HomeMy WebLinkAbout10A - Shepherd's Path
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
NOVEMBER 21, 2005
10A
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION MAKING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR THE SHEPHERD'S PATH DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
Liesch Associates, on behalf of the City, has completed an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Shepherd's Path development. The
need for an EAW was triggered by the number of proposed dwelling units (in
excess of 400) on this site. Based on the results of the EAW, and the
comments received, this report recommends the City Council make a Finding
of No Significant Impact, and a negative declaration on the need for the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for this development.
Historv
Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church is proposing to develop approximately
71 acres of land located north of CSAH 42, west of Pike Lake Trail, east of
CSAH 83, and in the vicinity of McKenna Road. The proposed development
includes 442 senior housing units, a YMCA facility, youth center, medical
office/clinic, bank, park area, trails, and companion uses to the existing church
(meeting areas, daycare, and retreat center).
The number of proposed dwelling units included within the project triggered the
need for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) under
Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, subp. 19. Under Minnesota Rules, the City
Council is designated as the Regulatory Governmental Unit (RGU) charged
with preparing and making the decisions on the EAW.
The City hired Liesch Associates to prepare the EAW on its behalf. The EAW
was completed in September and distributed to the Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties on September 21, 2005.
Notice of the EAW was also sent to the Prior Lake American on September 24,
2005, and published in the EQB Monitor on September 26, 2005. The
comment period on the EAW expired on October 26, 2005.
Within the 30-day comment period, the City received comment letters from the
Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
The City received additional comment letters from the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, Scott County, and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community after the 30-day comment period had expired. Although the State
law does not require the City to address any comments received after the
expiration of the comment period, the City has addressed all of these
www.cityofpriorlake.com
p;~ llt'Hdr1~95~1:i:f4!7(;'4:230'1 ''1IFa~952:lt47: 4248 ..J .,.
ISSUES:
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
ALTERNATIVES:
comments. (See "City of Prior Lake Proposed Shepherd's Path Development
EAW Comments and Responses, November 21, 2005.)
Copies of all of the comment letters are attached to this report.
Current Circumstances
Minnesota Rules 4400.1700, subp. 2, requires a decision on the need for an
EIS be made within 30 days of the expiration of the comment period. The
decision must be based on the following criteria:
a. The type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects;
b. The cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future
projects;
c. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation
by an ongoing public regulatory authority;
d. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and
controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by
publiC agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared
on similar projects.
Each of these criteria is discussed in detail in the attached Exhibit A labeled
"Findings of Fact and Conclusions."
There were no major issues identified in the EAW. That is, neither the EAW
nor any of the comments raised an issue that would require further review in
the form of an Environmental Impact Statement. The comments received
noted this project is subject to permit review and approval from several other
agencies, including the Army Corps of Engineers, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Scott County
Highway Department and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District.
These permits will assess the impacts of the project based on current statutes.
These permits will only be issued after a negative declaration on the EAW, and
after City approval of the development.
None of the comments implied or stated the need for additional environmental
review. All comments from the state and local agencies note an EIS is not
necessary for this development. The environmental impacts of this project will
be addressed through the standard permitting process. The staff therefore
recommends the City Council make a negative declaration on the need for an
EIS.
There is no budget impact as a result of this decision. The costs associated
with the EAW were paid, in advance, by the developer.
The City Council has two alternatives:
1. Adopt a resolution making a negative declaration on the need for an EIS
for this project.
2. Determine there is a need for further environmental review of this project.
In this case, the Council must direct the staff to prepare a resolution
declaring the need for an EIS based on specific findings of fact.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
The staff recommends Alternative #1. A motion and second approving a
resolution making a negative declaration on the need for an EIS is appropriate.
Reviewed by:
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION OS-xx
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCILMAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON
THE NEED FOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AS A RESULT OF THE SHEPHERD'S
PATH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS, The applicant, Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church, has made application for
consideration of a Preliminary Plat related to the Shepherd's Path development; and
WHEREAS, The project requires preparation of a mandatory EAW pursuant to Minnesota Rules
4410.4300 Subpart 14 and Subpart 19; and
WHEREAS, The EAW was approved for distribution and was published in the Environmental Quality
Board Monitor on September 26, 2005. The 30 day comment period ended October
26,2005; and
WHEREAS, The City Council is required to base its decision on the need for an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and the proposed scope of an EIS on the information gathered
during the EAW process and on the comments received on the EAW. Pursuant to
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, in deciding whether a project has the potential for
significant environmental effects, the following factors shall be considered:
a. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects.
b. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects.
c. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation
by ongoing public regulatory authority.
d. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and
controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by
public agencies or the project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared
on similar projects; and
WHEREAS, The EAW prepared by Liesch Associates, Inc. is incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, Comments regarding the EAW were received during the 30-day comment period
ending October 26, 2005. Responses to those comments dated November 15, 2005,
are incorporated herein. All comments were adequately addressed and no further
information is needed; and
WHEREAS, None of the potential environmental effects identified in the EAW are deemed to be
significant or to materially adversely affect the environment, particularly in light of the
mitigative measures proposed or integrated into the project and the extent to which
they are subject to regulatory authority; and
I .-(; FILEL.,,)) i..IIEf)I!!;:; :.!i\,(j/ iTII LIM PfAT'ShcDhc~.;ffi~.<?t13[iRr~~)SHmclul.cn.f)(;C:
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245
WHEREAS, Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential
for significant environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, This documents all matters set forth above and incorporated herein, together with all
matters in the same, shall constitute the Record of Decision.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The above recitals are incorporated herein as if fully set forth.
2. Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the proposed Jeffers Pond
development does not have potential for significant environmental effects and that preparation of an
EIS is not to be required based on a review of the submitted EAW and evidence received.
3. The preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and the comments received
on the EAW has generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed development
to be known as Jeffers Pond has the potential for significant environmental effects.
4. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the Jeffers Pond development.
5. The attached Findings of Fact and Conclusions are incorporated herein as Exhibit A as if fully set
forth.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2005.
YES
NO
Haugen Haugen
Flemina Flemlna
LeMair LeMair
Petersen Petersen
Zleska Zieska
Frank Boyles, City Manager
L:\05 FILES\05 SUBDIVISION\05 PRELIM PLAT\shepherd's path campus\eaw\eaw resolution.DOC
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) FOR THE PROPOSED SHEPHERD'S PATH
DEVELOPMENT
Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church is proposing to develop 71.2 acres of land
located on the north side of CSAH 42, and west of CSAH 21. The proposed project
expands on the existing church to develop a faith-based community with senior
housing, aquatic/fitness and youth centers, clinic/retail space, and approximately 26
acres of open space for trails, ponds and wetlands. Pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.4300,
subpart 14 and subpart 19, the City of Prior Lake has prepared an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for this proposed project. As to the need for an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the project and based on the record in this
matter, including the EAW and comments received, the City of Prior Lake makes the
following Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
Findings of Fact
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project
The proposal calls for a mixed use development consisting of 442 senior
housing units, a YMCA facility, youth center, recreation facilities including
soccer dome and enclosed hockey rink, medical office/clinic, bank, park
area, trails, and companion uses to the existing church (meeting areas,
daycare, retreat center) on 71.2 acres.
B. Project Site
The proposed Shepherd's Path project consists of development within
71.2 acres of land located on the north side of CSAH 42 and
approximately ~-mile west of CSAH 21 in the SE ~ and the SW ~ of
Section 22, T115N, R22W, in the City of Prior Lake. The site is currently
partially developed with the existing Shepherd of the Lake Church that is
centrally located in the north-central portion of the site. McKenna Road
currently borders a portion of the northern site property boundary and
crosses north-south through the eastern portion of the property. In
addition to the existing Church and parking lot, the site is currently
agricultural land, wetlands and some small wooded/brush land areas.
