Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Permit 14. 0227, 13. 0132, , Cnrrftfirafr of C rrupattr CITY OF PRIOR LAKE Prjnrf nrixtf of l'iuIbin cxts rrf nz N Final Permitted ElConditional C.O. Expires This Certificate issued pursuant to the requirements of Section 110 of the ❑Residential/❑International Building Code certifying that at the time of issuance this structure was in compliance with the various ordinances of the City of Prior Lake regulating building,construction or use. For the following: Use Classification �/N ! /1/1 L Bldg.Permit No. 1--3- /3.2- Occupancy Type Type Construction ,, Zoning District r�/S.� Legal Description 4 2 Jif //-/-6- !/1.Vff 5 d/' (moi"' /.te)y ( 0 v ."--• Owner of Building Site Address S 7* e--/ >✓oy, c-0v' Contractor's Name&Address Ni/l—TO/V //-,/(„(,67re._ 1201;A---/ ..0_ /moiC.W/ -5 ^ . City Planner / ld,ng Offi al J ,. Date: t . Date: POST IN CONSPICUOUS PLACE N N 2 gl'o' ( rz ] ■ ■ ■ § zw13a 2222www `IJ \ \ _ N 0 ■ § SS��g - z 2 ~ DOO000 w ■ i 2 © z , cc 2 5 z }}I k f o § ■ 0 o fa rz @ a. ILI z r- Z CC 2� XZzg \ w0. / ` ■ , 0 a azw ■ g ~ � w 0 en o $ oI_w o & Z 0.§§■ �a w w § § § 000000 Q U ■ z a a P. § § \ u $ S e n o (13. F . 2 § z 0 z 0 12 o o $ @ � k § z 2k2§� z W k 0 0 4 FA cg ow itj fs E. kk22zw- 2 . le ■ ■ u q 06 § § 2 P. 542E- ■ o 0O k 2 cl 2 0g « 0 a 000O� C.) Nk0 0 In A. r / J a' IL � T,' 1' W E C • J hhl SS.. Z .43 c Z 000000 !` > c W/ 0 4 = N cje,_ ci J i, w z t, n _ _ YYZ , a -■ = o W O a' H a' p LL J I O U () 4 X O W Z _ SS = ? t A. C1 c a H) 0 a m2CC Wwmx , a Z a � 3 aUl Ul / 1 44 ,q w w w w W a a a W w _ r p Z V IL Y0 (�� ^ O "li I`.8 C 0 o oto OZ Vl O 0 Z 4t A y 41 � , ' 0 1 u- V O �: OI 0 vi J I �' s 3 as m zo ?~ z W , a ' ' , i H w w w u.V W Z W F- ZZn < W 2 ce , L Q C V = <0 a 00 ❑ 00 V ❑ ❑ c W Z ~ _Jj EV � ti �VVi Q ., �; V tL T. � Wu) 2 N Ems. .N 1 ❑130000 \"" W O O • -r • J CO c O W Z W 0 > >13"2- < Z G 0 4, E2 O O LL J O N W W F 2 O z a N S :•�Z 1 Zr = ZLL a Z N �, 0 OW. 2 I UJ .�" �V O D z ►- O k. nJ � 3NOJ.� . W Ul 0 UJ UJ lij z ❑ 1313013❑ g►. c) Oa' 0 te uu a LL J o Y W Z . 0 O s ti 5p ° , g .,.. . n a 0o z 0 Z W cn ,1 < I- I 114 Fig c; 01:4:0r. cit V W DC W 00 <W O O O N O D uOtOi. ? �iv� ;(1t O r ❑ c V ? Q O o=. ❑ 00013 V C7 il 2w Z ~1- / p 3 a �. cc ' u; F"' WW � Z w �gggZ c ! 4 oa1z ' a s Z � � �C. w Z 000000 > 1 4) � NI, ` W o 1 N o W '� z z p D a L i Q� m o W , ! (7 0001 d �� i x 0 Q z 0 0 4� W OC x Zax = ZIL �, i P 16 W C N m R' a m �. CL N 0 a x w x AA w 8 Z �' W d ? W ..v g, o o z F- O a. NSwa2 Q two w w k' a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DO p � -- oOC O W i a a u. 4 � = J rt YV Z Z U p rw gO • Z 0 S 'k LL 17: po 0 w 'C W Z O Z W `12 4:., ;,I I I N s ti O! Fe" H O Zoz~ z W w v w u.v w z1 W 88gqg .�, - I§ (gyp a 0 6 6 "5 U 0 a o 3 0 (.u. uu.. 3 T. u, O \`� E/J 3 v v a 0z 4 0 a 00000 C) _ - _ ❑*❑ E g J Mc. z 1� ,,,t J aLre 4 Ili z wg5 � a>az 1c s 2 • Iiiii❑ kK v -N - W_ i 1 dig N J LL oy = YYz - z c O 4C H et O LL J v„- i ' Z o 0 W o 1- x o Doo $ yg _O la 4 Q' z - XZzz riN 0 d W a I W 1 04J mzZWapu. , 1 - i-1 — w ; - O E r o a131nalll V+ t W W wru.Z X k. 000000 �'\r }._ ''i`, o o i , , v •} - a a t- W 1. V Z. %4 �6 > 9 J re YW il L V,D 0 Q Q O IQ Ou. 03 Xz 0 z 0 to _ y z o 0 z - O a I— R .' I- a 3 4 a • 0 �, Lwy a � CO 0 \zOzg CO W - "'1 ` �. a) 0 0 4C u. F- z '� i W W w }}OW ce W liaZ pM N1111 V .x. I re CC aY CC Ct c a q 1�-N o 0 IOLtOi. ILZu. Z5 O -._ J� \4 �. i O U O 0 V V ? a 0 a. ❑❑ D ❑ 0 ❑ C.) � 0 Cy J i M J 1t2 W W W Z co i �555z < w n in O2W Wiry 0 O � \ ' �?O �p: .q Z < �y �\ w0u. it0 Z �C 0000 ❑❑ > N Jc3 w O - 0 v w T, O -� » a 1 W L Z NU. C p v F- 2 oo `I z k 03 o 0 W W I- X 0 000 < 1 O U V 4 = a Z xxzz F= d W a 0 ,,� 0 W maCCrtE, u. a to C.) a xzwlsx N ws a Z J W a J W W W a us N z X C �� X00000 o LU LU 111 LU O cg z Gam. a LL w 41 Y W -.4.) ,,F. 0 < 0 u0. gF z 0 0 o OCC Z z U t/) LL ~ 0 U a0 ' O z <Z� ai Z • d < < I F- F- 0(~j W ce W F=Zx � J - 2 x re fY L J A re O O V =y o 00 $LL �=" co p 3 u 0 a 0 = < 0 a. 000000 (..) 0(0 5 O J N A 2 Ili J K 1i I UW�- *�riIIa ' < kr p - W N) o55gJ z a w 43.- Op �� - z NUli5. 1 W N ) 000000 '� >0 a 1 W = • Ill N 0y m O O_1 z a z p g O U aso 1 44 OO _ U c � = Z1. . 8 (7 U ` O a I = W Z g S ' p p 2 X O 3U ~ � 3U • W W W W k. aa3ma2 M \ i cWi v re Z0 0 0 1:3)(0 illil,, i 0 0 o� IX W •L > Z J r w u. W W Z Q p c f- , YU ��i Q N U —4n- t- OWI OZ 1 O O a i . H V v�� 2 • 0 ;4- 0 Si Z Y Z fil c Q q -J iza LLO N Z HZ2-1JgW 2iii \ O O O U V OW OWC W Z 00 W I- 2 U U 2- 541)Z II- 0 § Z LLu. u.Ztiio O ❑ 0 2 Z5 0 a 000000 C.) fel of PRio CITY OF PRIOR LAKE BUILDING PERMIT, Date Rec'd a 44 e TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE Umy my AND UTILITY CONNECTION PERMIT a/Hxt3S011. I. White File PERMIT NO 2-1 3 Yellow ow A APPlicani f .ai. * t 3 (Please type or print and sign at bottom) ADDRESS _ ZONING(office use) 5C- l �-- C---14.40 C ` g 5.- . LEGAL DESCRIPTION(office use only) LOT 3 BLOCK ADDITION Mitt .—..AC,f-S GXC C0 PID Zs • 4 • ©O 3.O OWNER 11 c I z • 1 So •(a 150 (Name) °6‘ 4;s1%-/' ll� ��l'e• (Phone)N (Address) --1\---63'� 01c.©�I S Aitm S III AC +5*t-l.S1 't NI 55* 4-11 I BUILDER (Company Name) D 4-v\v_c_-- (Phone) (Contact Name) (Phone) (Address) TYPE OF WORK SNew Construction ❑Deck ❑Porch ❑Re-Roofing ❑Re-Siding ❑Lower Level Finish 0 Fireplace Addition ❑Alteration ❑Utility Connection CODE: [ I.R.C. ❑I.B.C. \Misc. 1�'*�v F14 . s.r, 17. \ Type of Construction: I II III TV V A B \ PROJECT COST/VALUE $ Occupancy Group: A B E F H I M R S U (excluding land) Division: 1 2 3 4 5 1 I hereby certify that I have furnished information on this application which is to the best of my knowledge true and correct. I also certify that I am the owner or authorized agent for the above-menu. ed property and that all construction will conform to all existing state and local laws and will proceed in accordance with submitted plans. I am aware that the building official canoke this permit for just cause. It� thermore,I hereby agree that the city official or a designee may enter upon the property to perform needed inspect ons. X �i • r. _ 41 A/24 l4 Signature Contractor's License No., Dat Perm'Valuation /210 0,00 - Park Support Fee # $ Permit Fee $ 20 -(1 3 � t SAC # $ 2.495- . / o Plan Check Fee $ C 34_1:18 Water Meter Size 5/8X,, $ �©_ State Surcharge $ i 5-` r- Pressure Reducer $ ( 5a. Penalty $ Sewer/Water Connection Fee # $ l 5 , Plumbing Permit Fee $ t s-- Water Tower Fee # $ 1 000 - Mechanical Permit Fee $ k , ?- Builder's Deposit $ W i.3„ V3 Lir Sewer&Water Permit Fee $ L5-6 9 Other $ Gas Fireplace Permit Fee I $ 9-A � TOTAL DUE o a4, (c21(4--- 1110 I le This Applica'to, •t ec es Your Blinding Permit Whet Ap, i ved Paid 9, 7�/ Receip O!pi• Date /4/J9_ By Bui tine tticial bate This is to certify that the request in the above application and accompanying documents is in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance and may proceed as requested. This document when signed by the City Planner constitutes a temporary Certificate of Zoning compliance and allows construction'/ to commence. {Before occupancy,a Certificate-Iof Occupancy must be issued. Val-Li,ces O .. /,260 p,27 Plannin,i%trector Date Special Conditions,if any 24 hour notice for all inspections(952)447-9850,fax(952)447-4245 4646 Dakota Street Prior Lake,MN 55372 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE BUILDING PERMIT, Date Rec'd °� pRf 0'� TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE 0� 5 /� Y ;' A 1 T�'�-fCTION PERMIT E � 33 p I.Why;- File - '"�NN> ,NE,..„ i/ ,A"�" n 2. F_ City PERMIT t 3- k3Z 3 low Applicant ....../.... —_ (Please type or print and sign at bott..) ADDRESS �" ZONING(office use) SG 114 COO& Elie friti E — At oi- lee, MA/ 5-5 37 2. LEGAL DESCRIPTION(office use only) LOT `� BLOCK 1 ADDITION 3-h e. 13i4c5 ect y, cV& PID ZS-418 90030 OWNER T /4' I(,� l0 I2—?.Sc Co lS 6 (Name) 450A A� f ' (( ,/(�,// (Phone) (Address) S(6C ifs ot�vtcs 4ti . S. — 141'00 c0 f01t5/ ,i'V 5S'// 7 BUILDER /n`1�P� (Phone) (Z-750 — r5r6 (�eyName) 3\\ Soh mi de, (Contact Name) V eit-50t^ /t4 /i/t (Phone) 6(Z-7c0 — 0So (Address) S-116C:::, Iikoms$ kit. S. — /4/VI vkac,Oc%51n/`- �/7 TYPE OF WORK New Construction ❑Deck ❑Porch ❑Re-Roofing ❑Re-Siding DLower Level Finish 0 Fireplace '(]Addition ❑Alteration DUtility Connection ElMisc. Fa—',.,,p f4—T-c.)/JsCrt.1 LI-- CODE: I.R.C. ❑I.B.C. 2 /t�� Type of onstnution: I II III IV V A B PROJECT COST/VALUE $ V (0°0 Occupancy Group: ABE F HI MR SU (excluding land) Division: 1 2 3 4 5 I hereby certify that I have furnished information on this application which is to the best of my knowledge true and correct. I also certify that I am the owner or authorized agent for the above-m. toned property and that all construction will conform to all existing state and local laws and will proceed in accordance with submitted plans. I am aware that the building official , revoke this per?(or just jcuse. Furm r ore,I hereby agree that the city official or a designee may enter upon the property to perform needed ins ection. x /, • � /0 �`7 Signature Contractor's License No. D to P. mit Valuation '3pt p®®, Park Support Fee # $ Permit Fee $ `1.& 9.CO SAC # $ Plan Check Fee $ 3675. l Water Meter Size 5/8"; 1"; $ State Surcharge $ t 5- — Pressure Reducer $ Penalty $ Sewer/Water Connection Fee # $ Plumbing Permit Fee $ Water Tower Fee # $ Mechanical Permit Fee $ Builder's Deposit $ l g00. Sewer&Water Permit Fee $ Other $ Gas Fireplace Permit Fee $ TOTAL DUE {fli, -/i J a/ . 1.. $2-1€'.$ .V5 This Appli 2 /5 /3 ion Be o es Your Building Permit en A proved Paid Z.- 2, '�eC •t No.` `r 7J�7 Date . Z z„ P :.. f...1 Building Official— Date This is to certify that the request in the above application and accompanying documents is in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance and may proceed as requested. This document signed by the City Planner constitutes a temporary Certificate of Zoning compliance and allows construction to commence. Before occupancy,a Certificate of Occupancy must be /07 a /4 /7- / o tie ft�.rjekl O„i ii? 4_4707.----- hector Date Special Conditiofts,if any 24 hour notice for all inspections(952)447-9850,fax(952)447-4245 4646 Dakota Street Prior Lake,MN 55372 o� Px�oR I CITY OF PRIORUTILITY LAKE BUILDING PERMIT, Date Rec'd ,� TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE I AND CONNECTION PERMIT v � 44A'NESOo' I. White File 2 Pink City PERMIT NO. 3 Yellow Applicant (Please type or print and sign at bottom) ADDRESS 7Th. , _ ZONING(office use) ca(4%. 4- -7/2t/\145) - ' ( LEGAL DESCRIPTION(office use only) LOT BLOCK ADDITION PID OWNER `_, S- At U.L.6`'-- (Phone) �2(z 7�- -ice l 5-6 (Name) G- �j_ °� (Address) \ l"U K 1 4 & p� r,,i,t`. (...SL f`N c5"4-i 1 1 BUILDER E / /y'\t— (Phone) (Company Name) (Contact Name) (Phone) (Address) TYPE OF WORK 0 New Construction ❑Deck ❑Porch DRe•Roofing ORe-Siding ❑Lower Level Finish 0 Fireplace ❑Addition DAlteration ❑Utility Connection /�j\ 1 ev 4'f c — p D Misc. ( �I� 1. " Aee,i � "�-`t.c - CODE: L.R.C. DLB.C. Type of Construction: I II III IV V A B PROJECT COST/VALUE $ Occupancy Group: A B E F H I M R S U (excluding land) Division: 1 2 3 4 5 I hereby certify that I have furnished information on this application which is to the best of my knowledge true and correct. I also certify that I am the owner or authorized agent for the above-mentioned property and that all construction will conform to all existing state and local laws and will proceed in accordance with submitted plans. I am aware that the building official can revoke this permit for just cause Furthermore,I hereby agree that the city official or a designee may enter upon the properly to perform needed inspections. ..(s, R Signature Contractor's License No. Date Permit Valuation Park Support Fee # $ Permit Fee $ (C./ SAC # $ Plan Check Fee $ Water Meter Size 5/8"; I"; $ State Surcharge $ Pressure Reducer $ Penalty $ Sewer/Water Connection Fee # $ Plumbing Permit Fee $ Water Tower Fee # $ Mechanical Permit Fee $ Builder's Deposit $ Sewer&Water Permit Fee $ Other $ Gas Fireplace Permit Fee I $ TOTAL DUE $ (; i This Applica':n Bo"•t mes our Building Permit n A proved Paid Receipt No. A� I / Date By '� ,� ` 4111 , Building Official rate This is to certify that the request in the above application an. .mpanying documents is in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance and may proceed as requested. This document when signed by the C'ty Plann st, es a • -. ertificate of Zoning compliance and allows construction to1ommen Before occcuppa�nccy,,a `rtifcaa of Occupancy must be issued. /' " 2/) / S O` t`L bt r:�►ts`ter""lei byte& pere`P'k �t /L/ ��� ! J[/ r`� S&ruet.-e Gi�oA,�rs,'r e'tte-°hF wra.LS �/ Planni A�irector Date Special Conditions,if any 24 hour notice for all inspections(952)447-9850,fax(952)447-4245 4646 Dakota Street Prior Lake,MN 55372 ,. � ,,.:...r.,, .:,�,;.r,x'f••,r`"i,z. ... �a.:: .. !nrwa w`^�"lak4 !^, Oi PRIp� e. U tri White - Building Canary -Engineering "'`^NES°�� Pink -Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST fr/ NAME OF APPLICANT \--- 1, `` . -•J 1 t � ,....-C2....._ APPLICATION RECEIVED ` `' ' L The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity whiclj is proposed at: ,,_. cfr, i.411,7- ,, ,o, \.„,) I il `‘,...,, ,, ' 1 1:— L,,,,,,,.0 1, ( , „,..., C.iv,' ,_ Accepted Accepted With Corrections Denied Reviewed By: // 4,------ Date: /02-/7-42 / Comments: A 144;4- 61- mouse f;;,,,,.,/.0.0„„ cel y . , , . ,... , "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." ' PRip� U to White -Building Canary -Engineering IZINNESO Pink - Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST NAME OF APPLICANT C___..4\-S -793 f\-1 L.-(_-,-_,(-Z, APPLICATION RECEIVED t d 721,1 I 1---' « -t 32– — The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity whit is proposed at: 5-'(, . t 4- ,,SLI .3 , a 1J. t. 041 Accepted Accepted With Corrections Denied c2 C.) 4 Date: 2-.Reviewed By: --r--Comments: • 1-4�c � -ifv, L` - Fuz,vvo pA---1' ( o"..) as,...n . --rti--6- ik, us-, Fc.9,4„,6 06,--)--t 0,-.3 -1 ,01424,4,‘ vt----k (-----0,11,-i t S 402j cS \ 3 - ' 3 3 . T(+ 4 - R„„( ___1_ (- 17-41,--0 (kic, Pt-4"i'-3 /Aiti)Err ke Rizrwv., '1 -r..,(2_6' _ k3 . (( 2? -) t S ts Nd-r-c-N- \C ('-'5' n --r----6()--- Loc- \ 4, 2. ,--14. -3 a ip---14-5-&-ar---5 ec---C -1 , "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." vRio,, ,o , EY, Iiik 't.4 White -Building ��, Canary -Engineering NNEsoPink -Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST NAME OF APPLICANT ' J ASo tJ t4 i c Jc. APPLICATION RECEIVED -464-7-6—' f t /zq/ t 3 • /3 Z The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity which is proposed at: /42-- d././771,70 9 c 7 V , F-�,�4-n diq a, Accepted ,, Accepted With Corrections Denied Reviewed By: L41 . 