HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - Credit River Road Feasibility o� rxro�
ti
U 4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
ArINNESO(P
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2014
AGENDA#: 8A
PREPARED BY: SENG THONGVANH, PROJECT ENGINEER
PRESENTED BY: SENG THONGVANH AND LARRY POPPLER
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE FEASIBIL-
ITY REPORT AND SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE
CREDIT RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CITY PROJECT#TRN15-
000006)
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to accept the Feasibility Report and schedule
a Public Hearing to be held on December 22, 2014 for the Credit River Road
Improvement Project.
History
Each year the City reconstructs street segments that are scheduled for recon-
struction as part of its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and have exceeded
their useful design life. The City uses the Capital Improvement Program and its
Pavement Management Program to plan for infrastructure improvements and the
financing for capital improvements. At its August 25, 2014 meeting the City
Council adopted Resolution 14-124 authorizing staff to prepare a Feasibility Re-
port for the Credit River Road Improvement Project as outlined in the CIP.
The M.S. Chapter 429 process applies to all projects that will be financed in whole
or in part through special assessments or bond proceeds.
The Credit River Road neighborhood is considered in the report and includes
improvements to Borgerding Addition, Brooksville Hills 1St Addition, Brooksville
Hills 8th Addition, Costello's Addition, S 02, T 114, R 22 Block 001, Lot 002&003
and portions of Sections 1 &2, Township 114, Range 22. These properties were
platted and developed from as early as 1920's to as late as the 1990's. A map
of the project area (Figure 1) is included in the Feasibility Report. The proposed
improvements include street reconstruction, storm sewer, storm water quality,
sanitary sewer, watermain, concrete curb and gutter, and appurtenant work.
Current Circumstances
The Feasibility Report includes total estimated costs, preliminary assessment
amounts, and a project financing summary. Also included in the report are de-
sign criteria, estimates and information on watermain, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, and streets. Details on each can be found in the Feasibility Report.
At the November 10, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council requested additional
information pertaining to possible impacts to Credit River Road due to future
plans for the Trunk Highway 13/County Road 21 Intersection Project and addi-
tional information relating to the forcemain and Credit River Road lift station re-
placement. The Council also requested that the Assessment Review Committee
review and evaluate the information prior to bringing the agenda item back to the
Council. The Assessment Review Committee subsequently met on November
14th to review the additional information including a three page memo which out-
lined the issues associated with sewer capacity together with a proposal for
avoiding such issues in the future. A copy of that memo has been shared with
the rest of the council and is attached to this report.
Conclusion
A public hearing is proposed for December 22, 2014. At that meeting the pro-
posed improvements, project schedule and assessments will be presented to
residents. The information contained in the Feasibility Report will also be pre-
sented at a neighborhood meeting that will take place prior to the public hearing.
The attached Feasibility Report outlines which portions of the cost for the above
project will be assessed to the benefiting properties. If the Council approves the
Feasibility Report, the Chapter 429 special assessment statute requires a public
hearing be conducted prior to proceeding with the project to determine if it is to
move forward.
In summary,the project is feasible from an engineering and economic standpoint.
Approval of the Feasibility Report does not grant final approval of the project.
ISSUES: The Assessment Review Committee (ARC) convened on November 14, 2014 to
review additional information in regards to the Credit River Road Project per the
request of City Council at the November 10, 2014 meeting. The two items re-
viewed were:
• Forcemain and Lift Station Replacement— History and capacity issues
• Trunk Highway 13/County Road 21 Future Plans — Impacts to Credit
River Road at Evanston Avenue
The capacity issues related to the Credit River Lift station were discussed. A
memo dated November 13th drafted by Larry Poppler was reviewed. Due to the
circumstances, the replacement of forcemain under Credit River Road from Ev-
anston to the Credit River Lift Station is necessary to gain the needed capacity.
Due to this replacement and disturbance to Credit River Road, the Assessment
Review Committee is recommended proceeding with the project.
The ARC reviewed 3 options for the TH 13/CR 21 future plans. The options
included:
1. Existing Alignment-Reconstructing Credit River Road with the City's
typical section within the existing road alignment at Evanston Ave-
nue. Option 1 would likely mean that this stretch of Credit River Road
(approximately 300 feet) would be reconstructed again when the in-
tersection project takes place.
2. Shift Alignment - Reconstructing Credit River Road with the City's
typical section and shifting road alignment to account for expansion
of County Road 21. The shifting of the road alignment (option 2)
would require property acquisition and would cost approximately
$9,000. This option would not necessarily mean this area of Credit
2
River Road would not be impacted again with the TH 13/CR 21 inter-
section. It would give the City an opportunity during the design of the
intersection project to try to minimize impacts or avoid reconstructing
this portion of Credit River Road again.
3. Temporary Road Section -Building a temporary street section for the
area that may be impacted by future construction of the TH 13/CR
21 intersection. Option 3 would provide a cost savings of approxi-
mately$33,000. The ARC recommended that if this option were cho-
sen the assessed parcels would be the same as the other two options
as they would not be assessed with the TH 13 and CR 21 project.
The ARC recommended that the final decision on which road option to use at this
location be deferred until additional design information is available that would
better illustrate impacts of each option.
FINANCIAL The Credit River Road Improvement Project is proposed to be financed by Spe-
IMPACT: cial Assessments, tax levy, Sewer Fund, Water Fund, and Trunk Sewer Fund.
Funding sources and amounts are as shown below:
ITEMS COST
Street/Storm Sewer* $1,046,434.50
Watermain $ 253,018.00
Sanitary Sewer $1,092,475.00
Street Lights $ 10,000.00
City's Project Support Costs* $ 258,349.04
TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,660,276.54
*Includes Water Quality Costs
**City's Project Support Costs includes the following:
Engineering
Administration
Financing
Assessments $399,185.10
Sewer Fund $300,387.18
Water Fund $309,744.95
Water Quality Fund $16,420.67
Trunk Sewer Fund $939,105.96
Tax Le $695,432.67
Project Total Cost $2,660,276.54
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution 14-XX accepting the Feasibility Report and establish a
Public Hearing date as per the attached Resolution
2. Deny this item for a specific reason and provide staff with direction.
3. Table this item until some date in the future.
RECOMMENDED Motion and second for alternative#1.
MOTION:
3
O� PRIp�
ti
U tri
4646 Dakota Street SE
' WIN so`�' Prior Lake,MN 55372
RESOLUTION 14-xxx
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR THE CREDIT RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT#TRN15-000006
Motion By: Second By:
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Resolution 14-124, the City Council, on August 25, 2014 ordered a Feasibility
Report to be prepared by the City's Engineering Department with reference to the Credit
River Road Improvement Project; and
WHEREAS, The Feasibility Report for the Credit River Road Improvement Project dated November
2014 contains information that the proposed project is necessary, cost effective, and
feasible; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The City Council hereby accepts the Feasibility Report as submitted.
3. The Council will consider the improvement of such streets and areas in accordance with the Report and
the assessment of property as described in the Report for all or a portion of the cost of the
improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the
improvements of$2,660,276.54.
4. A Public Hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 22nd of December, 2014 at Prior
Lake City Hall, with the address of 4646 Dakota Street SE, City of Prior Lake, Minnesota at 7:00 p.m.
statutory notice and publication requirements shall be followed.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014.
VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup
Aye ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Frank Boyles, City Manager
http://splash/teams/am/October 4 2010/1124 2014/Accept Feasibility Credit River Road Res.doc
O� pRlp�
U
Memo
INNE50M.
Date: November 13,2014
To: Frank Boyles, City Manager
From: Larry Poppler,City Engineer/Inspections Director
Subject: Southeast Sanitary Sewer Area
This memo addresses the sanitary sewer capacity in the southeast region of the City.
2005 Comprehensive Plan
The City uses the Comprehensive Plan to guide development within the City and trunk
improvements. The most recent Comprehensive Plan update was created in 2005 and is typically
updated every 10 years. A Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan includes a section on the sanitary
sewer system. This chapter is created from a separate document titled"Comprehensive Sewer
Policy Plan". This plan assigns and guides sanitary sewer districts within Prior Lake. It includes
chapters on Land Use,Design Criteria,Full Development System Descriptions, Cost Analysis,
Summary,and Recommendations. In terms of sanitary sewer it is the guiding document for the
City and includes Capital Improvement Recommendations. When a new development is being
planned,this document is referenced to determine if it is consistent with the Comprehensive
Sewer Policy Plan. It was also used to calculate the trunk area charges.
It is not uncommon that development densities or flows vary from the Comprehensive Sewer
Policy Plan, especially in a commercial/industrial area of the City. The plan typically assumes
a flow rate for various land uses. A factor of safety is also used in the planning effort because of
the many variables. Due to these variables,at times specific studies are completed to affirm
specific sub-areas within the City. Other study examples include the Lime Lift Station Study.
This study helped pinpoint the amount of flow capacity available to serve the annexation area
ahead of the sewer extension from CSAH 82,
2007 Credit River Lift Station Standardization
The lift station serving this area was built in the 1970's and was designed and operated by the
Metropolitan Council before 2007. Since the 70's some areas that historically flowed through
the lift station were re-directed to flow directly to the trunk gravity piping. Other areas have
been added to flow through this lift station. In 2007,the Credit River Lift Station was
standardized to City Specifications and turned over to the City from the Met Council. The
standardization included pump replacement,controls,and forcemain replacement. The existing
wet well was re-utilized.
2014 Sanitary Sewer Study
In the Winter of 2014 as the City was evaluating the layout for the Enclave at Cleary Second
Development Project, it was discovered that a property within the City limits west of the Enclave
at Cleary Development(Radanke Property)was not addressed in the Comprehensive Sewer
Policy Plan. The City was also reviewing the CR 44 sanitary sewer capacity in this area to
nt. ..:ACS A 9 nonn I r._.. ncn AA7 A 1 A t.....-..-:...,.c_:..-t..t...
determine if it could extend sewer to serve property outside the municipal boundary. Due to
these factors a sanitary sewer study was commissioned to review the sanitary sewer in this area.
The 2014 sanitary sewer study confirmed that the Credit River Lift Station and forcemain piping
is undersized to serve the region. Details can be found in the study completed by WSB &
Associates,but generally there are two problems; 1)The wet well for the lift station is
undersized for the area served resulting in frequent pump run times 2)The forcemain pipe is
undersized for the projected flows.
The results of the study were surprising to City Staff,but they were reviewed and confirmed
using pump down testing of the lift station. Using this information, City Staff suggested that a
lift station upgrade be completed in conjunction with the planned Credit River Road project. The
Credit River Road project was adjusted from 2017 to 2015 in the Capital Improvement Plan. If
the work is completed as contemplated in 2015,the City avoids overextending the capacity of the
lift station. The wet-well and forcemain pipe upgrades are needed per the feasibility report for
the Credit River Road Project.
It was also discovered that the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan contained an error in the
forcemain size assumptions. Specifically, a critical pipe was shown as 10"diameter when in
reality it was 6"diameter. The Plan also did not provide guidance on the replacement of the wet
well for the Credit River Lift Station as one could expect from the guiding document.
2014 CIP Discussion
In a general way, City Staff discussed the capacity issue with the City Council at a worksession
held in June of 2014. Ultimately the City Council agreed to include the Credit River Road
Project in the CIP for 2015 including the Lift Station. But in retrospect,we should have been
more in depth and detailed so the Council was aware of this important issue.
Other Issues
1. Since the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Platt did not include upgrade of the Credit River
Road Lift Station,the costs are not pant of the trunk acreage charges which are charged to
developers. In short,since 2005 we have been"undercharging"development fees for this
specific lift station upgrade. There are many variables when determining the fees
collected. The Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan makes assumptions on land use,
development scenarios,and includes contingency for the costs. Generally,the actual
expenditures are less than predicted because of the contingency or value engineering
(designing more cost efficient ways to deliver the trunk improvement). However,some
land areas which were planned to be served and fees collected have been purchased by
the SMSC which also affects the formula.
2. It is uncertain if other errors exist in the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan. An update to
this document will be prepared for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan beginning in 2016 to
verify the assumptions and flow projections. The City Council has already directed City
Staff to proceed with this update which includes updates to the trunk acreage charges.
3. In 2007,the City had an opportunity to address the lift station and forcemain needs when
upgrades were completed to meet City standardization requirements. It is uncertain what
assumptions this consultant made for that project or whether they relied on the
Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan.
4. Persons responsible for the oversight for the creation of the Comprehensive Sewer Policy
Plan and the 2007 lift station standardization project are no longer employed by the City
of Prior Lake. Their institutional knowledge may have assisted in alerting the City to this
situation sooner.
Recommendation
Without the completion of the 2014 Sanitary Sewer Study,the City would have been vulnerable
to over-taxing the Credit River Road Lift station without knowledge. It is recommended that
the City proceed with the improvements contemplated in the feasibility report for the
Credit River Road Improvement Project, The costs are contained in that document. Because
forcemain replacement is necessary to build the necessary capacity and because the forcemain is
located beneath Credit River Road for most of the length of the project,it is most cost effective
to complete the road improvements to Credit River Road at the same time. As discussed in the
feasibility report,the condition of Credit River Road is poor and extensive watermain
replacement is also needed.
The City can avoid a repeat of this scenario in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan by taking the
following steps:
i
1) Lengthen the time taken to prepare the plan. We were the first Metropolitan Area City to
submit a Comprehensive Plan during the last round of updates. More time should have
been spent cross checking the work of the consultant.
2) Review each study step by step during preparation and completion to double check
accuracy. Since these documents are used for a decade both to build our system and
collect fees,they must be accurate.
i
I
_ --- -
O� PRIO
V �
j r ESO��
PRELIMINARY REPORT
FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER ROAD
2015 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(PROJECT #TRN15-000006)
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, GRADING,
CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER,
BITUMINOUS PAVING AND APPURTENANT WORK
NOVEMBER 2014
fi
PRELIMINARY REPORT
FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER ROAD
2015 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INCLUDING
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, GRADING, CONCRETE CURB &
GUTTER, BITUMINOUS PAVING AND APPURTENANT WORK
NOVEMBER 2014
I hereby certify that this Feasibility Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
11/4/14
Seng Thongvanh, P.E. Date
Reg.No. 44666
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
On August 25, 2014, the Prior Lake City Council adopted Resolution 14-124, which ordered the
preparation of a Feasibility Report for improvements to the project area listed below:
Credit River Road, located within Sections 1 and 2, Township 114 North, Range
22 West, Scott County,Minnesota.
SCOPE
This report evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing the street and installation of utilities in the
project area. All existing infrastructure (streets, watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer)
elements were evaluated, improvements recommended, cost estimates of the proposed
improvements prepared and funding strategies developed in this report. Additional evaluation of
future County Road 21 and Trunk Highway 13 plans are also included in this report to ensure
proposed improvements are completed efficiently and account for future needs where feasible.
BACKGROUND
The proposed project area is shown on Exhibit 1. Credit River Road currently has a failing
bituminous surface and is 25 feet in width. The west curb line is currently concrete curb and
gutter while the east contains a bituminous curb.
I""� fie¢• ��}�`._'?"
Credit River Road Existing Condition:
Deteriorated bituminous surface
The street no longer meets a desired level of service and has reached a point in which
maintenance by the use of a bituminous overlay or patching is of limited value. The geotechnical
report indicates fill sections below the existing streets. The fill varied from sandy lean clay to
clayey silt to silty sand. The report also noted that petroleum odors were encountered in one of
the soil borings from a depth of 2-feet to 4-feet. A contingency will be included in the engineer's
estimate for removal of contaminated soils. Roadway sections are proposed to be constructed per
the recommendation of the Geotechnical Engineer.
GARecon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\FeasbiIity Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 3
The sanitary sewer system for the project area was installed in the 1950's. The sanitary system
north of Franklin Trail on Credit River Road consists of 8-inch vitrified clay pipe that flows
north to a 24-inch sanitary sewer line located on Evanston Avenue. Currently, a 6-inch
forcemain that runs from the Credit River lift station(LS58)discharges to this system. The
sanitary system that flows south towards the Credit River lift station consists of 10-inch vitrified
clay pipe that starts approximately 800-feet north of Franklin Trail and runs along Credit River
Road down to the lift station. The 10-inch sanitary sewer line serves approximately 15 properties
on Credit River Road and is considered under-utilized. Televising of the sanitary sewer pipes
was completed in September 2014. The televising shows the existing sanitary pipe to be in a
deteriorated condition with numerous cracks, spot replacements, and root intrusions.
The Credit River lift station(LS58)was originally constructed in the early 1970's. The lift
station was owned and operated by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission which is now
known as the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). Through an agreement
with MCES in 2005,the lift station, forcemain, and gravity sanitary sewer from the lift station to
County Road 82 was conveyed to the City. As part of the agreement,the lift station was
upgraded to meet City standards in 2007. The upgrade was paid by MCES as part of the
agreement. The forcemain from the lift station to Franklin Trail was also replaced in 2007 as
part of the County Road 21 improvement project. Due to current growth and future
developments within the service area of the lift station,the lift station and forcemain would be
undersized to meet future needs per the sewer analysis completed by WSB &Associates as
shown on Exhibit 3A.
The 6-inch cast-iron pipe watermain located on Credit River Road was installed in the 1970's.