1:\05 files\05 subdivision\05 prelim plat\shepherd's path campus\eaw\draft findings. doc
Page 1
II. PROJECT HISTORY
A. This project was subject to the mandatory preparation of an EAW under
Minnesota Rules. 4410.4300, subp. 14 and subp. 19.
B. An EAW was prepared on the proposed project and distributed to the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested
parties on September 21,2005.
C. A press release containing the notice of availability of the EAW for public
review was sent to the Prior Lake American on September 20, 2005, and
published on September 24,2005.
D. The EAW was noticed in the September 26, 2005, EQB Monitor. The
public comment period ended on October 26, 2005. Comment letters
were received on or before the deadline from the Metropolitan Council,
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation. Comment letters received after the
deadline were from Scott County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community. Copies of the letters
are hereby incorporated by reference. Responses to the comments are
also incorporated by reference.
III. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Minnesota R.441 0.1700, subp. 1 states that "an EIS shall be ordered for projects
that have the potential for significant environmental effects." In deciding whether
the project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City of Prior
Lake must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota R.441 0.1700, subp. 7.
With respect to each of these factors, the City finds as follows:
A. TYPE, EXTENT, AND REVERSIBILlTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The first factor that the City of Prior Lake must consider is "type, extent
and reversibility of environmental effects," Minnesota R.441 0.1700, subp.
7.A. The City's findings with respect to each of these issues are set forth
below.
1. The type of environmental impacts anticipated as part of this
project include:
a. Increased municipal water use
Increased water use will be accommodated by the
expansion of the existing watermain trunk system.
1:\05 files\05 subdivision\05 prelim plat\shepherd's path campus\eaw\draft findings.doc
Page 2
b. Increased wastewater discharge
All of the wastewater will be typical sanitary sewage from a
mixed residential and commercial/office development. The
additional wastewater will be treated at the Metropolitan
Council Environmental Services Blue Lake Treatment Plant.
This plant has the capacity to accommodate the additional
discharge.
c. Increased noise due to traffic within the area
Based on traffic and noise modeling, the additional traffic will
not have a significant impact on the noise levels which will
be within the MPCA standards
d. Wetland impacts from filling
Wetland filling will be mitigated through on-site wetland
mitigation. Further, wetland impacts will be evaluated
through the permitting process.
e. Increased pollutants in stormwater runoff
Treatment ponds designed to NURP guidelines have been
included in the plans for this development to mitigate the
effects of pollutants in the stormwater runoff.
f. Increased stormwater runoff rate and volume.
This project has been designed to limit discharge rates to
pre-project levels. As with any type of development, the
project does increase the volumes of stormwater runoff.
The stormwater analysis for the project has shown this
project will not create a significant bounce in the water
bodies.
Further, these impacts will be minimized and mitigated
through the local, state, and federal permitting and plan
approval processes.
g. Impact on wooded areas.
There are currently about two acres of woodlands on this
site. Much of the site, at some point in time, has been under
cultivation. The easternmost portion of the site appeared
with thinly scattered trees through 1951 and may have been
pastureland. The EAW indicates the wooded area will
remain at two acres.
2. In general, the extents of the environmental impacts are consistent
with those of a mixed use residential/commercial/office
development.
1:\05 files\05 subdivision\05 prelim plat\shepherd's path campus\eaw\draft findings.doc
Page 3
B. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED
FUTURE PROJECTS
The second factor that the City of Prior Lake must consider is lithe
cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects",
Minnesota R.4410.1700. supb. 7.B. The City's findings with respect to this
factor are set forth below.
1. The construction of the Shepherd's Path Development will be in
phases over the next 4 years; however, the specific timing may be
affected by market factors. The use of Best Management
Practices and the NPDES General Stormwater Permit will be
implemented and maintained throughout all construction phases of
these projects to ensure the effects of erosion and sedimentation
are mitigated. The property directly to the west is part of the
Deerfield Residential Development and is substantially complete.
The property to the south is part of the Scott County Urban
Expansion Area. This property is currently developed with large lot
residences. It is possible this property will redevelop in the future;
however, no plans have currently been developed.
2. In general, the City finds the cumulative impacts of this
development can be mitigated by the above conditions.
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ARE SUBJECT
TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY
1. The following permits or approvals will be required for the project:
Unit of Government
State:
MPCA
MPCAlMCES
MN Dept. of Health
Corps of Engineers
Local:
City of Prior Lake
City of Prior Lake
LGU - Prior Lake
Prior Lake Spring Lake
Watershed District
Scott County
Permit or Approval Reauired
NPDES Permit; General Storm Water
Permit
Sanitary Sewer Permit
Water Extension System
Wetland Mitigation Permit
Grading and platting plan approval
Building Permit/Sign Permits
Wetland Impact for Wetland Conservation
Act
Stormwater Management Permit
Access/R-O-W
1:\05 files\05 subdivision\05 prelim plat\shepherd's path campus\eaw\draft findings. doc
Page 4
2. The City finds that the potential environmental effects of this project
are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory authorities;
therefore, an EIS need not be prepared.
D. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE
ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC AGENCIES
OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, OR OF EIS's PREVIOUSLY
PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS.
The fourth factor that the City must consider is "the extent to which
environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of
other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project
proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects," Minnesota
R.4700.1700, subp. 7.D. The City's findings with respect to this factor are
set forth below:
The environmental impacts of the proposed project have been addressed
in the following plans:
1. City of Prior Lake Comprehensive Plan
2. City of Prior Lake Comprehensive Local Surface Water
Management Plan
3. Traffic Impact Study for the Shepherd's Path Development
4. Shepherd's Path Stormwater Analysis
The City finds the environmental effects of the project can be anticipated
and controlled as a result of the environmental review, planning, and
permitting processes.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The preparation of the EAW and the comments received on the EAW have
generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed development
has the potential for significant environmental effects.
2. The EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental
effects exist. Appropriate mitigative measures have been incorporated into the
project plan with respect to utilities, wetlands, traffic, noise and stormwater runoff.
The Shepherd's Path development is expected to comply with all City of Prior Lake
standards and review agency standards.
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota R.441 0.1700, the potential impacts of
this project can be addressed through the regular permitting process.
4. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required.
1:\05 files\05 subdivision\05 prelim plat\shepherd's path campus\eaw\draft findings.doc
Page 5
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
PROPOSED SHEPHERD'S PATH DEVELOPMENT
EA W COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
NOVEMBER 21, 2005
Comments received by the City of Prior Lake within the 30 public comment period
(September 26, 2005 through October 26, 2005) for the proposed Shepherd's Path
Development project are summarized below and provided with a corresponding response.
Metropolitan Council (letter received October 25. 2005)
The Metropolitan Council letter indicates that staff reviewed the EA W for Shepherds Path for
accuracy and completeness. They found the EA W to be complete and indicated that an EIS is not
needed for regional purposes. The following two relatively minor comments were provided for
City consideration.
Item 8. Permits and Approvals Required: The Metropolitan Council indicates that the City's 2020
Comprehensive Plan currently has the area of the proposed development designated as Urban
High Density, and notes that this needs to be changed and submitted to the Metropolitan Council
for review to reflect the proposed planned unit development.
Response: This Comprehensive Plan amendment was recently approved by the City Council,
and will be submiued to the Metropolitan Council for review.