7Je. 7 / 0, PG c�d1__ Date: _ . A/3 3 Comments: See Reverse Side for Additional Information! See Attachments: 1) Grading Plan, 2) Erosion Control Standards "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." O� pRIO+i' tri White -Building Canary -Engineering 41INNESO Pink -Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST NAME OF APPLICANT -' � � `" " `"r ..w APPLICATION RECEIVED --- The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity which is proposed at: Y, f Accepted 2( Accepted With Corrections Denied Reviewed By: AM/ Date: Comments: Uarrr;wiees 4pro tree/ e� re«-04 Oho cwyKet± (702°g0-7 4. "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." gf en White -Building Canary -Engineering 4474.,,Es°tt' Pink -Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST %.,‘,NAME OF APPLICANT `'� ! {-x .:yz .. APPLICATION RECEIVED 1 0 %.7 -,,-111 -' The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity which is proposed at: . �. ' �,1 ; -- r . Accepted Accepted With Corrections Denied Reviewed By: ,- -, Date: Comments: "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." 0.0 171 White -Building Canary -Engineering 4titvxase° Pink -Planning BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST NAME OF APPLICANT --- e4. t I— APPLICATION RECEIVED ' o 2' } L The Building, Engineering, and Planning Departments have reviewed the building permit application for construction activity which is proposed at: A-3&)v 5(, . 4— ,.47 _,C) ci, __ ,69:LA.57F-1- riN1 P. Accepted ✓ Accepted With Corrections Denied Reviewed By: ft ANAgii'a , --am Date: 4A.b 1 4- Comments: - Gc-) Ls l ".1 '9-(Ai- A) G .�-�--s' / j / 7 �\mss. "The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid." pgt0� Date Rec'd CITY OF PRIOR LAKE PLUMBING PERMIT � so�° I.sole Fiit PERMIT NO./g' (2 3 z.cola city 3.Yellow Applicant e (Please type or print and sign at bottom) ADDRESS ZONING(office use) 5(0 ) Li Cc,r%iJ-/ CO Tr l LEGAL DESCRIPTION(office use only) LOT BLOCK ADDITION PID OWNER p�„1` _ /` (Name) , / 1�6 U� l (Phone) (Address) APPLICANT °i(�> 1 t '9, Z -1/ 1 I j r L_ , 2/p (Name) U"W� (Phone) `1 �1 (Address) \11�� V V C 1 h j?l`;o.r1 (,ACe, - 3 7 1- (Address) (City) (Zip Code) (Contact Person) .t cLV-v-+.' \ (Phone) APPLICANT SIGNATURE \ _ !1 DATE 0 Z 1 c NI APPLICANT PLEASE COMPLETE BELOW Quantity Type of Fixture Quantity Type of Fixture Bath Tub with or without shower Rough-ins Dish asher Water Heater Flo;r "":i 1`;-' Water Softener L• c a oNt>s{o • rlcr.. Stand Pipe(Washing Machine) ia Laundry Trayjl or 2 compartment Sewage Ejector ShowerBackflow Assembly Sinks �7- )—$ .; -S Backflow Assembly Test Bar Sink Lawn Sprinkler Water Closet(Toilet) Other FEE SCHEDULE Industrial,Commercial&Multi-family 1%of job cost with a$49.50 minimum Residential,New One&Two-Family $149.50 Residential,Additions&Alterations $49.50 The Minnesota Statutes§326B.148 ` $ Building Permit# "SURCHARGE"has been extended The The minimum surcharge for a PLUMBING PERMIT FEE $ te "fixed fee"permit is$5.00 STATE SURCHARGE $ GTOTAL PERMIT FEE $ ) _SD This Application Becomes Your Building Permit When Approved Paid -.5-22 Receipt No. Z�>s7s--' ? 2...,/:/.(-----Dat2...,/:/.(-----2...,/:/.(----- By /� Building Official Date l�� 24 hour notice for all inspections(952)447-9850,fax(952)447-4245 4646 Dakota Street S.E.,Prior Lake,Minnesota 55372 VRIO RECEIPT#72265 0 �' CITY OF PRIOR LAKE � �� 4646PRIOR DAKOTALAKEMN STREET55372 S.E. 1 I 6 ,,,� tti (952)447-9800, FAX(952)447-4245 DATE: (� ILIINNESOi.1 Received of AA-50... 1/i/ \(-k-c....--%0.-- 1 �(315- Fey\ ( `wki4rRv To for the purpose of t1( liC 2 ')P-V , ONI ,F, 4 ' 2 zi I 1-4 ® - 113 4c),— (00t Payment EDCash Invoice # Er Check CC962-- 0 ACH iii Total Goo" -e - . _ _ . • he City of Prior Lake I BUILDING PERMIT# P.I.D.#ZSy$°lGY>30 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE SINGLE FAMILY r WORKSHEET NAME OF GENERAL CONTRACTOVO n )G,50� /144 le— ADDRESS OF :PROPOSED PROJECTl�� ( L" Qi I SF SQUARE FOOT FLOOR AREA FIRST FLOOR(INCLUDE 4-SEASON PORCH AREA)G L/C, -SECOND FLOOR AREA)G rj 2. BASEMENT FINISHED- Oyu'C Sem& t r t Co/ Co BASEMENT UNFINISHED- Low26tat52Menr /, GI (o GARAGE ?SGn2y 720 DECK 16",(K,',' Z.56 3-SEASON PORCH SCREEN PORCH _ NUMBER OF FULL BATHROOMS 7 NUMBER OF HALF BATHROOMS SEWER AND WATER CONTRACTOR: (-1(v^6 2 .ttINIIned NAME PHONE# NUMBER OF GAS FIREPLACE j / INSTALLER: Cc,C)N 114i)/tit- 6/Z --,CG'(/So NAME //�� PHONE# NUMBER OF WOOD BURNING FIREPLACES: (LJ INSTALLER: NAME �,,� PHONE# / 'CJ ?MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR: P4�( r (D/Z )8- ' 2NE PHONE# FURNACE: CHECK ONE: igYES ❑NO AIR CONDITIONER: CHECK ONE: • Z YES ❑NO AIR TO AIR EXCHANGER: CHECK ONE: El YES ❑NO n PLUMBING CONTRACTOR: D/�`ce 131►^Z- �52-2 i 2 -�%3b NAME PHONE# WATER METER SIZE: CHECK ONE: ❑ 5/8"(STANDARD) ›tt 1" ❑ 1 I/" ❑ 2" THE CONTRACTOR HAS VISUALLY INSPECTED THE SIDEWALK AND CURB AND THERE ARE NO CRACKS. THE CONTRACTOR HAS VISUALLY INSPECTED THE SIDEWALK AND CURB AND THERE ARE CRACKS IN THE ❑SIDEWALK ❑ CURB ATTENTION APPLICANT: YOUR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION IS COMPLETE. J:\FORMS\Single Family Worksheet.doc • • CIT'Y.OF PRIOR LAKE r,... ,, s r.;. ..„:.T 4 Imm• a au0,,,Q.,.....,4%-.,.. ,Caleu1at o�xe .x:_-. =xe; - . -' ' • (Tobe Submitted with Building Permit Application) • . = " For All Properties Located in the Shoreland District(SD), 01 . • The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted is 30 Percent: ;'- '-' Property Address 561'4 '. GlIND.Y COVE 1rXI+I L . .S,e- ::.r f;;.,. -• Lot Area pKEA o® a .IV. - /ao77 sq.; x 3 % - (?.: ' *************************** ** * ** * * * ** ** ***** * • LENGTH ,....,‘,.....,.:::"..-..,,•-,;...,4,4TIS,. SQ.FEET HOUSE = 9 6 16 �r. :�,;v_ ATTACHED GARAGE x *>: _ .. :--- - TOT<Alt PRINCIPAL.STRUCTURE .:.-..,.::,!;-4., ,.., ., •) • DETACHED-BUILDINGS # x ¢ „ . = . ,� . ... . . - , ; , . a , . _ : , • TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS • • • i 2-e, • DRIVEWAY/PAVED AREAS ` ^ - - ,O�i v A‘c • (Driveway-paved or not) w (Sidewalk/Parking Areas) x ' TOTALPAVED:AREAS, -• . i { 'ATIOS/PORCHES/DECKS F x :` (Open Decks%."min.opening between j� :;' boards,with a pervious•surfaee below, :` .. are not considered to be impervious) :" ' • x - • AT,D CKS Y 3 :L TOTAL OVER. . • ..i.,.%,.:... ' '`i'.` • ['OTAL,'•N. io EIA: VI l ''.:..'S.... R : c •---,�. Z7• ,., • fNDEItio ER • - Z3 1 r pared y A�(w&) • MA��•. Date 0.y t7`t '.. .., • ; ,.=t 1. ...-:... ::,.,..:;•.i .' ._. ..i .r',, if,,,.,: :,�„� iaz,: • o r '311r-�w .oni�anv STo�E�� K� �ii/�► �`�`����`;���,.bc .: :u `1,52-402 - 9 7.-0 2 Bob Hutchins From: millerfest@aol.com Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 2:55 AM To: Larry Poppler; Bob Hutchins Cc: jbennett@braunintertec.com Subject: Fwd: Global Stability Analysis for Candy Cove Proposed House, Prior Lake, MN Attachments: Footing_and_Foundation_Plans.pdf; Certificate_of_Survey.pdf; Cross_Section_Overview_Sketch.pdf; Section_B.pdf; Section_C.pdf Larry/Bob, Braun Engineering is aware of the exact house plans that I am building on Lot 3, and the previously submitted Global Stability Analysis is meant to be sufficiently accurate to cover the latest plans and latest Certificate of Survey of Survey for Lot 3 Will this e-mail from Braun Intertec(see below), which references my latest plans (see attachments), be sufficient for addressing this issue? Also, Bob: were you able to come up with a suggestion for the driveway slope? I'm thinking a tilt of about 6"towards highway 13, would probably be sufficient? I think this would send —95% of the water running down the driveway to the Hwy 13 side of the driveway where it can go into a catch basin and the small amount that might go past it during a downpour would just flow past the side of the house instead of running towards the garage. I'm pretty opposed to making the driveway steeper, because of the potential for cars to bottom out which is an every single day problem; whereas the potential for heavy rain events to send water past the door seal and into the garage is probably a couple of times a year problem and I think the garage will be waterproofed well enough that it won't cause any problems. Either way, the tilt should resolve this issue; and I have red-lined the certificate of survey to show this, which I will send over in the next e-mail. Do I need to revise the survey, or can you just attach the red-lined sheet to my permit. I thought that maybe since Stonebrooke has to do an as built-survey after we are done, this minor change wouldn't require them to adjust the survey right now? Since, most of these surveys end up being interim grading designs, which go in the trash after we do the as-built survey or we make landscaping adjustments at a later date. If you could let me know if this resolves the Driveway &the Global Stability issues, it would be helpful. I hope resolve the remaining Construction Sequencing issue tomorrow. Talk to you later, Jason Miller Original Message From: Bennett, Jimmy<jbennett a(�,braunintertec.com> To: 'millerfest@aol.com' <millerfest c(Daol.com> Cc: Van Abel, Josh <JVanAbel a(�,braunintertec.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 14, 2013 5:44 pm Subject: Global Stability Analysis for Candy Cove Proposed House, Prior Lake, MN To whom it may concern, The Slope Stability Evaluation Report, regarding The Bluffs of Candy Cove, rendered for Jason Miller on January 14, 2013, by Braun Intertec, includes global slope stability analyses that include the proposed house on Lot 3. As illustrated in the Appendix of the Report on the"Cross-Section Overview Sketch" (also attached to this email), both Section B and Section C pass through and apply to the proposed house on Lot 3. The global stability analyses for Section B and C, based upon design and construction assumptions referenced within the report, both yielded a Factor-of- Safety of 1.5. The applicable analytical results for both Section B and Section C are attached as a .pdf. 1 Furthermore, per the attached "Certificate of Survey"and "Footing and Foundation Plans"for the proposed house on Lot 3, provided by Jason Miller, the aforementioned global stability analyses, governed by the design and construction assumptions referenced within the report, still apply and yield an acceptable Factor-of-Safety. Please contact either Josh Van Abel at 952.995.3210, or myself at 612.750.3329, with any questions, comments, and/or for more information. Thank you very much, and have a great day. Sincerely, Jimmy Bennett BRAUN Jimmy Bennett,EIT,LEED AP BD+C I N T l RTFC Engineer-In-Training Employee 11001 Hampshire Avenue S I Minneapolis,MN 55438 Ownership 952.995.2232 direct 1612.750.3329 mobile jbennett@braunintertec.com working for you braunintertec.com (Twitter: Braun Intertec I LinkedIn:Braun Intertec 2 Bob Hutchins From: Bob Hutchins Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:41 AM To: Larry Poppler Subject: FW: Candy Cove Retaining Wall Attachments: P1070889.1PG; P1070891.JPG; P1070897.JPG; P1070898.JPG FYI Jason ha a copy of this email.He will pay extra fee. 0 '`' "' Robert D.Hutchins Building Official City of Prior Lake 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake,MN 55372 952.447.9851 Fax 952.440.4263 City Email Updates. Sign up now. From: Jason Wedel [mailto:JWedek wsbeng.com] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:05 AM To: Bob Hutchins Subject: Candy Cove Retaining Wall Bob, The Candy Cove retaining wall is coming along nicely. I have attached a few pictures for your viewing pleasure. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that they will get it finished this year and we will need to come back in the spring. There are a couple of reasons for this. First,they changed the plans for the proposed stairway from precast to cast-in-place. Second,they have changed the alignment of the wall and have run out of block for completion. The block manufacturer has halted production until the spring. The delayed project schedule will require our structural engineer to make an extra visit to the site that was not included in our original scope of services. In addition, review of the plans for the cast in place stairs was not included in our original scope of services either. The additional cost for these two items is $456 (4 additional hours). If these are items you would like us to perform is it possible to obtain the additional $456 in escrow from the developer? Please let me know how you would like us to proceed. Thanks. Jason Jason Wedel, PE Municipal Senior Project Manager d: 763-287-8520 I c:612-369-3931 WSB&Associates, Inc. 1701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 I Minneapolis, MN 55416 1 ge(jh REScheck Software Version 4.3.1 Compliance Certificate Project Title: New Home for Jason Miller Energy Code: 2003 IECC Location: Prior Lake,Minnesota Construction Type: Single Family Glazing Area Percentage: 17e Heating Degree Days: 7626 Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: Lot 3,Block 1 The Bluffs of Candy Cove Jason Miller Steve Vespested Candy Cove Trail Whitewater Development,Inc. Designed Living,Inc. Prior Lake,MN Minneapolis,MN 14662 Glendale Ave.SE 612-750-6150 Prior Lake,MN 55372 952-270-2797 Ccmp'iarce: Passes Compliance:15.5%Better Than Code Maximum UA:1024 Your UA:865 The%Better or Worse Than Code Index reflects how close to complance the house le based on code trade-oft rules. It DOES NOT provide an estimate of energy use or cost relative to a minimum-code home. Gross Cavity Cont Glazing UA Assembly Area or R-Value R-Value or Door Perimeter U-Factor Ceiling 1:Raised or Energy Truss 1585 44.0 0.0 35 Floor 1:All-Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 33 44.0 0.0 1 Floor 2:All-Wood Joist/Truss:Over Unconditioned Space 720 44.0 0.0 17 Floor 3:Slab-On-Grade:Heated 108 38.0 113 Insulation depth:0.0' Wall 1:Wood Frame,16"o.c. 1720 19.0 0.0 77 Window 2:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 327 0.330 108 Window 4:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 68 0.330 22 Door 5:Glass 36 0.310 11 Wall 2:Wood Frame,16"o.c. 1240 19.0 0.0 55 Window 3:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 264 0.330 87 Door 6:Solid 23 0.310 7 Door 7:Glass 40 0.330 13 Wall 3:Solid Concrete or Masonry:Interior Insulation 1548 0.0 10.0 99 Window 1:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 216 0.330 71 Door 3:Solid 20 0250 5 Door 4:Glass 20 0.310 6 Wall 4:Solid Concrete or Masonry:Interior Insulation 1548 0.0 10.0 113 Door 1:Solid 20 0.250 5 Door 2:Glass 64 0.310 20 Furnace 1:Forced Hot Air 92 AFUE Air Conditioner 1:Electric Central Air 13 SEER Compliance State : : The proposed building design described here is consistent with the building plans,specifications,and other calculations submi, with the permit application.The proposed building has been designed to meet the 2003 IECC requirements in iRESche Version ,.3.1 :1,„, . ply with the mandatory requirements listed in the REScheck Inspection Checklist. 