The watermain located on Credit River Road between Evanston Avenue and Franklin Trail has
experienced approximately 15 pipe break incidents within the last twenty years with the last
incident occurring in January 2014. The watermain from Franklin Trail to Fish Point Road has
experienced approximately 6 incidents within the same time period. The watermain is extremely
deteriorated and in need of replacement.
The majority of the Credit River Road neighborhood currently drains through a series of catch
basins and connects onto Scott County's trunk storm sewer system located on County Road 21.
The trunk storm sewer pipes drain to two separate ponds located along the County Road. The
storm water pond located at County Road 21 and Fish Point Road was built in 2007 as part of the
improvements on County Road 21. This pond was upgraded again in 2013 as part of the Eagle
Creek Estates Development. The other storm water pond is located on the south side of County
Road 21 and east of Trunk Highway 13. It is anticipated that minor revisions or additions to the
storm sewer system will be necessary to meet requirements for rate control, water quality
treatment, and volume control. A small area of the Credit River Road neighborhood also drains
to the wetland located adjacent to Brooksville Hills Park.
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 4
�A
` a ,,.t {pit•
t i
Existing storm sewer inlet `
d a
eta
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Roadway
Proposed improvements for the project area include storm sewer, concrete curb and gutter,
driveway restoration, and bituminous surfacing. The existing concrete walk would be replaced
as part of this reconstruction project. The concrete walk is currently on the residential side of
Credit River Road. During the final design, placement of the concrete walk between County
Road 21 and Credit River Road will be evaluated. Placement of the concrete walk closer to the
county road would provide a regional usage and a continuous connection for the trail located on
County Road 21 just south of Fish Point Road. It would also provide a cost savings of
approximately $10,000 due to elimination of concrete driveway aprons. The drawback is that the
street alignment would need to be shifted approximately 5' towards the residential side to make
room for the side walk.
The Credit River Road street section will be designed to meet seven-ton requirements per the
City standard for residential streets. The proposed street section per the recommendation of the
geotechnical engineer includes: geotextile fabric, 24 inches of granular borrow, 8 inches of Class
5 aggregate base, 2.5 inches of bituminous base course, and 1.5 inches of bituminous wear
course. Sub-cutting the roadway and placement of the granular borrow enlarges the scope of the
street reconstruction and increases the cost of the project. The typical street section is shown on
Exhibit 2.
The existing right-of-way for Credit River Road varies from approximately 138 feet wide to 210
feet wide in portions of the roadway. The existing right-of-way is part of the County Road 21
right-of-way. The existing right-of-way width will be sufficient to reconstruct the roadway but
Right-of-Entry agreements will be obtained in case restoration work is necessary beyond the
right-of-way width.
Even though the City standard street width is 32 feet, numerous roadways within the City limits
are less than 32 feet wide. In an effort to reduce impervious surface and long term infrastructure
replacement costs, the City has utilized narrower street widths. These streets are usually located
GARecon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 5
in older residential neighborhoods or if they are located within a new residential development,
environmental sensitivity necessitated their approval. Due to the narrower width, on street
parking on both sides of the street can create a situation that disrupts the free flow of traffic.
Vehicles may encounter one another in an area that has cars parked on the roadway. In those
cases, one car must wait while the other car proceeds through the area. For low volume
roadways, typically this would not be an issue. As in the case for Credit River Road, the
proposed width would be 24 feet wide, which would closely match the current width of 25 feet.
This would mirror the reconstruction project protocol of replacing street widths in kind where
feasible and deemed appropriate.
The final design of Credit River Road will also take into consideration future plans for the
County Road 21 and Trunk Highway 13 intersection. The impacts, as shown in the diagram,will
be most substantial where Credit River Road curves towards Evanston Avenue. Although the
details regarding the future plans at the intersection are not known,there are options that could be
taken into consideration during the design of Credit River Road. The first option would be to
design Credit River Road per the impacts shown on the concept plan. This option would shift
the roadway closer to approximately four homes and may require property acquisition. Although
this option would plan ahead for the future, there is no guarantee that Credit River Road would
not be impacted by the County Road 21 and TH 13 project. The second option would be to
design Credit River Road to follow the existing alignment with the understanding that the section
of Credit River Road at Evanston would need to be reconstructed with the County Road 21 and
TH 13 project. This option would minimize impacts to the four properties with the current
project but future impacts could be substantial. This option would also mean that this section of
street would be reconstructed twice,now and in the future.
Concept Layout: Impacts to Credit River Road at Evanston Avenue
Credit River Road
+� TK 13 County Road 21
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 6
Concrete Pavement Evaluation
The use of concrete pavement was reviewed for this project. Concrete pavement typically costs
more up front, but has less maintenance over time. An annualized life cycle cost analysis was
performed to compare bituminous paving versus concrete paving for this project. The analysis
revealed that concrete paving cost$0.64 per linear foot per year more than bituminous based on a
40 year service life. This amounts to a difference of nearly $70,000 over the 40 year service life
for the .56 miles of street in this neighborhood based on a similar level of service. In addition to
the cost difference for maintaining the pavement, future utility repairs will also cost more if
concrete were utilized.
The soils in this area need to be replaced under the streets for both the bituminous and concrete
paving. If better soils were encountered, the upfront costs for concrete could be comparable to
the cost of bituminous as soil correction under a concrete street is typically less than bituminous.
Concrete must cure for a 5 day period before vehicles can travel on the pavement. Bituminous
can be driven upon within 1 to 2 hours after placement. Using concrete paving presents access
challenges to the neighborhood, especially with the cul-de-sac situation for both stretches of
Credit River Road. Citizen expectations regarding access would need to be adjusted if concrete
were utilized.
Sanitary Sewer
Proposed sanitary sewer improvements are shown on Exhibit 3. The televising report shows the
8-inch vitrified clay pipe and 10-inch vitrified clay pipe to be in various states of deterioration.
The proposed improvements include replacement and upsizing of the existing sanitary sewer to
an 18-inch PVC pipe and redirecting sanitary sewer flow on Credit River Road north to the larger
existing 24-inch sanitary sewer pipe. The upsizing is required to provide the necessary capacity
for discharge of the Credit River lift station into this reach of the sanitary sewer system. The 18-
inch sanitary sewer will be installed from Fish Point Road to Evanston Avenue along Credit
River Road. Redirecting the sanitary sewer flow in this manner will also eliminate
approximately 1,800 feet of gravity sewer pipe from Fish Point Road to Adelmann Street.
The improvement project will also include upgrading the existing forcemain and components for
the Credit River Road lift station. The lift station and forcemain improvements will be
completed per the recommendation by WSB & Associates as part of their sewer analysis dated
June 20, 2014 as shown in Exhibit 3A, with modifications. The sewer analysis contemplates
replacement of the 6-inch forcemain with a larger size pipe and discharging into the existing 24-
inch sanitary sewer on Evanston Avenue. After evaluation of the system layout, the existing
forcemain will be replaced with a 10-inch forcemain that will discharge into the proposed 18-
inch gravity sewer located on Credit River Road at approximately the Fish Point Road
intersection. This option would reduce the length of forcemain installed as well as the size of the
proposed forcemain. The forcemain length will be reduced by approximately 2,100 feet. The
forcemain pipe size is reduced from 12-inch to 10-inch because of the shorter run of pipe. The
lift station component upgrades of the wet well, pumps, and control panel will also be included
as part of this project. The proposed improvements to the gravity sanitary sewer, forcemain, and
lift station takes into consideration future service needs of platted and undeveloped areas to the
south of Credit River Road and west of Revere Way (as shown as highlighted areas in the
G:\Recon—Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 7
diagram). If additional areas within Credit River Township, that extend further to the southeast,
are proposed for City sewer services, additional capacity needs should be considered for all
components proposed for upgrading along Credit River Road. A sewer analysis covering the
additional areas would be required since the analysis by WSB did not contemplate services to
these areas.
H
t L ,M
ate'
G' FLL
_ F ,
a & .
N
I r
DM
Credit River Road Lift Station Service Areas
NAME
Fully Developed
Plat ApprovediPartially Developed
Undeveloped/Unse,vered
Watermain
Proposed watermain improvements are shown on Exhibit 4. It is proposed that the existing 6-
inch watermain from Evanston Avenue to Fish Point Road be replaced with 8-inch ductile iron
pipe. The watermain within the project has a history of breaks with incidents occurring almost on
an annual basis. The latest incident occurred in January 2014. The watermain breaks are
disruptive,costly to repair, and waste valuable natural resources.
All water service connections will be replaced from the main to the property line and new curb
boxes will be installed within the entire project area. Gate valves, hydrants, and curb stops will
also be replaced with the mainline pipe. It is anticipated that only existing hydrants within the
project area will need to be replaced with no additional hydrants proposed.
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 8
Storm Sewer
Proposed storm sewer improvements are shown on Exhibit 5. The storm sewer system
improvements will consist of adding additional storm sewer collection system designed to
capture the 10-year event. Storm sewer currently exists on Credit River Road that is connected
to the storm sewer system on County Road 21. The areas north of Franklin Trail drains to the
storm water pond located on the south side of County Road 21, approximately 750 feet from the
intersection of County Road 21 and Trunk Highway 13. The areas south of Franklin Trail drains
to the storm water pond located on the northwest corner of the Fish Point Road and County Road
21 intersection as well as to a wetland adjacent to Brooksville Hills Park. It is anticipated that
minimal upgrades to the storm water ponds may be necessary.
Residential Access During Construction
Providing access to residential properties has always been a difficult issue during heavy
construction activities. It is even more challenging when construction takes place within a dead
end street. In the case of Credit River Road, both sections are dead end cul-de-sacs. The portion
north of Franklin Trail will be less of a challenge as there is another access located off of County
Road 21. The Credit River Road section south of Franklin Trail currently has only one access in
an out of the neighborhood. To help alleviate access issues during construction, it is anticipated
that a temporary access drive would be built at the north end of the cul-de-sac providing access
immediately onto Franklin Trail. The temporary access would only be used during construction
hours and with limited turn movements to the right onto Franklin Trail. Safety is paramount and
City field staff will monitor the temporary access to ensure traffic movements are not creating
hazardous conditions.
Urban Reforestation Program
A voluntary urban reforestation program is proposed to promote a dense urban forest canopy.
While this solution is not expected to pay off in the near term,the water quality benefits of an
urban forest are well documented. The proverb goes: "The best time to plant a tree is twenty
years ago,the second best time is now." A mature tree can use 200-1500 gallons of water a day
in the summer, and the canopy can intercept rains before they even hit the pavement or other hard
surface. The water use does not starve nearby plants for water however,because trees shade the
soil below them and protect them from winds, soil evaporation is lessened. The caretaker effect
of large trees, along with their ability to bind soils and prevent erosion makes trees very
beneficial to water quality.
The Urban Reforestation Program, in its current form, is being discontinued for the upcoming
reconstruction projects. Instead,residents are encouraged to partake in the Annual Arbor Day
Tree Sales which are held in May. The sale takes place at the Savage Public Works Facility.
Additional information will be shared with the residents regarding the annual sales event.
Drivewav Reconstruction Program
As a part of the 2008 Reconstruction Project,the City introduced a driveway reconstruction
program. Residents within the project area could reconstruct their driveway using the City's
Contractor. The driveway work was bid through the large City contract allowing for reduced
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 9
pricing on the driveway work. Residents were required to pay the costs up front prior to
construction based on the calculation and letter from the City's Engineering Department. In
2013,the City revised the program in order to streamline the process. Private driveway bid items
were still included in the project bids but estimates and payments for the private driveway was
between the property owner and contractor. The City was not involved in the transaction except
for auditing of the contractor's quotes when requested by the property owner. This program in
the revised form is proposed to be continued for the 2015 Improvement Projects
Street Lighting
Street lighting is proposed to be installed on Credit River Road per City guidelines. It is
anticipated that six traditional style lights will be furnished and installed by Xcel Energy at a total
estimated cost of $10,000. Street signage will also be replaced with this project. The street
lighting and new signage will be an assessable component of the project.
Typical traditional style street light
.Z:11&11 ;�-
Funding
It is proposed that the benefiting property owners will be assessed for street and storm sewer
construction. The property tax levy will be used to finance the City's portion of the street
reconstruction costs including all costs associated with the construction of the concrete sidewalk.
The Sewer and Water Enterprise Funds are proposed to finance the water and sanitary sewer
improvements including the restoration of yards and driveways beyond the street impact. The
Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund is proposed to finance the forcemain and lift station improvements.
The Water Quality Fund will be used to finance construction items relating to water quality
benefits. The driveway reconstruction program will be entirely funded by private households
participating in the program.
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Repo rt.doc
Page 10
Proiect Design
The design of the project will utilize existing City staff. It is anticipated that the bid opening for
the project will take place in March 2015. If a more aggressive timeline for bidding is desired,
consultant assistance will be required.
FEASIBILITY
From an engineering standpoint, this project is feasible, and can be accomplished as proposed in
this report.
j 3 Nom;
s Spp
I
Bituminous wear course paving on 150'h Street Brooks Circle after sodding
ESTIMATED COST
The following costs were prepared based upon an Engineer's Estimate (Exhibit 6) and are subject
to change, depending on the final design of the project, required easements and/or right of way
acquisitions, soil conditions, bids received, and actual work performed.
ITEM COST
Street/Storm Sewer* $ 1,046,434.50
Watermain $ 253,018.00
Sanitary Sewer $ 1,092,475.00
Street Lights $ 10,000.00
City's Project Support Costs** $ 258,349.04
TOTAL PROJECT COST S 2,660,276.54
*Includes Water Quality Costs
**City's Project Support Costs includes the following:
Engineering
Administration
Financing
GARecon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 11
FUNDING SOURCES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
The area proposed to be assessed is every lot, piece, and parcel within the City limits benefiting
from said improvement,whether abutting or not,within the following described areas:
Credit River Road
Specific property descriptions included in the above-described area, but not inclusive, are as
follows:
Borgerding Addition Portions of S 01, T 114,R 022
Brooksville Hills 1St Addition Portions of S 01, T 114,R 022
Brooksville Hills 8th Addition S 02, T 114,R 022,Blk 001 Lot 2 & 3
Costello's Addition
The costs of the improvements can be assessed on a unit basis to the benefiting properties as per
the Assessment Policy adopted by the City Council on February 21, 1989, and as amended. The
following shows the assessment distribution for the project area. See Exhibit 7 for the
preliminary assessment roll.
Total Assessable Street & Storm
Sewer Project Cost $997,962.76
Project Levy(60%) $598,777.66
Project Assessment(40%) $399,185.10
Assessment—Unit Method
Assessable Units @ 40% 27 Units
Estimated Unit Assessment(40%) $14,785/Unit
The cost estimate and funding sources for the project are summarized in the following table:
ITEM COST ASSESSMENT TAX LEVY SEWER WATER WATER TRUNK
ESTIMATE FUND FUND QUALITY SEWER FUND
FUND
Street/Storm $1,111,038.44 $399,185.10 $695,432.67 516,420.67
Sewer
Watermain $309,744.95 $309,744.95
Sanitary $1,239,493.14 $300,387.18 $939,105.96
Sewer
TOTAL $2,660,276.54 $399,185.10 $695,432.67 $300,387.18 $309,744.95 $16,420.67 $939,105.96
GARecon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 12
In order to use the bonding available through Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, Special
Assessment Bond issue requires that a minimum of 20% of the total bond issue amount be
recovered through special assessments. With a total estimated project cost of$2,660,276.54 and
estimated bond issue of$1,094,617.77 the assessed amount of$399,185.10 would be equivalent
to 36.5% of the total bond issue.
The estimated assessment amount is proposed to be $14,785 per unit based on calculations per
the assessment policy. This amount is higher than past amounts for the same type of
improvement project due to frontage of properties on one side of Credit River Road. This type of
street configuration reduces the number of assessable units for the entire project. The estimated
assessment amount could be reduced to bring the amount in line with past assessments for
similar projects. Since use of bonding available through MN Statutes Chapter 429 requires that a
minimum of 20% of the total bond issue amount be recovered through special assessments, the
total assessment amount would need to be at least $218,924 to meet the requirement.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following project schedule outlines an approach to complete the assessable project in 2015:
ACTIVITY DATE
Accept Feasibility Study/Call for Public Hearing Nov. 10,2014
Hold Second Informational Meeting Nov. 19,2014
Conduct Public Hearing/Accept Project/Order Plans and Specifications Nov.24,2014
Hold Third Informational Meeting January 2015
Approve Plans and Specifications/Order Advertisements for Bids February 2015
Open Bids March 2015
Accept Bids/Award Contract April 2015
Begin Construction May 2015
Complete Base Course of Bituminous Pavement August 2015
Authorize Amount to be Assessed/Schedule Assessment Hearing August 2015
Conduct Assessment Hearing/Adopt Assessment Roll September 2015
Complete Final Course of Bituminous Pavement July 2016
G:\Recon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 13
CONCLUSION
The proposed improvement is necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering
standpoint and should be made as proposed.
The total estimated cost of the recommended improvements is $2,660,276.54. The estimated
total project assessment amount is $399,185.10. A portion of the cost of this project is proposed
to be assessed to the benefiting property owners with watermain and sanitary sewer improvement
costs being funded through the Sewer Fund, Water Fund, and Trunk Sewer Fund. The estimated
assessment amount needs to be a minimum of 20% of the bonding amount to meet MN State
Statute Chapter 429 requirements to use bonding for the improvement project.