Other Advisory Comments: Met Council identifies that minor inconsistencies may exist for the
square footage and project magnitude data (Item 7), and that inconsistencies should be reconciled
as part of the comprehensive plan amendment.
Response: Efforts were made to address and accurately state the development phases and the
various dimensions of the proposed project in the EA W. Prior to completing the EA W, the
developer proposed changes to the Shepherds Path project, and several minor inconsistencies
were identified and clarified with the proposer. Information regarding the proposed project
will be reviewed and any remaining minor inconsistencies will be rectified and included in the
comprehensive plan amendment, as well as in the City's review of the planned unit
development. There are no significant differences.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (letter received October 26. 2005)
Review comments from the DNR indicate that the EA W appears complete and accurate. Two
comments were provided for consideration as follows:
Item 12 - Physical Impacts on Water Resources: The DNR indicates that Figure 3 (the General
Development Plan) suggests that the walking paths adjacent to wetlands may be below the
ordinary high water level of the protected wetland and that placement of fill below the ordinary
high water level is prohibited.
Response: The extent of specific work adjacent to the wetlands will be reviewed by the City
prior to commencement of construction or grading.
Item 14 - Water Related Land Use Management District: The DNR identifies some
inconsistency regarding the limits of the Shoreland Overlay District with respect to the project
site, specifically in the southeastern portion ofthe site and Outlot B.
Response: Assuming that the overlay district is accurately depicted on the figure, the DNR
correctly notes that any future development of Outlot B must meet the City's shoreland zoning
standards. The limits of the shoreland overlay district will be confirmed with respect to the
project site and appropriate standards enforced for future development.
Minnesota Department of Transportation (letter received October 6. 2005)
MnDot states in their letter that the development should have little impact on the transportation
system or right of way.
Comments received by the City of Prior Lake after the expiration of the 30 public
comment period (September 26, 2005 through October 26, 2005) for the proposed
Shepherd's Path Development project are summarized below and provided with a
corresponding response.
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Communitv Oetter received October 31. 2005).
The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (the Community) occupies land adjacent to the
Shepherds Path property; the Community also has a water supply well that is located north of
Shepherds Path. The Community comment letter indicates that they do not have any major issues
with the EA W. The letter and its attached comments discuss two primary issues of importance
(traffic and the Community water supply well).
With regard to traffic it is noted by the Community that the Traffic Study provided within the
EA W (completed in January 2005), did not include the new 58 unit East Village subdivision of
the Community. The timing of the traffic study may have coincided with the earlier planning
stages of the East Village development. The Community notes that the proposed traffic controls,
such as that at the Thunderbird LanelMcKenna Road intersection and on County Rd 42 should
adequately control traffic.
The Community notes that the Shepherds Path project does not include site uses that are of
concern to the Community, or conflict with, the Drinking Water Surface Management Area
(DWSMA) that has been defined for the Community's water supply well (the McKenna Well).
The Community letter also provided additional comments and information pertaining to wetland
mitigation, water use, surface water quality and relative susceptibility of the area to potential
groundwater impacts due to the permeability of the geologic materials in the area. The
information reiterates the importance of proper planning and permitting to mitigate against
potential environmental issues and as such does not require any specific response.
Scott County (letter received October 31. 2005)
Scott County provided comment to three items in the EA W but in general found that the EA W
adequately addressed the issues in accordance with EA W guidelines. The specific comments
provided by the County are as follows.
Item 17b. IdentifY routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site:
The County correctly states that surface water that leaves the Shepherds Path site and flows to
Pike Lake will eventually reach Dean Lake before entering the Minnesota River. According to
the County, Dean Lake is currently dealing with fluctuating water levels and erosion issues. The
importance of controlling the rate and volume of water that leaves the Site is stressed. The
County comment also refers to new Scott Watershed Management Organization Rules (WMO
Rules) that were recently adopted in May 2005. Standards that are included in the WMO Rules
need to be accounted for when permits are issued. This site is located within the Prior Lake
Spring Lake Watershed District, which is responsible for stormwater management permits.
Item 24 Odors, Noise and Dust
The County notes a potential concern for noise impacts to the proposed Shepherds Path
development from adjacent roadways is noted. Noise impacts were reviewed as part of the traffic
study and the potential that noise levels at peak traffic hours may be slightly above state standards
for some of the proposed residences. The Traffic Study notes that State standards do not apply to
the City and County roadways that are adjacent to the project and that noise mitigation measures
(such as construction of berms and use of landscaping) can reduce noise levels.
Item 27 Compatibility with plans and land use regulations
The County indicates that the EA W does not clearly indicate how the project site is currently
zoned. A similar question was included within the Metropolitan Council comments and in
response it is noted that the current Urban High Density land use designation will need to be
revised to account for the Shepherds Path planned unit development.
Minnesota Pollution Control A2encv Oetter October 25. 2005)
The letter from the MPCA indicates that the EA W was received but not reviewed, and that the
". .. decision not to review the EA W does not constitute waiver by the MPCA of any pending
permits required by the MPCA."
o
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan District
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville MN 55113-3174
r--~----
1 C"-,
'".... \
! )
OCT -' 62005
October 5,2005
City of Prior Lake
ATTN: Jane Kansier, AICP
Planning Director
17073 Adelmann Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
SUBJECT: EA W for the Shepherd's Path
Dear Ms. Kansier:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EA W for the Shepherd's Path. This
development should have little impact on the Minnesota Department of Transportation's
(Mn/DOT) transportation system or right of way.
If you have any questions regarding this letter feel free to contact me at (651) 634-2083
Transportation Planner
Copy: Mn/DOT LGL File - Prior Lake
An equal opportunity employer
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55106
651.772.7900
October 26, 2005
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714
RE: Shepherd's Path Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Ms. Kansier:
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EAW for the proposed
Shepherd's Path mixed-use development in the City of Prior Lake. In general, the
document appears to be complete and accurate. We offer the following comments for
your consideration.
Phvsicallmpacts on Water Resources (Item No. 12): General Development Plan
(Fioure No.3)
The walking paths described in the narrative and depicted on Figure 3 fragment wetland
#70-148W into three parts. Placement of fill below the ordinary high water level of this
protected wetland for trail development is not allowed under Minnesota Rules
6115.0190.
Water-Related Land Use Manaoement District (Item No. 14)
This item indicates that no part of the project involves a shoreland zoning district.
Figure 4a, however, includes a line indicating that the southeast potion of the site is
within a shoreland district. Future development on Outlot B, within the shoreland
district, must meet the City's shoreland zoning standards.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and the EAW. We look forward to
receiving your record of decision and responses to comments at the conclusion of
environmental review. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 and 5, require you
An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1.888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484
1-800-657-3929
Shepherd's Path EA W
October 26, 2005
Page 2
to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding on this action. If you
have any questions about these comments, please call Wayne Barstad, the Regional
Environmental Assessment Ecologist, at 651-772-7940.
Sincerely,
oe Kurcinka
Regional Director
C: Steve Colvin, Wayne Barstad, Sarah Hoffmann, Diana Regenscheid, Pat Lynch,
Daryl Ellison, Bernice Cramblit (DNR)
Jon Larsen (EQB)
Nick Rowse (USFWS)
#20050615
PR05ShepherdsPath.doc
An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484
1-800-657-3929
~ Metropolitan Council
Building communities that work
October 25,2005
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
OCT 2 1 2005
RE: City of Prior Lake Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Shepherd's Path
Development
Metropolitan Council District 4 (Julius C. Smith)
Metropolitan Council Review File No. 19578-1
Dear Ms. Kansier:
Metropolitan Council staffhas conducted a review of this environmental assessment worksheet
(EA W) to determine its accuracy and completeness, potential impacts that may warrant further
investigation before the proj ect is commenced, and the need for an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) on the proposed project.