1 grit, idu� �`�t /..E.kiLZPESSID LI- Name-Title —Cigneilre- Date Project Title:New Home for Jason Miller Report date: 11/11/12 Data filename:C:1Documents and Settings1Steveltocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\Jason Miller Rescheck(2).rck Page 1 of 1 P R ' R DRMO LAKEBUILDINGEPATANDENT NF SPECTION INSPECTION RECORD SITE ADDRESS __ \` �,,�•�( �� NATURE OF WORK SF--0 USE OF BUILDING F,or►-\,` PERMIT NO. — I4 22 DATE ISSUED CONTRACTOR ��0,s 1' <<-►-, -- PHONE tio'( Z - 1 • (o15 0 NOTE: THIS IS NOT A PERMIT FOR ANY OF THE INSPECTIONS BELOW r THE PERI� JT IS BY SEPARATE019.01Wirrl 0\21'P�`'`- (/2 77 lam' - .o `? u41t INSPECTOR DATE �L frOIiNbATIDN (Prior to Backfill) PLACE NO CONCRETE UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED 04;)et-) •Kb-041-64(2.-- ROUGH - INS SEWER /WATER /SEPTIC FRAMING w 1 L Q Zti 1�( - INSULATION ELECTRICAL PLUMBING14--/ I HEATING (if required) FIREPLACE GA INE AIR TAT 1 VER W6RK UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED E .e.)vs 'e-otP LA-144-- FINALS GRADING (Prior to Sodding) BUILDING ELECTRICAL PLUMBING HEATING DO NOT OCCUPY UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED NOTICE This card must be posted near an electrical service cabinet prior to rough-in inspections and maintained until all inspections have been approved. On buildings and additions where no service cabinet is available, card shall be placed near main entrance. FOR ALL INSPECTIONS (952) 447-9850 PRlp Builders Deposit 4szmu \ soy" City of Prior Lake A $2,500.00 Builders Deposit is included in the Building Permit fee. The Builders Deposit is issued as security to insure compliance for a Final Occupancy Permit. (It is not an escrow account.) All exterior items including but not limited to grading, sodding, landscaping, tree planting, driveways, siding and painting shall be completed 180 days after the date the building permit is issued. If the work is not complete within the 180 day time period,the City shall notify the applicant of the violation and the applicant shall have 10 days to comply or the $2,500.00 builders deposit will be forfeited and the applicant will be billed for clean up or corrective work to rectify the situation. A$500.00 Tree Deposit may also be required and will be refunded if specified trees are preserved for a period of one year. By signing this I, the undersigned contractor, acknowledge that I am aware of the erosion control requirements of the City of Prior Lake as outlined in the Erosion Control Measures for Building Contractors handout. DATE: e. 15 SITE ADDRESS: J< �o /9 GttA//JVf Cu v'v 7CPERMIT# REFUND TO BE MAILED TO: J 50 /1/(4 X12, ..56/9t- c/gAio y &ouc PLEASE REMEMBER AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE 1. KEEP STREETS CLEAN DURING CONSTRUCTION (For City Office Use Only) e_ 20. 1 C t() S-00 ,00 2. KEEP EROSION CONTROL IN PLACE Date Amount 3. TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY PERMIT MUST NOT EXPIRE OR ONE-THIRD MAY BE FORFEITED Lynda Alle Building Svcs. SIGNATURE: J:IFORMSIBUILDERS DEPOSIT FORM.DOC PIRIORDEPARTMENT OF LBUILDING AND INSPECTION INSPECTION RECORD SITE ADDRESS s�loc, NATURE OF WORK SF0 I `P� - TS L-`cam' USE OF BUILDING t.Y.- - 1—ArneNt - , PERMIT NO. «- E s Z DATE ISSUED CONTRACTOR 'sem MLA-62. PHONE e,iz--tcc NOTE: THIS IS NOT A PERMIT FOR ANY OF THE INSPECTIONS BELOW THE PERMIT IS BY SEPAL A- 5; Tj:." ` sNTA A �`"051�� 'C n-o l {/`NCAA- (til SPECTOR L TDATE t LES LFOOTING �',B /4.3 ___J I FOUNDATION (Prior to Backfill) ?b s y S PLACE NO CONCRETE U TIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED ROUGH - INS EWER /WATER / PTIC F- MING INSU► 'TION ELECT- „„ • L PLUM: c IIS, 40 HE NG Of ;quired) F -EPLACE AS LINE AIR TES' COVER NO WORK UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED FINALS g) BUILDING n ( I (6-•- CTRIpL PLU NG 7)11//(h. H ATING DO NO OCCUPY UNTIL ABOVE HAS BEEN SIGNED NOTICE This card must be posted near an electrical service cabinet prior to rough-in inspections and maintained until all inspections have been approved. On buildings and additions where no service cabinet is available, card shall be placed near main entrance. FOR ALL INSPECTIONS (952) 447-9850 11 ,1 • . e'l—ittnc..t-cAtre Wm.. s-Gfq co,"dy i . , LoAbI, moo' i 274e ovio.c.) C//8 4 - 4 SA kli elteeit AL hok.sed _,-- F . _ -- - CoAcetT4- SW* 568 # I 1 wxcie- , , , , -rff /2 , to, ( 2...0 , : • -..-_ , 5/- i 1 i CITY F ilr IOR I-AKE _ __ _ _ or 1 i INSPECTOR li 'I: 2 I .1 i 1 DATE /r. (e) (4.- PERMIT NO .000.0.- 4111.. OW i 1 1 i 0 ACCEPTED AS SUBMITTED 4. 11_CIA CCEPTED WITH CORRECTIONS-AS NOTED- - -- ri- ll 0 NOT ACCEPTED-CORRECT& RESUBMIT 4. The*comments are for your information,AS work shall be diele ____ _ ! i in full compliance with all applicable building A zoning cods raquimments including items not specificallynotsd in this mime KEEP THIS-PLAN-SET-ON SITE-AT ALLIIIIES - — - i 1 1 1 1 , , , -4-- - ; i ...---p (...ILA : i!„)::7 .,\ I 1 1 i 6-4- * 1' (/) l' l (4 I . 61 ' t : (sg‘ i .> lq Jo \ •41' ' 4rfii 'o ? co , R , \ \/ rat lias i i 1 0 ! 0 \ , At ilb .664.1 e'' . gg'02 lug\ r 14411; 0a I ')>' 1 r'l (1 %%4 I° 1 i 16.- 0. �02 r 1 1 'Pi ! 11 i t ! ' 1 k tbl • r AD I M'� \ �j�w*r.r "5;:*." r 0 \ i y t S., A ,,b0 ) / :', . ; p S ' (9(1. \il 1 . .x) - , c - ! _ .,6, i a ___ ‘..i.44 ,*4 , , . 9:1%\tt* :\l' o446' lal 'O � 91� � .v6 - .;\ i o ,c, O-\*I\ 6 I AI ' e co � 3 O O,- y -13 -o do 0 S %‘ .33 Nt, r --43 .-0 0 - c-) __, .1. rn 0 s .,;-1-ISte. � p CP crk rr it ot..,, ,_ 0 ., ..4.- - ; 1 , L,4 ; lig .---;-- 1 , / , 0, i ...) , Ctb - , ‘ 'Z1 ..\ I 1 ..—* , ( , Z � 1 oa k: .(sgv : 1„ o' iq i c, \ 44' p, I , � r ° is,0 I ;lop10 j , , , ,(i , s i 1-%(-%• nri 1 A04 Lad 1).1 2- I lip MI vi, I ift= 6 OC I I . CO tlieZe 0 0. , I •i il ' izz• tri 1 , , f. fk -40 o . 41. , i : 121 • • --I.P.6 f 1.• 0 .0 • **N., 1611v Ai r t ; ... ..40 04 . ti. it .v;p J/ 0 0' tO,V,V ' CIA /\ / "'''V'' 1;7;'W,t‘c'T ; tli . .4 g --4- /....) i\ . \\ ,\t r..........--.... .::„ 0 00 ,S.. L97- ''' / \'\'k; \ ''''. ..ii\c 0 • AA ` *, altUI 0 -, ,6. 77) -r �►• ��00 6613 .1� I ,e0 (N 1 A ... - ' .v0 .\\Nigv3 ef 1 -,-,-: (a - 0 -0 - til--3" -- r70 Tk ,3 _n .. v.4i . CJ, O rtO s -.1". ....... .* > k.i) ° al tj) 0 ..-1 tf) C,A 1 Ulrrt I s j O j Page 2 The building permit will stipulate requirements for the connection as well as abandonment requirements for the existing septic system. Your existing well can be maintained for outside non-domestic use or can be abandoned and sealed. It should be noted that the sanitary sewer service is required to be located at least 20 feet away from any well or the well will need to be abandoned. The building permit will give further details regarding these items. Sections 704.300 and 705.400 of the Prior Lake City Code requires connection to City water and sewer within one year of availability. Section 4715.0310 of the State of Minnesota Plumbing Code also requires connection to municipal sewer and water systems once they are available. This letter serves as the reminder of the upcoming one year time period which ends on March 14, 2015.Your utility connection needs to be completed by March 14, 2015. Attached for your convenience are copies of the building, plumbing, and sewer and water permits. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the building permit process, please contact the Building Department at 952 447 9850.Also, please contact this office within 30 days (by October 30, 2014)to communicate your plan. Sincerely, Larry Poppler City Engineer/Inspections Director CITY OF PRIOR LAKE CC: Bob Hutchins, Building Official Lynda Allen, Building/Inspections Assistant (reminder letter 1 year deadline sunset avenue /utility connections) Bob Hutchins From: Jeff Ma zke Sent: Tuesda , April 30, 2013 12:44 PM To: millerfe.t@aol.com Cc: Bob Hu chins; Dan Rogness Subject: RE: Ret..ining Wall Drawing Jason, Thanks for the drawing. It was helpful to -xplain the situation. City Staff believes the design is acceptabl; per the drawing and survey for the retaining wall and stairway. The accessory structure will need to be a minimum 10 ft from the 904 elevation (9.83 ft. currently indicated). The shed's zoning permit will be issued along with the full b ilding permit for Lot 3 due to the issue of needing a principal structure prior to approval of an accessory structure. However,we wanted to inform you that the plan is acceptable since you will begin the retaining wall work shortly. Let us known if you have further question.. Jeff Matzke Planner Community& Economic Development Deet. City of Prior Lake 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 phone (952)447-9814 fax(952)447-4245 Email jmatzke(ccitvofpriorlake.com Think Green.A Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.Thank you. From: millerfest(@aol.com [mailto:millerfest(a�aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:19 AM To: Jeff Matzke Cc: millerfest(aaol.com; Bob Hutchins Subject: Retaining Wall Drawing Jeff, I hope the attached drawings will help for clarifying and discussing the view that you would see from the side of the property. If we could talk fairly soon, it would be helpful. Or a site visit may even be helpful? We will be working on these walls again tomorrow. It would be great if I could put them in a spot that will keep everyone happy. Feel free to call me at any time. Talk to you later, Jason Miller 612-750-6150 1 • ,z.,, ....„,,,,,,,,-(/ ‘ , ; , % '•• ' N / / ''•' ,It • ' .., / "...', ;,• "-,\ ..' \ '‘ '`,s., V. 901 • '',. . ' kV, 414,,. •... , 4 ; / '''. -- • 4ikg.y) ,?•0500Cal" \ z i / ; I vie • 1111141h, -4.___ ). t,* .. colk 5 e. • f_s • _ ------: -el : 4,-•,;;-• 15001 --, 11111%%•%ibb.. . , 1111-411411- --------- •••___‘' • am- 1---...1.14:-.\''''....•$'. ____ .Pc'C'..N1 I /1 *\-------- ' ' ..:- II ot-•••'.*:;*-- rerili:Airill..1 f::::,-. ..- 906 --o-b- 5---4° s:--7.f. -. ''' .....‘ - --4141.cs ij, 0--2,'-- "` 1:01---.• oin Vrt°4 O./ •••••-• • 0 T6 • ...LA•,r,,,, u. • •,-6 bk. e.r. '1..:•*-•*•- •-•••" ....,- • . . . . . -I— - • - - 8- • -:. ' 'Mk' .... 1,i...ire - :.:c.) ------ -, -V surfmc .., .-.- -- -E . - --._f.- iimAk . .• • - . . - - 0 ih. 4. • 'ft .-• ,.. •T A /N ;-• '-'-'.:',4'... - ...----- ".- ----1-2.38...1 I t*:,---. • °'- • + ''R;.7;;" ::-,',1).,!..est \A .. •9..\ * .• 4 • - 4-1:%, - • .so.• . . _ ._ _ .. . ... . -.. . 9 flA. 11111. •- - \ .._ .... ._.... .L..... .. us •\... ,--• ou--. ,I, .•• Of •,,b• ,..--- ....--- ,, 0_1:61,0posi6-4,8002:11i,r- .:4•T‘ s' 2:9.!•.,' \-- '''..., -.6,* 4'7.. ‘,4 vi.4-4.• k_q__ _.....- . .• ,,..• ,......,. 94 -4 •,. 4 ‘. (i) Nia •• . .164. 4 \c* •- .• ...- ...-- ...- ... .. . OA* '-t . . \cf --- --- --' '.... -- . .._....... ..... .4.. -....., 942 IV \ ev ,,,e),, ,,..,- , _,......•_-- .„..„ .„ . $, 0 ',4 AI Cr--A.-.-- - . . ....s, ..-...._..__. • 944. '''.. ''' • ' \Atli /LA 4 ''' :,_ li"-..'.• .....\''''...-. .''.• ..'..' /' . , .. '. "..-'-' .,...-. s, \>.": \s, .•: : 440 TA% V ' .s....-' '...:;:* .\'''''-r. \h.e..-..'."' ,- ' .--", . -......!:— • A ,>.*'• c.,,,A . . • ..adiftiVu•-4 • • •I• ..—arimanwima I t • - -—--- - - !! ._. ... .. ... .. _.._ . .__ . . .. ., .._._. ...- .. • - •• . N8zF77___,_:_.triB _ _,--- •--/za.-- - - . . ...... .......... A ',,,,,,,•„.,• .,;,,,,..-7,::::-;-:- _,___::-._•_., ••,.. -„,.-1 -, -1,4,:-.• ' ' ! a. -10 er.Mkt—. at • 1 . .. •' • "--•-• Z•c;f.:••\'''''7,-.7, i, P-.•.11,1.*•• - ••,; - -- - 909 •••••••=•:,*_17tN‘, arit••.••• ••••••••,••••., 4:11 . ... . ---- ----101- , _ , .. . ..._ .. ..__ .... t, • r. 301 zpl • • ,/0 .... . ... ... .. .. ..,14. . ...... I . • a LLL L Larson Larson Specialty Structures Inc 5931 Hobe Lane White Bear Lake,Minnesota 55110 651 429 5143 Fax:651 429 6761 May 12,2014 Jason Miller 5406 Nokomis Ave. S Minneapolis,MN 55417 Re: Roof and Floor Trusses 5614 Candy Cove Trail Prior Lake,MN Comm.No. 9775 Dear Jason, On May 12,2014 I inspected the above referenced roof and floor trusses. The trusses have been stored unprotected outside over the winter. The purpose of the inspection was to evaluate the trusses to determine if there has been any deterioration or loss of structural integrity in the trusses. Some of the trusses were still outside and some had been erected at the time of my inspection. Connection Plates The connection plates on fabricated trusses are pressed into the wood under high pressure. There are small barbs on the many prongs that are presses into the wood. The plates are extremely difficult to remove once they are pressed on. They are difficult to remove even with hammer and chisel. They do not just pop off. For a plate to be loosened it has to be subjected to very wet conditions for a very long time. In this case it is my understanding the trusses were stored in an upright position. In this position the trusses actually stay fairly dry,or if they get wet they dry fairly quickly. The plates may become dislodged if a truss is dropped or broken or badly mishandled. There was one truss where the bottom chord had a small splinter due to handling. (See Picture# 3)The connection plate was still intact and the damage to the bottom chord was not enough to warrant any repair. I did not detect any other damaged trusses. I did not detect any loosened or damaged connection plates. The plates appear to be solidly embedded and structurally sound. Joints were tight with no apparent movement or separation in the joints. Page 2 Truss Members I did not detect any warping or misalignment in the truss members. Sighting down the installed trusses,the trusses appear to be straight and true. Diagonal struts and web members are intact and are as fabricated. I did not detect any deterioration or damage in the truss members. The trusses were not stored long enough for decay to be a concern. This was a very cold winter and there would be no decaying action. Evaluation This evaluation is based on a general visual inspection. Each and every truss was not inspected but there were no"red flags"to indicate that would be necessary. There was no evidence of deterioration or damage. In my opinion the trusses are structurally sound and can be used for construction as originally designed. Yours truly, 1- son, .E. PCEESSIONA El-El I etr hereby certify that this plan,speo,oagpon report was prepared by me or under my dire supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws Ott* State of Minnesota. Print Name: Wa rte C.Larson Signature: _ Data icense# �n p - - b. 'ate r v}Y 3 v�' 7. 4} ,: ..c,.1.....- . 4.i:- --- ,,-.-:. -..,.: , , : + 6 1 --'*i,11#''°,1*-..., F.x x v x Illisliop A* = ' J „,..,'""!1?. 'moi ” Nv‘...,‘ it, *.ry, U.� lr- , oh 4A, L � s 0 -c�� -mss ...„,4 ,,, ,.....,ti„,-;::.,. ,,,,,- .v.,,t.i'iltik!..,::04:i.:; `q»y 'swYG u"} #� 401"+++ S�; ,.„v Y yy��4 ate' "� ,;„:, caw` �P� z " r +�� ��, : �� �^ � ," ..*:'-'!!!':'''' '4-4 1,4.'1-'''.1..4%"..-Nt.t.-', •-. 'i,4M .. a , mss. s��m, • ;e. h*�'� fi: " ,� � °� .� 6;' 'i a " . . n` (L 's(22 e '1- vs' I3s .s, d r C7 „revs-5; "'"' ls. ,- ,a , fa teC ) 9 ht NLN.