GARecon_Projects\TRN15-000006 Credit River Road\Feasbility Report\2015 Credit River Road Feasibility Report.doc
Page 14
esnpru�
Y m L-
0
Q +,
L Q U p
Q L •Q o a U
•L V L N 3a t �, °S.,e
a c oa.
C N IdN. 1 LL 4z
02
•� U / U ^ O .. d. � � ao-�
a x 4 0 LLJ
�-
•`o
o�
J3,All
t
ci
m Yp •U Fillmore Av Sed "
I R o +, I;LO ca '
N a
i.
q
ag ny ease;l
1 ``� b F"k,��.
e
Ao
Lk
y
,
�t k
I
• r
r-
L� ��� �.;• { '�',�. � .� r ��i���c tit � � t � .� �,�r.,'� �� ,A'"!'��� �. �", ^�, ��_ >, '
.� '�,i. � �' •'7v, \tit. .L �'�a N� <.i'
C'e T �-
t' '
v -
DJ �-. •. tae` �+^ .i' $ �� i
i�o4e t C F £L 4r ` ickiACvlse
Brunsw �.
R.O.W. VARIES VARIES R.O.W.
VARIES 12' 12' VARIES
TC ELEV._
CENTERLINE ELEV.
4:1 MAX • *3.00% 4:1 MAX•
SODDED BOULEVARD '
W/5"TOPSOIL B618 CURB&GUTTER
r,
5'CONCRETE SIDEWALK
1 1/2"TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE(SPWEA340B)
2357 TACK COAT
2 1/2"TYPE SP 12.5 NONWEARING COURSE MIXTURE(SPNWB330B)
8"CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (100%CRUSHED LIMESTONE)
24"SELECT GRANULAR BORROW
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
* CROWN MAY VARY AT INTERSECTIONS&CUL-DE-SACS, SEE PLANS AND CROSS SECTIONS
** R.O.W.VARIES THROUGHOUT PROJECT SEE HORIZONTAL PROFILE
TYPICAL STREET SECTION
CREDIT RIVER ROAD
oFeR�oR CITY PROJECT #TRN15-000006
CREDIT RIVER ROAD EXHIBIT 2
N��So�P PROPOSED STREET SECTION
City of Prior Lake
Minnesota
2014
��— Credit Road
�' River R d
R ��, �► �, Exhibit 3 - Sanitary Sewer
x
w
Ex. Sanitary Structure
• Remove Sanitary Structure
,,, - ,� ,, � ,��",�- � s . � t• O Replace Sanitary Structure
O Replace Forcemain Structure
Tr .►. }, ,a a. ❑ i Station
m
R
Replace Lift
5 �'9aa ' tt - ExpForcemain
W i�c, 0, �, tib/`
� ^ • �.� '� Ex. Sanitary Sewer
ti Remove Sanitary Sewer
— — Remove Forcemain
��� Replace Sanitary Sewer
. ,
' �~`�� ► Replace Forcemain
000
p +,
`k `:.ii�l�.M1r� .. q, r�r�J d �1 •w�.r.vwKmn
Feet
200 100 0 200 400
,
fj
c zit" ♦ "E`� ^. � °` '-I" Y"
(S� ♦. 3
kt Y
9,
1YY v
y r
w
w ,
r
y ��6
. TM
i
4
0iYs:,. ,.:.. rk✓?, ', x. t a y t'.
Ile
��✓. Tom`. x.<' _ "a. � t �et''� d ,� � �r
Al
lip Ir
s
. A
i`x '`s-' ` f`'"�'� o � } i♦r�,�,� f.1 a y f��s�``.• ,;.k x t "
w
Exhibit 3A
WSB
&&Assoc- engineering-planning•environmental-construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis,MN 55416
Tel: 763-541.4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
Memorandum
To: Larry Poppler,P.E. —City Engineer
From: Jim Stremel, P.E.
Date: June 20, 2014
Re: Sanitary Sewer Study
Franklin Trail Area
Enclave at Cleary Lake Area
WSB Project No. 1964-17
The City of Prior Lake asked WSB &Associates to evaluate the capacity of the sanitary sewer
system in the southeast region of the City. Two lift stations are critical to the system capacity in
this region. These two lift stations are the Franklin Trail Lift Station and the Credit River Lift
Station. A Location Map for both of these lift stations and the proposed additional service areas
is shown in the Appendix.
FRANKLIN TRAIL LIFT STATION
The Franklin Trail neighborhood currently serves 432 existing homes. The waste water from
these homes flows by gravity to the Franklin Trail lift station which is located between 16253
Franklin Trail and 16281 Franklin Trail,on the east side of the roadway. The forcemain exiting
the lift station flows south on Franklin Trail across CSAH 21 and connects to a gravity sanitary
sewer located within Franklin Trail south of CSAH 21. The gravity sewer ultimately connects
into the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer that is located along the east side of TH 13.
There is an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer stub, located between 16147 Crossandra Circle and
5798 Crossandra Street, located to the east along CSAH 44,that was installed to provide future
service to the vacant property and existing homes that are currently on well and septic. The
existing capacity of the lift station and improvements that would be needed to accommodate
approximately 300 additional homes was evaluated.
Franklin Trail Lift Station Capacity:
Currently,the existing Franklin Trail Lift Station has a wet well diameter of 6-feet and a depth of
about 24-feet. The pumping capacity of the existing lift station is 277,920 gpd(gallons per day)
based on the pumping capacity of 193 gpm which was provided by the City. The current flow to
the lift station is 61,142 gpd which was also provided by the City. Per Ten State Standards,we
need to use a peak factor of four when computing peak flows. The existing peak flow is
therefore 244,568 gpd(61,142 x 4).
St.Cloud• Minneapolis•St.Paul
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
KA01964-170V.dmin\DoosV.4emo-Ipoppla•061914.doo
Mr. Poppler
June 20, 2014
Page 2
Based on this,the excess capacity of the existing lift station is as follows:
277,920 gpd—244,568 gpd= 33,352 gpd
Converting 33,352 gpd into the number of additional homes that can be added is calculated as
follows:
33,352 gpd x(1 person/100 gpd)x(1 home/2.5 people)x(1/4 peak factor)=33 homes
The current lift station can therefore accommodate 33 additional homes without any
improvements. This is a conservative number and likely adding between 30—50 homes should
be feasible.
Franklin Trail Lift Station—Additional Service Area:
WSB first looked at the current configuration of the Franklin Trail lift station to determine if we
could gain capacity be adjusting the allowable levels within the wet well. Unfortunately,there is
not enough height available in the existing wet well to accommodate any additional flow.
Therefore,to facilitate the addition of 300+additional homes to the system either the pumps will
need to be replaced with larger pumps with Variable Frequency Drives(VFDs)or an entire new
lift station will need to be installed. It was confirmed that the existing 6-foot diameter lift station
would be large enough to fit new larger pumps. Estimated construction costs for these two
options are as follows:
• Renovation(new pumps,valve vault, etc.) $150,000
• Full Replacement $250,000
In addition,with the proposed increase to the discharge coming from the lift station,the existing
6-inch diameter forcemain will be inadequate. A full replacement with 8-inch forcemain will be
required for both lift station options. There are two potential alternative routes that could be
used for the replacement of the forcemain. Alternative No. 1 would be to install all new
forcemain from the Franklin Trail Lift Station south to CSAH 21 and then west all the way to the
existing 8-inch gravity sewer located along CSAH 21. The estimated construction cost to
replace the forcemain as Alternative No. 1 is as follows:
• 1,850 linear feet= $134,500
01,050 linear feet x $90 per linear foot(assumed directional drilling) = $94,500
0 800 linear feet x$50 per linear foot(assumed open cut) =$40,000
This assumes that the new forcemain is constructed using directional drilling along Franklin
Trail from the lift station and south to Credit River Rd and using open cut installation along
Credit River Road. Credit River Rd is slated for reconstruction in the City's CIP and the
installation of new forcemain should be scheduled accordingly.
Alternative No. 2 would be to install all new forcemain from the Franklin Trail Lift Station north
to the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer located along TH 13. Franklin Trail, from the lift station to
CSAH 44 is slated for reconstruction in the near future. The estimated construction cost to
KA01964.1701Adn in\D.,%1 .-1popplc-061914.d-
Mr. Poppler
June 20,2014
Page 3
replace the forcemain considers open cut installation for the portion of forcemain from the lift
station to CSAH 44 and considers directionally drilling the force main from CSAH 44 to the 24-
inch trunk sanitary sewer located along TH 13:
• 2,500 linear feet= $165,560
0 1,486 linear feet x$50 per linear foot=$74,300
0 1,014 linear feet x $90 per linear foot = $91,260
Franklin Trail is slated for reconstruction in the City's CIP and the installation of new forcemain,
should Alternative No. 2 be selected, should be scheduled accordingly.
A Franklin Trail Lift Station Forcemain Alternatives map is included in the Appendix outlining
both of these alternatives. The best alternative should be selected based on project scheduling
and annexation timing.
It should be noted that we are assuming the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer can handle the
additional flow proposed throughout this study. A 24-inch gravity sewer,placed at minimum
grade, can handle approximately 2,900 gpm of flow. The addition of the annexation area of 300
homes is approximately 115 gpm making it a 4%addition if considered conservatively. Adding
the additional 300 homes would be considered negligible.
CREDIT RIVER LIFT STATION
The Credit River Lift Station currently serves a significant area in eastern Prior Lake. Currently,
the lift station serves approximately 277 residential units and 136 acres of industrial land use.
The lift station is platted for 151 additional residential units that are currently under
development. Additional acreage may be served by the Credit River List Station and has been
analyzed as part of this study.A Credit River Lift Station Service Area Map is included in the
Appendix. The areas being served can be broken down into three categories:
Fully Developed
Plat Approved/Partially Developed
Undeveloped/Unsewered
The neighborhoods that are Fully Developed include the following:
A) Wilderness Ponds and Deerfield Single Family homes
B) Deerfield Condominiums
C) Courtwood Village
D) Enclave at Cleary Lake 1St Addition
E) City of Prior Lake Fire Station
The neighborhoods that are Plat Approved/Partially Developed include the following:
F) Courtwood Village (Lot 1 Block 1)
G) Deerfield Industrial Park
H) Welcome Avenue Industrial Park
K:W 1964-170\dmio\Dws%1emo-Ipoppla-061914.dw
Mr. Poppler
June 20, 2014
Page 4
I) Eagle Creek Estates
J) Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition
The properties that are currently Undeveloped/Unsewered but will ultimately be served by the
Credit River Lift Station include the following:
K) The unsewered property located to the west and east of the Enclave at Cleary Lake
L) The undeveloped land immediately to the east of Welcome Avenue that is within Credit
River Township.
M) The existing small lot single family homes located within Credit River Township to the
east of Welcome Avenue.
I) The unsewered property located south of the Deerfield Industrial Park.
O) The undeveloped land immediately east of Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition.
Credit River Lift Station Capacity:
Currently,the existing Credit River Lift Station has a diameter of 6-feet. The first step in our
review of this area was to perform a pump down test on the Credit River Lift Station to confirm
its current capacity. The test was held the morning of March 10, 2014 between 8:00 and 10:00
a.m. The results of the test were that the lift station has a current capacity of 160 GPM.
Based on a capacity of 160 GPM,the current Credit River Lift Station has the capacity to serve
all of the existing fully developed property. However, depending on the intensity of the build out
of the neighborhoods that have already received plat approval but are partially developed,the
Credit River Lift Station may not have the capacity to serve all of these areas. For example, once
the Eagle Creek Estates and Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition are built out,the Credit River
Lift Station will be at capacity. This does not leave any capacity for the remainder of the build
out of the Courtwood Village,Deerfield Industrial Park or the Welcome Avenue industrial park.
Fortunately,the industrial development that has occurred in the City to date has not been very
intense and doesn't create a lot of waste water flow. It is also likely that the full build out of the
Eagle Creek Estates and Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition will take 3 to 5 years to complete.
We therefore strongly recommend that the City include in your 5-year Capital
Improvement Plan the replacement and upgrade of the Credit River Lift Station. Included
with the lift station upgrade will be the need to replace the existing forcemain from the lift
station to the west along CSAH 21. The new forcemain should connect into the existing 24-inch
trunk main and not the existing 8-inch gravity line. The existing 8-inch gravity sewer does not
have capacity to accommodate the flow from the Credit River Lift Station.
It is recommended to construct a new lift station and abandon the existing lift station. A dual lift
station option would require an upgrade of the existing pumps to provide proper head when the
two units pump concurrently, addition of a diversion structure with a weir plate, and would
require twice the operation and maintenance cost. A dual lift station at this time is not cost-
effective. The estimated cost for the construction of a new lift station is as follows:
K:W1964-170\dmin\DmsW=o-1poppla.061914.dm
Mr. Poppler
June 20, 2014
Page 5
• Lift Station=$350,000
o Pumps=$100,000
o Valve vault=$50,000
o Motor Control Center= $75,000
o Wet well=$125,000
• Forcemain=$360,900
0 2,135 LF x$90/LF (assumed directional drilling)_ $192,150
0 3,375 LF x $50/LF (assumed open cut)_ $168,750
This assumes that the new forcemain is constructed using directional drilling from the lift station
along Credit River Rd to Fish Point Rd and using open cut installation along Credit River Road
from Fish Point Rd to the existing 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer. Credit River Rd is slated for
reconstruction in the City's CIP and the installation of new forcemain should be scheduled
accordingly. A figure showing the forcemain replacement is provided in the Appendix.
In the meantime,we recommend that the City increase their monitoring efforts at this lift
station to ensure that capacity is not exceeded.
Credit River Lift Station—Additional Service Area:
In addition to reviewing the capacity of the Credit River Lift Station, WSB also analyzed the
ability of the City's sanitary sewer system to serve the undeveloped property to the west and east
of the Enclave at Cleary Lake. These 140 acres are shown as areas K and O on the Credit River
Lift Station Service Area map in the Appendix. We reviewed three potential alignments for
providing sanitary sewer to this area.
Alternative No. 1 included connecting to the existing sanitary sewer located at the intersection of
Parkwood Drive and Ridgewood Court. The sanitary sewer at this location is 8-inches in
diameter and has an invert elevation of 996.04. Alternative No. 2 involves connecting to the
existing sanitary sewer located at the southern terminus of Fish Point Rd. This is also 8-inches in
diameter and has an invert elevation of 947.68. Alternative No. 3 would connect to the proposed
stub that will be constructed as part of the Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition. The stub will be
8-inches in diameter and will have an invert elevation of 954.4. A map showing these three
alternatives is included in the Appendix.
The topography in this area ranges in elevation from 942 to 996 feet and generally slopes from
southwest to northeast. Alternative No. 1,which is the connection to the existing sanitary sewer
at Parkwood Drive and Ridgewood Court, is not feasible because the sanitary sewer is not deep
enough to service this area. Alternative No. 2,the connection at the south end of Fish Point Rd,
has the necessary depth to serve this area. Unfortunately,the existing Deerfield Lift Station and
forcemain,which this sewer line flows to, lacks the capacity to take on this additional flow. The
forcemain leaving the Deerfield Lift Station is approximately 4,000-feet of which 3,500-feet is
placed in a heavy residential area making construction costly. In addition,the forcemain
connects into an 8-inch gravity sewer line near the intersection of Hillcrest and Lyons that does
not have the capacity to support the additional flow from the Enclave Area. Replacing the
Deerfield Lift Station,the existing forcemain, and a portion of gravity sewer near the Deerfield
area proves this option not cost-effective.
K:\01964-170\6.dmin0—Nemo-1popple.061914.dm
Mr. Poppler
June 20,2014
Page 6
Ultimately, our recommendation is Alternative No. 3 which is to serve this area utilizing the
proposed sanitary sewer stub from the Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition. Our analysis
confirms the capacity of the existing downstream sanitary sewer system, including the existing
lift station currently located within the Enclave at Cleary Lake 1St Addition, all the way to the
Credit River Lift Station. Depending on how this property is mass graded in the future it may
require a new lift station to be constructed to service the northwest portion of the property. It is
also important to note that no development should occur until the Credit River Lift Station and
forcemain have been improved.
ENCLAVE AT CLEARY LIFT STATION
The Enclave at Cleary Lift Station currently serves approximately 119 residential units as shown
as Areas D and J on the Credit River and Enclave at Cleary Lift Station Service Area map in the
Appendix. In the future,the lift station is proposed to serve an additional 140 acres of potential
residential area shown as areas K and O on the Credit River and Enclave at Cleary Lift Station
Service Area map in the Appendix. The additional acreage may be served by the Enclave at
Cleary Lift Station and has been analyzed as part of this study.
