cfs 0.011 af Pond 6P: Storm Pond Peak Elev=923.71' Storage=22.414 cf Inflow=17.99 cfs 1.017 af Discarded=0.11 cfs 0.542 af Primary=3.88 cfs 0.471 af Outflow=3.99 cfs 1.013 af Total Runoff Area=5.147 ac Runoff Volume=2.147 af Average Runoff Depth=5.01" 25.62% Pervious=1.319 ac 74.38% Impervious=3.828 ac Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90/, Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment DA-1: Northwest Parking Lot Runoff = 4.84 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.302 af, Depth= 5.17" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(sf) CN Description 5,884 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 24,645 98 Impervious 30,529 93 Weighted Average 5,884 19.27% Pervious Area 24,645 80.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-2: Southwest/Parking/Building Runoff = 9.67 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 0.589 af, Depth= 4.68" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(sf) CN Description 25,224 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 40,593 98 Impervious 65,817 89 Weighted Average 25,224 38.32% Pervious Area 40,593 61.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-3: East Parking Lot/Small Retail Runoff = 14.02 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.791 af, Depth= 5.06" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(sf) CN Description 62,500 98 Impervious 19,175 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 81,675 92 Weighted Average 19,175 23.48% Pervious Area 62,500 76.52% Impervious Area Proposed Drai nage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfa11=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here) Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 sin 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-4: Northeast Parking Lot Runoff = 4.01 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.228 af, Depth= 5.25" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area (sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Impervious 3,651 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,735 94 Weighted Average 3,651 16.06% Pervious Area 19,084 83.94% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-5: DA-5/Outlot Runoff = 3.97 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.226 af, Depth= 5.28" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Area(sf) CN Description 19,032 98 Impervious 3,359 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 22,391 94 Weighted Average 3,359 15.00% Pervious Area 19,032 85.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment DA-6: East Driveway Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth= 5.29" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-Q, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Area(sf) CN Description 900 98 Impervious 153 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 1,053 95 Weighted Average 153 14.53% Pervious Area 900 85.47% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 7R: Menard's Pond [40] Hint: Not Described (Oufflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 5.147 ac, 74.38% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.73" for 100-Year event Inflow = 22.13 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 1.602 of Outflow = 22.13 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 1.602 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 9R: Offsite-North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.522 ac, 83.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.25" for 100-Year event Inflow = 4.01 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.228 af Outflow = 4.01 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.228 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 10R: (new Reach) [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 0.024 ac, 85.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.29" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.19 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.011 of Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 6P: Storm Pond Inflow Area= 2.389 ac, 78.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.11" for 100-Year event Inflow = 17.99 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 1.017 af Outflow = 3.99 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 1.013 af, Atten= 78%, Lag= 10.1 min Discarded = 0.11 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 0.542 af Primary = 3.88 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 0.471 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Proposed Drainage-2016-0510 Type 1124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=5.90" Prepared by{enter your company name here} Printed 5/11/2016 HydroCADO 10.00 sin 09165 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Peak Elev= 923.71' @ 12.15 hrs Surf.Area= 10,789 sf Storage= 22,414 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 804.0 min calculated for 1.013 of(100%of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 801.6 min ( 1,554.9-753.4) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 921.30' 37,525 cf Custom Stage Data(Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 921.30 7,990 353.0 0 0 7,990 922.00 8,697 365.0 5,839 5,839 8,720 923.00 9,865 385.0 9,275 15,114 9,971 923.10 9,987 387.0 993 16,106 10,100 924.00 11,187 407.0 9,523 25,629 11,413 925.00 12,619 429.0 11,896 37,525 12,936 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.90' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 180.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 920.90'/920.00' S= 0.0050'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends&connections, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 923.10' 48.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Discarded 921.30' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 12.15 hrs HW=923.71' (Free Discharge) t-3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.11 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.88 cfs @ 12.15 hrs HW=923.71' (Free Discharge) t-1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 3.88 cfs @ 4.94 fps) 4 -2=Orifice/Grate (Passes 3.88 cfs of 19.45 cfs potential flow) Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 5. Drainage maps 12 st/u/s NW`S1H`JI3H NMbd)1V0 MIN M,fffil y�r« ���M� T-X3 am IN3 W31113S-32id d noa J ` 'ON 133H5 4dV /43do13/134-32ld N3SS3Iaa 3H1 U.IOH(<<A AWN A9 NMtltlO � I �� Z W Q I X Z W D r ^1 I '001>'00ddV HI3 aVY'1110'NIB _- i , H�a;N3W M� �— / I i LH % — __ .4 i , ;TI !t \\ ` I I i I e' , , , fl,I 1 I I (, 1 j 1 !till 1 1',' 1 / r--.-_ u_ , 1' iI — % , 0 N 1 -iil . � d Ir� I % N N v� I� i - N cv I,� i 1'1 'I') < W ' 11 I(�1 I ' '1 1 t _ % 1 I I ` ill ' I �,� yyIA�\ I I 1 f / f \ 1 f 1 11;1'1 '1 h ! I If1r .1 . 1 \ f it II I''� , 11Avi\/ , , -61. 7: B IIII ,1 I1 ` r 1 I II l ,I ,X11 - ,,„./ ' ,y 1 1 1 O k I ‘,:\,C\\,_ "---->X/ I` II 11 i til)\ f ( 11I!a. I 1 i = �:,, -':fi �— �— % 7 !' I 1 = - / II 1, �, 111, 1„ \\ 1 \ j , Illl ii 11 1t�''i �\ i j ( (iI i` I I III , , i ,, ! I ;I, i 1 ; IH IIII-1 III ' 1V 1 _7 ) 1 1 1! I ' �� i'VI\I ��` L II V III' ,1 „l, \ 'ti uI It ,�h�\lil ,,\ II I I ,!)1;1'‘'\\' jj 1 I i� , ! 1 1 __.---. alII �!� ,l�'' ''t I\ _ - 9T/OT/5 NW`SIH9I3H N2ib'd)IVO IN,TMu atrAIIIIMOVIuIVIMM0/0 T-x3 31V0 Nb'ld dnoUJ 'ON133H5 CI cry/ 3DVNl`daO O3SOdO2id N3SS312id 3Hl UJOH<0 AWN A9 NMVNO IN (W/J Q E LWJ ' o a¢ 0 ., i r `-- A _ — — - — — — N =�z..C11111111 ( 11111111 .t LL. tL ! i � N �� nip_l p_ l l l l �-� J co ,1 1 c� a I �� i 9 Loo ) , 1 o �' o lll�ml1U o H� D CO s l l l k y l l l;' - 1 ,n t O ,._(3) - `"` . , 11114,111' _ I Q W llllllll' 00 11] 11 \, ,......_,, 7 ,.......„..._:.._____ „ , , ., \ r Lt _ • tn , ; C, a I i 1 N ' weg a JWP , I 1 (n °< w ti- d' LLL or 1 i 1 .,_, \ , , off _ I , LO - tL L.Lc �y 4,i,,,: i Illi M�N LC) a ���� i�� 0 • lik /::::::::,,::::;,, 1�1II1IT 11�i, _vim - - - � I I I 1' (I ,�1, �, .. _� jI i 11i I '�Ii I Ii F II ll 1., r �t { I; !I 1 I Vr,t6t Iit1ti3O_ mOe ,' tl � I 1 ou,� !� I il'i , ' 15 ,•,'' ,I iii , S( itd , „` ww 1 I�1� I \ I sw ik t I --- w fa `Hi d --.=.-- - Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 6. P8 Report 13 Eel f8 6 18 6 § ; ] § / \ \ ) ) § § ¥ • I ! ▪ ƒ } 2 ER , ! ) i & ® ( § ` ! t3 ! \ ) ) } 2 : m ) °g • OI2 _ - 2 \ „=, ) \ ! ) k IO \ ( [ CO \ 'Cr CO ) CO 0 ° » y e o 2 \ / 2 c 5) 0_ J CO/ cz 7 7 \ § c) $ R Eh as Z ] ) $ + 2 ƒ j \ ) \ ) / / ) Ili / 2 = u / Z % E o \ / 0 CO cO e a \ / ° k 0 \ \ E ® / ) / la Eca 0 _\ § o COTD / 1 co "cis' co w c f o l / ) \ j b / ) ._ \ k 42 LT S e co cu \ \ \ \ 2 o \ i a. 0 0 ± n 0 Cl) * 7 D 7 v N „ CD 21 7 7 -0 v -a -I 0 ro o o g w 0 co m 3 E. (D =. ca ro m m CD co M. 7 W 3 °' cn cn a c a 0 a m a a a m- coi 0 m C o CD m 7 0 0 •0' O n �D O 2 O 0 (p . C C Q. _ C? o' (D 0 CD (D (D N O 7 0 0 o o' m o_ < C7 -n C 7 O chi C �. .'::0 m 111 0 CCD 0 0 X m m CD m m m m 0 73 O `G Z K n 0 (D O N 7 7 C O N N N O O n Cn 7-1 DO Z CD n 2 O 7 CD o' m Q X n o 3 o' (' LIT 3 . K C v '0 0 ^ ; C ^ CD 0 o Ps 0 w o 0 7 0 A 7' m' 0 m Q 7 n 0 n w 3 Ci) O CD CD 7 N (D C N r' r 7- Q 3 "^O Q 0O 1.4 -0 10 CD CD m 0 3 Co n m < CO v 1 W N -+ "O • 0 -u (D n CD -D N 'O 1 0 N 7 7 O W a O U 0 0 (-" co o 0 0 0 0 0 -H 0 0 0 0 0 -b o Cl) ao -b a Co O O O O O -. _I O 1 i b O N NO N v --'• O O o o b O 0. U7 CNT Ut Ul O c..) O o H R7 r 7 2. CDN_ N N 7 O H " 0-' s O W N N N N N T. O N O N J O O O o C.J O 0 (D (D 01 Z o,-, (n o 0 0 o O -0 _, N 1 Pb 0 N • _ O --• b N (T N O v 0 O O O 6 OO _, N co 0 A ? --- co o O J I N O O O O •. 7 O p � NO 01N ON - -, o o O t0 p cT A N CT O U O o H cn )7 -a A (.2. 7 N C N O 7 0 0 0 o N .:_.<, n m W w C4, Z m CO rn N O A 01 01 O O 2 -- O O 0 co - 0 ? O O O O O O O O O O O LU LU LU L N N N N N O O O O O O O O CO CO Cfl O O O O O co CO 07 U r r r O O O O O O M M M CO CO O O O O O O O O O O O COO T O O OO O LU LU LC) W N C rn co co co O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 o O O O O CL a a O O / m \ 7 § S ¥ o o ) \ ƒ ƒ / ) } ) \ ) \ \ } 0 a- co \ \ f \ ) _ ƒ W \ \ \) L / 1 ® y g } / / � \ ( 2 £ f c / o -- o - CO \ % § « ^ \ 2 � \ k .1- ° \ \ n m c n \ \ \) E ) E _ � Oco ci isn o ei \ m } > / \ / \ / \ r 5', { 0 { 2_ E m § % } \ \ § § E ] P § } ® o \ E ƒ § g { _ o t. f y 2 / 2 2 E 0 / g - E E \ f a e » - t ) f $ \ 2 I- E \ \ { / § ) \ § j ƒ - \ ) 16/ / § \ / Cl) \ § / ui ca ` E E ` \ \ / I \ \ / \ .t.\ \ \ \ \ { \ \ \ \ \ \ ) [ f \ [ \ \ > ) CL o e m m o o C.o m � < e 2 2 E O < = m = Y co 2 m m m m u o \ ( : _ / 2 3 2 : ) / c 7 ^r_ 0 c T- 0 / ± \ & § c c c = x- \ E 0 / c cc os /\ { \Q / w 1- c- c x- o /w o o c ,- ) �} / / R LI- (1.) - 0 «: a) o -o \ _ CtS ) _ j cz } \ { \ c \ \ \ ƒ / \ 2 a £ / j 0 ® \ ii- ® ° @ ° - \ \ § f Cl.) ƒ z e \ ( o } \ 'CO { = m ) ƒ { / 3 c & . ± ± § _ 3 } S m f \ ) { ° a ) ) \ \ o 0 \ s ± E ° \ ° 2 o _ » I - \ \ \ / :r� ± a { { \ 3 \ A ƒ \ \ [ \ I 6 z / \. { / ) \ cp _ ) - ® £ - ƒ ) ƒ w f R E R 37 \ § / » / \ 2 = ° \ \ - \ ( \ ƒ / { / / { \ \ / � \ ¥ { ( \ 0 a o 0 Z :\ ) \ R m m f D D D = CO m m m m m W = A ± A 5 Z & coo \ ° £ ° \ \ 8 / R 3 / a E \ \ \ 1.0{L IIttT __ ) 0- \I $ \ \ \ ? ® / / a e ® \ \ ) \ E 2 z 0 & e ) o I ® ® - / ) \ e . . 4 a ( \ / e ) - \ £ £ - / { - _ F. ( \ \ J i \ ) \ \ \ \ S { { ( 2 f \ 6 ( E / ® / 0 ) } f f ) ƒ } \ { 2 2 \ _ § § \ £ m § g » 7 ` 3 \ 8- E & e / E O j E E : 6 2 = J 2 y H 0 \ } / C % n / \ ® $ E 7 / { \ \ 2 2 \ § \ - ( E E 2 f 5 e I 12 I a \ f / \ ] \ E _ { ) ` 45 & 6 ee m m / J ƒ ± E E E f 0 0 0 0 0 { = z I E m « 7 m 7 / i E i o CO2 J O O O O O U L0 o 0000 I O o r r p to Lo Lo In Cn N N N CV CV N N p CO CO O O O Nr COp CO r 1- CD COO (OO O O O OO N Nv `° O { O O O O r N o N in CO o o mro00r N MNp a. p pJO p CO O p to p LC) to V N O O O O O O • OOOOrQO N in N r r CD MMox- LLU M co O O O O O p cop LoLoO Z' . Lo o O O O O O O O O O r . N N N r O Y N O r p LULULULU LC) O I- O LC)r r r LO CO p CY) O in to O N in r p LC) 10 LO O O O O O O O O O r •. N N N O F O O r O CO CO CO O O r O p O O CO CO CO O O O O 0000 00 O O r r 000000 Cr). ,n Or ON r O O O O O CA F- 0000 O O O O CIS r N CO T E3 T) .) Q7 a Q �- O_ 'O as 0 E J J J r U O_ N c Q O] 41 N c C E >, rte-- 4' 7 O a. t0 cr. T a. a) O O 0 as ii5 a) Z-' U U c O U > w c a) 0 m U O Ts 0 a) 0 7 c c O Q7 0 w Z : N o_ TD CC U tO N U W W m 'c m U O W > a) Cr) N N CL CC _ w n a) c CO U c a O > > m 0 c O c O Q .2 0 0 9 C r a_ 43 n. amici ) o 0 o a .� a� m m cc m E c t o c) o o p II co LE N a a 0 a 3 5 cn 0 0 a a CL CL CL 11 Kimley >)Horn Appendix 7. Geotechnical Report 14 rInformation l' To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Testing April 26, 2016 Dreissen Group do Mr. Adam Beesch Fender Patterson Construction 4839 West 124th Street Savage, Minnesota 55378 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services Report Proposed Retail Development 6000 Krueger Lane Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Report No. 0675811 Dear Mr. Beesch: Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) is pleased to transmit our Geotechnical Engineering Services Report for the proposed new Retail Development in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. This report includes the results of field and laboratory testing; recommendations for foundation, slab-on-grade, pavement design; and general site development recommendations. PSI appreciates the opportunity to perform this Geotechnical Study and looks forward to continuing our participation during the design and construction phases of this project. If you have questions pertaining to this report, or if PSI may be of further service, please contact us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. 94 X. Rr `17g Joseph M. Rozmiarek, P.E. Kevin C. Miller, P.E. Project Manager Chief Engineer Geotechnical/Construction Services Principal Consultant PSI•2915 Waters Road,Suite 112•Eagan,Minnesota 55121 •651-646-8148•Fax 651-646-8258•www.psiusa.com , Information GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ToBuild On SERVICES REPORT Engineering • Consulting• Testing For the Proposed Retail Development 6000 Krueger Lane Oak Park Heights, Minnesota Prepared for: Kevin C. Miller, P.E. Fender Patterson Construction Chief Engineer 4839 West 124th Street Savage, Minnesota 55378 I hereby certify that this plan, Prepared by: specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision Professional Service Industries, Inc. and that I am a duly Licensed 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 Professional Engineer under the laws Eagan, Minnesota 55121 of the State of Minnesota. Phone (651) 646-8148 Fax (651) 646-8258 Print Name Joseph M. Rozmiarek, P.E. Signature: 94 PSI Report Number: 0675811 Exp. Date: 6/30/18 License#52629 April 26, 2016 ��{Sltrz 4eta LICENSED '; to PROFESSIONAL -0 ENGINEER x 5262 t, ©F hh4NN a•`, The above Profe=_sa n/ i tethnz Seal and Si=znature is an electronic reproduction of the orie-inal seal and sie:*atu re. An original hard copy was sent to the client hated on this donosnent. This electronic reproduction shall not be construed as an ori tnal or certified document. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. PROJECT INFORMATION 1 Project Authorization 1 Project Description 1 Purpose and Scope of Services 3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 Site Location and Description 3 Subsurface Conditions 3 Groundwater Information 6 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 Geotechnical Discussion 6 Site Preparation 7 Foundation Recommendations 9 Floor Slab Recommendations 10 Lateral Earth Pressures 11 Seismic Site Class 15 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 16 Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns 16 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns 16 Excavations 17 Utilities Trenching 17 GEOTECHNICAL RISK 18 REPORT LIMITATIONS 18 APPENDIX SITE VICINITY PLAN BORING LOCATION PLAN LOG OF BORINGS USGS SEISMIC ANALYSIS GENERAL NOTES Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No. 0675811 PROJECT INFORMATION Project Authorization The following Table summarizes, in chronological order, the Project Authorization History for the services performed and represented in this report by Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI). DOCUMENT AND REFERENCE NUMBER DATE AUTHOR OR AGENT&COMPANY Request for Proposal-Geotechnical 3/29/2016 Mr. Adam Beesch, Fendler Patterson Construction PSI Proposal No. 176806 4/1/2016 Mr. Joseph Rozmiarek and Mr. Kevin Miller, PSI Inc. Notice to Proceed 4/7/2016 Mr. Adam Beesch, Fendler Patterson Construction Project Description PSI understands that the project includes construction of a new Retail Development located at 6000 Krueger Lane in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. The following Table lists the material and information provided for this project: DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL PROVIDER/SOURCE DATE Mr. Adam Beesch, Preliminary Site Plan Fendler Patterson Construction 3/22/2016 At the time of drilling, the proposed Retail Development will consist of three new, standalone structures and associated pavements. Building #1 will be approximately 20,600 square feet in plan. Building #2 will be approximately 6,000 square feet in plan. Building #3 will be approximately 7,200 square feet in plan. The locations and footprints of Building #2 and #3 were modified after field operations had been completed. The new footprint sizes are 5,400 and 7,300 square feet, respectively. The original site plan and modified site plan are included in the appendix of this report. Each building will consist of a single-story, slab-on-grade structure with no below-grade levels. Building construction will consist of exterior concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls and interior steel columns supporting steel joists and decking for the roof. Based on this, maximum wall loads of 3 kips per lineal foot and maximum column loads of 150 kips were used in PSI's analyses. Maximum floor slab loads will be less than 150 pounds per square foot (psf). Finished floor elevations for the new buildings have not been established at this time. This report is based on the finished floor elevation being at or less than two feet above existing site grades (elevations 96± to 98± feet relative to the temporary benchmark). 1 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No. 0675811 Additional site work will include the construction of parking lots and drive lanes generally on the north and east sides of the buildings. Heavy duty pavements will be located to the south of Building #2 and to the west of Building #1. Building #1 will also have recessed truck docks and associated retaining walls. Final grades for the pavements are planned to be at or above existing grades. Access is planned from 60th Street to the north and Krueger Lane to the east of the site. Stormwater management will use the existing stormwater pond to the west of the site. The surface water elevation in the pond at the time of drilling was approximately 8 feet below existing site grades at elevation 88± feet relative to the temporary benchmark. The following Table lists the structural loads and site features that are required for or are the design basis for the conclusions contained in this report: STRUCTURAL LOAD/PROPERTY REQUIREMENT/DESIGN BASIS BUILDING Maximum Wall Loads 3 kips per lineal foot (klf) B Maximum Column Loads 150 kips B Finished First Floor Elevation At or less than 2 feet above B existing grades (96± to 98± feet relative to benchmark) Maximum Floor Loads and Size 150 pounds per square foot (psf)/ B Concentrated loads under 2 square feet Settlement Tolerances 1-inch total; 3/4-inch differential B between adjacent columns PAVEMENTS Pavement 18-kip ESAL (cycle & Light Duty — 30,000 ESALs B duration) Heavy Duty— 60,000 ESALs; with a life expectancy of 20 years GRADING Planned Grade Variations in Building 1± to 2± feet of cut B Pad and Pavement Areas 2± to 3± feet of fill B = Report has been prepared based on this parameter or loading in the absence of client supplied information at the time of this report. The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project information, building location, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If the noted information is incorrect, please inform PSI in writing so that we may amend the recommendations presented in this report if appropriate and if desired by the client. PSI will not be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes in the project. 2 Proposed Retail Development, Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 Purpose and Scope of Services The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and develop geotechnical design criteria regarding foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the proposed project. Subgrade preparation recommendations and construction considerations are also provided. PSI's scope of services included drilling a total of nineteen (19) soil test borings, select laboratory testing, and preparation of this Geotechnical Report. The scope of services for the geotechnical investigation did not include an environmental assessment for determining the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, surface water, groundwater, or air on or below, or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors, and unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for informational purposes. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Site Location and Description The proposed Retail Development site is located at 6000 Krueger Lane in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. The site is currently occupied by one single-story structure in the southeast corner of the property in a proposed pavement area. The remainder of the site is native grasses and a small pine tree farm. The site does not appear to previously have been developed otherwise, based on a review of historical aerial photographs dating to 1936. The project site is bounded to the west by an existing stormwater management pond for the existing commercial properties; to the north by 60th Street with Minnesota State Highway 36 beyond; and to the east and south by existing commercial properties and associated pavements. The site Latitude and Longitude are approximately 45.03516°N and 92.83947°W, respectively. The site topography is generally flat, but slopes gently downward to the west, with surface elevation differences between the borings within the building pads on the order of 2±feet. Elevations in the proposed pavement areas vary on the order of 1± foot. Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions were explored with nineteen (19) soil test borings. The following Table depicts the general location and depth of each boring completed for this project: BORING GENERAL LOCATION SURFACE DEPTH OF BORING ELEVATION(FT) (FT) B-01 Proposed Building #2, 95 16 Southwest Corner B-02 Proposed Building #2, 96 16 Northwest Corner 3 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Protect No.0675811 BORING GENERAL LOCATION SURFACE DEPTH OF BORING ELEVATION(FT) (Fr) B-03 Proposed Building #2, 96 16 Northeast Corner B-04 Proposed Pavements, 96 11 West End of North Lot B-05 Proposed Building #2 and #3, 96 16 Drive Lane between Buildings B-06 Proposed Building #3, 96 16 Southwest Corner B-07 Proposed Building #3, 96 16 Southeast Corner B 08 Proposed Building #3, 96 16 Northeast Corner B 09 Proposed Pavements, 96 16 Center of North Lot B-10 Proposed Pavements, 95 11 East End of North Lot B-11 Proposed Building #1, 96 11 Northwest Corner B 12 Proposed Building #1, 96 16 Northeast Corner B-13 Proposed Building #1, 96 16 Southeast Corner B-14 Proposed Building #1, 96 16 Center of South Side B-15 Proposed Building #1, 96 16 Southwest Corner B-16 Proposed Building #1, 96 16 Loading Dock Area B-17 Proposed Building #1, 95 11 Southwest Truck Lot B 18 Proposed Pavements, 97 11 Northwest Half of East Lot Proposed Pavements, B-19 97 11 Southeast Half of East Lot The surface elevation at each boring location was determined by the drill crew at the termination of drilling operations using conventional leveling techniques. The bonnet bolt of the fire hydrant on the east side of Krueger Lane, approximately east of the northeast corner of Building #1, was used as a temporary benchmark and was assigned an arbitrary reference elevation of 100 feet. This location is noted on the attached Boring Location Plan. PSI understands that a site survey has been ordered, and these elevations can be converted to mean sea level elevations if provided the site survey, including the reference elevation of the benchmark noted above. Elevations should be considered accurate to the nearest 1±foot. 4 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 The borings were advanced utilizing hollow stem auger drilling methods and soil samples were routinely obtained during the drilling process. Drilling and sampling techniques were accomplished generally in accordance with ASTM procedures. Representative soil samples were obtained from the soil borings and were returned to PSI's laboratory where they were visually classified using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as a guideline. Further, PSI conducted limited laboratory testing on select soil samples to aid in identifying and describing the physical characteristics of the soils and to aid in defining the site soil stratigraphy. The results of the field exploration and laboratory tests were used in PSI's engineering analysis and in the formulation of our engineering recommendations. The subsurface conditions consisted of surficial organic soils (4 to 7 inches thick). The surficial organic soils consisted of silty sand and trace amounts of roots and organics. No split spoon samples were taken in the surficial organic soils, and no laboratory testing was performed. Underlying the surficial organic soils were deposits of native silty sand and sand to the termination depths of the borings at 11 and 16 feet, respectively. These deposits were generally moist, with moisture contents ranging from 6% to 15%. SPT N-values in the sand soils ranged from 3 to 53 blows per foot (bpf), but more typically ranged from 9 to 15 bpf, indicating loose to medium relative densities. Exceptions to this general soil profile were deposits of sandy silt in Borings B-3, B-5, B- 6, B-9, B-11, B-12, B-14, and B-15. The sandy silt soils were present to depths of 5± to 15± feet below existing site grades. The sandy silt was moist to wet, with moisture contents ranging from 18% to 26%. SPT N-values in the silt ranged from 5 to 19 bpf, indicating loose to medium relative densities. According to published NRCS soils maps for the project site, the subgrade soils are anticipated to consist of Chetek Sand Loam soils, commensurate with the observed soils on site. The Chetek Sand Loam soils consist of up to 90 percent sand by mass, with greater amounts of silt in the upper soil profile. The soils are considered poor reclamation materials and somewhat to very limited for the foundation support of small commercial buildings. The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs included in the appendix should be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. These records include soil descriptions, stratifications, penetration resistances, locations of the samples, and laboratory test data. The stratifications shown on the boring logs represent the conditions at the actual boring locations only. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring locations. The stratifications represent the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and the actual transition may be gradual. Water level information obtained during field operations is also shown on these boring logs. The samples that were not discarded during classification or altered by laboratory testing will be retained for 60 days from the date of this report and then will be discarded. 5 1 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 Groundwater Information Groundwater was not observed during or at the completion of drilling operations. There is an existing stormwater management feature located directly west of the site. The surface water elevation of the feature at the time of drilling was 88± feet relative to the temporary benchmark, or about 8 feet below existing site grades. It is not known if the feature is lined to assist in water detention. The on-site soils generally have moderate to high permeability, and the groundwater observations should be indicative static groundwater levels onsite. Based on the observations during field operations, groundwater seepage issues are not anticipated for this project. If minor seepage is encountered, it be controlled using conventional sump and pump techniques. The nearest natural bodies of water are Brewer's Pond, located one-half mile northwest of the site; Long Lake, located two-thirds of a mile northwest of the site; and Cloverdale Lake, located one mile southwest of the site. The water level in the nearby water bodies is between 30± and 35± feet below existing site grades, according to published topographic maps. The groundwater observations noted on the boring logs represent the groundwater conditions at the test boring locations. It should be expected that the groundwater levels will fluctuate at least several feet seasonally, depending on climatic conditions and precipitation. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuation and perched groundwater conditions should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical Discussion There are two (2) primary geotechnical related concern at this site, which will affect the design, construction and possible performance of the proposed structures and pavements. The following summarizes these concerns: 1. Structural elements and utilities from the existing structure will be encountered during excavation in the proposed pavement areas. The primary geotechnical issue is the potential of encountering debris and foundation elements from the existing building on site. It is not known if the existing building on site has a basement or below-grade levels. It is expected that utilities, slabs, backfill, and possibly old structural elements will be encountered during construction. All building debris should be properly disposed of offsite. PSI recommends that the existing foundations, walls, and floor slabs, as well as any foundation elements from any previous structures, old utilities, etc. be removed in their entirety from beneath, and a minimum of 10 feet beyond the new building footprints. The resulting excavations should then be backfilled with compacted engineered fill as outlined in the Site Preparation section below. PSI recommends that after removal of foundation elements, 6 Proposed Retail Development, Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 if encountered, the exposed soils be observed by a representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer, prior to backfilling to the proposed subgrade elevations. Complete removal of existing foundations and foundation walls, if encountered, from within the proposed pavement areas may not be required; however, within these areas PSI recommends that foundations and foundation walls be removed to a minimum depth of 2 feet below subgrade elevation to minimize the potential for non-uniform settlement. 2. Loose to medium dense silty sand and sand soils were observed at estimated foundation bearing elevations. Loose to medium dense sand was encountered at foundation bearing elevations within the proposed building area. The observed N-values ranged from 8 to 14 blows per foot (bpf) at anticipated foundation elevations (92± to 94± feet relative to the temporary benchmark). These soils will require applied compactive effort prior to foundation construction to improve strength and deformation characteristics. Due to the granular nature of the native soils, the base of the exposed subgrade and foundation excavations will be easily disturbed through conventional excavation procedures. Surface compaction of the foundation subgrades should be performed with a ho-pac or vibratory plate compactor upon completion of excavation activities to re- densify the soils prior to construction of the footings. Care should be taken, however, if these soils are saturated. Excessive vibration can cause saturated non-cohesive soils to become unstable due to phenomenon called shear induced pore water pressure. Therefore, this process should be monitored by a representative of a geotechnical engineer during construction. The following geotechnical related recommendations have been developed on the basis of the subsurface conditions encountered and PSI's understanding of the proposed development. Should changes in the project criteria occur, a review must be made by PSI to determine if modifications to our recommendations will be required. Site Preparation Prior to the placement of new fill or preparation of the construction area subgrade, PSI recommends that the existing building be demolished and the associated debris be properly disposed of offsite. Then, the surficial organic matter, trees including root bulbs, frozen soils (if present during construction), and surficial organic soils should be removed from within and a minimum of 10 feet beyond the building and pavement areas. Unsuitable soils, including soft, wet, or loose soils, or soils containing organics or debris, should be selectively undercut and/or stabilized in place. A representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer should determine the need for and depth of removal or stabilization at the time of construction. If soft, wet, or loose soils are observed within the building and parking lot areas, they should be stripped from that area until more stable soils are observed or stabilized in place. If allowed to dry, these soils could be used as engineered fill, provided they are 7 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Protect No.0675811 placed and compacted as outlined below. A representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer should determine the need for and actual stabilization technique at the time of construction. After stripping the surficial materials, removing the existing structure, and excavating to the proposed subgrade level, the building and pavement subgrades should be thoroughly proofrolled. The subgrades should be proofrolled with a fully-loaded tandem axle dump truck or rubber tired vehicle of similar size and weight, typically 9 tons/axle. Soils that are observed to rut or deflect excessively under the moving load (typically greater than 1 inch), should be undercut and replaced with properly compacted fill. The proofrolling is important to identify soft or loose zones under buildings and pavements. The proofrolling and undercutting activities should be documented by a representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer and should be performed during a period of dry weather. The subgrade soils should be scarified and compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698) for a depth of at least 6 inches below the surface. Drying or wetting of the subgrade soils, typically to within 2% of the optimum moisture content, may be advised to facilitate compaction. After subgrade preparation and observation have been completed, placement of new fills needed to obtain proposed grades may begin. The first layer of fill should be placed in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be adequately keyed (where needed) into the stripped and scarified subgrade soils. New engineered fill required to achieve design site grades should be free of organic, frozen, or other deleterious materials, have a maximum particle size of less than 3 inches. Due to the underlying granular soils, PSI does not recommend using either a clay or silt soil for engineered fill. Rather, PSI recommends using a well graded granular soil such as a MnDOT granular borrow or select granular borrow. Engineered fill should be compacted to at least the compaction percentages noted in the table below. All densities and optimum moisture contents noted are relative to the Standard Proctor, ASTM D698. PSI recommends that a qualified geotechnical engineer test and review proposed fill materials prior to placement for gradation, maximum dry density, and optimum moisture content. MATERIAL TESTED PROCTOR MIN% MOISTURE FREQUENCY TYPE DRY CONTENT OF TESTING' DENSITY RANGE Fill under Foundation Elementso +1% 1 per 200 cy of fill placed or and Lateral Oversize Standard 98% -3 to minimum of three tests per lift Structural Backfill (Building), 1 per 1,000 cy of fill placed or including slab subgrades and Standard 95% -3 to+3% every 2,500 square feet of foundation wall backfill subgrade,whichever is less Structural Fill (Pavement, 1 per 1,000 cy of fill placed or deeper than 3 feet) Standard 95% -3 to+3% every 5,000 square feet of subgrade,whichever is less Structural Fill (Pavement, o +1% 1 per 1,000 cy of fill placed or Standard 100% -3 to every 5,000 square feet of shallower than 3 feet) subgrade,whichever is less 8 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 Random Fill(non-load bearing) Standard 92% -3 to+3% 1 per 3,000 cy of fill placed Utility Trench Backfill Standard 95% -3 to+3% 1 per 200 cy of fill placed Engineered fill should be placed in maximum lifts of 8 inches of loose material and should be compacted within the range of moisture contents noted in the table above. If water is to be added, it should be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into the soil by disking or scarifying. The compacted structural fill should extend at least ten feet beyond the edges of buildings and parking areas. In utility trenches, shallow foundation excavations, and other areas where large compaction equipment cannot be used, granular engineered fill should be placed as backfill. Engineered fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations stated in this section of the report. Foundation Recommendations Based upon the soil boring information, the proposed building can be supported by conventional continuous wall and column foundations once the site has been prepared in accordance with this report. Based on the soils observed on site, the friction angle of the sand and silty sand soils at foundation bearing elevation is 28 degrees. Based on this estimated friction angle and the foundations bearing on suitable bearing native soils or engineered fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report, PSI recommends that footings be designed for maximum net allowable soil bearing pressures as noted in the table below. Minimum dimensions of 18 inches for continuous footings and 30 inches for column footings should be used in foundation design to minimize the possibility of a local bearing capacity failure, even if the allowable bearing pressure recommended herein is not fully utilized. DEPTH BELOW ' MAXIMUM NET FOUNDATION TYPE ADJACENT GRADES ALLOWABLE BEARING (IN) PRESSURE(PSF) Interior Isolated Column Foundations 24 3,000 Exterior Isolated Column Foundations 42 4,000 All Continuous Foundations 42 3,000 The foundations must be supported by suitable native bearing soils or newly placed compacted engineered fill that has been observed, documented and tested in the field by a representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer. If during construction any unsuitable bearing soils such as wet or soft soils are encountered in a footing excavation, the excavation should be stabilized in place or deepened to competent bearing soil, and the footing could be lowered or an overexcavation and backfill procedure could be performed. An overexcavation and backfill treatment would require widening the deepened excavation in each direction at least six inches beyond the edge of the footing for each 12 inches of overexcavation depth. Overexcavations should be backfilled with an engineered fill placed 9 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Prosect No.0675811 and compacted as outlined in the Site Preparation section of this report. Due to the potential variations in the strengths of the natural soils, it is recommended that soils at bearing elevation in the footing excavations be observed and tested by a geotechnical engineering technician prior to concrete placement to evaluate the suitability and uniformity of the native soils for support of the design foundation loads. A method for evaluating the acceptability of the soils under footings would involve hand auger and dynamic cone penetrometer testing below the footing bearing level for a minimum of one footing width or 3 feet below subgrade level, whichever is shallower. Each isolated footing should include at least 1 test probe. Tests should be performed every 20-lineal feet in continuous footings. Based on the recommended net allowable bearing pressures of 3,000 psf and 4,000 psf, suitable bearing native soils should exhibit a dynamic cone penetrometer value commensurate with a Standard Penetration Test N- value of at least 9 and 12 blows per foot, respectively. Exterior footings and footings in unheated areas should be located at a depth of at least 42 inches below the final exterior grade to provide adequate frost protection in accordance with the International Building Code with the 2015 Minnesota state amendments. If the building is to be constructed during the winter months or if footings will likely be subjected to freezing temperatures after foundation construction, then the footings and concrete should be adequately protected from freezing. Otherwise, interior footings can be located on the native sand or newly placed compacted engineered fill at shallower depths below the floor slab, compatible with architectural and structural considerations. Foundations in unheated areas, such as isolated canopy and signage foundations, should be placed a minimum of 60 inches below grade for frost protection. After excavation, the foundation soils should be observed and tested and concrete placed as quickly as possible to avoid exposure of the footing bottoms to wetting and drying. Surface run-off water should be drained away from the excavations and not be allowed to pond. The foundation concrete should be placed during the same day the excavation is made. If it is required that footing excavations be left open for more than one day, they should be protected to reduce evaporation or entry of moisture. Based on the engineering properties of the soils that were encountered at the test borings and the recommendations provided herein, PSI estimates that the total foundation settlement for the foundation system discussed above will be about one inch. Differential settlement will probably be about three quarters of an inch over a 30-foot span. While settlement of this amount is generally tolerable, the structure must be designed based upon the estimated settlement and must include properly spaced vertical control joints to minimize the effects of differential movement (such as cosmetic "cracking" of sensitive masonry materials). Floor Slab Recommendations The building floor slab could be supported upon the existing native silty lean clay soils or upon newly placed engineered fill soils that have been observed and tested, provided the subgrade is prepared as outlined in the Site Preparation Section of this report. For soils that pass proofrolling operations, PSI recommends that a subgrade modulus (k) of 200 pounds per cubic inch (pci) be used for design considerations based on a 12-inch 10 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 square plate load test. However, depending on how the slab loads are applied, the value will have to be geometrically modified. The value should be adjusted for larger areas using the following expression for cohesive and cohesionless soil: Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, ks = (k) for cohesive soil and ks = k(B B1 )2 for cohesionless soil where: ks= coefficient of vertical subgrade reaction for loaded area, k= coefficient of vertical subgrade reaction for 144 square inches area B= width of area loaded, in feet PSI recommends that a minimum four-inch thick free draining granular mat be placed beneath the floor slab to enhance drainage. The granular mat should consist of sands with less than fifty percent of the material passing the #40 sieve by mass and less than five percent of the material passing the #200 sieve by mass. Some on-site soils may be suitable for this purpose, but should be tested prior to placement. Polyethylene sheeting should be placed to act as a