The proposed project expands on the existing Church to develop a faith-based community with
senior housing, aquatic/fitness and youth centers, clinic/retail space, and open space for trails,
ponds, and wetlands. The project is located in north-central Prior Lake on the north side of
CSAH 42 and about 1;4 mile west ofCSAH 21. The total project area would be 71.2 acres, of
which approximately 26 acres would be open space for trails, ponds, and wetlands. The EA W
states that there would be 443 residential units and 300,054 square feet of institutional/
commercial uses.
Council staff review finds that the EA W is complete and an EIS is not needed for regional
purposes. However, the following comments are provided for your consideration:
Item 8: Permits and Approvals Required
The City of Prior Lake's 2020 Comprehensive Plan identifies the Shepherd's Lake Development
area as Urban High Density. The proposed project would change the designated land use;
therefore, a comprehensive plan amendment is required to be submitted to the Metropolitan
Council for review.
Other Advisory Comments:
There appear to be inconsistencies with the land use and square footage information on Page 3 of
the EA W, under Item 7-Project Magnitude Data, and on Figure 5. The information, including
land use acreages needs to be reconciled as part of the comprehensive plan amendment submittal.
www.metrocouncll.org
Metro Info Une 602-1888
230 East Fifth Street . St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626 . (651) 602-1000 . Fax 602-1550 . TIY 291-0904
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
October 25, 2005
Page 2
This will conclude the Council's review of the EA W. The Council will take no formal action on
the EA W. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Freya Thamman,
principal reviewer, at 651-602-1750.
Sincerely,
~
Phy . s Hanson, Manager
Local Planning Assistance
cc: Jack Jackson, MultiFamily Market Analyst, MHFA
Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division
Julius C. Smith, Metropolitan Council District 4
Keith Buttleman, Environmental Services
Tom Caswell, Sector Representative
Freya Thamman, Principal Reviewer
Cheryl Olsen, Reviews Coordinator
V :\I{L V ILWS\Communil:(>
L~tl,J;-J/;!.L:t<.Frjor \ ~:UtlS LA \V J ()57;';',] Sh(;prh:;rds P<Hh,dor
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
October 25, 2005
OCT 2 8 2005
Ms. Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Southeast
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RE: Shepherd's Path Development
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Dear Ms. Kansier:
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has received copies of the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EA W) prepared for the above project, prepared by the city of Prior
Lake, Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). The MPCA has not reviewed the EA W for this
project. Therefore, the MPCA has no specific comments to provide the RGU. This decision not
to review the EA W does not constitute waiver by the MPCA of any pending permits required by
the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the project proposer to secure any required
permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. The enclosed checklist identifies
permits that the project may require, together with the most recent contacts at the MPCA.
We remind the RGU that, pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 5 (Environmental Quality
Board Rules), a copy of the RGU's decision on this EA W needs to be sent to the MPCA.
Sincerely,
~g ~,f1
James E. Sullivan
Project Manager
Environmental Review and Operations Section
Regional Division
JES:gs
Enclosure
cc: Kermit Mahlum, Shepherd ofthe Lake Lutheran Church
520 Lafayette Rd. N.; Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296-6300 (Voice); (651) 282-5332 (TTY); www.pca.state.mn.us
St. Paul · Brainerd · Detroit Lakes · Duluth · Mankato · Marshall · Rochester · Will mar
Equal Opportunity Employer. Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20 percent fibers from paper recycled by consumers.
.
Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community
OFFICERS
~~,/~'
"'~
Stanley R. Crooks
Chairman
I, > ,
"..'
Glynn A. Crooks
Vice Chairman
2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW - PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TRIBAL OFFICE: 952-445-8900 - FAX: 952-445-8906
Keith B. Anderson
~ Secretary [Treasurer
26 October 2005
Writer's Direct Line 952-496-6158
r-------:-"
I r-,
'["\,
OCT 3 I 2005
Ms. Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
17073 Adelmann Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Comments on Shepard's Path Environmental Assessment worksheet (EA W)
Dear Ms. Kansier:
Attached are the comments of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
(Community) on the Shepard's Path EA W. The Community does not have any major
issues with the EA W. In summary, the comments address two major areas, projected
traffic counts and the Community Public Water Supply Drinking Water Surface
Management Area (DWSMA).
The new Community subdivision, East village, is located just north of the proposed
project. Traffic from this subdivision was not included in the traffic study. Including this
58-unit subdivision would alter the projected traffic counts. Proposed traffic controls
such s the Thunderbird Lane/McKenna Road four way stop and the signal at County 42
should allow for adequate traffic control.
The Community Well Head Protection Plan update will alter the DWSMA to include
more of the proposed project area. None of the proposed uses appear to conflict with uses
allowed in the DWSMA.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EA W. If you require any further
information, please contact me at the above address or telephone number.
Sincerely,
/&Y(~
Stanley A. Ellison
Land and Natural Resources Manager
SHAKO PEE MDEW AKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
COMMENTS ON SHEPARD'S PATH EAW
26 October 2005
Wetland Mitigation. Page 13. The Community's experience indicates an increased area
of upland buffer associated with wetlands greatly enhances their public values and
functions. These areas provide aesthetic amenities, wildlife habitat and runoff treatment.
Shepard of the Lakes should be commended for including upland buffers and encouraged
to maximize the amount of natural area dedicated to such use on the Project area.
Water Use. Page 14.
Dewatering. The potential temporary dewatering of the surficial aquifers should
not impact the Community Public Water Supply Well (PWSW) along McKenna
Road. However, care should be taken to minimize the dewatering and protect the
dewatering wells to prevent accidental introduction of materials into the
subsurface.
McKenna Road PWSW. This well will begin serving 58 additional residential
units in the summer of 2006. A 100,000 gallon elevated storage tower will be
installed along with an iron filter facility. This PWSW is the primary domestic
supply for all residences and provides water for fire protection. There is an
interconnect with the Prior Lake supply for emergency water supply.
Community Well Head Protection Plan. The plan revision is underway. It will
be accompanied by updated modeling of the ten-year time of travel and will
include an updated DWSMA. It is expected that the DWSMA will occupy more
of the Project site based on the updated modeling. The proposed uses are
acceptable uses within the Community DWSMA.
Water Quality: surface water runoff. Page 16.
Infiltration. There is some concern regarding the use of infiltration areas for
stormwater management. If the stormwater is pre-treated before infiltration there
should be no issue. Community data indicates that the glacial material underlying
the site includes a thick section of granular material. It is likely that the infiltrated
water will eventually enter the Jordan Aquifer and become part of the Community
water supply. Given the critical nature of this resource it is important that
infiltration areas be designed to prevent entry of contaminates into the subsurface.
Ponding. Research completed by the Community on performance of stormwater
treatment ponds indicates that two cell ponds with a primary deep water settling
pond and a secondary shallower area remove significant amounts of nitrogen and
phosphorus from the stormwater. The primary cell must be deep enough to
provide an anaerobic layer. The pond depth must be maintained over time to
retain the benefit of the anaerobic layer. Pond design ofthis type is preferred
given the use of infiltration to manage stormwater.
H:\GENERAL\shepard comment.doc
Geologic Site Hazards. Page 19. The unconsolidated material underlying the site is very
permeable. Due to its thickness, the vulnerability of the McKenna PWSW is reduced.
Since the Project does not call for removal of significant surface material, this should not
be an issue. It does call for care due to the critical nature of the potential resource
impacts.