Enclave at Cleary Lift Station Capacity:
Currently,the existing Enclave at Cleary Lift Station has a diameter of 6-feet and has a pumping
rate of 207 gpm as calculated by City Staff. Based on the assumption of 2.5 homes built per acre
on the undeveloped 140 additional acres proposed to be served by the Enclave at Cleary Lift
Station,the existing lift station has capacity to serve the proposed areas.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
During an initial review, City staff's concern was that the Credit River Lift Station was of less
capacity than the Franklin Trial Lift Station. However, based on discussion with Public Works
staff, it was determined that the Franklin Trail Lift Station does not flow to the Credit River Lift
Station as suggested by GIS records. The capacity of one lift station does not relate to the
capacity of the other. Overall,the sanitary sewer flow in this region is less than generally
anticipated. Exfiltration may play a role in the reduced flows measured at lift stations throughout
the City. Based on the overall analysis the following are suggested recommendations:
Upsizing of the forcemains for both the Franklin Trail and Credit River Lift Stations should be
scheduled to occur with scheduled road reconstruction projects of Credit River Rd and/or
Franklin Trail to reduce the cost of replacement.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 763-287-8532 or
jstremel@wsbeng.com.
Thank you.
K:101964-170VAdmin\Dms\M=o-Ipoppla-061914.dw
s
m
a
�I _p
n
0
n
r W
0
t
i
91.
i
Credit River Lift Station
❑ Franklin Trail Lift Station
Additional Service Areas
Credit River
Franklin Trail
r:.
o4 7 aew Project Location Map N A� Sanitary Sewer Study
0 2,000
,,, City of Prior Lake,MN Feet ,
•""'4;1.. ��Y�P�� ��
0 �� ,lii� iii •. >�
w �
�r
= f
}1A 1
„
•
. f
�v
n
MW
.< ',. ` ��• f�dk �i t_• ti!. r'•i
`� t�Y "�7,�"' _��wi+ "D'� k'84s �'h� �'t!<� �i'.' i!r-q `�� �.� ✓�� ��x... y i
a e b
t
R ,
•i
^ SI
i
s
•:T
# t
fF
�Ia�V
0
77
✓i "
., ti �,�-. `, ,-�, � � • �� �t" ,.r' _ Franklin Trail�Lift�Station
•�� K Existing 24"Trunk Sanitary Sewer
Existing 8"Gravity Sewer
x � ►Alternative No 1 for Forcemain
Will!
• � ,_`. ►Alternative No 2 for Forcemain
z
Franklin Trail Lift Station - Forcemain Alternatives
xSanitary Sewer Study N
j o soo n WSB
"! 'r,' City of Prior Lake,MN Feet /V
et s o
1 3
.
k
t
r.
� F N
y, a
' d
p a
ra
B C
}
t
s
t
`.
C
>z � �. A.Wilderness Ponds and Deerfield Single Family
. " g•¢ B.Deerfield Condominiums
C.Courtwood Village
D.Enclave at Cleary Lake 1st Addition
aT E.Prior Lake Fire Station
F.Courtwood Village(Lot 1,Block 1)
G.Deerfield Industrial Park
H.Welcome Avenue Industrial Park
I.Eagle Creek Estates
NAME J.Enclave at Cleary Lake 2nd Addition
K. Undeveloped Land West of Enclave at Cleary Lake
Fully Developed L.Credit River Township Undeveloped Industrial
Plat Approved/Partially Developed M.Credit River Township-Existing Single Family
N.Unsewered Property South of Deerfield Industrial
Undeveloped/Unsewered O.Undeveloped Land East of Enclave at Cleary Lake
01 O8 Credit River and Enclave at Cleary Lift Station Service Areas
N WSB
Sanitary Sewer Study 0 1,500
'yMrvas��
t
City of Prior Lake,MN Fee
1 - t ■
In St "
1Noodside H, F
Win` ,
c S' n tom:
CL a
° a °4 i C
E
Gateway St f '
��> ^ Westwood Dr SE
'° 160th St SE
> ~ IS a
Q Qf e
m Memo ° c
w *' ° Q o
E
Wako Bounty St c
Q m F- c
g, "St.` s ..
m
nal Ridge
Colorad"so
t SF
A
2
x a,;kview Dr
'Pleasant St
w x, Summer St 'lis aim
!r"r ,
x; .`gots?� Cr •` �`c _
PV. a�.t
viGtor%a
C V`o
Brooks Cir.
,
��.. Franklit"
Anna Tr
• 'i ` `t
0
a
QTowerS'tSE :i �` °odd
+�' t o:
-
� Hillcrest�Sd6� �` oc, r
ryk
La qde�
Tr SE
0.1
° Ra �L or
' yo rQ. �_ rp
,eerfiekd
cy 0
o°aO Deese` �m
-
.615;41
Credit River Lift Station
Q� o
4f° c r
Existing 24"Trunk Sanitary Sewer
x
•
rt T
rWt
e
3 < JAL
71
Y x Y* ) f
rw�� l.> �iu4� �fi'.«J� ,� �� j� �J '7..r ec�f'wY r..t x.�..4}, ♦ js� ;rs. �; �. :K�_
aS
s '" a«r`�*'_." .7;.}^z#sa�'�'•sgy'tyy tit 4f:,'v '!.4^�. '' _ -_ —._ ----------
Service
_Service Area
lo-Alternative No 1
r ►Alternative No 2
�' ' ►Alternative No 3
Additional Service Area Alternatives N A
X` Sanitary Sewer Study
0 600 n wSB
"�!' City of Prior Lake,MN Feet A Awl
,
Y 6 •� ' N
J > c r o;>
O = m 's70
a� -
s
a ° o/>N X Co i
�° s33�o
C N I.L ' w M = "CD
r+ U �, U (Q U o x
� N = (a � (Q o .�
41 fl n n Q �.� . x
(, W w W Q' W
x o
At
2 W N
,� .'F .,`.gyp. �a' •@ � .�yA��m„ �� .
”
�-
.� x"
k
y4w K I
yy
At
�1R+ a � , � � ;�q '; r=te 4^`•-� '"
Atyx i.
w
i I
s
v�
"4 s
P�• �� . ,� �� " Tip ���
f a.
' 4
t�
3
.1C O C/)
7 3 0
CD
N
J
L E N cn w
Q
L C C
���//�� m U) C0 CO N o
p
o�N/ m
co
U U t w w ( N
a� o
x —
♦ pp4 - �`J0t Se
•tet, J
'P.
,rte• �. �
f
i 1 d1P
aat
-y
lr'�
. g �• s 1 �<
L _
4
A _
' t �
EXHIBIT 6
ENGINEERS ESTIMATE
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
2015 CREDIT RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CITY PROJECT STRN15-000006
SCHEDULE 1-STREET-CREDIT RIVER ROAD
REM# SPEC.REF DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 2021,501 MOBILIZATION LUMPSUM 1 $ 650000,00 $ 65,000.00
2 2101.502 CLEAR AND GRUB TREE 16 $ 300.00 $ 4,800.00
3 2101.502 CLEAR AND GRUB(SHRUB) SHRUB 24 $ 55.00 $ 1,320.00
4 2101.502 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 3318 $ 4.00 $ 13,272.00
5 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 950 $ 3.60 $ 3,420.00
6 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SO YD 1855 $ 8.00 $ 14,840.00
7 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 126 $ 8.00 $ 1,008.00
8 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN POST EACH 5 $ 28.00 $ 140.00
9 2104.511 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT(FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 69 $ 4.00 $ 276.00
10 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT(FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 570 $ 4.00 $ 2,280.00
11 2104.521 SALVAGE&REINSTALL FENCE LIN FT 40 _T__20 00 $ 800.00
12 2104.521 SALVAGE&REINSTALL LANDSCAPE EDGING LIN FT 100 $ 5.00 $ 500.00
13 2104.521 SALVAGE&REINSTALL SPRINKLER SYSTEM LIN FT 100 $ 25.00 $ 2,500.00
14 2104.523 SALVAGE&REINSTALL MAILBOX EACH 26 $ 80.DO $ 2,080.00
15 2104.618 SALVAGE&REINSTALL RETAINING WALL SO FT 620 7_28 00 $ 17,360.00
16 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION CU YD 9190 7_1 3 4 5 0 $ 124,065.00
17 2105.507 SUBGRADE EXCAVATIONCU YD 900 $ 13.50 $ 12,150.00
18 2105.609 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TON 13970 $ 10.00 $ 1391700.00
19 2105.526 SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW CU YD 1493 $ 28.00 $ 41,804.00
20 2105.604 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V SQ YD 10013 $ 2.00 $ 20,026.00
21 2105.543 3"MINUS 100%CRUSHED QUARRY LIMESTONE TON 90 $ 22.00 $ 1,980.00
22 2105,543 1 1/7'SCREENED CLEAN AGGREGATE TON 400 $ 27.00 $ 10,800.00
23 2112.501 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RS 30.1 $ 300.00 $ 9,030.00
24 2130.501 WATER DUST CONTROL M GAL 44 $ 30.00 $ 1,320.00
25 2211,501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 4366 $ 18.00 $ 78,588.00
26 2232.501 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE(STREET-FULL DEPTH) SO YD 8785 $ 2.00 $ 17,570.00
27 2232.501 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE(1.&') SO YD 20 7_1 0 DO $ 200.00
28 2357.502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 392 $ 4.00 $ 1,568.00
29 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE(3,B) TON 680 $ 73.00 $ 49,640.00
30 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE(3,B) TON 1040 $ 65.00 $ 67,600.00
31 2360.503 TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR CRS MIX(3,B)3"THICK DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 640 $ 25.00 $ 16,000.00
32 2411.618 MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL SO FT 120 T-30 00 $ 3,600.00
33 2521.501 4"CONCRETE WALK SO FT 13755_T_3w50 $ 48,142.50
34 2531.507 6"CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 810 _F-52 o0 $ 42,120.00
35 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER,B618 LIN FT 6325 $ 10.50 $ 66,412.50
36 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER REPLACEMENT LIN FT 632.5 $ 17.00 $ 10,752.50
37 2531.602 CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP EACH 6 $ 550.00 $ 3,300.00
38 2540,601 TEMPORARY MAILBOXES LUMPSUM 1 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00
39 2545.523 4"NON-METALLIC CONDUIT LIN FT 200 $ 10.00 $ 2,000.00
40 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMPSUM 1 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
41 2564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE SPECIAL(STREET NAME) EACH 4 $ 260.00 $ 1,040.00
42 2564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C EACH 7 -i-140 00 $ 980.00
43 2564.602 INSTALL STEEL POST EACH 5 $ 200400 $ 1,000.00
44 2571.502 TREE 2.5"CAL B&B(VARIETY-SEE SPEC) TREE 10 $ 400.00 $ 4,000.00
45 2571.505 SHRUB IB"HT(VARIETY-SEE SPEC) SHRUB 10 7_65 00 $ 650.00
46 2573.502 SILT FENCE,TYPE HEAVY DUTY LIN FT 350 $ 3.20 $ 1,120.00
47 2573.530 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 16 $ 160.00 $ 2,560.00
48 2573.540 FILTER LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER BIOROLL LIN FT 120 $ 5.00 $ 600.00
49 2573.602 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 3 $ 1,200.00 $ 3,600.00
50 2575.501 SEED AND MULCH-SEED MIXTURE 260(TURF MIX) ACRE 0.5 $ 3,000.00 $ 1,500.00
51 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN SO YD 7980 $ 4.00 $ 31,920.00
52 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS,CATEGORY 3 60 YD 2420 $ 1.30 $ 3,146.00
53 2581.503 CROSSWALK MARKING EPDXY SO FT 108 $ 20.00 $ 2,160.00
54 2105.501 CONTAMINATED SOILS REMOVAL LUMPSUM 1 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00
T SCHEDULE 1(STREET) TOTAL S 975,440.50
SCHEDULE 2-STORM SEWER-CREDIT RIVER ROAD
ITEM# SPEC.REF DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE LIN FT 460 $ 8.00 $ 3,680.00
2 2104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 16 $ 300.00 $ 4,800.00
3 2105.61 EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION HOUR 5 $ 450.00 $ 2,250.00
4 2451.607 PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL CU YD 70 $ 18.00 $ 1,260.00
5 2501.515 21"RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH 1 $ 900.00 $ 900.00
6 2502.541 4"PERF TP PIPE DRAIN(WITH GEOTEXTILE FILTER SOCK) LIN FT 740 $ 11.00 $ 8,140.00
7 2503.541 15"RC PIPE SEWER CL V DESIGN 3006(STORM) LIN FT 388 i-30 00 $ 11,640.00
8 2503.541 21"RC PIPE SEWER CL V DESIGN 3006(STORM) LIN FT 72 $ 42.00 $ 3,024.00
9 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 2 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,400.00
10 2505.503 RECONSTRUCT STORM SEWER MANHOLE EACH 6 $ 1,000.00 $ 6,000.00
11 2506.502 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES(2'X3')(PLATE#301) EACH 6 $ 1,450.00 $ 8,700.00
12 2506.502 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 484022(PLATE#300) EACH 8 $ 1,800.00 $ 14,400.00
13 2511,501 CLASS III RIPRAP CU YD B $ 100.00 $ 800.00
14 2576.500 POND EXCAVATION LUMPSUM 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00
T SCHEDULE 2(STORM SEWER) TOTAL $ 70,994.00
ENG EST 11/5/2014 5A
SCHEDULE 3-SANITARY SEWER-CREDIT RIVER ROAD
ITEM 0 SPEC.REF DESCRIPTION UNIT OTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE(SANITARY) LIN FT 3230 $ 10.00 $ 32,300.00
2 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE(FORCEMAIN) LIN FT 2345 $ 10.00 $ 23,450.00
3 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE(SANITARY SERVICE) LIN FT 1125 $ 9.00 $ 10,125.00
4 2105.501 ABANDON SEWER PIPE(SANITARY) LIN FT 1710 $ 10.00 $ 17,100.00
5 2105.501 ABANDON SEWER PIPE(FORCEMAIN) LIN FT 2270 $ 10.00 $ 22,700.00
6 2105.509 ABANDON MANHOLE EACH 11 $ 300.00 $ 3,300.00
7 2104.509 REMOVE MANHOLE EACH 18 $ 450.00 $ 8,100.00
8 2105.601 DEWATERING LUMPSUM 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00
9 2105.610 EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION HOUR 10 $ 450.00 $ 4,500.00
10 2451.607 PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL CU YD 500 $ 18.00 $ 9,000.00
11 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES(SAN) EACH 2 $ 1,10000 $ 2,200.00
12 2503.602 RECONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH 26 $ 400.00 $ 10,400,00
13 2503.602 18"X4"PVC SDR 26 WYE EACH 26 $ 750.00 $ 19,500.00
14 2503.603 *'PVC SEWER SDR 26 LIN FT 1125 $ 28.00 $ 31,500.00
15 2503,603 18"PVC SEWER SDR 26 LIN FT 3090 $ 70.00 $ 216,300.00
16 2503.603 10"PVC C-000 FORCEMAIN(HDD) LIN FT 2270 $ 90.00 $ 204,300.00
17 2503.603 18"SEWER PIPE(DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) LIN FT 140 $ 230.00 $ 32,200.00
18 2504.602 10"GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 5 $ 21400.00 $ 12,000.00
19 2506.501 SANITARY MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH(>81`11-) LIN FT 80 $ 150.00 $ 12,000.00
20 2506.502 48"DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE EACH 9 $ 24500.00 $ 22,500.00
21 2506.502 48"DIAMETER AIR RELIEF MANHOLE EACH 2 $ 41500.00 $ 9,000.00
22 2506.502 72"CLEANOUT MANHOLE EACH 5 $ 6,800.00 $ 34,000.00
23 2506.601 CONSTRUCT LIFT STATION LUMP SUM 1 $ 350,000.00 $ 350,000.00
24 2506.602 TRACER WIRE ACCESS BOX DRIVEWAY CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 5 $ 200.00 $ 1,000.00
T SCHEDULE 3(SANITARY) TOTAL $ 1,092,475.00
SCHEDULE 4-WATERMAIN-CREDIT RIVER ROAD
ITEM# SPEC,REF DESCRIPTION UNIT CITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 2140.501 REMOVE WATERMAIN LIN FT 3100 $ 10.00 $ 31,000.00
2 2104.504 REMOVE WATER SERVICE PIPE LIN FT 840 $ 4.00 $ 3,360.00
3 2104.509 REMOVE HYDRANT WITH GATE VALVE&BOX EACH 5 $ 400.00 $ 2,000.00
4 2104.509 REMOVE GATE VALVE&BOX EACH 5 $_200.00 $ 1,000.00
5 2104.509 REMOVE CURB STOP&BOX EACH 26 $ 85.00 $ 2,210.00
6 2105.601 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $ 1.000.00 $ 1,000.00
7 2105.61 EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION HOUR 5 $ 450.00 $ 2,250.00
8 2451.607 PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL CU YD 200 $ 18.00 $ 3,600.00
9 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EACH 4 $ 1,000.00 $ 4,000.00
10 2504.602 HYDRANT WITH 6"GATE VALVE&BOX EACH 5 $ 51300.00 $ 260500.00
11 2504.602 e"GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 6 $ 1,900.00 $ 11,400.00
12 2504.602 1"CORPORATION STOP EACH 26 $ 210.00 $ 5,460.00
13 2504.602 1"CURB STOP&BOX EACH 26 $ 280.00 $ 7,280.00
14 2504.602 RECONNECT WATER SERVICE EACH 26 $ 200.00 8 5,200.00
15 2504.603 8"WATERMAIN DUCTILE IRON CL 52 LIN FT 3100 $ 36.00 $ 111,600.00
16 2504.603 6"WATERMAIN DUCTILE IRON CL 52 LIN FT 60 $ 31,00 $ 1,860.00
17 2504.603 1"PE4710 WATER SERVICE SDR-9 LIN FT 840 $ 20.00 $ 16,800.00
18 2504.602 TEMPORARY WATER SERVICE EACH 26 $ 420.00 $ 10,920.00
19 2504.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS LBS 1090 $ 4.20 $ 4,578.00
20 2506.602 CURB STOP BOX DRIVEWAY CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 5 $ 200.00 $ 1,000.00
T SCHEDULE 4(WATERMAIN) TOTAL $ 253,018.00
TOTAL(14-011)
SCHEDULE 1-STREET-CREDIT RIVER ROAD $ 975,440.50
SCHEDULE 2-STORM SEWER-CREDIT RIVER ROAD $ 70,994.00
SCHEDULE 3-SANITARY SEWER-CREDIT RIVER ROAD $ 1,092,475'00
SCHEDULE 4-WATERMAIN-CREDIT RIVER ROAD $ 253,018.00
TOTAL ESTIMATE $ 2'391'927'50
ENG EST 11/5/2014 5A
EXHIBIT 7-PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
DESCRIPTION: TRN15-000006 CREDIT RIVER RD
ASSESSMENT UNIT RATE(40%): STREET AND STORM SEWER
ASSESSMENT CODE:
INTEREST RATE:
TERM: 10 YEAR STREETS
INITIAL YEAR:
ADDITIONAL INTEREST:
TOTAL UNITS 27 STREETS
PAYMENT METHOD: EQUAL PRINCIPAL
ASSESSABLE STREET TOTALASSESSMENT
NO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER PROPERTY OWNER&ADDRESS UNITS ASSESSMENT AMOUNT
Section 02 Township 114 Range 022 Block 001 JARED M HOFLOCK