vapor retarder where the floor will be in contact with moisture sensitive equipment or products such as tile, wood, carpet, etc., as directed by the design engineer. The decision to locate the vapor retarder in direct contact with the slab or beneath the layer of granular fill should be made by the design engineer after considering the moisture sensitivity of subsequent floor finishes, anticipated project conditions and the potential effects of slab curling and cracking. The floor slabs should have an adequate number of joints to reduce cracking resulting from differential movement and shrinkage. Lateral Earth Pressures Based on PSI's understanding of the proposed project, Building #1 will include recessed loading docks with associated retaining walls. Walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides, such as retaining walls for the loading docks, should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by the structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Lateral earth pressure is developed from the soils present within a wedge formed by the vertical below-grade wall and an imaginary line extending up and away from the bottom of the wall at an approximate 45° angle. The lateral earth pressures are determined by multiplying the vertical applied pressure by the appropriate lateral earth pressure coefficient K. If the walls are rigidly attached to the structure and not free to rotate or deflect at the top, PSI recommends designing the walls for the "at-rest" lateral earth pressure condition using K0. Walls that are permitted to rotate and deflect at the top can be designed for the active lateral earth pressure condition using Ka. Passive pressure can be determined using Kp, with a factor of safety of 2.0. Recommended parameters for use in below grade walls are as follows: 11 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS For active pressure - Movement (0.002 Z to 0.004 Z For at-rest pressure - } No Movement Assumed F,rnshed 1 I!HI !!!IIII!!II!!!!II!lII!ii!! Grade S H(Ft) Z 45° \ p2 I: IIIFlnlshed Grade LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE TYPE K VALUE EQUIVALENT FLUID <. .. PRESSURE(PCP). Active, Ka 0.36 45 At-Rest, Ko 0.53 65 Passive, Kp 2.77 330 *All values based on the reuse of on-site sands with a 28°friction angle value Conditions applicable to the above conditions include: • For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements 0.002Z to 0.004Z, where Z is the wall height • For passive earth pressure, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance • Coefficients are based on level backfill at the top of the wall with no induced surcharge at the top of the wall • In-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 110 pcf for clean sands and 120 pcf for silty sands • Newly placed horizontal backfill, if used, compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-698) • Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included • No hydrostatic pressure acting on wall • No safety factor was included in the aforementioned coefficients • The designer must ignore passive pressure in the frost depth zone (42 inches) Backfill placed against the new retaining wall, if used, should consist of granular soils. For granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out from base of the wall at an angle of at least 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active and passive cases, respectively. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.33 should be used as the allowable coefficient of friction between the footings for the foundations 12 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 and the existing subgrade soils. If additional sliding resistance is needed, the retaining wall footings can keyed into the subgrade soils. To control the water level behind the wall, PSI recommends a perimeter drain be installed behind the wall or regularly spaced weep holes are constructed in the wall facing. If this is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be used for the design of the wall. If the existing on-site soils are reused as granular backfill, equivalent fluid pressures of 45 and 65 pcf should be used for active and at-rest conditions, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added for proper design of the walls. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided. PSI recommends that a perforated drain line be installed at the base of the retaining wall to relieve hydrostatic loading on the wall and/or seepage into the foundation subgrade. The drain line should have positive drainage to a collecting point. To reduce the intrusions of fines, the drain should be surrounded by clean, well graded, select granular material with no more than five percent of the material passing the #200 sieve and no more than forty percent of the material passing the#40 sieve. As an alternate, the drain line could be surrounded with free draining granular material and encapsulated with suitable non-woven filter fabric. The granular fill should be used to backfill the wall to within 2 feet of final grade. The granular section behind the wall should have a minimum width of 2 feet. The remaining upper portion of the excavation should be backfilled with common granular soils with no more than twenty percent of the material passing the #200 sieve. A procedure should be used to discharge water from the collecting point, which would not allow reverse flow into the system, either by pumping or gravity flow. Pavement Recommendations Based on the borings completed within the proposed pavement areas (Borings B-4, B-9, B-10, B-17, B-18, and B-19), PSI anticipates the subgrade soils will consist of existing native sands, silty sands, or newly placed compacted engineered fill. These soils should be proofrolled and prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. A detailed traffic analysis was not performed as part of this exploration; however, based upon the proposed construction, the light and heavy duty pavement section shown below are based on a 20-year design life of 30,000 and 60,000 equivalent 18,000- pound single-axle load (ESAL), respectively. The existing silty sand and sand materials encountered that pass proofrolling operations are considered relatively good materials, having a minimum CBR value of 5. Engineered fill material used to raise existing grades within parking and drive areas should meet or exceed this CBR value. The following design factors were used in developing the recommended pavement sections: 13 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 • Design Life: - 20 years • Terminal Serviceability: - 2.0 • Reliability: - 85% • Initial Serviceability: - 4.2 • Standard Deviation: - 0.45 • Standard Pick-up Truck for Snow Clearing If during the final design phase these values are determined to be incorrect, PSI must be contacted to provide revised pavement recommendations. Based upon the soil borings, laboratory data and provided the subgrade soils are prepared as outlined in this report, the following flexible pavement section thicknesses are recommended for parking lot and drive areas. Light Duty Asphalt Pavement Section HMA Wear Course Thickness 1 % inches HMA Base Course Thickness 1 %inches* Granular Base Course Thickness 7 inches *If a front end loader is used for snow clearing, this value should be increased to 2 inches Heavy Duty Asphalt Pavement Section HMA Wear Course Thickness 1 % inches HMA Base Course Thickness 2 inches* Granular Base Course Thickness 8 inches *If a front end loader is used for snow clearing, this value should be increased to 2 % inches Portland Concrete Cement Pavement Section PCC Thickness 6 inches Granular Base Course Thickness 6 inches Minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi at 28 days The granular base course should consist of well-graded crushed stone meeting the requirements from Section 2112 of the State of Minnesota Standard Specifications for Construction. The granular base course should be placed and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D698) and within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. A representative of a qualified geotechnical engineer must test the base course prior to, and during, placement. Asphaltic binder and surface courses should meet the requirements from Section 2360 of the State of Minnesota Standard Specifications for Construction. Asphaltic courses should be placed and compacted to the minimum required density ranges contained within Section 2360 of the Standard Specifications. An adequate number of in-place density tests should be performed during construction to document the compaction. 14 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 The pavements should be sloped to provide positive surface drainage. Water should not be allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavement as this could saturate the subgrade and cause premature pavement deterioration. The granular base course should be protected from water inflow along drainage paths. Additionally, the granular base course should extend beyond the edges of the pavement in low areas to allow any water that enters the base course stone a path for exit. Otherwise, a storm sewer system may be appropriate to carry away storm run-off water. A flexible pavement system is not recommended in dumpster pad areas, loading dock areas, and areas where heavy trucks will turn frequently or will be parked. Within these areas, consideration should be given for use of a rigid pavement. Based upon the anticipated traffic volumes, PSI recommends a concrete pavement section consisting of 6 inches of crushed aggregate base course and 6 inches of Portland cement concrete. The minimum compressive strength of the concrete should be 4,000 psi at 28 days. The concrete must be properly reinforced and must have appropriately spaced control joints. Seismic Site Class The site is in a municipality that employs the 2015 Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC), which is based on the 2012 International Building Code. The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) requires that a site class be determined for the calculation of earthquake design forces in structures. The site class designation is a function of soil type (i.e., depth of soil and strata types). Rock was not encountered during this exploration. Based on PSI's borings and experience in this area, PSI is basing this site class designation on encountering rock at approximately 100 feet below the ground surface and that the consistency of the soils below the depth of the borings are consistent or stiffer than the 21 feet depth explored. Additional drilling is needed to define the depth to rock. Based on the estimated depth to rock and the estimated shear strength of the soil at the boring locations, Site Class "D" is recommended. The USGS- NEHRP probabilistic ground motion values interpolated between the nearest four grid points from latitude 45.03516°N and longitude 92.83947°W are as follows: 2% Max. Period Probability Site Spectral Design Spectral of Event in (seconds) Coefficients Acceleration Acceleration,parameters 50y ears parameters (y°g) 0.2 (Ss) 4.7 Fa = 1.6 Sms = 7.5 SDs= 5.0 To= 0.18 1.0 (Si) 2.7 Fv = 2.4 Smi = 6.5 SD1 = 4.4 Ts= 0.88 Sms=FaSs SDs=%*Sms TO=0.2*SD1/SDs Sm1 = FvS1 SD1 =%*Sm1 Ts=SD1/SDs The Site Coefficients, Fa and Fv were interpolated for IBC 2012 Tables 1613.3.3(1) and 1613.3.3(2) as a function of the site classifications and the mapped spectral response acceleration at the short (Ss) and 1-second (S1) periods. 15 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 Based on the Spectral Acceleration values for this site, this site should be defined as a Seismic Design Category A as defined in Tables 1613.3.5(1) and 1613.3.5(2). The Risk Category is based on the nature of the occupancy of the structure and is typically determined by the design team (Architect/Structural Engineer) or building official. The determination of the Risk Category is beyond PSI's scope of services. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS PSI should be retained to provide observation and testing of construction activities involved in the foundation, earthwork, and related activities of this project. PSI will not accept responsibility for conditions that deviated from those described in this report, nor for the performance of the foundation or pavement if we are not engaged to also provide construction observation and testing for this project. Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns Increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities. In addition, soils that become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of grading and compaction activities. It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform earthwork and foundation construction activities during dry weather. Water should not be allowed to collect in the foundation excavation, on floor slab areas, or on prepared subgrades during or after construction. Areas should be sloped to facilitate removal of collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of buildings, beneath floor slabs, and within pavement areas. The grades should be sloped away from buildings and surface drainage should be collected and discharged such that water is not permitted to infiltrate the backfill and floor slab areas of the building. Drainage and Groundwater Concerns Groundwater was not observed during field operations. Based on the observed conditions during field operations, groundwater seepage issues are not anticipated for this project. If minor localized groundwater seepage is encountered during construction, it is anticipated that it can be handled using conventional sump and pump techniques or by the use of perimeter trench drains connected to discharge the water away from the project area. More significant construction dewatering may be necessary during periods of high precipitation or spring snowmelt. Variation in the groundwater level should be expected throughout the year depending on variations in the climatological conditions and other factors not observed at the time the borings were performed. 16 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights, Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 Excavations It is mandated that excavations, whether they be for utility trenches, basement excavations or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines to protect workers and others during construction. PSI recommends that these regulations be strictly enforced; otherwise, workers could be in danger and the owner(s) and the contractor(s) could be liable for substantial penalties. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person", as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations. PSI is providing this information solely as a service to our client. PSI does not assume responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's or other parties' compliance with local, state, and federal safety or other regulations. Utilities Trenching Excavation for utility trenches shall be performed in accordance with OSHA regulations as stated in 29 CFR Part 1926. It should be noted that utility trench excavations have the potential to degrade the properties of the adjacent fill materials. Utility trench walls that are allowed to move laterally can lead to reduced bearing capacity and increased settlement of adjacent structural elements and overlying slabs and pavements. Backfill for utility trenches is as important as the original subgrade preparation or engineered fill placed to support either a foundation or slab. Therefore, it is imperative that the backfill for utility trenches be placed to meet the project specifications for the engineered fill of this project. Unless otherwise specified, the backfill for the utility trenches should be placed in 4 to 6 inch loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density and within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content achieved by the Standard Proctor test (ASTM D698). The backfill soil should be moisture conditioned to be within 2± percent of the optimum moisture content as determined by the Standard Proctor test. Up to 4 inches of bedding material placed directly under the pipes or conduits placed in the utility trench can be compacted to the 90 percent compaction criteria with respect to the Standard Proctor. Compaction testing should be performed for every 200 cubic yards of backfill placed or each lift within 200 linear feet of trench, whichever is less. Backfill of utility trenches should not be performed with water standing in the trench. In trenches were large compaction equipment cannot be used, granular soils shall be used as backfill material and compacted to meet the above compaction criteria. The geotechnical engineer can also specify a relative density specification for clean granular materials. 17 Proposed Retail Development,Oak Park Heights,Minnesota PSI Project No.0675811 GEOTECHNICAL RISK The concept of risk is an important aspect of the geotechnical evaluation. The primary reason for this is that the analytical methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science. The analytical tools which geotechnical engineers use are generally empirical and must be used in conjunction with engineering judgment and experience. Therefore, the solutions and recommendations presented in the geotechnical evaluation should not be considered risk-free and, more importantly, are not a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and the proposed structure will perform as planned. The engineering recommendations presented in the preceding section constitutes PSI's professional estimate of those measures that are necessary for the proposed structure to perform according to the proposed design based on the information generated and referenced during this evaluation, and PSI's experience in working with these conditions. REPORT LIMITATIONS The recommendations submitted are based on the available subsurface information obtained by PSI and design details furnished by Fendler Patterson Construction. If there are revisions to the plans for this project or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, PSI should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation recommendations are required. If PSI is not retained to perform these functions, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the project. The geotechnical engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practices in the local area. No other warranties are implied or expressed. After the plans and specifications are more complete, the geotechnical engineer should be retained and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to check that our engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents. At that time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by Fendler Patterson Construction, and their consultants, for the specific application to the proposed Retail Development to be located in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. 18 APPENDIX SITE VICINITY PLAN BORING LOCATION PLAN LOG OF BORINGS USGS SEISMIC ANALYSIS GENERAL NOTES wtS Gq e cn 0a C s x % r. L s ° a� C C L 0-) L .0-) N LO ca G Cr3 CS) O CD O O 11 r € } CC' I f ms o y ai cu C a a a } ! N f N ti ti O ,CI _ r 1....., y f ,. 1. N li t a N Q ti) re c N 45 = - w N Q.k C kt 1 0--,,_4.7...1-_--,;---5,-,--$::*---_---75' -.7-- 'CC ; Er- . _ 4 I _e I r' r t r t ; -. r z1:--t /pe),, t..),„,.! __,,,-,::,:,-.7_,::,%.,,,,.., ow ]�E i •,. ...,, ias÷, „ r_! t � I,_ O 111 _ 1: .� . ti< m — i - tf i it A. � LLF t ._N Ni p)__ N . ti V 1i _ : x-1 as y Y LYL ri , t ' al i IO /oI o/� 'i I. Wco; _ I -, L 4- -.' t=.- a 1 mill t `ji I r- o t : r I v r O i . In I 0 C :Ita O ! Si r `i i Z J _ __ , xw` •ami ami a i i–a ial- -. CO st t Ca , O O N -- �n o �: I Cl. D. a o ; mI m I 5 � I , _zt , MrMrm it co _M : at re CD G• 011 I Nt •�,t y"� o iCO4 T N® oirV' R C,r „L......., c .-m O r Wi 111111 •it — tx 14 Z ++ d C += ca Q N a M .±._.. .- # ^–#. _. 3NrA14 .=$ -i0 ' . l y 1 [ I 11 . III h I I ! ma—LI' i * y CU I ! wk-1I Amo' —` c 1 i 1 I -I ��____-- a��,use s ] ,...,,, . ..: .;1, : i al C I I .� L .� Z Z Latil.?"1.:9,/_ 11_11, r —TT, ! 7u r s': I O CO i p�� CD ! a+a• at�t a b60: I —i11! L1I._. .. _ I 1 V r.+ 1 k $ G it J{�T: -714„1„z.,` I " S`• J J Y ri I CO 0 fl ti I O G1 k z a G s t 1 4 o i -1 _—r---71 — 1 - 11 d ami a e^' El...; 11111111111111 1 y 1 { ' iIt I . . �, Tel ! ' ��. u. fi•r•, buy .,> ur` 1 • X t 1 ,ip ..k F f •t 1 t "16N k + F. / / 11 Pi Ch W cf L .. `�-_ • fit " III 'f , ., 4 flu , , .- clit it ta W DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-01 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y a While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 95 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS a LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#2 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J. Rozmiarek Southwest Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') a STANDARD PENETRATION co in a TEST DATA w o n• a •m c o N in blows/ft OO a J I, Z 2 m a- X Moisture A PL C r a Z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a 4. LL Additional 16 a s a) o N o 25 5o Remarks cp m @ m g u, 3 .. I I I o W 0 E STRENGTH,tsf a_ ♦Qu ME Qp 0 2.0 4.0 0 •0 I,'At TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL 95— 4.. SAND With Silt,Medium Grained,Dark - - Brown,Moist,Medium ,........•...) 15 3-5-6 10 X - - N=11 16 SP-SM 4-6-5 11 A 90— N=11 15 3-5-5 10 39E - - N=10 SAND,Medium Grained,Brown,Moist, -10- Medium 85_ 15 4-5-5 12 (°� N=10 SP 80— 14 4-5-5 12 b( N=10 End of Boring 16 feet Cave in at 9 feet in Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 ��. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail rilliMMM ti.Qpi Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-02 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y SZ While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS I LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#2 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northwest Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') F] F] STANDARD PENETRATION n o L TEST DATA mm o a o c .0 c o N in blows/ft © :? J i- z v n `;`2 d X Moisture A PL a) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL Additional PI- * r a n a N n o 25 so Remarks o c� `� ren U � o m 1 I I W a) co m STRENGTH,tsf Ct a co ♦ Qu 31E Op 0 }{i,• t o 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(5"Thick) Ir-SOIL 95— SAND With Silt,Medium Grained,Dark _ Brown,Moist,Medium SP-SM • 18 4-8-6 10 X - - N=14 SAND,Medium Grained,Dark Brown,Moist, - 5 -El:::.::s....'. Medium 17 4-5-5 7 X( 90— N=10 16 3-4-6 8 >Co) - - N=10 SP -10- 16 4-5-5 11 85— N=10 Silty SAND,Brown,Fine Grained,Moist, -15- I. Loose 15 SM 3-5-4 21 ó X 80— N=9 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet iii Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail Eagan, MN 55121pQpirLOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-03 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y SZ While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger es Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 1. LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#2 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northeast Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100) STANDARD PENETRATION w n o r TEST DATA °) O) a o . m c N in blows/ft OO w 4- J H Z N m ai X Moisture A PL o • o a� a) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 3 t LL Additional t a E ani . N m o 25 50 Remarks n > a '0 m o co 3 I I I w tY u) Fo STRENGTH,tsf a. ♦ Qu X Qp cn 0 ,y 0 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(5"Thick) T-SOIL 95— Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Loose 18 ML3-4-4 22 © X - - N=8 SAND,Medium Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, - 5 - Moist,Medium to Loose 17 4-6-4 11 a 90— N=10 SP 18 3-4-4 11 OOX - N=8 -Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, 10- Medium 16 4-5-5 13 bX 85— N=10 • SM 14 4-6-5 10 A 80— N=11 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 9 feet iiiiiiiii Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 ��. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail IJ Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane =RaTelephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-04 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BYJ.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger R Y Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 2 LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northwest Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') v7 STANDARD PENETRATION u) _ i a r TEST DATA m — o) . m c N in blows/ft © �' 4- J H z v m CO a X Moisture 0 PL Additional o o , a) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a • LL oo u) o 0 I Is I so Remarks W a.) u) 00 STRENGTH,tsf H ♦ Qu )IE Qp o 2.0 4.0 0 a'4.•i TOPSOIL(5"Thick) T-SOIL 95— Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, Loose to Medium 17 4-5-4 12 ©X - - N=9 - 5 - 18 3-5-5 13 bX 90— SM N=10 18 4-5-6 14 - • N=11 16 5-11-9 9 X 0 85— N=20 End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 6 feet ANI Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail iliM Eagan, MN 55121 paps Eagan, 6000 Krueger Lane ffijTelephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-05 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 d V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger s 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 7 LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#2&#3 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Drive Lane Between Buildings REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') Eii STANDARD PENETRATION in o t TEST DATA a) co n 0 _c m c N in blows/ft © w J H Z '=" w ai X Moisture p PL o t o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a • LL Additional a a m N 0 ze 50 Remarks w 0 O co 8 ci o I I I 0° STRENGTH,tsf o' n 1- a_ ♦ Qu NE Qp o 2.0 4.0 0 014 TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL 95- Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Loose 16 ML 23 0 X N=9 • Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, - 5 - :.` Medium 19 5-8-10 7 X 0 90- • N=18 16 4-9-14 9 X 0 - - N=23 SM -10- 17 4-10-11 9 X b 85- ...::.:: N=21 :.:i SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist,Medium 14 SP 4-12-14 10 X b 80- N=26 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 9 feet NI Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail illill Eagan, MN 55121IligiVpirLOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651) 646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-06 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 m V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#3 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Southwest Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') co v7 STANDARD PENETRATION _ o r TEST DATA u m t m c N in blows/ft © w w Z c �� <0 ai x Moisture 0 PL m -7-a) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Ef LL Additional m a m E E > C 3 o 0 I 215 I 50 Remarks CD CI O m COo 8 0 o 2 W m u) 00 STRENGTH,tsf H ♦ Qu *IE Qp co 0 }{4 0 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(5'Thick) r-SOIL 95— Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium - - 12 1-5-5 15 o X - - N=10 ML - 5 - 18 4-8-9 19 90_ N=17 - Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, Medium 17 4-10-14 8 X a N=24 -10- 15 3-10-9 10 X o 85— N=19 SM -15-....:.':. • t 16 4-11-14 10 X O 80— • • N=25 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 ��. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail tilliliM tirQpir Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-07 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 m V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger -A; 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS I LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#3 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J. Rozmiarek Southeast Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') -6 STANDARD PENETRATION co n o = TEST DATA m a) a o t m c N in blows/ft © w:cl w J Z C m CO ai X Moisture A PL o r r „, a .r MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a 5 • LL Additional > ani m E E > 0 3 0 0 I 215 I 50 Remarks S12 0 CO <n on o 0in W u) STRENGTH,tsf 0_ ♦ Qu X Qp cri0 2.0 4.0 0 0 it•0. TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL 95— Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, - - Medium 17 4-5-5 8 0 - - N=10 SM - 5 - 18 8-10-10 9 X o 90— N=20 SAND,Fine Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, Moist,Medium to Dense 16 4-10-12 3 X © N=22 -10-:;':.::. • 16 3-10-11 5 X o 85— N=21 - - SP -15-.•.`.- 16 5-14-18 5 X O 80— N=32 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 9 feet IN Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 . 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail Eagan, MN 55121IMINII ir, ,, LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-08 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger R Y Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS a LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#3 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northeast Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=1001 STANDARD PENETRATION co _ o = TEST DATA am m c N in blows/ft © w w .. ' z N `O ti x Moisture A PL Additional C " r a '� MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a • LL - Q E m o N Q o zs 50 Remarks a) o c� 7) in U 2 o I I I W m w m STRENGTH,tsf Ce I— a. ♦ Qu 3K Qp cr)0 {ly 0 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL 95— SAND,Medium Grained,Brown,Moist, - - Medium 18 SP 4-9-5 6 X o - - N=14 Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, Medium 18 7-10-9 7 X o N=19 90— SM 17 6-9-12 6 X OO N=21 SAND,Fine Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, -10- Moist,Medium to Dense 17 4-10-12 4 X 0 N=22 85— SP -15 15 5-15-19 4 X 0 N=34 80— End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet ili Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 ',IQ,/�. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail illill Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-09 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger s 1. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Center of North Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') STANDARD PENETRATION co in o .0 TEST DATA o a ra o c 4,`,' N in blows/ft OO w J Z n _ ai X Moisture A PL o r r a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a • LL Additional m E m > ai 3 ° ° I 25 I 50 Remarks W o U w 0) a) m to I STRENGTH,tsf CL a. ♦ Qu '•IE Qp u) 0 2.0 4.0 0 0 ..'.s TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL 95— SAND With Silt,Medium Grained,Brown, - - Moist,Loose 18 ML 12 © N=9 SandyMedium SILT,Dark Brown,Moist,Loose to - 5 - 18 3-5-4 20 © X 90— N=9 17 ML 3-4-8 21 (H X N=12 -10- 18 5-10-8 16 O 85— N=18 End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 6 feet iMProfessional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail 1,,„,. Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-10 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BYJ.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 it Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 95 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS T LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek East End of North Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') rn STANDARD PENETRATION rn w o TEST DATA w o n a U 'CO 0 o N in blows/ft © °- J Z S m a 3 X Moisture } PL Additional o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N .; N N . E j 3 o l 215 i 50 Remarks m a CD m u) 8 co 0 o W m U) m STRENGTH,tsf a 0) A 4u SIE Qp 0 2L 4.0 0 aj iiy.•:i. TOPSOIL(6"Thick) F-SOIL 95— SAND With Silt,Medium Grained,Brown, - Moist,Medium 5P-SM 18 4-7-4 11 - - N=11 //' Sandy LEAN CLAY,Dark Brown,Moist,Stiff 90-- 5 17 1-7-6 18 X'IE CL N=13 Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, Medium 16 1-10-14 11 X a N=24 - SM -10- 85— 17 1-8-8 8 X ID N=16 End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 7 feet Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 . 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail Eagan, MN 55121imilimi pIAQ,ILOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 I DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-11 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BYJ.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger R I. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 7 LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northwest Corner i REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') STANDARD PENETRATION co in a t TEST DATA m o� a •o . m c N in blows/ft OO w w J Z `O a- X Moisture A PL o r , a 'z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION g,' a • LL Additional > a m E m > o 3 ° 0 I I I 50 Remarks W o C w w 5 0 m � E STRENGTH,tsf I- o_ ♦ Qu )IE Op 0 2.0 4.0 0 a I•••_' TOPSOIL(5"Thick) r-SOIL Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium 95— - 18 ML 15 O X N=11 SAND With Silt,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, 5 Medium to Dense 18 8-12-14 12 X N=26 90— - . : • i 17 4-10-25 8 X 0 - - N=35 -10- 15 3P-SM 8-20-18 10 X N=38 85— - 15 4-12-13 9 X e N=25 80 • End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet rLOCAProfessional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail illiffiliMi �. Eagan, MN 55121 TION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-12 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 d Q While Drilling Not Observed • BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a Y Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS a LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northeast Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') a STANDARD PENETRATION co _ n o t TEST DATA am t m 0 N in blows/ft O 11 '3 Z n ma X Moisture A PL o 0 , MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 t LL Additional s a n o Z N 'a 0 25 5° Remarks ILD a (D f0 (CO/) o 0 o I I I W � m STRENGTH,tsf CC a_ A Qu NE Qp 0 '{r, i 0 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(7"Thick) T-SOIL Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium 95-- - 18 4-6-6 16 X N=12 - 5 - 18 6-9-10 18 N=19 90-- - 18 ML 4-10-10 18 >40- N=20 -10- 18 4-9-10 19 N=19 85-- - r SAND With Silt,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, 15 y Medium 17 SP-SM 5-12-14 11 X N=26 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet rillill Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 . 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail �Qp. Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-13 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BYJ.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 m .Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a Y Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 7 LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Southeast Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') co STANDARD PENETRATION _ -- o L TEST DATA a, a o . m c N in blows/ft OO w 4- -j I z c w m X Moisture A PL o r a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2 a • LL Additional •� n a E E a) o N Q o 25 50 Remarks CD 0 0 (0cj3 in 5 a I I I W 8 F STRENGTH,tsf CL Qu SIE Qp 0 2.0 4.0 0 0 iv••s' TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium 95— • 17 2-5-6 14 Co;X - - ML N=11 Silty SAND,Medium Grained,Brown,Wet, 5 - Medium 16 2-4-6 15 b X N=10 90— SM 16 2-6-4 16 0 X N=10 Sandy SILT,Brown,Wet,Loose -10- 18 1-3-3 26 0 X N=6 85- - - ML r SAND,Medium Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, 15 N 18 Moist,Medium SP 4-8-9 5 X 0 .:, N=17 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 ��, 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail F Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-14 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 m V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 7 LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Center of South Side REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') E STANDARD PENETRATION _ f a L TEST DATA a; C) a •• s C N in blows/ft w J Z U�• N m a X Moisture A PL o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2 A LL Additional 2r a a 0 25 50 Remarks a C @ on U 0 o 1 I I W a U m STRENGTH,tsf H • Qu * Op 0 2.0 4.0 0 '/:1 _TOPSOIL(4"Thick) _t-SOIL Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium 95-- - 18 ML 13 ©X N=10 Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, - 5 Medium 18 2-5-6 12 ok N=11 90-- - SM 18 5-6-6 12 N=12 Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Loose -10- 18 2-2-3 25 X N=5 85-- )\ 5— - - - ML 11 SAND With Silt,Mediu Grained,Brown, -15 Moist,Medium 17 SP-SM 4-9-10 8 X Z N=19 - End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 9 feet iii Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 j 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail �� Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane iiiiiiii Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-15 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger o 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS a LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Southwest Corner REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') STANDARD PENETRATION to m o r TEST DATA ICl) o n o 0 U c o N in blows/ft © ) '� F Z '.7- m Q° ,i X Moisture A PL o a� a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2 a • LL Additional d. p_ U U w N 0 25 50 Remarks N E m > m 3 ° I I I U` W CO 8 U o W a) u)m STRENGTH,tsf a_ ♦ Qu NE Qp 0 2.a 4.0 0 : !o:.o TOPSOIL(6"Thick) T-SOIL Sandy SILT,Brown,Moist,Medium 95-- - - - 18 ML7-11-11 13 X ° N=22 /%' Sandy LEAN CLAY,Gray,Moist,Very Stiff - 5 /� 17 2-9-8 18 X90— CL N=17 j SAND With Silt,Brown,Moist, Medium to Loose 18 5-9-7 14 ° N=16 -10- 18 3-3-4 11 4>< N=7 85— SP-SM 18 2-5-6 9 XS N=11 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet rLOCAiiiii Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail iga Eagan, MN 55121 TION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651) 646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-16 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 16.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 d Q While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger v Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 96 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS /. LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Building#1 STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Loading Dock Area REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') STANDARD PENETRATION u) w o L TEST DATA 0) a� o fl. o c o N in blows/ft © in -I H Z V F. `o �i X Moisture 0 PL a, MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2 iu f LL Additional .� a m E E > 0 3 o 0 , I5 I 50 Remarks a, m 0z 8 9 2 W a1, u) co STRENGTH,tsf CL a A Qu 31E Qp u) 0 11y 0 2.0 4.0 TOPSOIL(6"Thick) F-SOIL Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Brown,Moist, 95-- - •• Loose to Medium 17 1-3-6 9 IN - N=9 • SM 17 2-6-6 10 C� N=12 90s SAND,Medium Grained,Brown,Moist, Medium 18 5-8-9 4 X 0 - - SP N=17 Silty SAND,Fine Grained,Trace Gravel, 10- Brown,Moist,Medium 16 4-11-12 6 X d N=23 85-,^ SP -15- :.:N 18 5-11-11 8 X b N=22 End of Boring at 16 feet Cave in at 10 feet r2915ili Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 j Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail iliMill Eagan, MN 55121 LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-17 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 d a While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger a 1 Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 95 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Southwest Truck Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') 13 STANDARD PENETRATION co rn o r TEST DATA wo a o m c o N in blows/ft a0 � J H Z .0 in up a X Moisture 0 PL o r a� a z MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a s • LL Additional a�ai m CL m > o 3 ° I j5 I 5° Remarks m 0 0 co o 0 2 W 0 u) m STRENGTH,tsf d ♦ Qu )I( Qp m 0 2.0 4.0 0 a'�y.,• TOPSOIL(6"Thick) 95— r-SOIL Silty SAND With Gravel,Medium Grained, - Brown,Moist,Very Dense r SM.........-.) 0 8-32-21 >>© - - :� N=53 SAND,Medium Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, - 5 - Moist,Medium to Very Loose 90— 18 8-10-11 10 X 0 N=21 18 SP 2-2-1 10 O X - N=3 -10 •- 85— 18 2-3-4 9 0 N=7 End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 6 feet l Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail �. Eagan, MN 55121 liglig rLOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-18 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 m a While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger co Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 97 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J.Rozmiarek Northwest Half of East Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') STANDARD PENETRATION 07 rn o L TEST DATA o a o U c o N in blows/ft OO I -j H Z v e `O Gs- X Moisture O PL o a, MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 t s + LL Additional o r a a E Z 0 N N o zs 50 Remarks c m E m CO u, 3 I I I m o 0 W ate, u) m STRENGTH,tsf I-- 0_ co ♦ Qu 31E Qp ,{iy .. 0 2.0 4.0 Q TOPSOIL(6"Thick) t-SOIL Silty SAND With Gravel,Medium Grained, - - Brwon,Moist,Medium 95— 17 SM 2-7-5 11 V - N=12 SAND,Medium Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, Moist,Medium to Loose 18 3-6-6 9 X© N=12 ..- 90— .:.::.•:;-::: •:..::::.:-: . - -.:..::,:.•:-:..r. .. . . :.. ... •-"-•• 0- 18 SP 2-7-3 8 >OO - N=10 17 1-3-5 9 N=8 - End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 6 feet Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 �. 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail rQ„ LOEagan, MN 55121 CATION: 6000 Krueger Lane iiii Telephone: (651)646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 DATE STARTED: 4/18/16 DRILL COMPANY: ITT BORING B-19 DATE COMPLETED: 4/18/16 DRILLER: A.Bates LOGGED BY:J.Rozmiarek COMPLETION DEPTH 11.0 ft DRILL RIG: CME-75 y V While Drilling Not Observed BENCHMARK: See Remarks DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger co Y. Upon Completion Not Observed ELEVATION: 97 ft SAMPLING METHOD: SS 1. LATITUDE: 45.03516° HAMMER TYPE: Automatic BORING LOCATION: LONGITUDE: -92.83947° EFFICIENCY N/A Proposed Pavements STATION: N/A OFFSET: N/A REVIEWED BY: J. Rozmiarek Southeast Half of East Lot REMARKS:Benchmark:Bonnet Bolt of Fire Hydrant,East of Site on Krueger Lane(=100') F STANDARD PENETRATION cn in a L TEST DATA m m a o m c N in blows/ft © w J z c in C6 a X Moisture A PL o r lc a1 a. L' MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a • LL Additional .' m E 6 > 3 0 o •I 25 15 i 50 Remarks W Q O 8 U 2 00 STRENGTH,tsf CC D I- 11 ♦ Qu * Qp 0 2.0 4.0 0 >".. TOPSOIL(6"Thick) r-SOIL Silty SAND With Gravel,Medium Grained, - - Brown,Moist,Medium 95— • SM 16 1-8-5 14 C'SI: - - N=13 SAND,Medium Grained,Trace Silt,Brown, - 5 - Moist,Medium 18 4-6-8 12 X7 N=14 90- 16 SP 3-7-8 11 X o N=15 -10- 17 3-5-8 10 X N=13 End of Boring at 11 feet Cave in at 6 feet iiii Professional Service Industries, Inc. PROJECT NO.: 0675811 . 2915 Waters Road, Suite 112 PROJECT: Proposed Oak Park Heights Retail iliM Eagan, MN 55121 ii,Q„ LOCATION: 6000 Krueger Lane Telephone: (651) 646-8148 Oak Park Heights,Minnesota The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 1 4/24/2016 Design MaNs Summary Report Design Maps Summary Report User-Specified Input Report Title Oak Park Heights Retail Sun April 24,2016 19:04:28 UTC Building Code Reference Document 2012 International Building Code (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 45.03516°N, 92.83947°W Site Soil Classification Site Class D - "Stiff Soil" Risk Category I/II/III r ` i .:4: l �, ; t 7,.,s ...i t T4s... '° :. 1. p'W.::- -7 :' .1 ii ,,- - ,,,' ,„:„.„7,-, „.„„4.„„s, , ,; : 1 ,„,„: ,..,. ' , sr .4 # ` .� ; i4D ke E `a,eil s r '. rt"il�f c- lE:. „,akdae__ H USGS-Provided Output SS = 0.047 g SMS = 0.075 g SDS = 0.050 g Si = 0.027 g SMi = 0.065 g S1)11'- 0.047 pl = 0.044 g For information on how the SS and Si values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk-targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the"2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. PACER Response Spectrum Design Response Spectrum 0.09 0.05 0.07 0,04 0.04 pI 0.05 C 0.02 a 0.04 N 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.a0 0.2a 0.40 0.G0 0.90 1.a0 1.20 1.d0 1.60 1.90 2.00 0.00 0.20 0.da 0.00 0.90 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.6a 1. 