Solid Wastes. hazardous wastes. storage tanks. Page 21. Due to the permeable nature of
the underlying material, any above ground fuel storage should be required to have double
wall construction and a containment structure capable of trapping all fuel.
Traffic. In 2005, the Community constructed a new residential subdivision, East Village,
north of the Project along McKenna Road. This subdivision contains 58 lots. The traffic
study should be reviewed to include trips from this subdivision. Given that the SMSC
Community Center is located to the south, a significant number of the daily trips will
likely be south along McKenna and west along County 42 to County 83. Increased traffic
along with associated noise and delay is of concern to the Community. McKenna Road is
the primary access for three Community residential subdivisions. As planned, the ''New
McKenna Road will be the resident only access to County 42.
H:\GENERAL\shepard comment.doc
~) ..~~~~
!Scott
SCOTT COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
GOVERNMENT CENTER A104
200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1220
(952) 496-8177 Fax: (952) 496-8489
OCT 3 I 2005
October 25, 2005
Jane Kansier
Planning Director
16200 Eagle Creek Ave SE
Prior Lake MN 55379-9711
Re: Shepherd's Path Development, Prior Lake Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Ms. Kansier:
We have reviewed the Shepherd's Path Development, Prior Lake EAW and found that it adequately addressed
most of the issues in accordance with the EAW guidelines. We have provided comments according to
Question number below.
Question 17 b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site.
In addition to Pike Lake, Dean Lake will receive water from the project site before entering the Minnesota River.
Dean Lake is currently dealing with erosion and fluctuating water levels. The EAW states that the project is
required to control runoff to equal to or less than existing (pre-development) runoff. It is important to enforce
this requirement for rate and volume to ensure minimual impact to downstream water bodies. These projects
may be required to adhere to additional standards related to volume control in accordance with the new Scott
WMO Rules depending on when Prior Lake adopts confonning standards and when the pennits are issued for
these projects.
Question 24 Odors, noise and dust.
There may be a concem for noise relative to the proposed type of development and location adjacent to County
Road 42 and the proposed location for County Road 21. Please refer to Minnesota Rules Chapter 7030.0030
and 7030.0050 Subpart 3 as well as Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116.07 Subdivision 2a.
Question 27 Compatibility with plans and land use regulations.
The EAW does not state what the project site is currently zoned, for example, A- Agricultural and Residential R-
4 high density residential. The EAW refers to Item 14 but in Question 14 it simply notes "Water related land
use management district- but zoning is not addressed.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving written responses to any
substantive comments received on the EA Wand a record of the decision on the need for an EIS. If you have
~;;~view oflhis EAW, please contact me at 952-496-8351.
/ Kate Sedlacek
Scott County
Community Development Division
Environmental Health Dept.
An Equal Opportunity/Safefy Aware Employer
Worksheet Format Revised 2/99
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) during the
30-day comment period following notice of the EA W in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the
accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need
for an EIS.
1. Project title: Shepherd's Path Development, Prior Lake
2. Proposer: Shepherd of the Lake
Lutheran Church
Contact person: Kermit Mahlum
Title: CEO
Address: 13760 McKenna Road NW
City, state, Zip: Prior Lake, MN 55379-9711
Phone: 952-230-2916
Fax: 952-230-2961
E-mail: Kermit-mahlum@sollc.org
3. RGU: City of Prior Lake
Contact person: Jane Kansier
Title: Planning Director
Address: 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.
City, state, Zip: Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Phone: 952-447-9812
Fax: 952-447-4245
E-mail: JKansier@CitvofpriorLake.com
4. Reason for EA W preparation (check one)
_ EIS scoping X Mandatory EA W _ Citizen petition
_ RGU discretion _ Proposer volunteered
If EA W or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart
name
Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.4300
Subpart 19. Residential development.
Subpart 14. Industrial, commercial, and institutional facilities.
5. Project location: County: Scott
CitylTownship: City of Prior Lake
Located in the SE % and the SW 114 of Section 22, Township 115 North, Range 22
West
1
Attach each of the following to the EA W:
Figure 1:
Figure lA:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4a:
County map showing the general location of the project
Site Location
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project
boundaries
General Development Plan (Pope Associates, revised August 11,2005)
East Grading and Utility Plans (Pope Associates and Sunde Engineering, PLLC.
May 25, 2005)
West Grading and Utility Plans (Pope Associates and Sunde Engineering, PLLC.
May 25, 2005)
Land Use Program / Summary Sheet (September 12, 2005)
Protected Waters and Wetlands Map (MN DNR)
National Wetland Inventory Map (US Fish and Wildlife)
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community McKenna Well
Drinking Water Supply Management Area (Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community, Wellhead Protection Plan, 2002)
Figure 4b:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 6A:
Figure 7:
Attachment 1- Shepherds Path Development Traffic Study (SRF January, 2005)
Attachment 2 - Natural Heritage Information and State Historic Preservation Office response
Attachment 3 - Pinnacle Engineering Wetland Delineation (October, 2000)
Attachment 4 - Applied Environmental Services Wetland Delineation Report (Nov., 2004)
Attachment 5 - AET Geotechnical Report
6. Description
a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB
Monitor.
The proposed Shepherd's Path development (71.2 acres) is located on the north side of
Co. Highway 42 and west Co. Highway 21 in Prior Lake. The proposed project expands
on the existing Church to develop a faith-based community with senior housing,
aquaticlfitness and youth centers, clinic/retail space, and approximately 26 acres of open
space for trails, ponds, and wetlands.
b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new
construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction,
operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the
environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment
or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of
existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities.
The proposed Shepherd's Path project consists of development within 71.2 acres of land
(the "Site") located on the north side of County Highway 42 and approximately lA-mile
west of County Highway 21 in the City of Prior Lake. The Site is currently partially
developed with the existing Shepherd of the Lake Church (the Church) that is centrally
located in the north-central portion of the Site. McKenna Road currently borders a
portion of the northern Site property boundary and crosses north-south through the
eastern portion of the property (see Figure 3). In addition to the existing Church and
2
....---.-----. ----'-"._-'_.,--.-.-~~-.....---"-~._-------'~~...,,-"'--,.,--'_.,---"-~~"~"~---'----~-"""----~---"~~'"--"-
parking lot, the Site is currently agricultural land, wetlands and some small wooded /
brush land areas.
The Preliminary Plat for the proposed Shepherd's Path development (the "Project") was
submitted to the City of Prior Lake in December 2004 with other related materials
provided to the City in February 2005. A revised General Development Plan with some
modification to the originally proposed Project was submitted to the City in May 2005.
The proposed Project includes expansion of the existing Church facilities to create a
faith-based community. The proposed facilities include: senior townhomes;
condominium/apartments; assisted living and skilled nursing residences; an
aquatic/fitness center; a youth center; a soccer dome; potential hockey rink/soccer field;
potential bank/credit union; and potential clinic. Green space to be maintained or
developed will include wetlands, a public park, and recreational trails. Approximately 26
acres will be maintained as open green space. The proposed development includes
alteration to some of the existing wetlands for which mitigation will be required.
The Project will be developed in phases and the overall proposed General Development
is provided as Figure 3 and listed on the Land Use Program / Summary Sheet (Figure 5)
and is summarized below.