1 Lot 002&003 SubdivisionCd 25001 4900 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
SubdivisionName CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 4900 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 258010160 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
Section 02 Township 114 Range 022 COPI PT
ON E&W 1/16 LINE 35'W OF INT W/E LINE BRIAN 1 BERLE
2 BILK 1,CITY OF P.L.,5 90',W TO PT 57'E OF E 2017 NORTON DR 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
LINE BILK 1,(POB)S 173.9'TO N LINE OF RD,W 4916 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259020680 SHAKOPEE MN 55379
TOMMIE N&DOLORES TRICHIE
3 Section 02 Township 114 Range 022 1.17A 495D CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
SE1/4 NE1/4 EX.53A 4950 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259020700 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
4
Section 02 Township 114 Range 022 SEl DAVID L BUSSE
4 NEI/4 N OF RR,COM 168'E OF PT 195'W OF 4958 CREDIT RIVER RD 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
INT OF N LINE&E LINE OF BILK 1 4958 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259020520 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
PAUL E BAUMGARTNER
5 SubdivisionName BORGERDING ADDN Lot 002 4944 MINNESOTA ST SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
SubdivisionCd 25010 4964 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250100020 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SubdivisionName BORGERDING ADDN Lot 003 CRAIG D RASMUSSEN
6 SubdivisionCd 25010 LYING W OF LINE COM PT 13536 RHODE ISLAND AVE S 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ON N LINE OF LOT 3 10'W OF NE COR,S TO SE 4980 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250100030 SAVAGE MN 55378
SubdivisionName BORGERDING ADDN Lot 004 JAMES D&JOANN B LARSON
7 SubdivisionCd 25010&P/O LOT 3 LYING E OF 4994 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
LINE COM 10'W OF NE COR,S TO SE COR& 4994 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250100040 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SubdivisionName COSTELLO'S ADDN Lot OD6 MICHAEL F SHOEMAKER
8 Block 004 SubdivisionCd 25004&S 130'OF 6& 5008 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
P/O LOT 7 LYING NW OF LINE COM 145'S OF 5008 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250040360 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SubdivisionName COSTELLO'S ADDN Lot 008 PETER J 1R PAVICH
9 Block 004 SubdivisionCd 25004 LOTS 8-10 EX 5032 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
COM 23'S OF NW COR LOT 8,SE TO PT ON E 5032 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250040370 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SubdivisionName cosTI7TUT75=3ck 004
SubdivisionCd 25004 S'ERLY P/O 10-11-12& EDWIN L&AMY E BOUNDS
10 P/O VACATED ST PAUL AVE(ORIGINALLY 5050 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
PRIOR AVE) 5050 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250040351 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SubdivisionName COSTELLO'S ADDN Block O04 MICHELLE M&JAMES 1 SINKULA
11 SubdivisionCd 25004 5 130'OF LOTS 1 THRU 5 16280 ST PAUL AVE SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
&P/O 8 THRU 12 EX S'ERLY P/O 10-12,&P/O 16280 ST PAUL AVE SE 250040350 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
Section 01 Township 114 Range 022 SWl 4 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC
12 NW1/4 COM SE COR OF COSTELLO'S ADDN,N 400 COUNTRYWIDE WAY 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
150',E 120 S TO N LINE OF CREDIT RIVER RD 5086 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259010130 SIMI VALLEY CA 93065
Page 1
Section U1 Townsnip 114 Range 022 SW1/4
NW1/4150'N&120'E OF SE COR COSTELLO'S SALLY A HAYUNGA 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
13 ADDN E 120',S TO N LINE OF CREDIT RIVER RD 5102 CREDIT RIVER BLVD
NW ALONG ROW TO POB. 5102 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259010131 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
STEVEN ALLAN GIGSTAD
14 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS 1ST 5114 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 001 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25013 5114 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250130010 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
LOREN L&BEVERLY 1 STEVEN
15 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS 1ST 5128 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 002 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25013 5128 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250130020 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
LAWRENCE H SCHMID
16 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS 1ST 5138 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 003 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25013 5138 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250130030 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
TAMMY L STITZINGER
17 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS IST 5168 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 002 Block 002 SubdivisionCd 25013 5168 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250130050 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
KENNETH N WEILER
18 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS 1ST 5182 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 003 Block 002 SubdivisionCd 25013 5182 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 250130060 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
NATHAN D WENNINGER
19 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS STH 5200 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 001 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25260 5200 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 252600010 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
STEVEN M&KATHRYN BLONIGAN
20 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS STH 5210 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 002 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25260 5210 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 252600020 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
RYAN S STEFFEN
21 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS STH 5218 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 003 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25260 5218 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 252600030 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
KALEN J FISCHER
22 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS 8TH 5234 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 004 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25260 5234 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 252600040 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
CHARLES HOPKE
23 SubdivisionName BROOKSVILLE HILLS STH 5242 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
ADDN Lot 005 Block 001 SubdivisionCd 25260 5242 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 252600050 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
Section 01 Township 114 Range 022 P O LARRY A SHEPARD
24 SWJ/4 COM SE COR SW1/4,N ALONG E LINE 5290 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 2 $ 14,784.63 $ 29,569.27
SW1/41140.23',N 62-31-00 W 838.58',N 50- 5290 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259010114 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
Section 01 Township 114 Range
SW1/4 COM 1140.23'N OF SE COR SWI/4,N LARRY A SHEPARD 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.63
25 62-31-00 W 838.58',N 50-32-00 W 390.62'TO 5290 CREDIT RIVER RD SE
POB,N 39-08-00 E 208,N50-32-00 W 96',S 3 5310 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 259010112 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
Section 03 Township 114 Range 022 P 0 DONALD&MARY J KLINGBERG
SW1/4 COM 1141'N OF SE COR SWI/4 TO CL
N26CO
5330 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 1 $ 14,784.63 $ 14,784.6RD 12,N 62-31-W 836.85',N SO-32-W 15330 CREDIT RIVER RD SE 2590101201 PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
27 Total $ 399,185.10
Page 2
Credit River Road Project Support Cost Estimate
Staff Public Works Total
Position WRE Tech 3 Tech 4 PE CE DA City
Hourly Rate $55 $48 $54 $58 $79 $32 $40
Feasibility and Design 60 300 500 300 80 40 40
Construction 30 140 650 120 40 80 50
As-Builts 8 120 100 40 20 8 10
Total 98 560 1250 460 140 128 100
"1.5 Overhead Factor
Total Cost $5,390 $26,880 $67,500 $26,680 $11,060 $4,096 $4,000 $145,606.00
Consultant Design $18,000.00
Borings and Pavement analysis $4,240.00
Surveying -
$11,750.00
Staking $15,000.00
Bonding (31/o Street/Storm Cost) -
_ — —
$31,393.04
Administration& Legal $15,000.00
Publishing $1,500.00
Appraisals
Permits $3,000.00
Pei $860.00
,Testing
$12,000.00
Estimated Project Support Costs $258,349.04
11/5/2014
ASSESSMENT CALCULATION
2015 Credit River Road
Number of Units= 27
Total Streets and Storm Sewer
Schedule 1 Steel $975,440.50
Schedule 2 Storm Sewer $70,994.00
Street Lights Xcel $10.000.00
Total $1,056,434.50
Subtractions
2015 UTILITY IMPACT-UTILITY FUND
SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT OTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 2 CLEAR AND GRUB TREE 8 $300.00 $ 2,400.00 ASSUME HALF
1 3 CLEAR AND GRUB(SHRUB) SHRUB 12 $55.00 $ 660.00 ASSUME HALF
1 5 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO VD 285 $3.60 $ 1,026.00 ASSUME 30%
1 11 SALVAGE&REINSTALL FENCE UN FT 40 $20.00 $ 800.00 Includes All
1 12 SALVAGE&REINSTALL LANDSCAPE EDGING UN FT 100 $5.00 $ 500.00 Incudes All
1 13 SALVAGE&REINSTALL SPRINKLER SYSTEM UN FT 100 $25.00 $ 2,500.00 Incudes All
1 15 SALVAGE&REINSTALL RETAINING WALL SO FT 620 $28.00 $ 17,360.00 Includes All
1 19 SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW CU VD 540 $28.00 $ 15,120.00 Includes Geed areae
1 25 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 63 $18.00 $ 1,134.00 Based on Removal 8
1 31 TYPE SP 9.5 VvEAR CRS MIX(3,B)3"THICK DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO VD 285 $25.00 $ 7,125.00 Based an Removal
1 44 TREE 2.5"CAL B&B(VARIETY-SEE SPEC) TREE 10 $400.00 $ 4,000.00 Includes All
1 51 SODDING TYPE LAWN BOYD 167 $4A0 $ 668.00 Assume 15%
TOTAL $ 53,293.00
2015 TRUNK UTILITY IMPACT
SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 50 SEED AND MULCH-SEED MIXTURE 260(TURF MIX) ACRE 0.5 $3,000.00 $ 1,500.00 Incudes All
1 52 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS,CATEGORY 3 SO VD 2420 S 1.30 $ 3,146.00 Includes All
1 49 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1 $1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 For lift station installa
TOTAL $ 5,846.00
2015 CONCRETE WALK
SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICETOTAL PRICE
1 33 4"CONCRETE WALK SO FT 13755 $3.50 $ 48.142.50 Includes All
1 34 6"CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO VD 640 $52.00 $ 33,280.00 For Sidewalk and On'
TOTAL $ 81,42250
2015 WATER DUALITY
SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT DTV UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 46 SILT FENCE,TYPE HEAVY DUTY LIN FT 350 $ 3.20 $ 1,120.00
1 47 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 16 $ 160.00 $ 2,560.00
1 48 FILTER LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER&DROLL UN FT 120 $ 5.00 $ 600.00
1 49 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 3 $ 1,200.00 $ 3.600.00
1 52 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS,CATEGORY 3 SO YD 2420 $ 1.30 $ 3,146.00
2 13 CLASS III RIPRAP CU VD 8 $ 100.00 $ 800.00
2 14 POND EXCAVATION LUMP SUM 1 $ 3.000.00 S 3,000.00
TOTAL $ 14,826.00
Total After Subtractions= $901,047.00
Street Costs $975.440.50
Storm Costs $70,994.00
Sanitary Costs $244,569.00
Trunk Sanitary Sewer $847.906.00
Watermain Costs $253,018,00
Street Lighting $10,000.00
Total $2,401,927.50
Indirect Cost Total= $258,349.04 $2,660.276.54 TOTAL WITH INDIRECT COSTS
Assessable Indirect percentage 37.51% 37.51%$ 96915.76
Assessable Indirect Casts $ 96,915.76
Add Assessable Indirect Costs $997,962.76
Assessable Portion $997,962.76
Assessment at 40%(X 0.4)_ $399,185.10
Assessment%Stree0fStorm costs= 36.47%
Assessment%of Overall Project= 15.01%
Bid Unit Rate(Divide by Units)_ $14,784.63
Ad Valorem $695,432.67 3.63% $9,386.52 Additional indirect costs for subtracted items
Bond Amount $1,094,617.77
Utility Fund Sanitary $300.387.18 Includes indirect costs and impacts from street(501A) 11.29% $29.171.68
Utility Fund Water $309,744.95 Includes indirect costs and impacts from street(50%) 11.64% $30,080.45
Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fund $939,105.96 Includes indirect Costs 35°4$ 91,199.96
Water Quality $16,420.67 1%$ 1,594.67
$2,660,276.54 100.00%$ 258,349.04
ASSESSMENT CALCULATION
2015 Credit River Road
Number of Units= 26
Total Sanitary Sewer
Schedule 3 Sanitary Sewer $1,092,475.00
Total $1,092,475.00
Subtractions
TRUNK SANITARY SEWER
SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 49 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH 1 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 For UR Station C
1 50 SEED AND MULCH-SEED MIXTURE 260(TURF MIX) ACRE 0.5 $ 3,000.00 $ 1,500.00
1 52 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS,CATEGORY 3 SO YD 2420 $ 1.30 $ 3,148.00
3 2 REMOVE SEWER PIPE(FORCEMAIN) UN FT 2345 $10.00$ 23,450,00 Includes All
3 5 ABANDON SEWER PIPE(FORCEMAIN) UN FT 2270 $10.60$ 22,700.00 Indud.Al
3 6 ABANDON MANHOLE EACH 11 $3,620.00$ 39,820.00 Indudes Al
3 8 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 0.5 $5,000.00$ 2,500.00 Assume 50%for
3 9 EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION HOUR 5 $450.00$ 2,250.00 Assume 50%for
3 10 PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL CU YD 250 $18.00$ 4,500.00 For 18"Pipe
3 13 18"X4"PVC SDR 26 WE EACH 26 $500.00$ 13,000.00 Coat difference fl
3 15 11r'PVC SEWER SDR 25 UN FT 3090 $26.00$ 80,340.00 Cost difference 9
3 16 1O.PVC C-900 FORCEMAIN(HDD) UN FT 2270 $90.00$ 204,300.00 lnlcudes All
3 17 18"SEWER PIPE(DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) LIN FT 140 $230.00$ 32,200.00 lnlcudes All
3 18 10"GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 5 $2,400.00$ 12,000.00 lnlcudes All
3 19 SANITARY MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH(>81`T) UN FT 80 $150.00$ 12,000.00 lnlcudes Al
3 21 48"DIAMETER AIR RELIEF MANHOLE EACH 2 $4,500.00$ 9,000.00 lnlcudes All
3 22 72'CLEANOUT MANHOLE EACH 5 $6,800.00$ 34,000.00 Inlwdes All
3 23 CONSTRUCT LIFT STATION LUMP SUM 1 $350,000.00$ 350,000.00 Inlwdes All
$ 847,906.00
rD
co
Qodk°td St se 4950 Exhibit -Assessments
'b4916 TRICHIE TOMMIE N&DOLORES
10
i.0) BERLE BRIAN J 259020700 oe p�O� Minnesota
Ndstl 259020680 a
4980 al a
RASMUSSEN CRAIG D = u 2014
250100030 U
r..___. _. 5008 c
4900 SHOEMAKER MICHAEL Fb
Y Robir
HOFLOCK`JARED M — —250U4p m
258010160 I I U.
..._,_ / 50040 A MICHELLE M 8 JAMES J
2
I fftj / 5pb40350
4958
BUS
BUSSE DAVID L f *�•°0°
259020520 \ 5102
4964 - / 5054 HAYUNGA SALLY A
Pleasant
ds 3 BAUMGARTNER PAULE yfl UNDS EDWIN L&AMYE 259010131 Summer St Se Thiadrawing is eiMeralaBally recorded map nor a survey
le dnt St$e -c 250100020 // /2 0/40351 _ `nndpHano�o n-ra.inro,fi-nd d to homy�or,a
_) / I / ciry�o�ny ane smro o,fioae ane curer sources.Tnisdi—meat
S 4994 5032 \\ 5114 should be used far inference only.No represenb6on is made
LARSON JAMES D&JOANN B m.tfeawreap—ledw—layreflectMewcancn.The
PAVICHPETERJJR ��� ` GIGSTAD STEVEN C%ofPrrorLake,orany omerendryrremwnicnd.meas
250100040 250040370 V 250130010 obtained,aea�mes nc rabilM for any errors or omissions harem.
H discrepancm,are found,please oonteM me City of Prbr Lake.