0 2.00 Period, T(sec) Period, T(sec) Although this information is a product of the U.S.Geological Survey,we provide no warranty,expressed or implied,as to the accuracy of the data contained therein.This tool is not a substitute for technical subject matter knowledge. http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.goo/designmaps/us/summary.php?template=minimal&I atitude=45.03516&Iongitude=-92.83947&siteclass=3&riskcategory=0&edi... 1/1 PMS GENERAL NOTES SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS),AASHTO 1988 and ASTM designations D2487 and D-2488 are used to identify the encountered materials unless otherwise noted. Coarse-grained soils are defined as having more than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve(0.075mm);they are described as: boulders, cobbles,gravel or sand. Fine-grained soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; they are defined as silts or clay depending on their Atterberg Limit attributes. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS SFA: Solid Flight Auger-typically 4"diameter flights, SS: Split-Spoon- 1 3/8" I.D., 2"O.D., except where except where noted. noted: HSA: Hollow Stem Auger-typically 3%"or 4%I.D. ST: Shelby Tube-3"O.D., except where noted. openings, except where noted. BS: Bulk Sample M.R.: Mud Rotary- Uses a rotary head with Bentonite PM: Pressuremeter or Polymer Slurry CPT-U: Cone Penetrometer Testing with Pore-Pressure R.C.: Diamond Bit Core Sampler Readings H.A.: Hand Auger P.A.: Power Auger- Handheld motorized auger SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS N: Standard"N" penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D. Split-Spoon. N60: A"N" penetration value corrected to an equivalent 60% hammer energy transfer efficiency(ETR) Qu: Unconfined compressive strength,TSF QP: Pocket penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength,TSF w%: Moisture/water content, % LL: Liquid Limit, PL: Plastic Limit, % PI: Plasticity Index=(LL-PL),% DD: Dry unit weight, pcf Y,5Z,E1. Apparent groundwater level at time noted RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS ANGULARITY OF COARSE-GRAINED PARTICLES Relative Density N-Blows/foot Description Criteria Angular: Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane Very Loose 0-4 sides with unpolished surfaces Loose 4-10 Subangular: Particles are similar to angular description, but have Medium Dense 10-30 rounded edges Dense 30-50 Subrounded: Particles have nearly plane sides, but have Very Dense 50-80 well-rounded corners and edges Extremely Dense 80+ Rounded: Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges GRAIN-SIZE TERMINOLOGY PARTICLE SHAPE Component Size Range Description Criteria Boulders: Over 300 mm(>12 in.) Flat: Particles with width/thickness ratio>3 Cobbles: 75 mm to 300 mm(3 in.to 12 in.) Elongated: Particles with length/width ratio>3 Coarse-Grained Gravel: 19 mm to 75 mm(%in.to 3 in.) Flat&Elongated: Particles meet criteria for both flat and Fine-Grained Gravel: 4.75 mm to 19 mm(No.4 to 3 in.) elongated Coarse-Grained Sand: 2 mm to 4.75 mm(No.10 to No.4) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES Medium-Grained Sand: 0.42 mm to 2 mm(No.40 to No.10) Fine-Grained Sand: 0.075 mm to 0.42 mm(No. 200 to No.40) Descriptive Term %Dry Weight Silt: 0.005 mm to 0.075 mm Trace: <5% Clay: <0.005 mrn With: 5%to 12% Modifier: >12% Page 1 012 i ��� GENERAL NOTES (Continued) • CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS MOISTURE CONDITION DESCRIPTION Q„-TSF N-Blows/foot Consistency _ Description Criteria • 0 0.25 0 2 Very Soft Dry: Absence of moisture,dusty,dry to the touch Moist: Damp but no visible water 0.25-0.50 2-4 Soft Wet: Visible free water, usually soil is below water table 0.50-1.00 4-8 Firm (Medium Stiff) 1.00-2.00 8- 15 Stiff RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL 2.00 4.00 15-30 Very Stiff Descriptive Term %Dry Weight 4.00-8.00 30-50. Hard Trace: < 15% 8.00+ 50+ Very Hard With: 15%to 30% Modifier: >30% STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION Description Criteria Description Criteria Stratified: Alternating layers of varying material or color with Blocky: Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small layers at least'/-inch(6 mm)thick angular lumps which resist further breakdown Laminated: Alternating layers of varying material or color with Lensed: Inclusion of small pockets of different soils layers less than 1/1-inch(6 mm)thick Layer: Inclusion greater than 3 inches thick(75 mm) Fissured: Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little Seam: Inclusion 1/8-inch to 3 inches(3 to 75 mm)thick resistance to fracturing extending through the sample Slickensided: Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, Parting: Inclusion less than 1/8-inch(3 mm)thick sometimes striated SCALE OF RELATIVE ROCK HARDNESS ROCK BEDDING THICKNESSES Q„-TSF Consistency _ Description Criteria 2.5 10 Extremely Soft Very Thick Bedded Greater than 3-foot(>1.0 m) 10-50 Very Soft Thick Bedded 1-foot to 3-foot(0.3 m to 1.0 m) Medium Bedded 4-inch to 1-foot(0.1 m to 0.3 m) 50-250 Soft 50-525 Medium Hard Thin Bedded 11/4-inch to 4-inch(30 mm to 100 mm) 2 25 1,050 Modeuly Hard Very Thin Bedded /z-inch to 1%<inch(10 mm to 30 mm) 1,050-2,600 Hard Thickly Laminated 1/8-inch to'/-inch (3 mm to 10 mm) >2,600 Very Hard Thinly Laminated 1/8-inch or less"paper thin"(<3 mm) ROCK VOIDS GRAIN-SIZED TERMINOLOGY Voids Void Diameter (Typically Sedimentary Rock) Pit <6 mm (<0.25 in) Component Size Range Vug 6 mm to 50 mm(0.25 in to 2 in) Very Coarse Grained >4.76 mm Cavity 50 mm to 600 mm(2 in to 24 in) Coarse Grained 2.0 mm-4.76 mm Cave >600 mm(>24 in) Medium Grained 0.42 mm 2.0 mm Fine Grained 0.075 mm-0.42 mm Very Fine Grained <0.075 mm ROCK QUALITY DESCRIPTION DEGREE OF WEATHERING Rock Mass Description RQD Value Slightly Weathered: Rock generally fresh,joints stained and discoloration Excellent 90-100 extends into rock up to 25 mm(1 in),open joints may Good 75-90 contain clay,core rings under hammer impact. Fair 50-75 Poor 25-50 Weathered: Rock mass is decomposed 50%or less,significant Very Poor Less than 25 portions of the rock show discoloration and weathering effects,cores cannot be broken by hand or scraped by knife. Highly Weathered: Rock mass is more than 50%decomposed,.complete discoloration of rock fabric,core may be extremely broken and gives clunk sound when struck by hammer, may be shaved with a knife. Page 2 of 2 i SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL GRAPH LETTER DESCRIPTIONS •'""S•"""Ill CLEAN '`` AL. WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL- GRAVEL GRAVELS ,� �•� �1 GW SAND MIXTURES,LITTLE OR NO AND •.pS, •0 a FINES GRAVELLY . SOILS o�o °�� POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, (LITTLE OR NO FINES) )0 bO0 5c GP GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES,LITTLE • O 00000 OR NO FINES COARSE DTh ° t U GRAINED GRAVELS WITH �•`�1°C SILTY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND- SOILS MORE THAN 50% FINES 0 ► OF COARSE DO 1I 0`, 0 FRACTION �• RETAINED ON NO. ,,�'�,0L� 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE I I�+•# CLAYEY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND- AMOUNT OF FINES) ;1j� GC CLAY MIXTURES 61 %,"4.02 MORE THAN 50% SAND CLEAN SANDS SW WELL-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES OF MATERIAL IS AND •••••••••••••••••• LARGER THAN SANDY NO.200 SIEVE SOILS POORLY-GRADED SANDS, SIZE (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SP GRAVELLY SAND,LITTLE OR NO FINES SANDS WITH SILTY SANDS,SAND-SILT MORE THAN 50% FINES SM MIXTURES OF COARSE :•: FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLESC CLAYEY SANDS,SAND-CLAY AMOUNT OF FINES) - MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE ML SANDS,ROCK FLOUR,SILTY OR • CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY SILTS j INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO FINE AND LIQUID LIMIT j MEDIUM PLASTICITY,GRAVELLY CL CLAYS,SANDY CLAYS,SILTY CLAYS, LESS THAN 50 GRAINED CLAYS / LEAN CLAYS SOILS _ - - - OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC _ SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY MORE THAN 50% INORGANIC SILTS,MICACEOUS OR OF MATERIAL IS MH DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SMALLER THAN SILTY SOILS NO.200 SIEVE SIZE SILTS LIQUID LIMIT je.111INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH CLAYS GREATER THAN 50 CHAND PLASTICITY OI I ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY,ORGANIC SILTS . .fin HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS '' -`' `' ' P'j' PEAT,HUMUS,SWAMP SOILS WITH „ „ „ HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS I . Mme' Kimley>>>Horn Appendix 8. TSMP Cooperative Agreement 15 REVISED COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT For a Project to Manage Stormwater and Protect Water Quality in the Brown's Creek Watershed,Washington County, Minnesota The parties to this Revised Cooperative Agreement("Revised Cooperative Agreement") are the City of Stillwater, a Home Rule City of the Third Class, existing under the constitution and laws of Minnesota("Stillwater"), the City of Oak Park Heights, a statutory city ("Oak Park Heights") and Brown's Creek Watershed District ("BCWD"), a watershed district created pursuant to Minn. Stat. §103D. Recitals and Statement of Purpose WHEREAS Brown's Creek is a unique and important natural resource and a designated trout stream located within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, the ecological health and habitat viability of which depend on the maintenance of water quality, water temperature, and stable flow character. WHEREAS, Stillwater conducted an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for areas proposed to be annexed by Stillwater between now and the year 2020 and produced a Report(May 1997) and Final Report(December 16, 1997) (together, the "AUAR Reports") reviewing impacts to water resources from development in the annexation area consistent with the Stillwater comprehensive plan and proposing means of mitigating those impacts. WHEREAS. the implementation and use of regional measures to manage stormwater may serve to allow properties within the drainage area to meet the requirements of BCWD rules, the AUAR, and Stillwater and Oak Park Heights ordinances in a more cost-effective way than managing stormwater on an individual site basis. WHEREAS, the parties desire to implement measures recommended in the AUAR to protect Brown's Creek and its tributaries and acknowledge that their ability to do so requires that each party satisfactorily and promptly perform its obligations and cooperate with the other party on those tasks, As used in this Revised Agreement, the Regional Treatment System that will be designed, constructed, owned and maintained by Stillwater is described as the Brown's Creek Trout Stream Mitigation Project ("TSMP"). WHEREAS, on August 7, 2003, Stillwater and Oak Park Heights have reached an agreement establishing terms on which land within Oak Park Heights may drain to the TSMP,entitled"Memorandum of Understanding Between The City of Oak Park Heights and The City of Stillwater With Regard to Storm Water Management Issues Within the City of Oak Park Heights' Central Business District and adjoining lands, Lying South of Trunk Highway 36, West of Oakgreen Avenue and East of Trunk Highway 5"("Stillwater/Oak Park Heights MOU")and Stillwater and the BCWD have determined the TSMP as designed will manage surface water flows from the areas described in this Revised Agreement so as to protect Brown's Creek, its tributaries and the other water resources within the watershed. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties enter into this Revised Agreement to document their understanding as to the scope of their undertaking;reaffirm the commitment of each party as to the responsibilities and tasks to be undertaken by each party; establish procedures for performing these tasks and responsibilities; and facilitate communication and cooperation among the parties to ensure successful completion of the undertaking. AGREEMENT 1. General Responsibilities and Performance Guidelines 1.1 A Work Plan describing the tasks and schedule anticipated in performance of the TSMP is incorporated in this Revised Agreement by reference (Exhibit"A"). Consistent with its obligations under this Revised Agreement, Stillwater will retain final authority as to the manner in which it implements the responsibilities assigned to it but will provide the BCWD and Oak Park Heights the opportunity for review and comment with regard to the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the TSMP by timely providing any documents that another party requests and will cooperate with each other party in good faith to achieve goals of this Revised Agreement. 1.2 With respect to compliance with paragraph 2.4.1(b)of the BCWD Rules,the TSMP, within the area subject to the terms of this Revised Agreement, constitutes a regional facility pursuant to paragraph 2.7.4(c) of those rules. 1.3 The area of Stillwater that is subject to this Revised Agreement is limited to Phase I,Phase II, Phase III, and Phase IV as described in the Orderly Annexation Agreement between the City of Stillwater and Town of Stillwater dated August 16, 1996. Areas not described in this section, and areas that become part of the City in the future by reasons of annexation or other expansion., are not subject to the exception unless this Revised Agreement is amended to include those areas. The orderly annexation area is described in Exhibit "13," Phase I on Exhibit "C," Phase II on Exhibit "D," and Phase III on Exhibit"E." Phase IV is that part of the orderly annexation area(Exhibit "B")not shown on Exhibit "C," ,,D,. or ,,E11 1.4 Also subject to this Revised Agreement is that part of Oak Park Heights labeled on Exhibit F as "Remaining Parcels in the BCWD to be Developed Subject to the Revised Cooperative Agreement." Oak Park Heights recognizes that a portion of this area lies within the BCWD hydrological boundary but currently outside the BCWD legal boundary, and therefore that development of this portion may be subject to the stormwater management review of another watershed management organization. 