Residential Units General Description Phase
Senior Independent Living 84 units 4-story & underground parking Phase 1
(Congregate Care)
Senior Assisted Living 72 units 4-story & underground parking Phase 1
& Memory Care
Low Income 45 units 3-story Phase 3
Senior Housing (northeast)
Independent 90 units two 3-story & underground parking Phase 2
Senior Housing (east)
Senior Brownstones (east) 72 units two 2-story & underground parking Phase 3
Skilled Nursing 80 units 3-story Phase 4
[Total Residential Units: 443 Units]
Other: Institutional/Commercial General Description Phase
Town Center (27,254 sq.ft.) senior living commons 2 levels Phase 1
Aquatic & Fitness Center (40,000 sq.ft.) YMCA 1.5-level ''Future''
Youth Center (5,500 sq.ft.) single level Phase 1
Soccer Dome (96,000 sq.ft.) single level Phase 2
Potential Hockey Rink (60,000 sq.ft.) outdoor rink/soccer field Phase 2
Potential CliniclRetail (63,800 sq.ft.) 2 story on 3.6 acres (Outlot B) "Future"
Potential Bank/Credit Union (7,500 sq.ft.) single-story on 1.3 acres (Outlot A) "Future"
3
----~"..,-"---_._---~"-'_.....~...._.~._-------"._.,.--"-_..-,,-----_.._-~~._-----_._~-----~--~"_.
The Project includes a large existing parking lot next to the Church; parking availability will be
increased with underground parking areas beneath many buildings, a large parking lot on the
western portion of the Site and smaller lots next to some other buildings.
The documents reviewed for this EA W that characterize the Project include the
following:
. Wetland Delineation and Evaluation, Prior Lake Church Community Site, County Road
42 & McKenna Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota (Pinnacle Engineering, October 4, 2(00).
. Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review, New Shepherds Path Church, McKenna
Road NW & CSAH 42, Prior Lake, Minnesota (American Engineering Testing, Inc;,
December 1,2000).
. Wetland Delineation Report, Sunde McKenna Road, Prior Lake, MN, Section 22,
T115N, R22W (Applied Environmental Services, LLC, November 12,2004).
. Preliminary Demand Estimate for Senior Housing and Skilled Nursing Beds on the
Shepherd's Path Site in Prior Lake, Minnesota (Maxfield Research Inc., December 31,
2004).
. Shepherd's Path Development Traffic Study (SRF Consulting Group, Inc., January 13,
2005).
. General Development Plan [a plan sheet], Shepherd's Path (Pope Associates, revised
August 11, 2005) and associated Land Use Program / Summary Sheet (September 12,
2005).
. Preliminary Plat with Tree Inventory, Shepherd's Path Addition, Prior Lake, Minnesota
(Sunde Land Surveying, LLC February 1,2005).
. Stormwater Management Calculations, Shepherd's Path, Prior Lake, MN (Sunde
Engineering, PLLC., May 25, 2005).
. East and West Grading and Utility Plans, Shepherd's Path, Prior Lake, Minnesota (pope
Associates and Sunde Engineering, PLLC., May 25, 2005).
The Project is proposed to commence as soon as practical following all necessary approvals.
As such, an estimated start date would be the latter part of 2005. The General Development
Plan (Figure 3) identifies the general phasing of development. The initial phase focuses on
the Town Center, the youth center, the senior independent living facility, and the senior
assisted living & memory care facility. The second phase of the Project consists of
construction of the soccer dome and hockey rink/soccer field. The third phase of the Project
would include the independent senior housing, including the senior brownstone buildings;
while the fourth phase would consist of the skilled nursing facility. A subsequent phase(s)
would include the aquatic! fitness center, clinic and bank/credit union. In its entirety, the
project is estimated to be completed within a period of approximately four years; however
the specific timing may be affected by market factors. Infrastructure to support the
developed areas will be coordinated with the overall project development; including
4
municipal roads, sanitary sewer and water.
In general the north-central portion of the Site that includes the existing Church will be
developed with community and care facilities (town center, fitness center, assisted
living/memory care, skilled nursing care and an independent living facility). The south
central portion of the Site will be primarily open space focusing on existing wetland and
wetland mitigation areas, and will include a public park. The western portion of the Site
will be occupied by the soccer dome, outdoor hockey rink/soccer field and a wetland
area. Residential buildings will occupy eastern portions of the Site. The limited
commercial space, consisting of the potential clinic and bank/credit union, has been
targeted for Outlots A and B of 1.3 and 3.6 acres respectively, that are situated along Co.
Highway 42. The Site plan includes a trail system that utilizes the perimeter of wetland
and wooded areas (see Figure 3). The trail system of the proposed Site will link different
portions of the Site and also be connected to a regional traiL
Presently, McKenna Road borders a portion of the northern Site boundary and then
curves south to pass through the eastern portion in a north-south direction (see Figure 3).
During implementation of the Project, the present McKenna Road (hereafter referred to
as "old" or "existing" McKenna Road) will be re-aligned so that it will pass through the
western portion the Site in a straight north-south orientation to its intersection with Co.
Highway 42 (this new portion of McKenna Road is hereafter referred to as "new" or
"future" McKenna Road). The current portion of McKenna Road that borders the
northern Site boundary is proposed to become a portion of Thunderbird Circle NW,
which eventually will be extended to the east where it will intersect with a proposed
northbound extension of County Road 21. Access to the proposed Site will be from
County Highway 42 and the proposed "new" McKenna Road as depicted on the General
Development Plan (Figure 3). Road re-alignment and extension is discussed in the
Traffic Study prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc., January 13, 2005 (see
Attachment 1).
Storm water and surface water management are important elements of the proposed
development of the Site. The existing Site includes a number of wetland areas, some of
which will be impacted by the Project, and for which mitigation is required. In addition to
proper standard construction storm water management, the Project must control runoff to a
level that is equal to or less-than existing conditions. Also, it is noted that the discharge from
the Site contributes some surface water to the Prior Lake Outlet. Additional discussion
regarding surface water and storm water management issues is provided in later items.
c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a
governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries.
The project purpose is to expand the existing Church to a faith-based community by
developing primarily agricultural land with residential housing (primarily senior
housing), and institutional and recreational areas.
d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots
5
"......"^'--,..__.,~."_._"._~'_....."'."-----r-----~'----._~-~.-___,__".~._,__.'___m . '_'.^-_""..,,"_._-'->~-';~----_._---------,.._---_..._-_.-,~,~._--
planned or likely to happen? _Yes lNo
If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and
plans for environmental review.
e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? l Yes_No
If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past
environmental review.
The proposed project expands upon the existing Shepard of the Lake Church
(constructed 2002) onto adjacent parcels of land to create a faith-based community
focusing of senior living. The initial Church development did not require an
environmental assessment worksheet and one was not completed.
7. Project magnitude data
Total project acreage 71.2 (total Site acreage)
Number of residential units:
443 total units comprised of
443 attached (four or more units to a building)
Commercial, industrial or institutional building area (gross floor space):
843,796 ft2 (inclusive of below listed specific uses and existing church)
Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet)*:
Office: NA * Manufacturing: 0
Retail: NA * Other industrial: 0
Warehouse: 0 Institutional: 77,500 (existing Church)
Light industrial: 0 Agricultural: 0
Other commercial (specify):
Town Center: 27,254
YMCA AquaticlFitness Center: 40,000
Youth Center: 5,500
Commercial: 71,300 (Outlots A and B)*
Total Senior Housing: 506,202
Soccer Dome: 96,000
Potential Hockey Rink/Soccer Field: 60,000
*NOTE some office and/or retail may be included in the commercial space of Outlots
A and B.