5086 5128
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC C� STEVEN LOREN L&BEVERLY J yin
259010130. QQit _ /250130020
e Dm Q >
5138 mr m m
P/0 S10 i �SCHMID LAWRENCE H <S` ° `
C^P ,! 250130030 i E _
'9p5182 �
So Brooks Cir Se
WEI
� WEILER KENNETH N
Crest Or$e 5166 250130060
.umber
STITZINGER TAMMY L/X
m 250130050 5 .._.� _
WENNINGER NAT ,D 5218
c>e 252600
�1\ STEFFEN RYAN S
5210252600030
t Off' BLONIGAN STEVEN M&KATHRKN�� / -
��„ F a 252600020
N /
N /
5234 �/J
FISCHER KALEN J' 5242
252600040 OPKE CHAFE .S 5330
_. 204600050 KLINGBERG.DONALD&MARY J
259010120
> 5290
W m SHEPARD LARRY A
c c 259010114 T
° (2 ASSESSABLE UNITS)
or Se
ds5310P� % Se
< n
D S1� SHEPARD LARRY A ^&Q,t Rwer Ra
Ctt Se 259010112
Dublin RdS0xP '
e
EXHIBIT 8
Element Materials Technology P 651 645 3601
212rT12r1+ 662 Cromwell Avenue F 651 659 7348
L St Paul,MN T 888 786 7555
55114-1720 USA irfo.stpaul@Delement.com
element.com
Geotechnical Exploration Program
City of Prior Lake 2015 Street Improvements
Credit River Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Element Materials Technology St. Paul Inc. Project No. ESP017939P
Prepared for:
City of Prior Lake
October 31, 2014
Professional Certification:
hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Licensed
ProfessionT7-
MarkVtrtight,
r the laws of the
State of i
P.E.
Senior Pepject Engineer
MN Reg.No.41658
This report shall not be reproduced,except in full,without prior permission of Element Materials Technology.
EAR Controlled Data:This document contains technical data whose export and re-export/retransfer is subject to control by the U.S.
Department of Commerce under the Export Administration Act and the Export Administration Regulations. The Department of Commerce's
prior written approval is required for the export or re-export/retransfer of such technical data to any foreign person,foreign entity or foreign
organization whether in the United States or abroad.
'11111111111' element'
October 31, 2014
City of Prior Lake
Attn: Mr. Seng Thongvanh, P.E.
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
RE: Geotechnical Exploration Program
City of Prior Lake 2015 Street Improvements
Credit River Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Element Materials Technology St. Paul Inc. Project No. ESP017939P
Dear Mr. Thongvanh:
We have completed the geotechnical exploration and engineering analysis for the above
referenced project. This report presents the results of our field and laboratory review
programs, and provides recommendations concerning the soil and groundwater conditions as
they relate to the proposed construction.
The soil samples will be retained in our laboratory for 30 days, at which time we will dispose of
them. If you desire Element Materials Technology St. Paul Inc. to retain the samples longer
than 30 days, please notify us.
We are pleased to be of service to you in this important phase of the project. If there are any
questions regarding the information contained in this report or if we can be of further service to
you, please contact Mark Straight directly at (651) 659-7447 or by email at
mark.straight@element.com.
Respectfully Submitted,
ELEMENT MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY ST. PAUL, INC.
Kevin Zalec, P.E. Mar.k S night, P.E.
Staff Engineer Senior roject Engineer
MN Reg. No. 47909 MN Reg. No. 41658
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 2 of 16
element"'
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report concerns our recent geotechnical exploration program at the site of the proposed
2015 Street Improvement Project in Prior Lake, Minnesota. We understand a geotechnical
exploration program was required to depict the subsurface conditions in the proposed
pavement areas and provide boring logs depicting the subsurface conditions. This report
presents the results of the field exploration, our laboratory testing, geotechnical review, and
recommendations.
1.1 Scope of Work
We recently performed a geotechnical exploration program in accordance with our September
12, 2014, proposal and your subsequent Standard Agreement for Professional Services dated
September 22, 2014 as authorization by the City of Prior Lake to proceed. The scope of our
work for the project was as follows:
1. Arrange to have buried public utilities marked through the Gopher-State-One-Call
System.
2. Explore the subsurface conditions by performance of ten (10) standard penetration
test borings to unit depths ranging from 10' to 24' in various roadway/pavement
areas. Soil boring B7 was deleted from the work scope due to an existing on-going
construction project/utilities at that location limiting site access.
3. Visually classify the extracted soil samples and perform laboratory testing including
moisture content, gradation tests and Atterberg Limit tests as needed to aid in soil
classification and to determine engineering properties.
4. Prepare a formal geotechnical report which includes the following information:
a. Logs of the soil test borings showing the existing pavement profile where
applicable, soil and groundwater data, including the N-values.
b. A site plan showing the approximate boring locations.
c. Written description of encountered soil and groundwater conditions.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 3 of 16
element'
d. Results of any laboratory testing performed.
e. Pavement recommendations for bituminous pavement design for Credit River
Road (7-ton standard).
f. Provide alternative concrete pavement design recommendations.
The scope of our work is intended for geotechnical purposes only. This scope is not intended
to explore for the presence or extent of environmental contamination at the site. However,
through normal human sensing, it should be noted that petroleum type odors were detected
within soil samples from boring B2 from 2' to 4' below the drilling surface collected in the field
at the time of drilling operations.
2.0 FIELD TESTING PROGRAM
2.1 Soil Borings
A total of nine (9) soil test borings were drilled on Credit River Road or planned future
alignment between September 30 and October 2, 2014. The approximate boring locations are
shown on the attached site plan. The borings were field staked by our drill crew based on the
plan provided by the City of Prior Lake. It is our understanding that the elevations of the
borings were to be performed by others during the project survey and provided at a later date.
The standard penetration borings were performed with a truck mounted rotary drill rig using
split-barrel sampling procedures. Water level observations were made in the boreholes during
and upon completion of the drilling and sampling operations. During the field operations, the
drill crew maintained logs of the subsurface conditions including changes in stratigraphy and
the observed groundwater levels. The boring logs are attached.
After completion of the drilling operations, the boreholes were backfilled with auger cuttings to
the existing surface. Soil borings drilled in existing pavement areas were patched at the
surface with cold bituminous patch matching the thickness of the existing pavement.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 4 of 16
element'
Sampling and classification of soils were performed in general accordance with American
Standards for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures, and are described on an attached
sheet.
2.2 Surface Conditions
The soil borings were drilled within existing roadway areas of Credit River Road within the City
of Prior Lake. Soil borings 131-136 were drilled in areas of existing bituminous pavement of
Credit River Road, soil borings 69-1310 were drilled within existing sand with gravel base
aggregate shoulder, and boring B8 was drilled in green space (proposed future utility
alignment) as depicted on the boring location plan. The majority of the street topography was
relatively level with slight inclines and declines.
Residential properties were located along the north side of Credit River Road from soil borings
131-136. Eagle Creek Avenue SE was located parallel to the south of Credit River Road. A
small previously constructed pond was located at the northwest corner of Credit River Road
and Fish Point Road.
The surface of the pavement of Credit River Road was in poor to fair condition. The surface of
the bituminous showed signs of medium severity weathering, with minor signs of pitting.
Isolated portions of the pavement were observed to have fatigue (alligator) cracking or rutting.
Some of the cracks observed in the pavement appeared to have been previously sealed.
However, some cracks observed were not sealed or the previously sealed crack had
expanded.
Several utilities were observed overhead, mainly electric services. During the utility clearance
process through the Gopher-State-One-Call system, several below grade utilities were
identified and marked on the pavement or aggregate base by utility locate contractors. These
included water, gas, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, phone and cable.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 5 of 16
@ element"
2.3 Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface conditions encountered at the test boring locations are shown on the test
boring logs. The boring logs also indicate the possible geologic origin of the materials
encountered. We wish to point out that the subsurface conditions at other times and locations
on the site may differ from those found at our test locations. If different conditions are
encountered during construction, it is necessary that you contact us so that our
recommendations can be reviewed.
2.3 Subsurface Conditions
The boring logs indicate a generalized soil profile consisting of fill at the surface, extending to
2' at boring location B1 up to the termination depth of 14' at boring location B6, underlain by
buried topsoil (boring B1), glacial till (borings B2, and 133), glacial outwash (borings B5, B8, B9
and B10). Generally, the fill was comprised of a layer of bituminous pavement at the surface
ranging from 4" to 8'/z"thick underlain by sand and gravel aggregate ranging from 2" to 20"
thick underlain by mixtures and layers of sandy lean clay, silty sand, clayey sand, sand with silt
and sand with various amounts of gravel. The fill profile in borings B5, B8 and B10 also
included lenses of organic lean clay topsoil.
The base aggregate as observed in its current condition may not meet the current
requirements for Mn/DOT Specification 3138 Aggregate for Surface and Base Courses. The
fill was found to be very loose to medium dense, based on the penetration values (N-values)
obtained during drilling activities.
Buried topsoil and weathered soil was encountered directly below the fill within boring B1. The
topsoil/weathered soil extended to a depth of 7'/2' below the surface of the boring. The topsoil
was comprised of organic lean clay (CL-OL), and the weathered soil was comprised of lean
clay (CL). The topsoil/weathered soil layers were in a soft to firm condition based on the N-
values obtained during drilling.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 6 of 16
@element'
The glacial till encountered below the fill within borings B2 and B3, below the weathered soil
within B1,and within outwash layers of boring B5 included sandy lean clay (CL) and lean clay
with sand (CL) and various amounts of gravel. The glacial till was generally in a soft to firm
condition, based on the penetration values (N-values)obtained during drilling activities.
The glacial outwash encountered below the fill within borings B5, B8, B9 and B10 was mainly
comprised of sand (SP), clayey sand (SC) and silty sand (SM) with various amounts of gravel.
A cobble was encountered in boring B5 at a depth of 4'/2 feet below the drilling surface. The
glacial outwash was in a medium dense to dense condition, based on the penetration values
(N-values) obtained during drilling activities.
Fine alluvium comprised of lean clay (CL) was encountered within the till layers of boring B3,
and below the fill layers of boring B4. The fine alluvium was generally in a firm condition based
on the N-values obtained during drilling activities, however, a very soft layer was encountered
within boring B3.
Based on normal human sensing, product odors were detected within fill of boring B2 from a
depth of 2' to 4' at the time of drilling activities. Product odors were not detected within the
remaining soil samples collected at the site. This does not eliminate the possibility that
petroleum based products may be present at other locations within the reconstruction project
area away from our boring locations. Environmental screening and laboratory tests were not
included in our work scope for this project.
2.4 Water Level Conditions
Water level observations were made during and after completion of the drilling operations.
Groundwater was not encountered within borings B2-B3, and B5-B9 at the time of drilling
operations. Groundwater is most likely just beneath the depths of these shallow borings or
due to the soil types encountered not risen to its hydrostatic level during drilling operations as
the mottled soils would indicate. Groundwater was encountered within soil boring B1 at a
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 7 of 16
element'"
depth of 19.3', soil boring B4 at a depth of 10.0', and within soil boring B10 at a depth of 21.9'
below the drilling surface. The glacial till soil above the groundwater elevation in several
borings showed signs of mottling and iron oxide staining. The mottled or iron oxide stained soil
is an indication of water being present within the soil mass previously, most likely during
previous periods of wet weather.
Since the clayey and silty soils encountered in the borings are relatively impervious or slow
draining, it may take several days for groundwater in a borehole to rise to its hydrostatic level.
If more accurate water level determinations are required, piezometers should be installed and
the water level monitored over a period of time.
In general, water levels may fluctuate throughout the year depending on variations in the
amount of precipitation, degree of evaporation, surface run-off characteristics and other related
hydrogeological factors.
3.0 LABORATORY REVIEW AND TESTING
The soil samples obtained during the drilling operations were logged, labeled, sealed and
delivered to our laboratory for further review. An Element geotechnical engineer classified the
soil samples in general conformance with ASTM standards. Representative samples were
submitted to the laboratory for moisture content and gradation testing and the results are
attached or shown on the boring logs.
4.0 REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the information obtained from our geotechnical work and our understanding or
assumptions of the project data, we made our engineering review which resulted in
recommendations which are presented in the following sections. If any of our understanding or
assumptions are not correct, or if conditions observed during construction are significantly
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 8 of 16
r►; element'
different than those encountered in our geotechnical work, we should be contacted
immediately so we may review our recommendations.
4.1 Proiect Data
We understand the project will include street reconstruction on Credit River Road within the
City of Prior Lake as defined by the 2015 Improvement project. The street reconstruction area
for Credit River Road was bounded by Evans St. to the north and Adelmann St. to the south.
The street reconstruction areas are shown on the attached boring location plans.
It is our understanding that the reconstruction will include milling/excavating the existing
pavement section where applicable and installing/repairing utilities as needed then placing a
new pavement section upon approved subgrade. The exposed roadway subgrade would be
test rolled and any soft areas detected by the test rolling would be corrected prior to continued
construction. We were informed by the City that Credit River Road will be constructed to a 7-
ton design standard. We understand that local storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer
construction would also be installed along portions Credit River Road.
Our design recommendations were based on a 20-year pavement design life with associated
routine maintenance being performed as applicable to the types of pavements being
constructed. We were provided estimated traffic counts by the City assuming 10 trips per
day/per house along the proposed route with possible additional trips for garbage carriers and
school buses.
4.2 Utility Installation
Utility plans were not available at the time of this report. Based on the borings, utilities placed
within the upper 10' of subgrade will generally bear upon granular or cohesive fill or naturally
deposited glacial outwash, glacial till or fine alluvium soil types. In many areas, the granular or
cohesive fill could be found to be in a low density condition. In some areas, soft clays and/or
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 9 of 16
@element"
soft existing fill may be encountered. This was especially apparent at boring locations B2 and
B3.
If very soft soils or uncompacted fill soils are encountered at pipe invert elevation, these soils
may not be suitable for pipe support. We recommend unsuitable fill or very soft natural soil be
over excavated, by a minimum of 1', to place a foundation or bedding for pipe support.
Additional aggregate bedding material may be required if very soft wet conditions are
encountered at the time of construction at the bottom of pipes/manholes, etc. Manholes or
utility structures may require a minimum of 2' of aggregate bedding materials. Any organic
materials found during construction should also be removed. Organic soils were encountered
within soil borings 131, B5, B8, and B10 at the time of drilling operations. The foundation
should be of coarse, granular material or pea gravel. The granular or aggregate materials may
be separated from the subgrade by geotextile fabric, especially in loose/wet conditions. We
recommend at a minimum that the exposed soils in the utility trenches be recompacted prior to
new utility placement unless groundwater is present.
After the foundation bedding and pipe placement, fill should be placed to attain final grades.
Where pavement may be placed, the fill should be compacted to at least 95% of the Standard
Proctor density (ASTM D: 698). Fill placed in the top 3 feet of subgrade for pavement should
be compacted to at least 100% of the Standard Proctor density. In addition, the moisture
content of the fill should be within 3% of the optimum as determined by the Standard Proctor
test. Backfilling operations should be performed uniformly around structures as to not to
damage them during construction. Selected on-site clays and silty soils may not be suitable
for reuse as engineered fill within roadway areas due to their high moisture content and as a
result their inability to obtain proper compaction during backfilling operations. As a result,
some replacement of excavated soils with soils that can be readily compacted as structural
backfill may be required.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 10 of 16
M element'
Based on the soil borings isolated dewatering may be required to facilitate utility placement,
especially in the area of soil boring B4 where groundwater was encountered at a depth of 10.0'
below the drilling surface.
Proper shoring or sloping of the excavation for utility placements per OSHA guidelines should
be provided for at all times. Care should be provided by the contractor as to not to damage
surrounding structures/properties.
If exposed soils supporting the utilities are disturbed or become saturated they may no longer
be able to support the utility. Care should be provided by the contractor as to not to disturb
supporting soils otherwise additional corrective measures may be necessary.
4.3 Pavement Subwade Preparation
Based on the borings, we recommend the subgrade preparation should consist of removing
the existing pavement section where encountered. Any organic soils where encountered
within the upper 3' of existing road grade should also be excavated. This would include within
the area of boring B1, B5, B8, and B10. Consideration should also be given to excavating
clayey soils within the upper 3' of subgrade where encountered and replacing them with
granular soils as described below to aid in increasing the R-value at these locations. Only
limited soil corrections may be required where more granular soils where encountered while
drilling (i.e. boring 138). These areas should be further evaluated during construction.
However, if these soils are disturbed during utility placements and mixed with clayey soil types
additional corrective work may be needed. Additional excavation may also be required to
allow for proper placement of the new pavement section where thinner and/or no existing
pavement and aggregate base or granular section were encountered.
Proper draintile systems would need to be incorporated into the design where more granular fill
was placed/encountered at the surface underlain by relatively impervious clay soil types. Any
contaminated soils encountered during construction should be properly tested and disposed of
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 11 of 16
element'
under standard construction practices per the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) guidelines.
After the recommended excavation and ordinary surface compaction of exposed soils,
engineered fill may then be placed to attain final grades. We recommend all exposed soils are
thoroughly surface compacted with a large vibratory self-propelled compactor. Fill placed in the
upper three feet of the subgrade should be compacted to 100% of the Standard Proctor
density. The moisture content should be within 3% below and the optimum as determined by
the Standard Proctor test. Moisture conditioning the soil may be required to attain the proper
soil compaction.