‘''' +416;%:a.? ` 4*? .r - ti �� $,v *. ,x;,^a ry . 3t `: ,t7.',:,.-',..-`- �.' , � sp„ „" ,usd.` •tx 1.1 'pjww-x> ay,� ' t ,. : TT. R ,: .xad:A a�p g ', '' 'y ; s L ;» • „„t„—°S.'‘''.:4:11'1:-f4...,'Ik.,4-, -:?t:-.4 , . '''-('''''''': ,', '''., 1 1 •,'' ,„j•-''i-10:'. %.: .�.' :r. a#n ;..�M$Swl ' . ic 4,-?- ` -44- air. "> xz" ' u 'ls` ,_ - .17`;',74. :, 2,vY :,'4 -:z4_rZ OP k.S.YUA"V17_1"- FOA)- ci:/115.?2N- flIZZZA) :4fiv,z27 rovz .77.RAZZ ,5-1A7 PR/01? Z44.7{Z, .17./V 'Mt air lIntilandri 9, ____.,.... --..---.:,,,,,..„..., -....- ,.....,,......- 1 ' - ' - ----'--- PRIOR LAKE „,---- _ ,. .. . toi-908— ‘e., -------z,..,„........_ ,....E.--9-...-.1,i i... ,.\,..„•\ (;) •k.. 969- . - 6 ---•-•"---7-1,-,..4,...,..,, •"., 1, 144v19o4 EW91s.......... . ...% 908 \ Aiiiii , •14 I__________—_:, 1 , ... "•'z\ ., / IVIC8 \ . O's 't• \\ , // Alse I ' ' ...v `, G +ovreirAs ilw i3:: ,nrelv.17..;14 REA CC?"' ,k\ r _. v elP \ . \lib, / PY9/4 a' ---1 \\ 4'9,8 \,-4111.,„ 7.>. -..., vosv SOG L__ l' 2° ``A,uz411 1-4.44. / M-- 1 9\21 4 illrillMt --.-- .1 1\14 ?' .- - NO6 -• 111111 1 • 1 41111k .., li '-'- ---___,-- --- ____IWIelleilM -1.11 10*(1130 / / 1 i 924 °1 - • iit-r4/.Are ' c‘i 806\GI c_s_ - - ../. I i ‘ --- ' ::. \ ktsd cp----4N? li iti \-tc.-__, / - .- 1 - sritiacK LIN, i sw?It -•v.- \ tO /_-----•.:1-•;;.. 1 c 926 ...----__... .... 1 ...,.,..., , - ----- -- 17 \ g6 os ovos • k\‘. s•i'.1-9 •.,_.• ,.....0.1„. z.- IIIPP;o. 10s 1- . 1•,) ... • / \\\ 1. , - • -t- 9' 1, \ %.5.0.1 5 • ..__ -- . . , \ • *%.56.. "'":e. \ ... ---. ' 16 ' .... 948 _. I 8 i Ir -- - RETP04114G Iv'• - t c ,,,. 4011101 s ... 1 1 Ot,6 , x --A \ •:- .k.- 942 ei• - • - - s • \ 0 • T\ ._ ' '..-- , ••:. li, 4, .. . ,,, ,„ - . -- _,-. -, ‘ ,.- 11 4'6 ' •cp -ek-\....--:--' ,,_ •vIc,--'- ."....;';* _ - - _ \, -- - it16 ,,.,..,r.,‘ . e ,-k. .",:,:,..-."..'(-1(-(f"\''•07',..)•.,,..,.... ')C 7•-••,kC-_.,•. a ;6l. 4v.. 0,6 ' 6 6 A -.• • `‘.'- -' ,e-- - - - - ‘ , -. -• \ 1‘ -9.4 c.'is% , -- /-.. leg 9"ti „ • -- \ 1-LAT THIS SURVEY,PLAN,OP.REPORT WAS P - •BY ME OR UNDER DESIGNED . CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY SION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAINS A2+4 INNSOTAez le DRAwr4 c":- Stonebrooke LOT 3,BLOCK 1 A.Ty 1 75707 CHECKED Engineering Responsible Solutions THE BLUFFS OF CANDY COVE m.g- LIC NO m, 11.2-12 ATM , PRtp,p ti Memo jN so* Date: October 24,2012 To: Bob Hutchins,Building Official From: Jeff Matzke,Planner, Community Development Department Subject: 5614 Candy Cove Trail—New Construction The Community Development Department reviewed the building permit plans for the subject project with a survey date of September 27,2012 and we have the following comments: 1. Provide proof of recording at the Scott County Recorder's Office for variance resolution 11-09PC which approved variance for the Bluffs of Candy Cove Plat. Variances were approved by the Planning Commission on October 24, 2011. 2. Indicate side yard setback from rear deck. 3. Provide details of the proposed accessory building and setbacks. t ��s� O pt p . .(1/,/'� y (of oie- 44 5 Ito u‘W ma( flea/6 e4"azey- 14eit rr$454-1(41 pia, ,,,c,. L-.;(I A50.. fH*V 'ta Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245/www.cityofpriorlake.com 2012 PROJECT VALUATION WORKSHEET ADDRESS: 5-c— I �C Gr O Com '204. L,- SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED: 1ST Floor Wood Frame $84.85 X = 2nd Floor $42.43 X = SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED: 1st Floor Wood Frame $92.94 X , s = "8 2i1 2nd Floor $46.47 X t 5 = 13, c S'5; GARAGE: Wood Frame $39.23 X 72, = ZS,Z46P„ Slab On Grade Garage $20.00 BASEMENT: L•c. &34+u.1 ' Completely Finished (New) $25.00 X EMI= = 5c(s.s0_ Unfinished $16.50 X 8 • _+ , = 2. 2„,Z, Crawl Space $16.00 X = 3 Season Porch (unheated) $45.00 X = Screen or covered Porch or stoop $30.00 X =ME = (`t20 Deck $12.00 X , = ? Z FIREPLACE: Masonry Single $7,000.00 X = Stacked Masonry $5,000.00 X = Gas or "0" Clearance E.A. $3,000.00 X = 30,70 Other X = TOTAL VALUATION 2c (?6_" CONTRACTOR'S VALUATION 3-'6',ooc z- 1 -t C5 t *o A..... u5c-ro7 0�� vAtuitc 3d 000.- UPDATED 6/22/2012 r Le cio be..144. 214 opo. J:\FORMS\PROJECT VALUATION WORKSHEET 2012.doc `�$SQr-� �1 `Lc��,2, $14,' Ssr-r- ( ?LA/1/415 LAz/3 ,ip,422-- A\ in_6A-40.174- /1,%((3 (5 N' -l-t) 13'e- 14063 ? • v \ C v GES / e--FAiso 4coFAz /s em *A, , .127i IfV V.V LAa121 14G1/ • 4,Dc 7t/LE- 4,7 P 13.>(-45vIetee.5Tre4) C-4--Z-1-et- .\ Utrc-(re-5 ---1‘ \JK00A. ilo. _ AZy* r7-,40ri-tm /Vx/D ` —• oP /J«r+ ( ,� PA:9.0 � � of ttev. 7-(9 5- Nowt z� cw� � cve:04-r �j� 3.4 5 adv �urt Kms'7 /1 Sri �®. F o�Sri �t 6'42, zi3I.3 Ti (5 O. K. s FF�w 5 pelf• 4'.(1.0 /0 ,an- >kiAte (4,117 arikAri,&/p ,o mal ikyz, 2:00 3(-4 1.4)14,,-41(14- '' _ a1 PRI° ' 4 U rrl ` 1NNEso* Date Received Date Reviewed= Permit # PERMIT REQUIREMENT REPLY DATE Date: Date: Request: Reply: pc-o Jam ' N� /45x..„, ,, ,, Accept Decline ❑ 6i)c-r- 61-AO(4i. ''') cbdi t r uca. f&tae,</a - L e 4449 P bt. O Date: (.,krc, G Date: /2.5". 4,,,,_ �S w 'ye oma• 7 Request:ilo Reply: o ' 4.i . - orsi,�. ren Accept ❑ S` 6�� Decline❑ , z atL 4 tco8T-rpt. ,' 1% LI rr pan- 5(.490�- er b Dater 2 t I $ Owe P2°f)6111 tiA-d- Date: Request./5. a c, Reply: 6 T� � - Accept ❑ 1 Decline ❑ \4 T. C,Loget,. Siv91b1 L J 24.q-j-GaN IAc4 012 U6) - w $ ` L Date: Date: Request: Reply: Accept ❑ 1 , S To c)rrr 6 Decline I. 5fr - 1464a-- DR�u ❑ l0 • LNfj. S.riPuCt iy+'1 ARSON• A411. (Jcca' i �p /2 " � we- w/ l -� ' (�' t C147 �� I J�ar-� 3�� (13 . INtc-- � Building1 nning/Engineering Permit Com tete Permit Issued J:\BUILDLNGIFORM \PE INFO REQUEST.doc 10/08/2012 16:10 9524454367 HORIZON CONTRACTORS PAGE 01 • MECHANICAL WORKSHEET • K' JOB ADDRESS: 1 i G.e,Tr"i C.&--- 1'r-io✓' -e_i Ai CONTRACTOR: Jacor f'l;li&✓/EorF c/ Complete this form. Your application will not he processed without all the required information. CODE TYPE: (CaECKon) ❑CATEGORY 1❑ 2000 ENERGY CODE FURNACE TYPE: (Cxrcc tom) %SEALED COMBUSTION ❑ POwER VENT 0 DIRECT VEN‘rr • ❑NATURAL DRAT r WATER I 'TER: (cxEccowE) . 0 SEALED :: .OWER VENT Q NATURAL DRAFT ❑ ELECTRIC 0 OTHER . FIREPLACE: (LIST FUEL TYPE&VENTING) AidUr I 4.k-5 MECHANICAL VENTILATION�} ` IR: DESCRIBE HOW VENTILATION WILL BE ACHIEVED. iIQiA. T C.C'�,• 1, . 'V -' „ _ , 7 i:iE✓ LIST ALL EXFIAUSTING APPLIANCES: INCLUDE CFM. (BATH FAN, RANGE HOOD,DRYER,CENTRAL VACUUM,ETC.) D- h.:: 6, 13S cin- ( 1 - �6.e 'i� I- .)evde, .3c &CY, .A MAKEUP AIR: DESCRIBE HOW MAIEUP AIR WILL BE ACHIEVED. C ' ' e:;k at..,' :"to .Qpl €. �c .• f coo,lvt . SIGNATURE: (- ( 4 DATE: /'oj9IZ°oZ J:\BUILDrNG RMS\VMECHANICAL WORKST-IEET.doc 10/08/2012 16:10 9524454367 HORIZON CONTRACTORS PAGE 02 • Load Short Form '10°� limier wreghtsoft nate: Oct us,2012 Entire House By: Mike Horizon Contractors,Inc. 8197Horizon drive,Shakopee.Mt55379Phone:612-508.9226 Fax 952-445-4367 Errol midrael g@yahoo.com Project information For. Miller,Whitewater Development, Inc. ' Design information . .E_ ma Cig infiltration Outside db(°F) -15 91 Method Simplified Inside db(°F) 68 75 Construction quality Average Design TD(°F) 83 16 Fireplaces 0 Daily range - M Inside humidity(%) 50 50 Moisture difference(gr/lb) 51 32 HEATING EQUIPMENT COOLING EQUIPMENT Make Bryant Make Bryant Trade BRYANT Trade 13 SEER ENTRY R410AAC Model 986TA30040V14A Cond 113AN(A,VV)018-E" AHRI ref no4706932 Coil CNPV*1814A"`+986*A30040V14* AHRI ref no.4765535 Efficiency 96.5 AFUE Efficiency 11.8 EER, 14.2 SEER Heating input 40000 Btuh Sensible cooling 12320 Btuh Heating output 39000 Btuh Latent cooling 5280 Btuh Temperature rise 62 °F Total cooling 17600 Btuh Actual air flow 587 cfm Actual air flow 587 cfm Air flow factor 0.018 cfm/Btuh Air flow factor 0.047 cfmlBtuh Static pressure 0 in H2O Static pressure 0 in H2O Space thermostat Load sensible heat ratio 0.89 ROOM NAME Area Htg load Clg load Htg AVF Cig AVF (ft2) (Btuh) (Btuh) (cfm) (cfm) Media 636 6610 2517 120 118 Meeh 169 1894 105 34 5 B Bath 91 1376 81 25 4 Law [Laundry 56 1885 629 34 30 Bar 208 2985 1270 54 60 Low bath 77 1123 417 20 20 Entry/Hall 228 3329 408 60 19 Lower Storage 135 2456 805 44 38 Office 170 1408 922 25 43 Guest Bed 187 1483 718 27 34 Family/Stair 555 7865 4636 142 217 Calculations approved by ACCA to meet all requirements of Manual J 8th Ed. 2012-OcF0815:12:36 fli"wrightsoft Right-Suite®Universa!2012 12.0.07 RSU07800 page 1 A'Ck C.itlsusvvkauoarmntstWrightsoftiWACNfiitersup Cate*,KS Front DoorfaoaG S 10/08/2012 16:10 9524454367 HORIZON CONTRACTORS PAGE 03 Entire House 2512 32414 12507 587 587 Other equip loads 0 0 Equip. @ 0.96 RSM 12007 Latent cooling 1577 TOTALS 2512 32414 13584 587 587 Calculations approved by ACCA to meet all requirements of Manual J 8th Ed. 2012 oa oa t -1-wrightsoft" Right-Suttee Universal 201212.0.07 RSW7800 Page AICA Culs9rslhlikeiDoamlenis\WrightsoftPWACIMillersup CaIc.MJ8 Front Door faces S 10/08/2012 16:10 9524454367 HORIZON CONTRACTORS PAGE 04 Load Short Form `� : Miller -1 �-wrightsoft t08.2012 Entire House By: Mike Horizon Contractors,Inc. 8197 I-b4mn drive,Shakopee,U6n 55379 Phone:612-508-9226 Fax 952-445-4367 En 5:mrharletr 9 hoo.com • Project Information.` . For. Miller,Whitewater Development, inc. .., � . �. Design Information .� Htg Gig Infiltration Outside db(°F) -15 91 Method Simplified inside db(°F) 68 75 Construction quality Average Design TD(CF) 83 16 Fireplaces 0 Daily range - M Inside humidity(%) 50 50 Moisture difference(glib) 51 32 HEATING EQUIPMENT COOUNG EQUIPMENT Make Bryant Make Bryant Trade BRYANT Trade 13 SEER ENTRY R410AAC Model 986TA42060V17A Gond 113ANA042-B' AHRI ref no4740263 Coil CNPV*4217A'*+986*A42060V17"" AHRI ref no. Efficiency 96.3 AFUE Efficiency 10.9 EER, 13 SEER Heating input 60000 Btuh Sensible cooling 28000 Btuh Heating output 58000 Btuh Latent cooling 12000 Btuh Temperature rise 41 °F Total cooling 40000 Btuh Actual air flow 1333 cfm Actual air flow 1333 cfm Air flow factor 0.027 cfrrtBtuh Air flow factor 0.051 cfm/Btuh Static pressure 0 in H2O Static pressure 0 in H2O Space thermostat Load sensible heat ratio 0.92 ROOM NAME Area Htg load Cig load HtgAVF CIgAVF (ft2) (Btuh) (Btuh) (cfm) (cfm) Kitchen 272 7491 3973 199 201 1/2 Bath 36 0 70 0 4 Dining 162 2355 1770 63 90 Great 372 7570 4632 201 234 Master Bath 156 2497 1384 66 70 Bed 2 240 5713 3035 152 154 Master Bed 272 8154 4077 217 206 WIC 3 45 651 139 17 7 Bed 3 156 3979 1759 106 89 Bed 4 156 3731 1521 99 77 WIC 4 48 1263 697 34 35 Up Laundry 72 1782 1214 47 61 Master WIC 63 1094 224 29 11 Up Bath 108 2025 866 54 44 Up Hall 238 1827 936 49 47 Up Mech 36 66 39 2 2 Calculations approved by ACCA to meet all requirements of Manual J 8th Ed. wri illit5oft' 2012-Oct-0815:06:58 9 Right Suite®Universal 201212.0.07 RSU07800 Page 1 ACCII CWsersUkelDocumenls\WnghtsoftHVACMUiera rp Cale=M1a Front Door faces:S 10/08/2012 16:10 9524454367 HORIZON CONTRACTORS PAGE 05 . Entire House 2432 50197 26336 1333 1333 Other equip toads 0 0 Equip.@ 0.96 RSM 25283 Latent cooling 2418 TOTALS 2432 50197 27701 1333 1333 Calculations approved byACCA to meet all requirements of Manual J 8th Ed. .� ft ht wri so2012-Oa-08 154656 9 Rigl t.Sulte®U wer5a1201212.0.07 RSU07800 page 2 ACM C:1UserslMke1DocumentslWrightsoftHVAC1149Iter4up Caro=MJB Front Door faces;S Bob Hutchins From: millerfest@aol.com Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 2:55 AM To: Larry Poppler; Bob Hutchins Cc: jbennett@braunintertec.com Subject: Fwd:Global Stability Analysis for Candy Cove Proposed House, Prior Lake, MN Attachments: Footing_and_Foundation_Plans.pdf; Certificate_of_Survey.pdf; Cross_Section_Overview_Sketch.pdf; Section_B.pdf; Section_C.pdf Larry/Bob, Braun Engineering is aware of the exact house plans that I am building on Lot 3, and the previously submitted Global Stability Analysis is meant to be sufficiently accurate to cover the latest plans and latest Certificate of Survey of Survey for Lot 3 Will this e-mail from Braun Intertec(see below), which references my latest plans (see attachments), be sufficient for addressing this issue? Also, Bob: were you able to come up with a suggestion for the driveway slope? I'm thinking a tilt of about 6"towards highway 13, would probably be sufficient? I think this would send —95% of the water running down the driveway to the Hwy 13 side of the driveway where it can go into a catch basin and the small amount that might go past it during a downpour would just flow past the side of the house instead of running towards the garage. I'm pretty opposed to making the driveway steeper, because of the potential for cars to bottom out which is an every single day problem; whereas the potential for heavy rain events to send water past the door seal and into the garage is probably a couple of times a year problem and I think the garage will be waterproofed well enough that it won't cause any problems. Either way, the tilt should resolve this issue; and I have red-lined the certificate of survey to show this, which I will send over in the next e-mail. Do I need to revise the survey, or can you just attach the red-lined sheet to my permit. I thought that maybe since Stonebrooke has to do an as built-survey after we are done, this minor change wouldn't require them to adjust the survey right now? Since, most of these surveys end up being interim grading designs, which go in the trash after we do the as-built survey or we make landscaping adjustments at a later date. If you could let me know if this resolves the Driveway &the Global Stability issues, it would be helpful. I hope resolve the remaining Construction Sequencing issue tomorrow. Talk to you later, Jason Miller Original Message From: Bennett, Jimmy<jbennettCa braunintertec.com> To: 'millerfest@aol.com' <millerfestaol.com> Cc: Van Abel, Josh <JVanAbelabraunintertec.