Building height: Four-story maximum If over 2 stories, compare to heights of
nearby buildings:
The proposed project does not include buildings that are over four-stories. Future
development plans in nearby areas include commercial and residential development
that may be four-stories or higher. The topography of the Site and adjacent areas
6
..~,-"..,...,--,__.,~..__, '"__.~_.."...._,._."__".~....,.~._.,,.~_'"........--.._"____---:_____"'~"__'--^,"__'~,_,._'~'___._,w._'_'_~.,,___v,.,~.<__
includes rolling hills to the west and east. The elevation of the Site ranges from 860 to
915 feet. Properties within one-eighth mile west and southwest rise to elevations of up
to 960. Thus, the Site is generally similar to or in some cases at a lower elevation than
adjacent land.
8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits,
approvals and C"mandal assistance for the project. Include modifications of any
existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms
of public fmandal assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment
Financing and infrastructure.
Unit of eovernment TVI>e of application Status
Prior Lake-Spring Lake Stormwater Management Plan Pending
Watershed District
City of Prior Lake Stormwater Management Plan Pending
City of Prior Lake Preliminary Plat Plans Pending
City of Prior Lake Preliminary Planned Unit Pending
Development Plan
Corp of Engineers Wetland Mitigation Permit Required
City of Prior Lake LGU Mitigation Permit Required
MPCA Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Required
MPCA NPDES Construction Storm Required
Water Permit Application (prior to construction)
Scott County Access and Right-of-Way Required
MDH Watermain Extension Required
In addition, the proposed Project will require City of Prior Lake building permits, and
grading and excavation permits as required for construction projects. Other reviews will
also include review of water distribution system by Department of Health, and
construction plans for sanitary sewer by Metropolitan Council.
9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site
and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby
land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental
matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such
as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby
hazardous liquid or gas pipelines.
7
~""'-".-""'- '"'' .-----r'~--"..,.-~~~.---u
Past Land Use
Aerial photographs and topographic maps were reviewed to identify past land use and
potential environmental concerns on and/or adjacent to the Shepherd's Path site.
Photographs from the years 1937, 1940, 1951, 1957, 1964, 1970, 1980, 1984, 1991,
1997, and 2003 were provided to Liesch by Historical Information Gatherers, Inc.
Historic land use is also discussed in Item 25.
The Shepherd's Path site appears to have been utilized almost entirely as agricultural land
with some wetland areas, throughout the years spanning 1937 through 1997. In various
years, most notably 1937, 1940, 1951, and 1964, low-lying pond and/or wetland areas on
the Site appear dry or nearly dry. A farmstead area and several unpaved field roads are
apparent on aerial photographs through 1997. The farmstead area consisted of what
appears to be several structures located in the north-central portion of the Site. Aerial
photographs through 1997 illustrate a railroad bed crossing through the southwestern
portion of the Site; The railroad tracks appear to be abandoned beginning with the 1991
photograph and it is noted that topographic maps revised in 1993 indicate the railroad to
be "dismantled." The most recent (2003) photograph includes an increase in trees and
shrubs along the former railroad and in areas adjacent to some of the wetlands.
A small gravel pit is identified on the revised 1993 topographic map. It is located on the
north side of County Road 42 in the southwest portion of the Site. The City and County
had no specific records of a gravel pit at this location, and none is clearly identified by
the aerial photographs. What is identified on the topographic map may have been a small
borrow pit that has since been eliminated with dismantling of the railroad bed and/or
upgrading of Co. Highway 42.
The easternmost portion of the Site appeared with thinly scattered trees through 1951 and
may have been pastureland. The aerials indicate that much of the Site, at some point in
time, has been under cultivation. In 2002 the farmstead structures were demolished and
removed from the Site and the present-day Church and associated parking areas are
located in the general location of the former farmstead.
Adjacent land use appears to have been primarily agricultural cropland, open land and
woodland based on review of the aerial photographs. A large wooded area is evident in
all photographs to the northwest of the Site with all other surrounding lands being open
and apparently utilized for agricultural purposes. Beginning with the 1980 photograph
some residential development within the wooded area to the northwest is apparent, and
gradual growth of the number of homes is evident in later photographs. Co. Highway 42
is apparent as a through road to the south of the Site beginning with the 1951 photograph
and McKenna Road is apparent as a through road beginning with the 1940 photograph.
What appears to be a small sand / gravel mining area is evident north of the Site, across
McKenna Road, in some historic aerial photographs. Ryan Contracting Co. proposed to
expand mining operations on land north of the site and completed an EA W for their
proposed operation in 2000. However, to date additional mining on this property located
north of the Site has not been initiated.
8
n_.____,_.._._..~.._._ ...........__._.._.__..........__._,______...
Property located south of Co. Highway 42 has historically been primarily agricultural
land, woodland and wetland. As noted below, the property located to the south is referred
to as the Jeffers Pond property and is expected to be developed over the next several
years with residential, commercial/retail and institutional (school, fire station)
development.
Current Land Use
The Shepherd's Path site is currently occupied by the Church and the associated parking
lot that are situated in the north-central portion of the Site. Other current land use on and
adjacent to the Site remain primarily as described above; however in a general sense there
has been gradual development in surrounding areas over the years.
It should be noted that approximately 22 acres situated in the south-central portion of the
Site has been managed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) as a
wildlife management area that includes a DNR protected water/wetland as noted in Item
12. The Proposer has acquired these 22 acres. As such reference to the Site and its 71.2
acres within this EA W includes the property formerly owned by the DNR.
Potential Environmental Hazards or Land Use Conflicts
Based on the information reviewed above, the potential for environmental hazards or soil
contamination on the Site appears to be minimal and limited to those few items that could
potentially have been associated with the original farmstead, such as septic systems,
wells, storage tanks (fuel, oil, agricultural chemicals), or asbestos-containing building
materials, or old fann dumping areas. According to Scott County records, a septic system
located at the former farmstead on the Site was removed. A fuel tank may have also been
associated with the former farmstead at the Site. The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community Wellhead Protection Plan, further discussed in Item 13, references an
underground storage tank for the farmstead. It is likely that if such a tank was present, it
would have been located near the farmstead buildings where the Church is now located.
Therefore, it appears that there is very little potential that environmental hazards
associated with historic land use could be encountered as development occurs. If a tank
or other potentially hazardous materials from historic landuse are discovered during Site
development, the materials should be managed and disposed in accordance with
applicable regulations.
An underground septic tank was previously located on the Site at the location of the
church and was removed during excavation for church construction in 2002, as indicated
by the Site owner.
Potential land use conflicts also appear relatively minimal; there are no known industrial
land uses being proposed in the immediate vicinity of the Site with the exception of the
previous Ryan Contracting Co. proposal to utilize approximately 12 acres north of the
Site for gravel mining. Land to the northwest is currently occupied by residential
properties associated with the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC). The
Jeffers Pond Development south the Site, across Co. Road 42, is a 336-acre property for
9
__.,. "'~"'____'.__""__"""__"'_'~;"_~_'___.o---:..______~_".._~~....~_".~~,___._~,,__.~,,_"_~~.~___......_,_.
which 693 residential units, office, retail, elementary school, fire station have been
proposed and some work initiated. An EA W was completed in 2004 for the proposed
Jeffers Pond Development. Potential land use issues associated with the Project, and
other similar or future projects in the area, will include management of storm water and
traffic, as discussed in Item 17 and Item 21, respectively.
10. Cover types.
Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and
after development:
Before After
Types 1-8 wetlands 10.5 11.0
Wooded/forest 2 2
Brush/2rasslandlcropland 49.7 0
Lawnllandscaping/storm 1 30.5
waterpond~r&entionponds
Impervious surfaces 8 27.7
Other: 0 0
TOTAL 71.2 71.2
The above acreage estimates were derived from the following: the Wetland Delineation
Report (Applied Env. Nov. 12, 2004); General Development Plan (pope Associates,
August 11, 2005); Storm Water Management Calculations (Sunde Engineering, et al
February 3, 2005); and, the 2004 aerial photograph.