1.5 All designs,written materials,technical data, research or any other work in progress concerning implementation of the TSMP must be available for review and copying by the other party, except to the degree limited by law. 1.6 Review and comment as provided for in this Revised Agreement means distribution of the documents or materials in question to each other party for a 30-day opportunity to review and comment. This period shall begin on the later of(a)the other party's receipt of documents under paragraph 1.1; or(b) the other party's receipt of documents pursuant to a request under paragraph 1.4 made within 15 business days of the Administrator's initial receipt under paragraph 1.1. Stillwater will in its discretion ensure that review occurs at a time when any comments may be meaningfully considered and implemented by Stillwater. The parties agree to consider all timely comments fully and to modify documents or materials to the extent feasible. 1,7 In the event of conflict between the terms of the Stillwater/Oak Park Heights MOU and this Revised Agreement, the Stillwater/Oak Park Heights MOU, specifying the terms by which land within Oak Park Heights may drain to the improvements described at paragraph 2,1 of this Revised Agreement, shall supersede the terms of this Revised Agreement as to the rights and obligations of Stillwater and Oak Park Heights with respect to each other. Nothing in the Stillwater/Oak Park Heights MOU shall affect the rights and obligations of the BC WD as set forth in this Revised Agreement, nor shall Stillwater deny any lands credited by the BCWD under paragraph 4.1 of this Revised Agreement the use of the improvements to the extent contemplated in the plans for development of those lands incorporated into a BCWD permit. 1 1.8 This Revised Agreement shall apply to land within Oak Park Heights,and to the rights and obligations of Oak Park Heights, effective retroactive to August 7, 2003. 2. Structural Improvements 2,1 Stillwater will prepare planand specifications for the construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed improvements and distribute them for review and comment in accordance with paragraph 1.5. 2.2 Stillwater will be responsible for selecting the contractor or contractors to perform the construction of the improvements, negotiating construction contracts and supervising project construction. It will be responsible for obtaining any governmental permits and conducting any environmental reviews necessary for the construction,operation and maintenance of the improvements, and for acquiring any property or access rights needed to design. construct, operate and maintain the improvements. 2.3 Stillwater will take all reasonable and feasible measures to minimize impacts on Long Lake and Brown's Creek that are caused by development that takes place before and following complete construction and operation of the TSMP and all elements thereof. 3. Responsibility for Costs. 3.1 Stillwater will be responsible for all project costs for the design, construction and maintenance of the TSMP. Nothing in this section will limit the right of Stillwater to seek contributing funds from any entity other than BCWD that contributes flows to the TSMP on any basis allowed by law. 3.2 Stillwater and BCWD will exercise reasonable efforts to secure outside means of funding for activities under section 2. The parties will assist and cooperate in these efforts. 4. Application of BCWD Rules to Areas Affected by the Improvements. 4.1 It is the intent of the parties that the improvements constructed pursuant to this Revised Agreement constitute a regional facility for manaaing storrnwater flow volume within the area described at Paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4 of this Revised Agreement. Therefore, pursuant to Paragraph 2.7.4(c)of the BCWD 4 rules, development within the area described in this Revised Agreement is deemed to be in compliance with the standard at Paragraph 2.4.1(b)of the rules. 4.2 Stillwater will cooperate with the BCWD on any monitoring the BCWD may undertake with respect to TSMP performance and water resource conditions, and will provide a location for a BCWD monitoring facility as identified jointly by the parties. This shall not obligate Stillwater to pay the cost of any such monitoring, except as may be specified in the monitoring plan referenced in paragraph 5.1 of this Revised Agreement. 4.3 Nothing in this Revised Agreement affects the authority or responsibility of the BCWD to revise paragraph 2.4.1(b) of its rules as appropriate. In the event a revision of paragraph 2.4.1(b) should impose a stricter standard than presently applicable to the Orderly Annexation Area as described in Paragraph 1.3 of this Revised Agreement, or the area of Oak Park Heights described in Paragraph 1.4 of this Revised Agreement, any permit applicant subsequent to adoption of the revised standard would be required to meet that standard, after consultation and agreement of the municipalities within the drainage area of the Regional Treatment System or TSMP as defined in Paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4 of this Revised Agreement. An applicant within the area described in Paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4 of this Revised Agreement will receive compliance credit for that degree of volume control that the TSMP is providing, but also shall be required to provide for such additional volume control as is necessary to meet the standard. A revised standard would operate only as to applications considered after adoption of the revision, and would not operate retroactively to any existing development. 5. Monitoring Plan 5.1 The parties, with the participation of other interested governmental bodies,jointly will develop and implement a monitoring plan ("Monitoring Plan") that will identify specific sampling procedures, analytic methods, detection limits, and quality assurance and quality control procedures to facilitate the accurate measurement of baseline data and any water quality or quantity impacts within the Long Lake drain;:e area and areas downstream. The specific monitoring activities for which each party is responsible will be identified in the Monitoring Plan. 5 6. Remedies. 6.1 In the event that periodic sampling or analysis done by BCWD or the Monitoring Plan reveals that the TSMP or any associated improvements are not functioning to meet BCWD volume control standards,the BCWD will meet and confer with Stillwater and Oak Park Heights to determine appropriate curative action, 6.2 In the event the parties cannot agree on an appropriate curative action, BCWD may send a notice to Stillwater and Oak Park Heights entitled "Notice to Cure,"describing the curative action necessary. The notice must allow Stillwater six(6)months to cure. 6.3 If curative action is not taken, or for any other dispute between the parties arising under this Revised Agreement,the parties agree to mediation for a minimum of ninety (90) days before seeking redress in the District Court of Washington County, Minnesota Mediation shall be conducted pursuant to procedures, and with a mediator, agreed on by the parties. The 90-day period shall commence on the written request of either party for mediation under this paragraph. 7. Indemnification 7.1 Stillwater agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the BCWD against claims including those made by third parties that arise out of the design, construction or maintenance of the TSMP, whether during construction of the system or after its completion. 8. Notice. 8.1 Notices to the parties to this Revised Agreement shall be given by hand delivery or first-class mail addressed to an elected or appointed representative of a party or a person as the party may designate. Documents required to be provided pursuant to paragraph 2.1 must be addressed to the BCWD Administrator at the BCWD's designated address and to the City Administrator, Oak Park Heights, unless otherwise specified by either party in writing. 6 9. Amendments. 9.1 This Revised Agreement may be amended only by agreement of the parties in writing. 10. Effect and Binding Nature. 10.1 This Revised Agreement replaces and supersedes the August 18, 2000 Cooperative Agreement executed by Stillwater and the RCWD as of the date on which this Revised Agreement has been fully executed by all parties. 10.2 This Revised Agreement will be binding on the parties and their respective successors, whether by merger, consolidation or transfer of authority to another government agency, to the fullest extent permitted by law. 11. Termination. 11.1 This Revised Agreement shall remain in effect in perpetuity. Any party may withdraw its participation under this Revised Agreement on two (2) years' written notice to the other parties. Before termination is finalized, the parties shall meet in good faith to attempt to resolve the reasons for the noticed withdrawal. 11.\I WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Revised Cooperative Agreement. CITY OF STILL WATER i - Date ; .411111611a • 07- '.• • , Mayor' /__ - e',2 And: 4pet 16,74 2.1.--e---$ee.._ Date Diane F. Ward, City Clerk CITY IO 7 .-...e,,!ii HEIG Ir --e, - By: j I Date av't Beaut, Mayor 1410 . And: / A , Date .ric John. n. City Administrator / 7 BROWNS CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT G3 o, By: ` 4 Date Craig Leiser, President 8 10-29-'03 17:58 FROM- T-@40 P02/07 U-557 EXHIBIT "A" Work Plan for TSMP Item 7/1/2000 Status Estiaated Completion Date Trout Stream Realignment— Completed Spring 2000 Completed Oak Glen Segment _ McKusick Downstream Out for bid Fall 2002 Conve ance Imsrovernent McKusick Lake Diversion • Partially Complete Fall 2003 Construction Long Lake Outlet Control Conceptual Design 2005 Long Lake Conveyance System Partially Complete 2007 Improvements 10-29-'03 17:58 FROCK-- T-0M0 F03/07 U-557 :. d L 1335.._.. ! 3I P,1 , ijcr.,",15 FRANI?. ROSS *. • - ,,- iii ..„ j - "' :7 -�;p, �, mil 11 4 ..,,,, N , - a --.. , -v2.2'12= .- — - , ii — - iiii ...., maw i -- .lir bow 41 tiiillta**1.,. 41111111Wi #:4.ii - 0 - -„,....— .veni ri , 111r1 + C 411 IFIJ Iair n ,wait . `� -, Pliki-1 it er6!,c,.1-o%:11 flitagala: im--‘14410,..."507 ,:._ of_ �,+� j� 4AMA. f 0 /1_ _ .......6......44,1xci_ _ .,.../yip op I, .... ... . .1 , Y gle4711; "'2:- • 'i• 47 h r le .... _a lip" lir 4 Calk i .41 v '''.. Ci. ;Wk. 1,..litip- i to acc,.....1zoie` 00:,..r..-10).. -.,„' pp iZi... .°4 {� .. : ICr' v lilli n Viiie* ;, 0.t ,, . " - tifftl, w. , trga# gio) "Wir , '9 1111 414111 4 " � • :f V• � lark *� �'���"�`�l'A:�FLti�k1 ,�,.-`�r�Ittr,..46141-Fill....". No�f#'jam-. dir .♦i .; j4, j �,'�► • ' �- _' , $44,i 4,74NNISN:Noto%•%,14'„I'L NY'•a ,payar.-- •••••71/4 AverNaz‘sakit\'‘k,N....,:•,:,‘, .-\01 aft ...v. , zio‘..\\\,,,s,,:x, + _A � _\ lhit Sy „il♦ i i� � • '- }� F. •�s +nexaor .�>+ : ,4. * , � , *fy - Area 1 111 • . ��y#* +�� .+� it;'V0 tet` # ;iY , 90111e.1 . `Y1 S1/41S's rhL 1 4V ,4. AlAtiN..* r 111 nirift.-"Ar A it °,. or,40,,N.:,oiite..,14,0p.... iv • I �kA i'6 1i'.E -:* • s A iY i 111 IN:... 11. %1/2,7S, A. -`lam_`` .. �Ltz, `fir ''"u► 4* '� « mow min k• wy. #36 i ,4' 7 { , i any. - . ricCotths Frank Roos Iszpci etua, Inc. CITY & TOWNSHIP , .. , (Ai is05o 25rd A.a, N. OF STILLWATER I�ly,c.ut6�. HN, 55 � Eragsnecrs ORDERLY FINN 7�RTTON ' 0 12-29- In al 58 FROM- T-04P4/07 1J-557 [0. 1996— i , .3!?m,,,,,...,__Ncr,-,3s f RANK mss ......___J 0. 6/6 8........p. 3/6_ „...-- .. ,„ ,wsgracsimapeli : -- - qv, - ----e----, ifa - we in / 1 .........,, 4 ,„ .., 11.11EL ill0 ill ..'.11, vsioth------La orb=z *gigs bi ... ., la fa._ !i : , 1.9 (01* I lb”. 1 Mit illaribilOt ' . Am. v t git a m 9 i ...... ,-,, _ . 4 pli 1 an • ..4., - -,. ti _ , • Kara P- ---:------ tigyAv • — ..... ft,.. t Az i . .._ ., _..pplchAtk.th%ftworits- Nil .. 1/44 fetgoss .. tirti011,144 sa ..., ::::%illiirrek4istalaYill ei ..,,,,, kg; ....4 ..q..... - . . atem-------_- Awir. _ i . cot off --oil '--vii-e-r-. ---,--- - 40 Ift ME_ r------ . , .. Ak----___,,,...,7.11,--5'=.""°"-- . ,..,,,r*". '4, Q1 ... 1,. .... 4., mw,N taw : , .) .. IN: le ,c -.. ,4". Ct o - r-- R WIN .., ,...... 4, +.4- iif .4 m XMIN * • Gamax........ ti.., Is _ r..., . ,... . ... , , . - i -it....iFtzt at.1.-elsiar I aim--4 : isINE,k--,4 „......- ! tip ad Irrg 11/4 vx...... , ..... _ . It ile eurrot - • .. I 1 115111TiimiA#1.1110M we..15:4111 I'M b lailift 1 Z. it .. ..11 .'i 1 bet'..-::: -‘-y.,j Et'4.--11111111"I)A'.-- 1: CI .-nUallhie*,:. 0 F I ...... an Ail . - . - e, . • ' . . L . .1111 • 0......rzi , F Ir-V-V-11 . I ,,, 401/FFIM111110*MI .. , . - ,1„,4 .44 wrigimallair rp. * d ,-,, .... .."' -„„„ 407„, 7 111111"ir oh - . /all lit Arils"' ....1.: ' • . i ' 400.,,,, lo:e .' ., ''_. • III' 1 ..- i0000 :,, ,jef 4 sir ,,,, / ..t, , . 1....fle /1" , 9- t, „ , l'i \-14r 40/4 .1.-- : t I Ask -r,e f 1111 *711112 liagPliknb A agad• diniaccitAg ,erzae..g.7 PK= meta ..._, 7.7..„„.„....1.„....„ _de, . _ tweespi 1-'1Ili cia. Amp/ • .., oar min t PI ,.... MO ow aim oozy* bow..44 II Et MillgaAliii ut 'Doiterr ..C • .... , tleCciatbr, Frank Ra crs fissrocJ ntot-, Inc, CITY & TOWNSHIP 10-25-'03 17:59 F T-°040 P05/07 U-557 ____l . 40. €995__ E;.3!? t.( MC'"UBS FRANK ROSS „-�No 8.l t A4/6 -,. ... 111, v, :etc U ..sor 4, i; 8 411111‘11111 Ell . . . art ,....„.....1 ii„11 _RANI°F f s' 2J,40 25,* 2 j,,,th... ; *.! .1..1 rrc u "�I�.'f . . ; :fi x "U" r Road #64 cKusick 1154 Nei-` r-•• . ) . x rai a/. Y Ys ' w r ' ,� I - . ....,,.... ..... ., . \ - fri"..„ y.. . I. . l.1 a PHASE :- - - • r�:tr E 11M174 37-40 ` � f 111116ii- tie tioti Elm Elm 3 9 111111131 1111--.-,1 1lif 5gall VALI 14. r.� rJ !1id4t?I..„4 "3 -cr. 62' - zr: arzo tio-,, 4c �. _. � , : .141402-1:, m 7r'e+;�. tiler 0:2„, I 1 I — 4(.. .., .. t oto coa ', .,. Lf: ,gip qinp 111 . brxr r zi 424310:19,-1*-434%1 ' :g .,,, --4 'xis !, a+ac j 32 se, wl. 1 � IS .. ap 4,_.....wrir'-- ""1--m ri,13', . a 1I' , . 2IOC t ` _... I EXHIBIT [ "assweJ McCnii Frank Rngar-Rasrsc+ttcs, roc-; CITY & TOWNSHIP 10-29-'03 18:00 FROM- 1.-Me Petitt1 r ti-n c Jun. 19 1996`" 1 :32? f MCC 2#P5 FRANK ROSS )1s. 6158 5:. \ 1 41_ 3 4.#rL 14!''" fie p= :!. e �y til 1 y ea .. e ~"" >_ + rmss:: ( j� r?':11C F ar 4. a - ' ellwood,,ySeo d) - . , I i . { 2t,� f r . i pllA iiiitilL,". 1,iiiili 3 z«1,. 1 19 ,. ..s.., . _ 411111" r - cin 106. I - t7(j - 1 i 1vl 1' ]ico ,�,. is I �.4+°.facer _ `r7+-= a .. l! Road # 4' t 7cSs t :1•• le =s. - "-I , i �. is /", -- mi _ `. _ �� ` * e7 s 4• 1 - 1 ewe I iJ sylvl .. w* Oft :1" } (r...„..../ t+ xea>a / 1 CZi 'x3 . 80th Street yI '" 1 • ' • .rS" I f"'^-�' i *ilrf ISA it 7)51 r „,,, 1 {{� 1.. I. i,leA r hvAti ,;. .1 s 5 i} 1'. s�t j` r1 :trA- ... I i 144 C Z0.20 i''''..) . .-ZwISCI [yj = T 4 6 - - i .� _. _/ �„ Tt 2:59 ''2 tZ45 - •. ;.?:E: 1y . // EXHIBIT tteCoabx Fronk Rcxn fizzociatat. Xrec. CITY & TOWNSHIP i5OStt Z3rd five. x, OF STILLWRTER ves,>,-nye ........_..._._._.. . _____ii ' , ,.,.., . , ' 0 r I m ar Y, .f Iiip . . T.! ! I i 1 4„ 1 ,i , , , . # „,,, , ,., , ,, , , ., , .,1 , , tf 0 . ,,,,, , , , , . ......... . . , -,,,,•., , I110610 . ,; iiillp § :, 1 / 1 i � x ,-,' ,-:',..:7:1'-:;::::V.:::::::44!;i: N 4 III I f Nj ' ' , N Is .ii 11 4