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 14, 2013 5:44 pm Subject: Global Stability Analysis for Candy Cove Proposed House, Prior Lake, MN To whom it may concern, `�, The Slope Stability Evaluation Report, regarding The Bluffs of Candy Cove, rendered for Jason Miller on January 14, J' 2013, by Braun Intertec, includes global slope stability analyses that include the proposed house on Lot 3. As illustrated in the Appendix of the Report on the"Cross-Section Overview Sketch" (also attached to this email), both Section B and Section C pass through and apply to the proposed house on Lot 3. The global stability analyses for Section B and C, based upon design and construction assumptions referenced within the report, both yielded a Factor-of- Safety of 1.5. The applicable analytical results for both Section B and Section C are attached as a .pdf. 1 Furthermore, per the attached "Certificate of Survey" and "Footing and Foundation Plans"for the proposed house on Lot 3, provided by Jason Miller, the aforementioned global stability analyses, governed by the design and construction assumptions referenced within the report, still apply and yield an acceptable Factor-of-Safety. Please contact either Josh Van Abel at 952.995.3210, or myself at 612.750.3329, with any questions, comments, and/or for more information. Thank you very much, and have a great day. Sincerely, Jimmy Bennett BRAUN Jimmy Bennett,EIT,LEED AP BD+C INTERTEC Engineer-In-Training Employee 11001 Hampshire Avenue S I Minneapolis,MN 55438 Ownership 952.995.2232 direct 1612.750.3329 mobile jbennett@braunintertec.com working for you braunintertec.com 1Twitter: Braun Intertec Linkedln: Braun Intertec 2 v i Slope Stability Evaluation Report The Bluffs of Candy Cove Candy Cove Trail East and Highway 13 Prior Lake, Minnesota Prepared for Whitewater Development Professional Certification: I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Joshua J. Van Abel, PE -, Associate Principal-Senior Engineer - r. License Number: 45108 January 14, 2013 Project BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation BRAUN hroaen Into rt:, t"4.1,, Yio!) r.. :.,;, _ INTERTEC January 14, 2013 Project BL-10-09736A Mr.Jason Miller Whitewater Development 5406 Nokomis Avenue S Minneapolis, MN 55417 Re: Slope Stability Evaluation Report The Bluffs of Candy Cove Candy Cove Trail SE and Highway 13 Prior Lake, MN Dear Mr. Miller: We are pleased to present this slope stability evaluation of the site slopes associated with the Bluffs of Candy Cove project in Prior Lake, Minnesota. The purpose of our evaluation was to provide Whitewater Development with geotechnical recommendations regarding the proposed design and construction of the site slopes and engineered retaining walls. Services were performed in accordance with our Authorization for Services letter dated September 24, 2012. Please see the attached report for a detailed discussion on the field exploration results and our recommendations. The report should be read in its entirety. Thank you for making Braun Intertec your geotechnical consultant for this project. If you have any questions about this report, or if there are other services that we can provide in support of our work to date, please call Jimmy Bennett at 612.750.3329 or Josh Van Abel at 952.995.2310. Sincerely, BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION N Jimmy Bennett, EIT, LEER AP BD+C Engineer-In-Training Joshua J. Van Abel, PE Associate Principal-Senior Engineer SlopeEvaiRpt-Candy Cove Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction 1 A.1. Project Description 1 A.2. Purpose 1 A.3. Scope of Services 1 A.4. Background Information and Reference Documents 2 A.S. Site Conditions 2 B. Results 3 B.1. Boring Locations and Elevations 3 B.2. Log of Boring Sheets 3 B.3. Geologic Origins 4 B.4. Geologic Profile 4 B.4.a. Geologic Materials 4 B.4.b. Topsoil 4 B.4.c. Slopewash 4 B.4.d. Glacial Deposits 4 B.4.e. Groundwater 5 B.S. Laboratory Test Results 5 B.6. Slope Stability Analyses 5 B.6.a. Basis for Analyses 5 B.6.b. Material Properties 6 B.6.c. Criteria 6 B.6.d. Analytical Results 6 B.6.e. Analytical Assumptions 7 C. Discussion of Stability Results 8 C.1. General Commentary 8 D. Recommendations 9 D.1. Excavation 9 D.1.a. Excavation Limits 9 D.1.b. Benching Into Existing Slope 10 D.2. Selection,Placement,and Compaction of Fill and Backfill 10 D.2.a. Materials 10 D.2.b. Placement and Compaction 11 D.3. Slope Protection 12 D.3.a. Limits 12 D.4. Retaining Wall Design 12 D.S. Plan Review 12 D.6. Construction Quality Control 12 D.6.a. Excavation Observations 12 D.6.b. Erosion Protection 13 D.6.c. Materials Testing 13 D.6.d. Cold Weather Precautions 13 Table of Contents (continued) Description Page E. Procedures 13 E.1. Penetration Test Borings 13 E.2. Material Classification and Testing 13 E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification 13 E.2.b. Laboratory Testing 13 E.3. Groundwater Measurements 14 F. Qualifications 14 F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions 14 F.1.a. Material Strata 14 F.1.b. Groundwater Levels 14 F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility 14 F.2.a. Plan Review 14 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing 15 F.3. Use of Report 15 F.4. Standard of Care 15 Appendix Cross Section Overview Sketch Log of Boring Sheets(ST-1 to ST-8) Descriptive Terminology Analytical Details(2 Figures) Analytical Results(7 Figures) BRAU NT ETEC A. Introduction A.1. Project Description This Slope Stability Evaluation addresses the design and construction of slopes associated with Lots 1,2, and 3 of the Bluffs at Candy Cove project in Prior Lake,Minnesota. Houses proposed in these lots will be built on native and filled soils that are partly retained by a series of retaining walls. The majority of the fill will likely come from high ground(cut areas)in the southwest corner of the site. Braun Intertec was contracted to perform soils borings and a slope stability evaluation of the built condition,focusing on the retaining walls at the north end of the project,where grades will slope down to existing open water. Please refer to the Cross Section Overview Sketch in the Appendix. A.2. Purpose The purpose of our evaluation was to provide Whitewater Development with geotechnical recommendations regarding the proposed design and construction of the site slopes and retaining walls. General building support issues(filling,compaction,etc.)were previously addressed in a Geotechnical Evaluation by Braun lntertec in 2010,while this evaluation focuses only on the slope stability aspects of the proposed plans. A.3. Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was submitted as an Authorization for Services letter dated September 25,2012. Tasks performed in accordance with our authorized scope of services include the following: • Clearing the exploration location of underground utilities. • Performing four standard penetration test(SPT)borings within the slope to nominal depths of 20 to 40 feet below grade to provide further subsurface information. • Performing laboratory tests on selected samples. • Perform slope stability analyses on select cross sections through the proposed slopes and walls. BRAUN iNfE IEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 2 • Preparing this report containing a CAD sketch,exploration logs,summary of the geologic materials encountered,results of laboratory tests,retaining wall soil design parameters (associated with ST-8 only),and geotechnical recommendations regarding site/retaining wall design and construction. A.4. Background Information and Reference Documents To facilitate our evaluation,we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents: • Project plans. Mr.Jason Miller provided us with the Construction Plans for street,driveways, utility,landscaping,retaining wall layout,and grading work for the Bluffs at Candy Cove. The plans were prepared by Stonebrooke Engineering,and were dated June 14,2012. • Retaining wall plans. Mr.Jason Miller provided us with the Retaining Wall Plans for the tiered series of retaining walls adjacent to the lake. The plans were prepared by Civil Design Professionals,and were dated July 19,2012. • Geotechnical Evaluation Report. In November 2010,Braun Intertec performed four soil borings throughout the project site,and provided a report to Whitewater Development with general geotechnical recommendations regarding design and site development of single- family home lots with a street. The previous report was dated November 11,2010 and was performed under Braun Intertec project number BL-10-09736. • Surficial Geology Map. We reviewed the Surficial Geology of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Map prepared by the University of Minnesota,Minnesota Geological Survey. The map is denoted as Miscellaneous Map Series,Map M-178,Surficial Geology, Metropolitan Area, dated 2007. A.S. Site Conditions Prior to subsurface exploration in September of 2012,the existing slopes had been mostly cleared and grubbed,with some topsoil stripped; part of prescribed past work described in our 2010 report. The top area of the slope in the southwest corner of the site had been stripped down to an elevation near 970, and the bottom of slopes terminated at Prior Lake,which had a current water level elevation of approximately 901.1. The existing slopes were generally at,or flatter than,2:1(H:V)in most areas. The slopes did not exhibit any visible signs of instability. RAUN ;1` rrn Er' Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 3 As of December 2012,the top area of the slope in the southwest corner of the site has since been stripped down further,and in most areas,the proposed final grade is still below current elevations. The sand mined from this area,qualified as generally meeting MnDOT select granular(less than 12 percent by weight passing the number 200 sieve),has been used both to correct areas of unsuitable soil near the foot of the slope,and to build the foot of the slope to a higher elevation to prepare for retaining wall construction. These steps have been based off of geotechnical recommendations to follow in this report. B. Results B.1. Boring Locations and Elevations We performed four new standard penetration test borings for this evaluation,denoted as ST-5 to ST-8,in sequence with the previous borings(denoted as ST-1 to ST-4)drilled in November of 2010. The eight borings were performed at the approximate locations shown on the Cross Section Overview Sketch included in the Appendix. The locations for the new borings were selected and staked by Braun Intertec. Surface elevations and locations of the borings were acquired with GPS technology through the use of the State of Minnesota's permanent GPS base station network. B.2. Log of Boring Sheets Log of Boring sheets for our new and previous penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and describe the geologic materials that were penetrated,and present the results of penetration resistance and other field tests performed within them,laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples retrieved from them,and groundwater measurements. Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the auger cuttings. Because sampling was not performed continuously,the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations,and the boundaries themselves may also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions. BRAUN Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 4 B.3. Geologic Origins Geologic origins assigned to the materials shown on the logs and referenced within this report were based on: (1) a review of the background information and reference documents cited above,(2)visual classification of the various geologic material samples retrieved during the course of our subsurface exploration,(3)penetration resistance testing performed for the project,(4)laboratory test results,and (5)available common knowledge of the geologic processes and environments that have impacted the site and surrounding area in the past. B.4. Geologic Profile B.4.a. Geologic Materials The general geologic profile at the boring locations consisted of a variable layer of topsoil overlying either glacial soils,or slopewash underlain by glacial soils. The slopewash is wet,and consists of a widely variable composition of clayey soils mixed with silt,sand,gravel,cobbles,and/or organics. The glacial soils consist of either intermixed glacial till or glacial outwash associated with the Des Moines lobe glacial advance. The following subsections discuss the strata in greater detail. B.4.b. Topsoil A surface layer of topsoil was encountered at all boring locations,except for ST-8,whose topsoil had already been stripped. The topsoil ranged in thickness from approximately 1/2 to 2 feet and consisted of silty sand and clayey sand. B.4.c. Slopewash Below the topsoil at Borings ST-4 through ST-7,slopewash was encountered to depths ranging from approximately 4 to 7 feet below grade. The slopewash was wet,and consisted of lean clay,lean clay with sand,clayey sand,and silty sand,with varying amounts of gravel,organics,and roots. Penetration resistances ranged from 5 to 9 blows per foot(BPF). B.4.d. Glacial Deposits Below the topsoil at Borings ST-1 through ST-3,and ST-8,and below the slopewash elsewhere,glacial till and outwash was encountered at all locations. Glacial till,encountered at ST-4 through ST-6,generally consisted of lean clay and sandy lean clay with variable amounts of sand and gravel,or silty sand and clayey sand with variable amounts of gravel. Glacial outwash,encountered at ST-1 through ST-3 and ST-7 through ST-8,generally consisted of poorly graded sand with variable amounts of gravel. BRAUN H\ITERTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 5 Penetration resistances ranged from 4 to 25 BPF within the glacial till,and from 2 to 25 BPF within the glacial outwash,although the penetration resistances were typically well above the lowest recorded values. B.4.e. Groundwater Groundwater was not observed as any of the new borings were advanced. However,based upon a waterbearing soil sample in ST-5,it appears perched groundwater conditions could be present, seasonally or periodically;at variable elevations within or trapped above the glacial till. The water level of Prior Lake was at an elevation of approximately 901.1 on October 2,2012,and 902.5 as noted in our geotechnical report in 2010. The City of Prior Lake indicates a normal lake water level of 901.96. Seasonal and annual fluctuations of level and groundwater levels should be anticipated. B.S. Laboratory Test Results We performed sixteen moisture content tests,four sieve analysis tests through a#200 sieve,and one Atterberg limits test on select samples recovered from the borings in accordance with ASTM procedures. The laboratory test results are shown on the Log of Boring sheets included in the Appendix,across from the associated soil sample. B.6. Slope Stability Analyses B.6.a. Basis for Analyses We analyzed slope stability along three cross sections,shown on the Cross Section Overview Sketch as Sections A,B,and C. From a global perspective,all sections are relatively similar;each will have previously existing 2:1 gradients flattened to nearly a 3:1 gradient,due to cuts at the top of the slope paired with fills at the toe of the slope. The proposed retaining walls accommodate most of the grade changes across the slopes. Section A is centrally located along a previously existing swale axis,where it is assumed that the poorest soil conditions exist(with slopewash being more prevalent over the glacial soils). Section B is located within a geologic profile underlain with glacial outwash and less slopewash. Section B also captures the influence of a proposed house near the toe of the slope,while Section A considers a house farther up the slope. Section C is intermediate in geology to Sections A and B,but considers more directly the influence of a proposed