We recommend where additional fill is required within the upper 3' of subgrade be granular
soils meeting Mn/DOT Specification 3149.26 Select Granular having no greater than 12%
fines passing the #200 sieve and preferably no greater that 50% passing the #40 sieve.
The subgrade surface, as well as the pavement surface, should be uniformly sloped to
facilitate drainage of the base and sand subgrade material within the pavement system, and to
avoid any ponding of water beneath the pavement.
We also recommend proof-rolling the pavement subgrade to aid in detecting any loose or
unstable zones. This proof-rolling should be performed with a fully loaded tandem axle dump
truck. In those areas where deflection or rutting is obvious, additional excavation or reworking
may be necessary.
4.4 Pavement Thickness Design
Assuming the pavement subgrade preparation is performed as recommended in the preceding
section and the subgrade soils are judged suitable based on a proof-roll test, we recommend
the following pavement design be used:
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 12 of 16
element'
Credit River Road 7-Ton Street Section Thickness
Mn/DOT Spec. 2360 Type SP12.5 Bituminous Wear Course 2"
Mn/DOT Spec. 2360 Type SP12.5 Bituminous Non-wear Course 2"
Mn/DOTSpec. 3138 Class 5 Aggregate Base 8"
Mn/DOTSpec. 3149.2B Select Granular Fill 24"
Mn/DOTSpec 3733 Type V Non-Woven Geotextile Fabric --
Approved Sub rade --
Transition zone tapers should be constructed where Credit River Road connects to existing
construction and where pavement section thicknesses vary to minimize differential movement
between different pavement sections. The transition tapers should begin at the bottom of the
lowest section and transition to the higher section at a grade of 20 horizontal to 1 vertical
(20:1). Depending on the actual site conditions at the time of construction the transition zones
may need to be adjusted to properly support the new pavement.
By reducing the sand section it is more likely that during periods of freezing and thawing that
expansion and contraction of the subgrade soils may occur in a manner that may affect
pavement performance. The City should be made aware that additional maintenance may likely
be needed to sustain the slightly shorter pavement life with this option.
The thickness of each of the components of the street section indicated above is assumed a
minimum for construction. The design also assumed the aggregate base will be compacted to a
minimum of 100% of the Standard Proctor density and the bituminous pavement placed and
compacted to a minimum of 92% of the maximum specific gravity. We recommend for increased
pavement performance that Mn/DOT Class V supporting the pavement be comprised of crushed
limestone aggregate base.
The City may consider utilization of a concrete pavement section in lieu of the bituminous
pavement discussed above to add long term value to the street reconstruction projects. The
concrete pavement provides for a durable long lasting surface with relatively low maintenance
costs. The concrete pavement is also a more reflective surface that can add both beauty and
Project Number ESP017939P October 31.2014 Page 13 of 16
AOMAVAL
%) element
minimize street lighting. Typical concrete pavements may last thirty to forty years with proper
construction and maintenance thus greatly extending the life cycle of the pavement.
We recommend placement of six inches of compacted aggregate base supporting a minimum
concrete slab thickness of five inches for 7-ton roads after the subgrade is prepared as
outlined above. The aggregate base provides a constructible base for concrete placement,
reduces faulting, and helps dissipate loads. It is very critical for the proper performance of the
concrete pavement section to be placed over approved subgrade. Proper soil compaction of
the subgrade and around utilities is critical in the performance of the pavement and to minimize
pavement settlements. If the subgrade fails the proof-rolling tests and is not suitable additional
corrections and evaluation of the pavement section thicknesses should be performed.
Additional pavement section thicknesses along with subgrade corrections may be required to
properly support the concrete rigid pavement. Appropriate panel sizing, jointing, doweling, and
edge reinforcement are critical for performance of the rigid pavement.
The concrete should have a minimum 28-day unit compressive strength of 4000 psi and a
minimum flexural strength of 580 psi. We recommend specifying 5 to 8 percent air
entrainment to provide resistance to freeze-thaw deterioration. The designer should also
designate a maximum water-cement ratio of 0.45 using a water-cement ratio of 0.40 or less for
concrete exposed to deicers. We recommend the pavement be constructed in accordance
with the American Concrete Institute: ACI 330-"Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete
Parking Lots".
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 14 of 16
element
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Excavation Safety
All excavations should comply with the requirements of O.S.H.A. 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart
P, "Excavation and Trenches". This document states that excavation safety is
the responsibility of the contractor. Reference to these O.S.H.A. requirements should be
included in the project specifications.
5.2 Quality Control Testing
We recommend that all geotechnical related work, including subgrade preparation, and
engineered fill placement, be observed by the project geotechnical engineer or their
representatives. The geotechnical engineer will perform appropriate testing to verify the
geotechnical conditions that have been anticipated during preparation of this report.
As variations in soil conditions may exist at locations and elevations other than those of our
borings, we recommend the geotechnical engineer be retained to observe the soil conditions
during site preparation. We recommend in-place field density testing be performed in the
compacted new fill as detailed in the Appendix.
5.3 Cold Weather Conditions
Construction during cold weather should be exercised with care. We have included a sheet
entitled "Precautions for Excavating and Refilling During Cold Weather." Please refer to this
sheet in the Appendix for specific details.
5.4 Soil Sensitivity
The silty and clayey soils at this site are susceptible to disturbance from construction traffic,
especially in wet conditions. If the soils become disturbed, additional excavation may be
required. Therefore, proper excavation equipment during construction should be used to
minimize the potential for disturbance.
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 15 of 16
element"
6.0 REMARKS
This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it is addressed. The soil testing and
geotechnical engineering services performed by Element Materials Technology for this project
have been conducted in a manner with the level of skill and care ordinarily exercised by other
members of the profession currently practicing in this area under similar budgetary and time
constraints. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
Attachments: -Soil Boring Location Plan (1 page)
-Soil Boring Logs#B1-#B6, #B8-B10 (9 pages)
-Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (1 page)
-Symbols and Terminology on Test Boring Logs (1 page)
-Field Exploration Procedures (1 page)
-Prerequisites for Sound Engineering Practice (1 page)
-Construction Observations and Testing (1 page)
-Cold Weather Precautions (1 page)
F:\BMC\2014CME\GEO\ESP017939P Prior Lake Credit River Road 2015 Street Improvements\2015 Prior Lake Credit River Road
Improvements Geo Report.doc
Project Number ESP017939P October 31,2014 Page 16 of 16
City of Prior Lake
of pr<pPtMinnesota N
N
Credit River Road
r
Improvement Project !r Gateway St Se
^.
�—
Westwood Dr Sc
1+
s
r3! 160th St Se t
570 286 0 570 Q• i E•.-� r t '! y
Feet
This tlrowlnp le neither a legelty recorded map nor a survey - eg^
end is not Intended to be used as one.This dmwing is a
cwnphadon of record a.Information and dale Irom vadous " �'rt
dty.eountyendste o-0--ndoaemsource, Tisadocumsni as
• should be used for roference Doty.Na raproaenladon Is made . s ' �T J �Y
dml171Pg,q -,ad tlmrelely renea ol.location.The Bounty sl Se T+"; •�,.
{ Gty of prior Lake,w any other endly from k"
whbh data wee --- ... r _ M1 srh
na.
obudnad.seaumee ns Nabtllry for enY .o lX Q
rroro oromiselms herein. 6s� A ,- "">
( H dlswepan6es are Found,please contact the City of Ferlor lake.
i' 2 CONTOUR LINES ARE FROM A SPRING 2003
AERIAL IMAGERY FLIGHT FOR SCOTT COUNTY. 4 •
AERIAL IMAGERY IS FROM A SPRING 2001 •CC( tp
FLIGHTFOR SCOTT COUN'Y ` ,` C $e
TO$5811dT3 Sc
r f.
' 0
F A' •`
V.
�2 i 3 o�°� r�
r�n�r 1 i Sum
t
• an` � ^ ► k
B
�. e h
i
9 s /+
Y f .Tri, y f 3
N
a Victoriacu�y�.rw
e
k .y ...^ ° 0`illi ; r" ,` Q� 8rooks Cir Se
�� � '*r€► Tai �sr'*.: , .r "* � f � r . LL
S1n1be# f, s�L • 1 e rr{r -�t, y.� es r m.
• i
{.
� CC
^ T
a
k Is
h
B7 B10
B$ ZV
B91 .r °` f `a�J rtr.'' rr11 t •t L /Jy7
it
to
f � 00,
mai
r
� ax
J � j
r
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. 131 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
OW
LU
W >Z W
ADDITIONAL
cD O W X Z DATA/
> REMARKS
a _j Q M W wr N o
O a. p>o W �o },L
Surface Elev.: o m z Qf z F z z o a
FILL., "of bituminouspavement ___- -—— FILL AS 1 UGE 24
0_9� FILL,7"of sand&gravel aggregate
\base`brown,moist __________i�
2.0 FILL, silty sand with a little gravel,dark
brown moist 9 2 SS 24
ORGANIC LEAN CLAY, black, moist �. .
4.0
(CL-OL)
LEAN CLAY with a little gravel, brown, N—EATHER—ED 9 3 SS 24 15
moist, soft to firm(CL) SOIL
5—
7.5 11 4 SS 18 18
SANDY AN CLAY with a little —GTA C_1A L
gravel, gray and brown mottled, iron TILL
oxide staining,moist, soft to firm,with
a lens of waterbearing sand at 19.3'
(CL) 10— 8 5 SS 18
9 6 SS 18
15— 12 7 SS 18
20 13 8 SS 18
21.0
Q End of Boring
d
z
z
z
a
c�
0
J
a
U'
ri
m
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
element STARTED 9/30/14 FINISHED 9/30/14
W WL V 19.3 materials technology
o 662 Cromwell Ave. DRILL Co. Element DRILL RIG 367
W St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
w Telephone: 651-645-3601
LJ LOGGED BY KSZJ APPROVED MAS
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B2 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
U � o F
W ADDITIONAL
U w ir O W IX z DATA/
= 0 x N a m w o REMARKS
o_ 0 ~ 0O>O 2 }a} WU — >-u_
Surface Elev.:
U U' 0 mZ2 Z F �Z M 0a
0.7 FILL,8 1/2"of bituminous pavement__ FILL AS 1 kUGEF 24
03 T FILL,2 of sand&gravel aggregate
\base dark brown,moist _
2-0 FILL,silty sand with a little ravel,dark
--� ty 9 / 8 2 SS 18 Odor of
\brown moist _ _/ petroleum
FIFL a mixture of clayey sand and silty detected from 2'
4.0 sand with a little gravel,dark brown to to 4'.
—� brown, moist,with an odor of
petroleums moist___________/ 5—
6 3 SS 18
FILL, sandy lean clay with a little
gravel, dark brown to brown,moist
4 4 SS 18
9.5
SANDY LEAN CLAY with a little GLACIAL 9 5 SS 18
gravel, brown and gray mottled,iron TILL 10
oxide staining,moist,firm(CL)
13 6 SS 18
15 14 7 SS 18
16.0
End of Boring
Q
0
z
0
a
0
J
'a
n
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS element
STARTED 9/30/14 FINISHED 9/30/14
W None n"`' i°'`r ��r."°'"`�} DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
0 662 Cromwell Ave.
z WSt. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
2 Telephone: 651-645-3601
W LOGGED BY KSZ1 APPROVED MAS
JL
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B3 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
O 1 F
W j z w N ADDITIONAL
_ 0Z DATA/
0 _ `�J W 00> D W REMARKS
IL -i E_.. O Q Co d W E of o � 0
Surface Elev.: 0 o m z Of z z z 2 o n-
-FILL,
^FILL, 5 1/2"of bituminous pavement __ FILL AS 1 UGE 24
FILL, 18 1/2"of sand&gravel _ _�—
aggregate base, brown, moist
2-0 ___ _______
FILL, a mixture of silty sand, clayey t 5 2 SS 18
sand and sandy lean clay with a little
gravel, dark brown, moist
5 3 3 SS 18 14
7.0
SANDY LEAN CLAY with a little GLACIAL 8 4 SS 18
gravel, brown and gray mottled, moist, TILL
soft(CL)
9.0
!SANDY LEAN CLAY with a little
gravel, brown, moist,firm(CL) 10 13 5 SS 18
12.0
LEAN CLAY,gray with iron oxide FINE 2 6 SS 18
staining, moist,very soft to firm(CL) ALLUVIUM
15 10 7 SS 18
16.0
SANDY LEAN CLAY with a little GLA IAL 17 8 SS 24
gravel,gray, moist, hard(CL) TILL
18.0
End of Boring
v
>
0
0
z
z
a
0
0
J
'a
a
m
o WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS elemenF'" STARTED 9/30/14 FINISHED 9/30/14
va 1 L
W None materials technology
662 Cromwell Ave. DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER ISP
WF
Telephone: 651-645-3601
wI LOGGED BY KSZ APPROVED MAS
IN
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B4 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake,Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
O W o
W
ADDITIONAL
U LL D of O w z DATA/
x O = ¢ m w wry,F p REMARKS
Surface Elev.: o m z W z � Z K 0 0 Of a
o.3 ,FILL, ofbituminouspavement _ ----- Flu- AS 1 UGE 24
FILL,sand&gravel aggregate base,
brown,moist
2_0_ -----.-----------------
FILL, sandy lean clay with a little t 6 2 SS 18 16
gravel,brown, moist
5 11 3 SS 18 14
7.0 �
LEAN CLAY,brown, moist,firm,with a FINE 13 4 SS 18
lens of waterbearing sand at 10'(CL) ALLUVIUM
Q 10 15 5 SS 18
12.0 ___ -----
LEAN CLAY,gray, moist,firm(CL) 10 6 SS 18
15 10 7 SS 18
11 8 SS 24
18.0
End of Boring
m
N
z
Z
z
Q
O
J
a
t7
a
o�
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS element" STARTED 9/30/14 FINISHED 9/30/14
WL Q 10.0 662 Cromwell Ave. DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
0
St, Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
2 Telephone: 651-645-3601
1 LOGGED BY KSZ APPROVED MAS
W
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B5 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
O
O of
r w j z ui y ADDITIONAL
U O7) 0� O> z DATA/
= 0 in_Jw U— F o REMARKS
Q O a C) a-Co LU �� >_LL
Surface Elev.: (D o LU m z� z 1 z z 2
0 4 F 0
ILL,_4" um
_of bitinous eave_ment___ __ FILL AS 1 UGE 24
0.8-/-\ FILL, 4"of sand&gravel aggregatenoi
,---
\base.dark browmst --_----/
FILL, silty sand with a little gravel,
brw
on moist /^ 9 2 SS 18
FILL,a mixture of topsoil and sandy
lean clay,with a little gravel, cobble
encountered at 5', black to brown,
moist
5.0 32" 3 SS 18 "N-Value
SAND, mostly fine grained, light brown LA IAL 5— influenced by
to brown, moist, dense(SP) OUTWASH cobble.
7.0
LEAN CLAY with lenses of sand, LA IAL 13 4 SS 18
brown, moist, soft(CL) TILL
9.5
SILTY SAND with a little gravel, lenses FACIAL 5 5 SS 18
of silt,fine grained, brown, loose(SM) ouTWaSH 10—
12.0
LEAN CLAY with SAND, gray mottled GLACIAL— 6 6 SS 18
with iron oxide staining, moist, soft TILL
(CL)
15 6 7 SS 18
16.0
End of Boring
c
u
0
z
C
O
a
a
m
M
rn
N WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSSTARTED 9/30/14 FINISHED 9/30/14
element"
w Nonemria
atels technology DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
662 Cromwell Ave.
z St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
w
Telephone: 651-645-3601
w LOGGED BY KSZ APPROVED MAS
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B6 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
Ld
0 w F
Ld ADDITIONAL
U - -7) Qf O W W z DATA/
za 0 = N¢ m w> D o REMARKS
Q 0 d 3p>0 a �0 O >-U
Surface Elev.: a o m z W z z? 2 o n
�=8FILL,8"of bituminous pavement FILL AS 1 UGE 24
-----------------------
FILL,sand with silt and gravel,dark
2 0 brown, moist ___
FILL,silty sand with gravel,dark brown 8 2 SS 18 6
to brown,moist
4.0 —_--
FILL,sand with silt a-na gravel,brown,
moist 5 19 3 SS 18 5
9 4 SS 18
9-0 ----
FILL,clayey sand with gravel,brown,
10 5 SS 18
moist 10
12.0_ ___
FILL,silty sand with gravel,brown, 9 6 SS 24
moist
14.0
End of Boring
r
z
z
c9
a
c°3
S WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSe1 emen�"' STARTED 10/2/14 FINISHED 10/2/14
a 1
"' None ""'`" " `'0'"1O'"'� DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
0 662 Cromwell Ave.
ti @ St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
Telephone: 651-645-3601
LOGGED BY KSZ1 APPROVED MAS
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B8 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
O - Of
W N
`L
>- �Z W a
ADDITIONAL
~ NW
= p = in w O j D w DATA/
p REMARKS
Q O d p>p 2 a ffm >u
Surface Elev.: o m z z ?? B o a
FILL, organic lean clay with roots, FILL AS 1 \UGEF 24
1_0 black moist
FILL, silty sand with gravel,brown, _
moist
14 2 SS 18 11
SAND with a little gravel,fine to GLACIAL
medium grained, light brown to brown, OUTWASH 5— 21 3 SS 18
moist, medium dense(SP)
7.0
�A _
� ND,mostly fne grained,light 22 4 SS 18
brown, moist, medium dense(SP)
10 18 5 SS 18
_11.0__
End of Boring
c
a
0
z
z
v
0
C7
a
o=
a7
m
NWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSelemenf° STARTED 10/2/14 FINISHED 10/2/14
w None materials technology
a 662 Cromwell Ave. DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
J
W St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
g Telephone: 651-645-3601
w
LOGGED BY KSZ I APPROVED MAS
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B9 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
L9 W o
F >z Uj ADDITIONAL
U (D iLl O w W z DATA/
x O = Q m w Fy F- 0 REMARKS
Surface Elev.: o m CoX z z z o aU
FILL, silty sand with gravel,brown, FILL AS 1 kUGEF 24
moist
2.0------
FILL, a mixture of silty sand and clayey 9 2 SS 18
sand with gravel, brown,moist
4.0-------- --------------
FILL,a mixture of sand and silty sand
with a little gravel, brown, moist 5 10 3 SS 18 9 p200=14.2%
7.0
SILTY SAND,fine grained,gray to GLACIAL 9 4 SS 18 p200=22.5%
brown with a trace of iron oxide ouTWASH
staining,moist, loose(SM)
9.0
CLAVEY SAND with gravel,fine to
coarse grained, brown,moist, loose 10 7 5 SS 18
(SC)
11.0
End of Boring
0
C7
z
z
U
0
a
n'
CL
m
M
K WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS eieEjnt" STARTED 10/2/14 FINISHED 10/2/14
None DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
662 Cromwell Ave.
i St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
Telephone: 651-645-3601
W
LOGGED BY KSZ APPROVED MAS
Project No. ESP017939P LOG OF BORING NO. B10 Sheet 1 of 1
CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER
City of Prior Lake City of Prior Lake
SITE Credit River Road PROJECT
Prior Lake, Minnesota 2015 Street Improvements
SAMPLES TESTS
0
W
Y
J } W >z W ADDITIONAL
U r O W W z DATA/
n- -i _ ¢ m W i o REMARKS
¢< O w p>o0 ? a �O Ln >-U-
Surface Elev.: 0 o m z� z � ?z o a
0.2j-A FILL,2"of sand&gravel aggregate /——— FILL AS 1 UGE 24
\base brown moist
FILL, silty sand with gravel, brown to
2 0 dark brown, moist __ _
FILL,a mixture of sandy lean clay and 13 2 SS 18
topsoil,dark brown to black, moist
5 7 3 SS 18 14
7.0
FILL,a mixture of clayey sand and � 11 4 SS 18
sandy lean clay,trace of topsoil,with
gravel,dark brown some black, moist
10— 6 5 SS 18
12.0
SILTY SAND with gravel, fine to GLACIAL 8 6 SS 18
medium grained,gray, moist, loose ourwnsH
(SM)
14.0_ _
SILTY SAND mostly fine grained,
brown,moist, loose(SM) 15 5 7 SS 18
CLAYEY SAND with gravel, fine to— 9 8 SS 18
medium grained, brown,moist to
waterbearing,loose(SC)
20 10 9 SS 18
0
u Q
z 7 10 SS 24
z
z
a
°0 24.0
End of Boring
R
a
w
m
o WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSelement" STARTED 10/2/14 FINISHED 10/2/14
WL Q 21.9 >�N materials tzchnnlogy DRILL CO. Element DRILL RIG 367
o 662 Cromwell Ave.
7 St. Paul, MN 55114 DRILLER Dunleavy ASST DRILLER BP
u Telephone: 651-645-3601
W
LOGGED BY KSZ APPROVED MAS
element' Element St. Paul
SYMBOLS AND TERMINOLOGY ON TEST BORING LOGS
SYMBOLS
Drilling and Sampling Laboratory Testing
Symbol Description Symbol Description
HSA 3-1/4"I.D.hollow stem auger W Water content,%(ASTM:D2216)"
_FA 4",6"or 10"diameter flight auger D Dry density,pcf
_HA 2",4"or 6"hand auger LL Liquid limit(ASTM:D4318)
_DC 2-10,4",5"or 6"steel drive casing PL Plastic limit(ASTM:D4318)
_RC Size A,B or N rotary casing
PD Pipe drill or cleanout tube —Inserts in Last Column(Ou or ROD)--
CS Continuous split barrel sampling
DM Drilling mud Qu Unconfined compressive strength,psf(ASTM:D2166)
JW Jetting water Pq Penetrometer reading,tsf(ASTM:D1558)
SB 2"O.D.split barrel sampling Ts Torvane reading,tsf
L 2-1/2"or 3-1/2"O.D.SB liner sample G Specific gravity(ASTM:D854)
T 2"or 3"thin walled tube sample SL Shrinkage limits(ASTM:D427)
3TP 3"thin walled tube using pitcher sampler OC Organic content–Combustion method(ASTM:D2974)
TO 2"or 3"thin walled tube suing Osterberg sampler SP Swell pressure,tsf(ASTM:D4546)
W Wash sample PS Percent swell under pressure(ASTM:D4546)
B Bag sample FS Free swell,%(ASTM:D4546)
P Test pit sample SS Shrink swell,%(ASTM:D4546)
Q BQ,NQ,or PQ wireline system pH Hydrogen ion content–Meter Method(ASTM:D4972)
X AX,BX,or NX double tube barrel SC Suffate content,parts/million or mg1l
N Standard penetration test,blows perfoot CC Chloride content,parts/million,or mg/I
CR Core recovery,percent C' One dimensional consolidation(ASTM:D2435)
WL Water level Qc" Triaxial compression(ASTM:D2850 and D4767)
M Water level D.S.' Direct shear(ASTM:03080)
NMR No measurement recorded,primarily due to the K' Coefficient of permeability,cm/sec(ASTM:D2434)
presence of drilling or coring fluid P" Pinhole test(ASTM:D4647)
DH' Double hydrometer(ASTM:04221)
MA' Particle size analysis(ASTM:D422)
R Laboratory electrical resistivity,ohm-cm(ASTM:G57)
E' Pressuremeter deformation modulus,tsf(ASTM:D4719)
PM' Pressuremeter test(ASTM:D4719)
VS" Field vane shear(ASTM:D2573)
IR' Infiltrometer test(ASTM:D3385)
RQD Rock quality designation,percent
Results shown on attached data sheet or graph
ASTM designates American Society for esting and Materials
TERMINOLOGY
Particle Sizes Soil Layering and Moisture
Type Size Ranae Term Visual Observation
Boulders >12" Lamination Up to 1/4"thick stratum
Cobbles 3"–12" Varved Alternating laminations of any combination of
Coarse gravel 3/4"–3" clay,silt,fine sand,or colors
Fine gravel #4 sieve–3/4" Lenses Small pockets of different soils in a soil mass
Coarse sand #4-#10 sieve Stratified Alternating layers of varying materials or colors
Medium sand #10-#40 sieve Layer 1/4"to 12"thick stratum
Fine sand #40-#200 sieve Dry Powdery,no noticeable water
Silt 100%passing#200 sieve and>0.005 mm Moist Damp,below saturation
Clay 100%passing#200 sieve and<0.005 mm Waterbearing Pervious soil below water
Wet Saturated,above liquid limit
Gravel Content Standard Penetration Resistance
Coarse-Grained Soils
Fine-Grained Soils Cohesionless Soils Cohesive Soils
° ravel Description ° Gravel Description N-Value Relative Density N-Value Consistency
2-15 A little gravel <5 Trace of gravel 0-4 Very loose 0-4 Very soft
16-49 With gravel 5-15 A little gravel 5-10 Loose 5-8 Soft
16-30 With gravel 11-30 Medium dense 9-15 Firm
31-49 Gravelly 31-50 Dense 16 30 0 Hard
Very hard
>50 Verydense
Form GEO-004
0 element Element St. Paul
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
ASTM D2487 (Unified Soil Classification System)
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Syn6310 and Group Names l>,aing Laborelory TesteA Gip Group Names
Syrbol
OOARSE-GRAINED SOILS Gravels Clean Gravels Cu:-4 and 1 s Cc=30 GW Wel graded grav@16
(More than 50 9. (Lasa then 5%4nae0)
of coarse frsctton teteined m Cu<4 and!or GP Poorly graded gravels
No.4 sieve) [Cc<1 or Cc a 3]0
Gravels with Fines Fines classify as LL or MH GM Silly grevels,Fu
Lions than 50% (More than 12%ffnee� Fines classify as CIL or CH GC Clayey gravalaFo
rem load on No.200 sieve Sends Clear)Sands Cu z 6 and 1 s Cc s 3o SW Wellyraded aordr
(50 In or more of coarse (Lose then S e fines")
fraction passes Cu<6 snd!or SP Poorly graded sand
No.4 sieve) (Cc<1 or Cc�3)°
Sends wfi Fines Fines cblseAy as AFL or 1.11-1 SM cgty send°•o•'
(More then 12%fines' Fale6 classily as CL or CH SC Cl,,,,sandF°'
FINE-GRAINED SOILS Silts and Clays Inorganic PI r 7 and plots on or above W fine' CL Loan cley'CIA1
Liquid bruit PI<4 or plods below"A"line) ML SRKA-ar
loss than 5O
orgen(c Liquid *it-oven Judd<OA OL Or C pd At"
50%or more ' - e 4rgankh sit"—
passes the No.200 sieve Sills and Clays Inorganic genic PI plots on or above'A"tarts CH Fat qrlKcar
Liquid limit PI plate belovr'A-Erre MH Elask skKL.ev
50 or more
organic Liquid -oven driedOH of solo cls •tet
riaaarRd-nor <0.75
Organk aC
HIGFLY ORGANIC SOILS Prime*organic matter.dark in color,and organic oda PT Past
A Based on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm)sieve. K If soil contains 15 to<30%plus No.200,add"with sand"or
s if field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add "with gravel,"whichever is predominant.
"with cobbles or boulders.or both"to qroup name. L If soil contains?30%plus No.200,predominantly sand,
Gravels with 5 to 12 fines require dual symbols: add'sated"to group name.
GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt M If soil contains?30%plus No. 200,predominantly gravel,
GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay add"gravelly"to group name.
GP-GM poorly graded gravel with sill N
GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay o PI PI<<4 and plots on or above"A"line.
n Cu- D aDtc Cc = (D„ iz/D,a x D” P 4 or plots below"A"line.
F If soil contains�15 sand.add-with sand"to group name. o pI Pots belowlots on or 'A"line.
ve"A"lino.
If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM.
G If fines are organic,add"with organic fines'to group name
rr Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols:
SW-SM well-graded sand with sill
SW-SC well-graded sand with clay
SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt
SP-SC poorly graded sand with day
'If soil contains X15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name.
"It Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL-ML,silty clay.
SIEVE A4ALYS1;
SCNFrh IA I sitr( h0
+o*clossrf,cotion of fins- leLd
ged lolls
f aeTTine groins r2-Tf ton of cora yrame2
c H 50 tolfi �/
UC 1 4 I
Equation of A'-line
z W x Flonzontal of PI-4 to LL-25.5.
i z W
t then PI-0 73!LL-20) f♦/ Q� '.p��
0„..r5na _ ,:. F 2 Equation of'U"-line
a �� i W — VerticalatLL=l6tOPl=7
F so I /
G�
z _
d, M H
_ __ . -a0 ML i OL
PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETRLS oG �G 6-.0 7c1
". _"50 60 1 oro 110.. '00- 110
cu-0eco° 1e o "5e LIQUID Lf MIT(LL)
0.., ' -
J Jr; Cc- 2 5
AMA element' Element St. Paul
FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
Soil Sampling
Soil sampling was performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Using this procedure,
a 2" O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30".
After an initial set of 6", the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional
12" is known as the penetration resistance, or N value. The N value is an index of the
relative: density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. Thin wall
tube samples were obtained according to ASTM D 1587 where indicated by the
appropriate symbol on the boring logs. Rock core samples, if taken, were obtained by
rotary drilling in accordance with ASTM D 2113. Power auger borings, if performed,
were done in general accordance with ASTM D 1452.
Soil Classification
As the samples were obtained in the field, they were visually and manually classified by
the crew chief in accordance with ASTM D 2488. Representative portions of the
samples were then returned to the laboratory for further examination and for verification
of the field classification. Logs of the borings indicating the depth and identification of
the various strata, the N value, the laboratory test data, water level information and
pertinent information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the drill holes
are attached. The descriptive terminology and symbols used on the boring logs are
also attached.
Form GEO.005
element Element St. Paul
PREREQUISITES FOR SOUND ENGINEERING PRACTICE
In order to properly evaluate the foundation soils at a building site, it is imperative for
our firm to know exactly where the building will be placed, its size, and the elevation of
the foundation elements. Without this information, a judgment regarding the adequacy
of the preparatory foundation earthwork is not possible.
This project data is especially critical in situations when the excavation extends below
the footing grade and compacted fill is required to attain building elevations. In these
situations, the excavation would require lateral oversizing to provide suitable lateral
distribution of the footing loads.
Offset batter boards of the building lines stakes provide the best on-site verification of
the building location and size. It must be recognized that Element St. Paul does not
practice in the field of surveying. Therefore, we must rely on staking by others. If
Element St. Paul is required to perform the survey, we will retain a licensed surveyor
and invoice our client for the amount per our current fee schedule. Provision of the
building foundation plans is also important so that we may properly perform our
engineering judgments.
If the construction is redesigned or otherwise moved subsequent to our work, we should
be informed so our firm can assess if additional engineering observation is required or
suggest sound engineering alternatives. We cannot be responsible for any soil
foundation system if the structure has been relocated with respect to the excavation
subsequent to our observations.
Form GEO_007
element* Element St. Paul
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
The recommendations made in this report have been made based on the subsurface
conditions found in the borings. It is possible that there are soil and water conditions on
site that were not represented by the borings. Consequently, on-site observation during
construction is considered integral to the successful implementation of the
recommendations. We believe that qualified field personnel need to be on site at the
times outlined below to observe the site conditions and effectiveness of the
construction.
We recommend that the completed excavation and prepared subgrade be observed
and tested by a soils engineer/technician prior to fill placement or construction of any
foundation elements. These observations would be necessary to judge if all unsuitable
materials have been removed from within the planned construction area and that an
appropriate degree of lateral oversize has been provided for in those areas where fill will
be placed below the bottom of foundation grade.
We recommend a representative number of field density tests be taken in all engineered
fill placed to aid in judging its suitability. We suggest that at least one density test be
performed for at least every 2,500 square feet of engineered fill placed for every 2' of fill
depth. Additional tests should be taken where confined areas are compacted. Any
proposed fill material should be submitted to the laboratory for tests to check
compliance with our recommendations and project specifications.
Form GEO_009
element' Element St. Paul
PRECAUTIONS FOR EXCAVATING AND REFILLING DURING COLD WEATHER
The winter season in this area presents specific problems for foundation construction.
Soils that are allowed to freeze undergo a moisture volume expansion, resulting in loss of
density. These frost-expanded soils will consolidate upon thawing, causing settlement of
any structure supported on them. To prevent this settlement, frost should not be allowed
to penetrate into the soils below any proposed structure.
Ideally, winter excavation should be limited to areas small enough to be refilled to grade
higher than footing grade on the same day. Typically, these areas should be filled to floor
grade. Trenching back down to unfrozen soils for foundation construction can then be
performed just prior to footing placement. The excavated trenches should be protected
from freezing by means of insulating or heating during foundation construction. Backfilling
of the foundation trenches should be performed immediately after the below-grade
foundation construction is finished. In addition, any interior footings or footings designed
without frost protection should be extended below frost depth, unless adequate
precautions are taken to prevent frost intrusion until the building can be enclosed and
heated.
In many cases, final grade cannot be attained in one day's time, even though small areas
are worked. In the event final grade cannot be attained in one day's time, frost can be
expected to develop overnight. Leaving a layer of loose soil on top of the compacted
material overnight can minimize the depth of frost penetration. However, any frost that
forms in this loose layer, or snow that accumulates, should be completely removed from
the fill area prior to compaction and additional soil placement. Frozen soils or soils
containing frozen material or snow should never be used as fill material.
After the structure has been enclosed, all floor slab areas should be subjected to ample
periods of heating to allow thawing of the soil system. Alternatively, the frozen soil can be
completely removed and be replaced with an engineered fill. The floor slab areas should
be checked at random and representative locations for remnant areas of frost and density
tests should be performed to document fill compaction to slab placement.
Due to the potential problems associated with fill placement during cold weather, a full-
time, on-site soils technician should monitor any filling operations. Full-time monitoring
aids in detecting areas of frozen material, or potential problems with frozen material within
the fill, so the appropriate measures can be taken. The choice of fill material is particularly
important during cold weather, since clean granular fill material can be placed and
compacted more efficiently than silty and clayey soils. In addition, greater magnitudes of
heaving can be expected with freezing of the more frost susceptible silts and clays.
If more specific frost information or cold weather data concerning other construction
materials is required, please contact us.
Form GEO_011