house. BRAUN =NTERTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 6 The analyses were performed first assuming only topsoil stripping would be performed,and then taking into account recommended corrections to remove and replace the poorer quality slopewash with engineered granular fill. For the indentified sections,we used Slope/W,version 7.19,by Geo-Slope International,to perform our stability analyses. Slope/W computes associated factors of safety based on finite element or limit equilibrium methods. The analyses for this evaluation were performed assuming steady-state effective stress conditions with limit equilibrium methods. B.6.b. Material Properties Material parameters used in our stability analyses are provided in Table 1. Soil parameters were derived or correlated from the soil boring and laboratory test results,or were estimated from historical data. Effective stress parameters were used for our analyses. Table 1.Material Parameter Summary Moist Unit Weight Friction Angle Cohesion Material (pcf) (deg) (psf) Topsoil/Slopewash 115 23 0 Glacial Till 125 30 0 Glacial Outwash 120 32 0 Engineered Fill(Select Granular) 120 32 0 B.6.c. Criteria The factor of safety summarized in Section B.6.d,is the ratio of resisting forces to driving forces for a given trial failure surface. A value of 1.0 indicates that these forces are balanced,and stability is marginal or failure is imminent. Most geotechnical references recommend a minimum factor of safety for stability of 1.5 for slopes on which structures are supported. B.6.d. Analytical Results The results of our stability analyses for the identified cross sections are summarized below in Table 2. Companion graphics,showing the location and configuration of the critical failure surfaces are included in the Analytical Results section Appendix. BRAUN NTERTE'` Whitewater -10-09736ADevelopment January 14,2013 Page 7 Table 2.Summary of Stability Analyses Results Condition of Proposed Slopes Lowest Factor of Safety No Slopewash Removal—Section A at Retaining Walls 1.2 With Slopewash Removal—Section A at Proposed House 2.2 With Slopewash Removal—Section A at Retaining Walls 1.6 No Slopewash Removal—Section B 1.3 With Slopewash Removal—Section B 1.5 No Slopewash Removal—Section C 1.1 With Slopewash Removal—Section C 1.5 Details regarding the extent of soil corrections to deal with the poor soils on site and achieve a minimum 1.5 factor of safety are provided in Sections D.1 and D.2. B.6.e. Analytical Assumptions For our analyses,the following assumptions were made regarding the geological conditions or construction procedures. • Vegetation,topsoil,unstable surface soils,slopewash soils,and soft glacial till soils shall be stripped/excavated as recommended prior to fill placement. • Retaining wall and slope fill/backfill shall be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor density. • Retaining wall reinforced backfill and retained soil,per plans,shall consist of sand with less than 12 percent by weight passing the#200 sieve. • Structural slope fill/backfill shall consist of sand with less than 12 percent by weight passing the#200 sieve. • Slope fill/backfill shall be benched into the existing slope. • Slopes will be vegetated and protected from erosion. • Retaining walls will be located outside of the zones of influence of future houses/structures. • Only the retaining walls designed by Civil Design Professionals on July 19,2012,are considered. If these assumptions are not correct,we should be consulted to review our analyses. BRAUN !NTERTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 8 C. Discussion of Stability Results C.1. General Commentary C.1.a. Proposed Construction Natural slopes at the Candy Cove site had gradients as steep as 2:1(horizontal to vertical),with total elevation changes of approximately 80 feet. According to the proposed plans,a variety of flatter slopes are proposed with gradients ranging from approximately 10:1 to as steep as 2.5:1. These flatter slopes, divided by a series of proposed retaining walls throughout the project site,are planned to feature houses and comprise areas with up to 15 feet of fill above the existing slopes and soils. The retaining wall system is generally located along the toe of the natural slopes. As per the provided wall plans,the majority of the retaining wall system consists of three modular block reinforced-earth walls with heights up to fifteen feet, but as the walls change direction or tie into existing slopes,the height and number of walls/tiers diminishes. Several,smaller,large block gravity walls are also included in the project. C.1.b. Analyses Results The analytical results indicate in order for the proposed site design to perform satisfactorily from a slope stability perspective and meet recommended factor of safety standards,all slopewash needs to be removed and replaced with suitable engineered fill. Without complete removal below structures,walls, and adjacent fill/backfill,the factors of safety within the analyzed slopes are below recommended standards. C.1.c. Current Conditions and Future Construction Up to date,nearly all of the slopewash has been removed and replaced with either onsite sands having less than 12 percent fines(by weight)or similar imported sands per the recommendations within this report. A small portion of slopewash,located up the slope from the natural swale,has yet to be removed. In this area,as well as areas where soils were stockpiled or placed for construction traffic and staging,deeper topsoil stripping and the removal of glacial soils laden with roots has yet to be completed as well. Building pad/footing preparation for all proposed houses,footing preparation for future retaining walls,subgrade preparation for the road/driveways,and all final grading still remains to be accomplished. BRAUN i NTE RIEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 9 Our analyses and recommendations provided within this report assume the remaining work will be completed per our recommendations,and there are no modifications and/or additions to the plans. However,if changes from the current plans or recommendations occur,as it is likely that these things will happen,it is crucial we are contacted to assess the impacts on slope stability,and if warranted,provide further geotechnical recommendations. Examples of when to contact us include,but are not limited to: • If retaining walls are moved/removed/added/resized. • If any structures are moved/removed/added/resized. • If the houses/foundations/walls are designed and do not assume our recommended parameters. • If any slopes are changed to a gradient steeper than a 1-1/2:1(h:v)slope. • If any structural/site design alternatives are being considered. D. Recommendations In accordance with our findings and discussions with Mr.Jason Miller with Whitewater Development and Civil Design Professionals,the following sections include our recommendations for final design and construction of the project's slopes/walls. D.1. Excavation D.1.a. Excavation Limits We recommend first stripping vegetation,topsoil,organic soils(soils with majority of roots),slopewash, soft clays,and any other soils deemed generally unstable by an onsite geotechnical engineer prior to placement of fill or reinforcing. Although no previously existing rigid site features have been discovered in the area of fill/reinforcing,the removal of items like concrete slabs,existing utilities,or anything that may trap groundwater is also recommended. Table 3 provides the anticipated soil correction depths at the soil boring locations within the slope. Please note,these are anticipated approximate excavation depths for soil correction;excavation depths may vary considerably between borings. After the excavation of unsuitable soils,the subgrade should be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Prior to fill placement,surface compaction of the exposed subgrade may be required to improve the density of the in-place soils. Surface compaction should be performed as directed by the geotechnical engineer. BRAUN "_NTER FC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 10 Table 3.Anticipated Excavation Depths for Soil Correction Anticipated Depth Approximate of Excavation Bottom Elevation Boring Ground Surface Elevation (Feet) (Estimated) ST-2 934.9 1 934 ST-3 921.6 2 919-1/2 ST-4 905.0 7 898 5T-5 916.0 10 906 ST-6 904.1 7 897 ST-7 903.6 4 899-1/2 D.1.b. Benching Into Existing Slope We recommend benches be excavated into banks of excavation prior to placement of fill,or as fill is placed on them. The benches are recommended to help key the fill into the banks,allowing the fill to be spread and compacted on level surfaces,and reducing the risk of finished slope instability. D.2. Selection, Placement, and Compaction of Fill and Backfill D.2.a. Materials Fill and backfill should consist of onsite or imported sands consisting of less than 12 percent passing the #200 sieve by weight(MnDOT Select Granular)including,but not limited to the following proposed zones/areas: • Buildings: • Beneath building pads,where excavations are deeper than bottom of subbase elevation for the building pad. • Beneath footings,where excavations are deeper than bottom of footing elevation,at a 1:1(h:v)downwards from both edges of bottom-of-footing to suitable native soils,then upwards to proposed finished grade elevation at no less than a 1:1 slope on interior and exterior sides. • Adjacent to footing,where excavations are not deeper than bottom of footing elevation, extending laterally two feet from the bottom outside edges of the footings,then upwards to proposed finished grade elevation at no less than a 1:1 slope on interior and exterior sides. • Adjacent to foundation walls,per future recommendations from the structural engineer or in the aforementioned zone specified for footings,extending laterally two feet from the bottom outside edge of the footing. BRAUN N . _RTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 11 ■ Walls known/evaluated herein: ■ Within every zone influencing the retaining wall system;all reinforced,retained,and foundation soils as specified in the retaining walls plans by Civil Design Professionals, dated July 19,2012. Per conversation with CDP,the low permeable soil that extends back from the bottommost leveling pad shall be treated as retained soil and will consist of select granular. • Other Walls/Structures that we have not evaluated: • Within all similar zones of influence mentioned above: beneath building pads,below and above footings,adjacent to foundation walls,all reinforced,retained,and foundation soils pertaining to retaining walls,above and below geotextile reinforcement,etc. • All zones deemed necessary per a geotechnical engineer Slope backfill beyond the extent of these areas may comprise of select granular and/or other onsite mineral soils,as long as they are deemed suitable by a geotechnical engineer and properly compacted. Topsoil,slopewash,soils containing debris,etc.should not be reused as fill/backfill. Previously existing topsoil may be reused to finish the completed slopes. We recommend stockpiling the topsoil separately from other onsite soils,as to maintain its low permeability for providing superior surface runoff down to the lake. If suitable subgrades become waterbearing due to seepage,rainfall,snowmelt,etc.,we recommend removing the wet/soft soils and replacing them with select granular or clear rock. Frost and frozen soils should be removed prior to fill placement. No frozen soils should be used as fill/backfill. D.2.b. Placement and Compaction We recommend the backfill and fill be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. We recommend all fill and backfill placed within or below the slope be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of standard Proctor density,except for specified areas where fill soils be compacted to higher minimum densities or within the retaining wall or future structural plans,determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 698(standard Proctor). The fill should be within 3 percentage points of its optimum moisture content. BRAUN INTERTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 12 D.3. Slope Protection D.3.a. Limits We recommend all exposed slopes have a one-foot minimum layer of low permeable soil(clay soils) covered with vegetation,to provide for higher surface runoff and greater surface stability. If no immediate vegetation occurs,or placed vegetation perishes/erodes,we recommend placement of a geotextile or reinforcement mat on the slopes. Recommendations for geotextile/reinforcement materials can be provided if needed. D.4. Retaining Wall Design Assuming soil corrections and grading are performed as recommended,the design parameters provided in Section D.3.0 of the November 11,2010 report are still valid. We recommend houses/structures be located so the retaining walls(and horizontal reinforcement)is outside of the 1:1(H:V)influence zone outward and downward from the perimeter structure footings. If retaining walls are located within these zones,we recommend the retaining wall designer be contacted review impacts to the wall,which could potentially impact structure support. We should also be contacted to review global stability of the slope and structure. D.S. Plan Review Prior to construction of the remaining engineered structures,we should be consulted to review the project plans and specifications for conformance with the recommendations provided in this report. D.6. Construction Quality Control D.6.a. Excavation Observations We recommend having a geotechnical engineer observe all excavations related to slope and retaining wall subgrade preparation and construction.The purpose of the observations is to evaluate the competence of the geologic materials exposed in the excavations,and the adequacy of required excavation oversizing. BRAUN ! !TE PTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 13 D.6.b. Erosion Protection During construction,the contractor should provide temporary erosion protection to exposed areas of the slope and adjacent undisturbed portions of the slope. D.6.c. Materials Testing We recommend density tests be taken in excavation backfill and additional required fill placed within or below the slope and within the retained zone of the retaining walls. D.6.d. Cold Weather Precautions If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather,all snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. E. Procedures E.1. Penetration Test Borings The penetration test borings were drilled with a tracked vehicle-mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger.The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586.Penetration test samples were taken at 2-1/2 or 5-foot intervals. Actual sample intervals and corresponding depths are shown on the boring logs. E.2. Material Classification and Testing E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice D 2488.A chart explaining the classification system is attached.Samples were placed in jars or bags and returned to our facility for review and storage. E.2.b. Laboratory Testing The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM procedures. BRAUN N E RIL • Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 14 E.3. Groundwater Measurements The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced,and again after auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled. F. Qualifications F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions F.1.a. Material Strata Our evaluation,analyses and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth,and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be inferred to some extent.Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions,and can be expected to vary in depth,elevation and thickness away from the exploration locations. Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until additional exploration work is completed,or construction commences. If any such variations are revealed,our recommendations should be re-evaluated.Such variations could increase construction costs,and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them. F.1.b. Groundwater Levels Groundwater measurements were made under the conditions reported herein and shown on the exploration logs,and interpreted in the text of this report. It should be noted that the observation periods were relatively short,and groundwater can be expected to fluctuate in response to rainfall, flooding,irrigation,seasonal freezing and thawing,surface drainage modifications and other seasonal and annual factors. F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility F.2.a. Plan Review This report is based on a limited amount of information,and a number of assumptions were necessary to help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications,and evaluate whether the design is as expected,if any design changes BRAUN NTEPTEC Whitewater Development Project BL-10-09736A January 14,2013 Page 15 have affected the validity of our recommendations,and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications. F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing It was recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction,and since October 22,2012,have been contracted,and are currently doing so. This has strengthened correlations of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered by the borings,and provided a continuity of professional responsibility. F.3. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval,we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation,analyses, and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.4. Standard of Care In performing its services,Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty,express or implied,is made. BRAUN Iia RIE,C Appendix BRAUN 1NTtFR {TFC tiil l :,,.:\ t � L <« Z \- I rit .1= c« _ Mg > g 17}\£ �aum,�o��:am, \ \ \ % ) A }, \}. \ - A' : \ w \ § , Z d « wp^t < '27/ \ ® , \ \ \| - \ . \ %/ . \ 4J e . A Os 0 /\ (\ \\\\ \\ <A !.F.! _ \ (}\�\% _ EE 40 �z ng 6.3 WE '•=;7- I < \ §\ » §E\E BRAUN "' LOG OF BORING I NTE RTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736 BORING: ST-1 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail Prior Lake, Minnesota $ DRILLER: M.Barber METHOD: 31/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 11/4/10 SCALE: 1"=CD 4' o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes c 983.0 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USAGE EM1110-1-2908) n SC- / SILTY CLAYEY SAND,fine-grained,dark brown,dry to Benchmark: Elevations at _ SM moist. _ Borings ST-2 and ST-3 were 6 981.5 1.5 / (Topsoil) obtained using GPS and the SP – POORLY GRADED SAND,fine-to medium-grained, – State of Minnesota's y with a trace of Gravel, brown,moist, loose to medium 9 permanent base station >– dense. network. Elevations at (Glacial Outwash) Borings ST-1 and ST-4 were c– – estimated from the topographic site plan. 1 11 >_ U_ — y N o_ 8 N c 11 _ I –X 13 969.5 13.5 /� END OF BORING. — Water not observed while drilling. – Boring immediately backfilled.(9 – 0 z it V CI > Z co — a O CO N n m _ - O O N _ d _ Z_ rH V - 0 z a _ _ Z C7 Z K O m O l7 O BL-10-09736 Braun Intertec Corporation ST-1 page 1 of 1 • • BRAUN" LOG OF BORING INTERTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736 BORING: ST-2 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION LOCATION: See attached sketch. I Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail .03 Prior Lake, Minnesota JD DRILLER: M.Barber METHOD: 31/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 11/4/10 SCALE: 1"=4' o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes c 934.9 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USAGE EM1110-1-2908) n 934.1 0.8 �/SC- SILTY CLAYEY SAND, black to dark brown, moist. x m– SM d (Topsoil) F O SC- / SILTY CLAYEY SAND,with a trace of Gravel, brown, moist, loose to medium dense. a)– SM – y– (Glacial Till) 410 ® – 0 a hor rd— I- r 16 >– Øi "5 927.9 7.0 a SP- POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine-to SM medium-grained,with varying amounts of Gravel, 5 a)– I brown,moist,very loose to loose. – 1 (Glacial Outwash) 2 4 m n — X 6 r – 0 z – – = m – – O m cl 913.9 21.0 X7 m END OF BORING. E Water not observed while drilling. Boring immediately backfilled. N _ 0 d _ W z z N V O K c- 0 i --- z Z Z C O co o '',,9 I BL-10-09736 Braun Intertec Corporation ST-2 page 1 of 1 BRAUN' LOG OF BORING I NTE RTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736 BORING: ST-3 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail trl Prior Lake, Minnesota a DRILLER: M.Barber METHOD: 3 1/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 11/4/10 SCALE: 1"=4' m o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL MC P200 Tests or Notes 921.6 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) % % nSC %( SILTY CLAYEY SAND,fine grained,dark brown, dry to - SM f ` moist. 0 920.1 1.5 (Topsoil) SC- 5 SM SILTY CLAYEY SAND,with a trace of Gravel, brown, / moist, loose to medium dense. ,,1I g 12 44 o (Glacial Till) '1 > 16 915.6 6.0 ,/;; SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to medium-grained, _ with Gravel and layers of Clayey Sand, brown, moist, medium dense. – (Glacial Outwash) 18 co 910.6 11.0 12 SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, very loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 4 1 7 ti F { I� 11 7 I 10 No recovery. cl 900.6 21.0 I SP- POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT,fine-to - 899.1 22 5 SM medium-grained,with Gravel, brown, moist, medium `4 13 m dense. – \ (Glacial Outwash) END OF BORING. NN – - g Water not observed while drilling. — Z Boring immediately backfilled. I _ a a _ - - Z _ O BL-10-09736 Braun Intertec Corporation ST-3 page 1 of 1 BRAUNS'' LOG OF BORING INTERTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736 BORING: ST-4 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail frg Prior Lake, Minnesota a DRILLER: M.Barber METHOD: 31/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 11/4/10 [SCALE: 1"=4' m o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL MC P200 Tests or Notes .76 905.0 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USAGE EM1110-1-2908) % % n SC- ? SILTY CLAYEY SAND,fine-grained, black,wet. _ SM (Topsoil) 0 903.3 1.7 — CL LEAN CLAY with SAND,with lenses of Silty Sand, gray,wet. 9 a 18 — % (Slopewash) " 5 37 91 c) 898.0 7.0 , o CL /// SANDY LEAN CLAY,with Gravel, brown,wet, medium. aa)— (Glacial Till) 8 23 co_ 895.0 10.0 SM SILTY SAND,fine-to medium-grained, dark brown, 6 894.0 11.0 \waterbearing, loose. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. - Water not observed while drilling. - Boring immediately backfilled. coti 0 w - U ml Z � I z m a t n m o — - 00 0 N _ N 0 1 _ z z z _ g — i U - O a _ Z - z 0z 0 m O 9 BL-10-09736 Braun Intertec Corporation ST-4 page 1 of 1 BRAUNS" LOG OF BORING • I NTE RTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736A BORING: ST-5 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail 76 Prior Lake,Minnesota DRILLER: K.Keck METHOD: 3 1/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 9/26/12 SCALE: 1"=4' o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL qp MC Tests or Notes c 916.0 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) tsf % c,, SC / CLAYEY SAND,slightly organic,dark brown and black, _ moist to wet. (Topsoil/Slopewash) a— a_ r5 14 c € 911.0 5.0 SM SILTY SAND,fine-to medium-grained,trace Gravel, ` 9 14 >— brownish gray,moist. 909.0 7.0 (Slopewash) CL V LEAN CLAY with SAND,trace Gravel and roots, _ brown, olive and gray,wet,rather soft. _1 4 2 19 (Glacial Till) A 906.0 10.0 SC CLAYEY SAND,trace Gravel,with occasional Silty 10 I 2 1/2 15 P200=47% Sand layers throughout, brown and gray,wet, medium to rather stiff. — (Glacial Till) — _ 6 3 18 902.0 14.0 SP- POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT,trace Gravel, E SM with Sandy Lean Clay seams,dark brown, moist to waterbearing,very loose. 4 900.0 16.0CL \ (GlacialOutwash) — j� SANDY LEAN CLAY,trace Gravel,with occasional Silt —' Z — jand Sand seams, rust staining,gray, moist, rather stiff. (Glacial Till) C j — j ( 11 m n j o j - j9 *Boring 890.0 26.0 immediately 2 END OF BORING. backfilled. FN 1 _ Water observed at a depth of 14 1/2 feet with 14 1/2 — feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Z — Water not observed with 23 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. I 22 Water not observed to cave-in depth of 23 feet o — immediately after withdrawal of auger. 9 BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation ST-5 page 1 of 1 'BRAUN"' LOG OF BORING INTERTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736A BORING: ST-6 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail .c Prior Lake, Minnesota - DRILLER: K.Keck METHOD: 31/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 9/26/12 SCALE: 1"=4' 03 o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL qp MC Tests or Notes c 904.1 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USAGE EM1110-1-2908) tsf % SM ' SILTY SAND,fine-to medium-grained, black, moist. a_ (Topsoil) - 902.1 2.0 CL LEAN CLAY,trace Gravel and roots,olive,gray and N dark brown,wet. 7 20 LL=46 o (Slopewash) PL=16 c_ PI=30 °�' % ►) 5 33 > j n 0 897.1 7.0 o CL SANDY LEAN CLAY,trace Gravel,with rust staining throughout, olive,gray and brown, moist, medium to ` 8 4 16 - j very stiff. A (Glacial Till) X 11 4 16 - j _Z 17 4 1/2 13 - 21 4 1/2 0 z K j a Possible Cobbles encountered from 20 to 21 feet. 25 m _ 0 j N _ _ ° W j 20 41/2 878.1 26.0 END OF BORING. IJ _ o Water not observed with 24 1/2 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. H - Water not observed to cave-in depth of 23 feet H immediately after withdrawal of auger. ° Boring immediately backfilled. 0 I BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation ST-6 page 1 of 1 . BRAUN' LOG OF BORING INTERTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736A BORING: ST-7 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail Prior Lake, Minnesota DRILLER: K.Keck METHOD: 3 1/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 9/26/12 L SCALE: 1"=4' m r o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL qp MC Tests or Notes I 903.6 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) tsf % Q SM SILTY SAND,fine-to medium-grained,trace Gravel a_ and roots,dark grayish brown, moist. (Topsoil) 901.6 2.0 i Iu SC / CLAYEY SAND,trace Gravel,dark brown, moist. N_ % (Slopewash) _V 7 3 9 0 899.6 4.0 s SP- i POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine-to € SM icoarse-grained,with Gravel,dark brown, moist, medium dense. X 13 6 P200=10% 897.6 6.0 (Glacial Outwash) //\ 8 SP POORLY GRADED SAND,fine-to medium-grained, — trace Gravel,with occasional Silty Sand pockets, light — a brown,moist,very loose to medium dense. —X 11 a (Glacial Outwash) 1 9 8 P200=3% —1 4 889.6 14.0 SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to coarse-grained, .41 with Gravel, brown,wet,very loose to medium. N (Glacial Outwash) ' 4 0 Z — ccc 0 V — — m I >1 z , 8 882.6 21.0 a END OF BORING. 0 d — — Water not observed with 19 1/2 feet of hollow-stem O — auger in the ground. N — Water not observed to cave-in depth of 14 1/2 feet — 1 o immediately after withdrawal of auger. w z Boring immediately backfilled. G w — — 0 z 0 0 z Fc 0 m O — 0 9 BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation ST-7 page 1 of 1 BRAUNS" LOG OF BORING I NTE RTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736A BORING: ST-8 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park o Candy Cove Trail Prior Lake,Minnesota DRILLER: K.Keck METHOD: 31/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 9/26/12 [SCALE: 1"=4' o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL qp MC Tests or Notes 971.7 0.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) tsf % a SC f 2 CLAYEY SAND,fine-to medium-grained,trace Gravel, _ j brown,moist to wet,stiff to very stiff. o (Glacial Till) _ `I 17 4 9 N % 1 c I14 4 11 > 965.7 6.0 /4/SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to medium-grained, _ light brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) _ A 13 2 P200=2% rn 14 12 l0 11 — z _ V — W >I z 13 m _ m m _ - 0 0 o w I X13 G 0 z 0 2 0 z V 20 0 o BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation ST-8 page 1 of 2 BRAUN LOG OF BORING I NTE BTEC Braun Project BL-10-09736A BORING: ST-8 (Cont.) SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS LOCATION: See attached sketch. Candy Cove Park Candy Cove Trail .115 Prior Lake, Minnesota a DRILLER: K.Keck METHOD: 3 1/4"HSA,Autohammer DATE: 9/26/12 SCALE: 1"=4' o Elev. Depth o feet feet Description of Materials BPF WL qp MC Tests or Notes 939.7 32.0 Symbol (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487,Rock-USAGE EM1110-1-2908) tsf % Q POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to medium-grained, _ light brown, moist, medium dense. - o (Glacial Outwash)(continued) 937.7 34.0 SP POORLY GRADED SAND,fine-grained, light brown, moist, medium dense. g (Glacial Outwash) /1 19 o— c ai I — >— II .Q _ co O 25 930.7 41.0 (\ END OF BORING. Water not observed with 39 1/2 feet of hollow-stem — auger in the ground. - - Water not observed to cave-in depth of 29 1/2 feet — immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. N — C7 Z C C a0 z — — Q C to a C7 - N n 0 o o � N — N d _ _ Z u _ I _ o K z � z Z _ - z 0 m 0 L7 0 BL-10-09736A Braun Intertec Corporation ST-8 page 2 of 2 - BRAUN Descriptive Terminology of Soil Standard D 2487-00 I N T E RT E C ___ __ Cla(UnifiessificationdSoil ofClassiSoilsfication for EngineeringSystem) Purposes Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Soils Classification Particle Size Identification Group Names Using Laboratory Tests a Group Boulders over 12" Symbol Group Name b Cobbles 3"to 12" c Gravels Clean Gravels Cu>_4 and 15_Cu< 3° GW Well-graded gravel d Gravel a-a More than 50%of 5%or less fines° C d Coarse 3/4"to 3" o ca coarse fraction C0<4 and/or 1 >C0>3GP Poorly graded gravel Fine No.4 to 3/4" •o 2 > retained on Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel d f g Sand c `.N No.4 sieve More than 12%fines C Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel d f 9 Coarse No.4 to No.10 ei 0 0Medium No.10 to No.40 W N Sands Clean Sands Cu 2 6 and 1 <Cu -.3 C SW Well-graded sand h Fine No.40 to No.200 in r a 50%or more of 5%or less fines' C <6 and/or 1>Cc>3 c SP Poorly graded sand h W. coarse fraction ° Sift <No.200,l PI<4or o B Fines classi as ML or MH SM Silt sand'e" below"A"line Sands with Fines classify y v o passesClay <No.200,PI 2 4 and E No.4 sieve More than 12%' Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand f g h on or above"A"line a y Inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A"line i CL Lean clay k'm a.. Silts and Clays g k I m Relative Densityof o PI<4 or plots below"A"line' ML Sift o a e Liquid limit Cohesionless Soils CO m less than 50 Organic Liquid limit-oven dried < 0 75 OL Organic clay k'm" m rz Liquid limit-not dried OL Organic silt k''"° Very loose 0 to 4 BPF R `o N PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clay k'm Loose 5 to 10 BPF E d Silts and clays Inorganic Medium dense 11 to 30 BPF PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic sift k m m `o z Liquid limit Dense 31 to 50 BPF 50 or more Liquid limit-oven dried OH Organic Gay k'" c iL Organic < 0.75 Very dense over 50 BPF in Liquid limit-not dried OH Organic silt k'm a Highly Organic Soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color and organic odor PT Peat Consistency of Cohesive Soils a Based on the material passing the 3-in(75mm)sieve. Very soft 0 to 1 BPF b. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles or boulders or both"to group name. Soft 2 to 3 BPF c. C"= D./Df" C.=(D„)2 Rather soft 4 to 5 BPF Medium 6 to 8 BPF Dfc x1)&3 Rather stiff 9 to 12 BPF d. If soil contains 215%sand,add"with sand”to group name. Stiff 13 to 16 BPF e. Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt Very stiff 17 to 30 BPF GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay Hard over 30 BPF GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay f. If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. g. If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name. h. If soil contains 2 15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. i. Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: Drilling Notes SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay Standard penetration test borings were advanced by 3 1/4"or 6 1/4" SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt ID hollow-stem augers unless noted otherwise,Jetting water was used SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay to clean out auger prior to sampling only where indicated on logs. j. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix"ST" k If soil contains 10 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with gravel"whichever is predominant I. If soil contains 230%plus No.200,predominantly sand,add"sandy"to group name. (Split Tube). All samples were taken with the standard 2"OD split-tube m If soil contains 230%plus No.200 predominantly gravel,add"gravelly"to group name. sampler,except where noted. n. PI 2 4 and plots on or above"A"line. o. PI<4 or plots below"A"line. Power auger borings were advanced by 4"or 6"diameter continuous- p. PI plots on or above"A"line. flight,solid-stem augers.Soil classifications and strata depths were in- q. PI plots below"A"line. ferred from disturbed samples augered to the surface and are,therefore, somewhat approximate. Power auger borings are designated by the 60 prefix"B." 50_ Hand auger borings were advanced manually with a 1 1/2"or 3 1/4" �: diameter auger and were limited to the depth from which the auger could e be manually withdrawn. Hand auger borings are indicated by the prefix 40_ •' "H." a / BPF: Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration 30 - / test,also known as"N"value. The sampler was set 6"into undisturbed d soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resisnces were then counted for second and third 6"increments and added to get BPF. Where they amdiffered significantly,they are reported in the following form:2/12 for the 20 second and third 6"increments,respectively. to /. MH or OH WH:WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer 10 and rods alone;driving not required. 7-- cLtitL ,,,,,>,7 or OL. �- WR: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods O alone;hammer weight and driving not required. 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 TW indicates thin-walled(undisturbed)tube sample. Liquid Limit(LL) Laboratory Tests Note: All tests were run in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. DD Dry density,pcf OC Organic content,% WD Wet density, pcf S Percent of saturation,% MC Natural moisture content, % SG Specific gravity LL Liqiuid limit,% C Cohesion,psf PL Plastic limit,% 0 Angle of internal friction PI Plasticity index, % qu Unconfined compressive strength,psf P200 %passing 200 sieve qp Pocket penetrometer strength,tsf Rev.7/07 Analytical Details I as ,U as cD N Fl -c O u) U cl) Xa 4....0 ,.n o Cl) ;� Cl)O ,_ U 2 CD Cr -a a) 0)0 O !!artrt V _ al 71 N U 0 c{ lir k 0 4... NM i W ';1 t CO ,,,,,:::,,, 4.1.• '.4= b x: , al U = O C/ ....rit4.ifiq0 T vJ �C15 n4,' ' C tak J 2 _ ' 0.411� CO c O > U J a) U C O U CD n CC CS CD N Q l 0 al > .Q c X 'c U a) A a) c� cC c CO ,cp�' -2 0C� L . ,„ U V 0 ^' yyyy 1 t C) U o � � � O Cl) mw � 6. ap I #O U) , , T (n (TS .,r .._.; M f U V ......................................... .........1..........11..111.111111..1... .11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 3`... .......1..........1.....1............111 ..........111111.11.11.111...1111...1..1 ♦........♦1111....1.111111.....11...1...1 ..........1....1....11.11111.11.1.1.11.1 .:.:.:.*.�.�.�.1.�.�111111.:.1111*.111.11111.1.1111111.:.1.1111111.:111.11111111 `, .��1�1�1�1�1���1�����1�1�1�1�1���1�1�1�1�1�1�������1�����1������������:•:���1:1�� .1.1.11••1:1:1:1k.�.*1�..1.4.:41:1.1�1�:1:1�����4.1�1�1�:�..�:::.::.:1*Ft.:.4 1i.�1�1��1��1:.;1�1:.iiii.11111.�1�1�1�.iiiiiiiiiiiiiii�•1� ..11111..111. ..11.1........1....11... .11111.....1.11.1.1........11....111.. ♦11111....♦i11...1....1.i.11.11.111111.�♦ a '+ ♦11.....♦...1...1.....1....11....111...♦ ♦11111...........1....11..111....111..1.♦ ♦111...1........1..1..11..111....111.... ♦..1....1♦.......1..1..1..111....111..... .11111111..........1..1....1.....11..... 4V ♦11111111........1....1.....1....1.1..... � i 11i1i1i1i1i1i1i�i�i1i1i1i1i�i�ili�i1i1i1i1i�ili�iii�ilili�i�i�i�i�ili�ili�i�i�i�i �� N .�tii �1i1i1i1i�i1i1i1i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�ili�i�i�ili�i�i�ilili�i�i�i1i1i1i1i�i�i�i�i �'k_� 1111...............111.11.111.1.1...♦ /�''�♦ .11.111...........1.11111......11..... P'� "/.111111.........111....1.....1..1...♦♦ .111111.1.........1....11.11.....1...♦ yh1111111....1....11.11..1.....1......♦ 1♦ .1♦1111.....1....11..1.1...1....1.111♦. j�.�.1.1�1�11.11�.�.�.�.�.�.�1�.�.11�1�.�1�1�11.�.�.�1�.�11.�.�1�1��i� .4 111 ..............1.11...11.., a♦ ....11.111.1..1.1.11.........11....♦ ♦ �� .�11.�.�.1.1.1.�.�.11111111.1111�111�.1....1.�.11��1.�1�1�.�.�.�.1�1111 i..............1.1..1....1...11 ....1.1. ♦..1..i..♦.1....1.1.1...........1..... 1♦ �` ......1..11....1.1..11.....1....1..1.. 1kl 1 O ♦.i......♦...........1....11.........11.♦ 11111111.•.�.111.11�.X1111.1.11.1.1.1111.11111111.�.�.�� 11*1.�*:•1.•.x.1.41:.:1�1:.�1:111:...�.�....11..11..1.1..1.:11111:: ' ♦.........1.....11...................11♦ _ al CtS ...........111.11.111.1................1♦ ♦.........1111111111............1......♦ A ♦.........1111.1.1111................1..♦ ♦1....11♦.1111.111.1........1....1.....♦ ♦111.....♦..1.11.1.1..1.................♦ ♦........♦1.1.11.1....1111..11.1.1....x. Tt� .....1....1.11.1.1..1.............1... .• +� .� ♦111..♦.....1....1..1.11...11.1.11.... ♦111..♦....1.......1..1....1......11.. ♦. � ♦11.......♦......1111..1..11..1..111.11'1. ..1....1.�1�1�...11�.1...�1�..11�1�...1.11�.11�11.1.1.�11.1.�1.�1�.�� _ .111...1.......1....11.....1...........♦ `0 CCS ♦.1......♦..1....11.11....11.1.........1♦ V V ♦...1....♦...1..1....1....1..11........♦ .i1 t:4:1.1..*1�..1.�111�.X11.1.1..1..i i111111111�1:.1.1.1.I.i i i.111.1.�1 .i1i.11111.1.iii.1111111.ii11.i1iiliii.11111111111.ii1i1i1i1ii1ii1i1i1i. iiiiii11111ii//iiiiiiiiiiiiiii/iiiiiiiii,.....liiii i i•i•i iii.•1i i iiiii i1 iiiiilii/iiiiiiiiiiiiii1ilii iiiiiiiiiiiliiiii i i iiiiiiiii i....,.iiiiiiii. iiiiiiiiii11111iiiiiiiiii/iii/i/•ilii/ii..i.11111.iiiii1i1iiiiii11111i� ♦1.♦♦1♦♦11.1111..11..1.1111111.11.11♦�.�.� Analytical Results • o o 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) CO CO 0 0 0 N 0 0 0) CO 0 CO U) 0 CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) Q) 0) CO CO co co CO co co 0 1I1111III1IIII1I 0 — CO J V' i O •c 0 — Co L 0 a) 0 — 0 iT r 0 • — 0 C P V o UCh a) : coTu 0 — CO JM LL , , 0 t.. (fir) Z , t " I 0 N " i —_ , , co r t O . t, I 0 } n C), c • N O J + — CO /^�'' £V.;" W C') L O U = O , — N C TM as O ' Iii) i••••••••••70 t .--, UCL .•.O:+:..y , o co •VA......:.:'.7 ). CC CO CD .•••••••••.,...4 : I CD ❖.❖.•.•.e t 0 %%%i% NQ. %+., tI 0% +44 LL •ii•ii!•••• O t N _ , — t 0 ad._ .� co C , O t , O = `°i Uo� a' t L 0tL — .;,- >t 7+ � 0 a ; O C (� — t — r C cs W 0 0 — Cr) .� o t z ' t co CO Oco I CO > 2 - o O L o , i= CT) a C ai c acts o � ° ° 0 0 - N CO � /�� 0 I I I 1 IL I I ►. I I I I.....I o W 0 V/ OD) co0n co co m• C) N O 0 O0) CO N- COO U M 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) O) 0) 0) 0) 0) 00 CO CO CO CO CO CO UO! eA013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O) CO N CO ID d' CO N O O CO 1", CO In Cr CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) O) 0) 0) 0) CO CO 00 CO CO 00 CO 0 1 1 1 I a) 1 1 I I I I I I 1 8 . O as — 00 L O a — co v o 3 a) p — N c (7) d' f6 O — O C - -a- c,12 a- Cti L 77,,...'„; 0 a) II — a� ;' O ,, CO ,,5�' t , - 0:: Z , N� y �'�0 'A — N r'`.4.,_ 1 N t4,, 4 1 M t — O U _ M C 1 m O }+ 1 N 1 8 U) L A 1 o U O - N .......... A o C/) v _. . . ....._a ci) ....... — a) '• 0 O O.:•:.:•:cV A t N Q +> O 2 .000acm t 0Cti N (./) t _ C I 03 a) 0) o ' U 1 i — O = a) CD i f U 06 o / o f o t C CCSo ; r. . — N V W A f f o U -_ t - 4 Las ett / O co1 1 00 0 (., . , W �� . ; - co O I� L o OU Q c}n Ca ' 5 - Tr i 1 C as p � 0 U 0 0 — N CO U Cl) 00) CO0N. COO ( d0' 0 N O O 00) CO0N. COO L()) M 0) 0) 0) 01 01 0) 0) 0 0 01 CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO U0112A813 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) CO I,- CO t.f) CON 0 CO CO N. CO (1) '1 0) 0) C)) 0) 0) O) O) 0) 0) CO 0) CO CO CO CO CO CO OD 0 II 1 111 1 I ° o —.I O 0 L O a) a O 0 — N C°1 O Cr) rl R) • C — .;- — i ::::71:: D -k(,z ,. Et rI „% (""Sd. 0 V CO Z 3 C] t ( _ 0 +-+ c `' i o V c ( — CO.cis I._ _J ( _ r N Cf) L ,a irg- ( CD C 0 (� Vii,, I — (DO U O ' r N (15 0 'i CD }, t U O) — +) t CM 0CtiI 0 CT) " ' C ( _ O ^' � 1- W > •= ami t — ° U i clic,) L 0 — t - N — c� ; al W (/ , 0 < 1CCS- MQ) 0 U f` I co d7 0 ° '` o � o es • N CO 0 Cl) 60) 000 N- ° U) 0 0 0 0 00) COON- ° (F) C`O') 0) 0) C)) 0) 0) O) 0) 0) 0) Q) co co co co CO CO CO uo! e'Ae J • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) CO N- CO 10 et M N 0 0) CO I,- (0 ( d' CO 0) 0) Cr) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 00 CO CO 03 00 00 CO 0 1 1 1 1 1 ? 1 1 1 1 I S — 000 O 0 OL 0 CO N O 0) co O u N O 0 MI 0)c .� ff y' — CO0 NcC co O _ 0 co a) O 'i0'i Oi — o coZ5 N 'i'i'i'i Oi _ 0 Q 'i'i'i'i^i'i CNI CO O V/ a . ` — 0 co�� O — co 1 C N + I 4) L — 00 C O N N as O .� 0C/) U0_ `n ��f)� . N Q /V/ LL i LL (r i — 0 Q) 1� I N W } O !NCV Cr) II II VJ I — 0 ' �� I 0 i c00 O = 0 r U a) 0 U T 0 • (Z W O ' C') 0 0 — o ' 0 CO • Z • ) co i � •, 0 Q H C ' /�\ o ' \`V RI Ih ) = co Oo m (.0 ° '' — ° ro — CO OO c) cz '630 C'3 C'3 0 T..' J (Z N 11 I I I _1 1 1 1 1 0 Cu 0 C/) Q- FP)) 000 c00 M N O O 0) c00 c0•) W 01) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 00 00 00 00 00 000 00 uoi�ena13 • o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) CO 1,- CO to CO N _ 0 M CO I- CO LI) Ch CO 0) 0) O) Cr) O) 0) 0) 0) 0) O) 00 CO CO CO CO CO CO O 1 1 1 1 1 0 - O Ca - CO J—.N O 0 CO d nt V Q0 _ mt N C4 �, �I C o , Tr ' • _0 y ,— — CO0 a) co CC ;, 0 ; CO as+asp:r=n i — M a)N .*:s :•.•.:. �;♦i 0 *AV* CO• C) •••••;#i,•••°: — 0 N •iiiiii CO•• f N O - CO f0 s- J '-e. 0 7 — CO L N N ��/�4 , (n L 0 — 0 V C O o N C O • m cd ^U ` — 0 •Cl) W M_ t t N CC co.., t 0 t N Q) T r N W i O CZ N Cr) I �-. t CO_ 0 i C O W �--r t > = 0 — Ot 0 05 O t t _ O 0I >+ N _ t t— �/ t 0� ;N CD I t CZ W t U — ..0 — 0 t CZ t QLi t 0 F— C i — CO CD UN i o CO > 0 `° — CO N. O t I = U0 d7 m N C) >� WSoo O . as as O U 0 (3 N W 0 Cr) Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0) 0) 0) � 0) 0) 0) 0) ' 0000COCO -5CO uoil�na1� . • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO N CO CD •V• CO N 0 Cr) CO 1,- CO to CO Q) 6) C7) C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 co co 00 co co 0 1 1 1 1 1x,1 11 11 I I I o J — CO O 0 I 0 — CD O L N d 0 N — N a v O j 0 — 0 T C T1 c • - 0 c� co mIcc 0 — (0 � co .❖.•..e�e• a 00❖.❖.❖:° 0 Ud .i�Oi�Q•�Qi�i: — 0M 4 co L J N V) L Cil 0 C _O 7 4 C O •L C y N cti -. 0- - v •-- U N O CC Cr) C� m _ 0 T N = t N //�� `` LL ^ 1 0 O N CO ` .0 i — COo CD> 'CD C T 0 t 0 0 CO ' oV0 ` o I — r Cr) V I i — N (i W o U - 0 •R{ o I --- CV Zi t i - 8 Cfl O o t t co > •0 al - co 'U _ �pU co 0 r — O >' O o U — (C:‘9 ...ICC p 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 I. 1 I I1 0 CO U (n a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CA CO N CD to 1- CO N 0 Cn CO N CD CO CO O CA Cr) O O O CA O CP O) CO CO CO CO CO CO CO La cilleAei3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M to 1.0 tt CO N 0 0) CO 1,•• (D U) V' CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) Cr) 0) 0) CO CO CO CO 00 CO CO 0 Y J — co NrO dO O y coO N N Q —— N.--7- F 4 O 0 O LC) O) C_ rl c• — co co tl) 0 — (D CO r•••4••♦ ri::::::::::1•;;�444 w -0 i..0,......:.:.:.:.: — N i. g r.......i�i� • M O- 444440: 0 2 ri:i:i:i:iii:iii CL Ntgt&tier,4,0! CO = CZ 0L (y4—r L fCO oc�C N CO i e :,./:: /U � o _ � N/�a) O N QoC M N N t T . a)a^) ` E. IT 0_ ^ O O N Cn ' C 0 00 a) a) 0 r r o O + (n 05 Lo t — 0 > _ U r "0 — r C CES o t 0 c� W cmII U — �CO : o t H o - 0co a) I - > 0 o O V L ' = cp U (I) o E-a a — O ,›' O 5 13 0 co U co 0- 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) CO 1` CO to Nr CO NO to 00 1\ CO ID Vr CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) CO CO 00 CO CO CO 00 U0112Ael3