If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why:
11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources
a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and
describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be
taken to minimize or avoid impacts.
Fish and wildlife resources on and near the Site include wetlands and two small
woodedlbrushy areas. The Site included a 22-acre DNR Wildlife Management Area and
associated wetland that was formerly owned by the DNR as mentioned in Item 9, above.
The Proposer recently purchased this property from the DNR. Much of the 22 acres will
be maintained as wetland and open space. The overall benefit to wildlife may be
diminished as surrounding land is also developed; however, maintaining the wetlands and
wetland buffer areas will minimize the potential effect to wildlife resources to the extent
possible for growing urban areas. Other smaller wetlands on the site will be impacted by
the development and a wetland mitigation area is proposed and will be required. To
maintain the general quality of the wetlands, the Project includes storm water
management ponds. Additional discussion pertaining to wetlands is provided in Item 12.
10
~_._'.-.." + .-...-"'..."'-----"..".-.-------r.-~---".--..-"'--"'
b. Are any state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare
plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie
habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities
on or near the site? l Yes _No
If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project.
Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the
results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been
contacted give the correspondence reference number: ERDB 20050615
Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
The Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program of the DNR was contacted to
determine if there are any rare plant or animal species or significant natural features
within an approximate one-mile radius of the site. The DNR response is provided as
Attachment 2. According to the DNR, the database represents the most complete source
of data on rare and significant natural features and species, and the information in the
database is generated from an ongoing county-by-county survey of such occurrences. The
survey for Scott County has been completed and as such the DNR information about
natural communities is relatively thorough for the County. It is noted in the Natural
Heritage and Nongame Research Program response that each county database is updated
if new information becomes available and that there may be rare or otherwise significant
natural features in the State that are not represented in the database.
The DNR response identified two occurrences for the area searched, neither of which is
located on the Site. The occurrences listed consist of approximately 25-acres of a Maple-
Basswood Forest Natural Community located in Section 22 on Shakopee Mdewakanton
Reservation property and 20-acres of a Maple-Basswood Forest Natural Community in
Section 27. This forest type is a remnant of the Big Woods, a large expanse of forest that
once stretched across 1.3 million acres of Minnesota. As remnant stands of the Big
Woods forest type are considered to be one of the most threatened natural community
types in Minnesota, the DNR recommends that the project be designed to avoid both
direct and indirect impacts to this forest community. These natural features are located
north and south of the Site respectively, and will not be impacted by the proposed
Project.
12. Physical impacts on water resources.
Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration - dredging, filling,
stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment - of any surface
waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? lYes _No
If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters
Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI:
There are a number of wetlands located on the 71.2 acre Site including the entirety of one
DNR Protected Water, and a small portion of a second Protected Water. The DNR
11
- ...,..,....,......~_., ..."..~,.,,~.._..,....~_... -"-~~-r'"----...--~"--_._~_.~'_.."-_...."._.~.-._----~.,,--.
Protected Waters Map showing the area of the Site is provided in Figure 6 and National
Wetland Inventory Map is provided in Figure 6A. The DNR Protected Waters on or
immediately adjacent to the Site are listed below.
· DNR Protected Water #148W: located in south-central portion of the Site; this wetland is
associated with the DNR Wildlife Management Area that will become part of the Project Site
· DNR Protected Water #247W: the southeastern most portion of this wetland area may be
associated with a small area in the northeastern comer of the Site.
Additional site-specific evaluations of wetlands on the Site have been completed and
documented in two wetland delineation reports. The first delineation was completed in
October 2000 by Pinnacle Engineering, and thus prior to construction of the existing
Church. The Pinnacle report excluded the DNR parcel in the south central portion of the
Site. The Pinnacle Engineering report (provided in Attachment 3) identified a wetland area
in the southwestern comer of the Site in addition to the southernmost portion of Protected
Water #247. Both areas were flagged.
The second Wetland Delineation Report was prepared by Applied Environmental
Services and dated November 2004 (see Attachment 4). This second report was more
comprehensive than that prepared by Pinnacle, as it included the entire Site, including the
DNR property. Applied Environmental delineated eight wetlands with a total of
approximately 10.5 acres as listed below. A copy of the Applied Environmental
delineation map is reproduced in a reduced format in Attachment 4.
Wetland ID Size (acres) ~ CommentslNotes
Wetland #1 0.13 2
Wetland #2 7.63 3/4 Protected Water #148W
Wetland #3 0.97 3 Size of Wetland #3 confirmed by
Sunde Engineering, PLLC.
Wetland #4* 0.15 4 constructed storm water basin *
Wetland #5 0.72 6
Wetland #6* 0.6 4 constructed storm water basin *
Wetland #7 0.12 1
Wetland #8 0.18 2 portion of Protected Water #247W
* constructed storm water basin for which a Certification of No Loss or Exemption may
apply (see Applied Environmental Wetland Delineation Report)
The East and West Grading and Utility Plans (Pope Associates and Sunde Engineering,
PLLC., May 25, 2005) indicate that the north half of Wetland #3 will be eliminated by
the proposed Project. Wetland #1 will be impacted in that much of the wetland mitigation
for the Site encompasses the area surrounding this small wetland. Wetland #4 will also be
impacted in that a portion of the wetland mitigation for the Site encompasses
modification and expansion of Wetland #4 and the surrounding area. The largest wetland
on the Site (Wetland #2; Protected Water #148W) will not be encroached upon by
grading or direct Site development with the exception of some limited site work
associated with construction of walking paths near the wetland and installation of a
12
0' '~'M"'..m'-'~'''.,,,",",,''~-~._'''''"'-___W__'1
bridge over a portion of the wetland. Some minor grading also appears to approach the
northernmost portion of Wetland #6. (see Figure 6).
Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize
impacts.
The above referenced information indicates a total wetland fill for the proposed Project of
0.55 acres. Compensatory wetland mitigation of 1.13 acres of new wetland is proposed
for the south-central portions of the Site. Additional public value credits may be obtained
for the Site with construction of the two (east and west) storm water management ponds
and wetland buffer areas.
A required element for wetland mitigation according to the Wetland Conservation Act is
the preparation of a Sequencing Mitigation Plan application subject to review by the
Local Government Unit (LGU) and other regulatory agencies. This document must be
prepared and submitted to the City of Prior Lake and the Prior Lake - Spring Lake
Watershed District and for review and approval.
In addition to addressing wetland loss and mitigation, storm water management
calculations and planning documents are required to be submitted and approved for the
Project. Review of the East and West Grading and Utility Plans (pope Associates and
Sunde Engineering, PLLC, May 25, 2005) identify that for storm water management
purposes the Site is being divided into east and west halves. For each half, a storm water
management pond and infiltration basin is proposed (see Figure 4). The western storm
water pond is located west of Wetland #2 and discharges to the southeast into an
infiltration area. The infiltration area in turn discharges to the wetland mitigation area.
The east storm water pond and infiltration area are situated in the southeastern corner of
the Site. Discharge from the infiltration basin is to a basin associated with the utility and
drainage easement on the eastern boundary of the Site.
Storm water management is further discussed in Item 17.
13. Water use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water
wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of
any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? lYes _No
If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply
affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source,
duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers
and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and
new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain
methodology used to determine.
The County Well Index (CWI) database maintained by the Minnesota Geological Survey
(MGS) and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), accessed on the MDH website,
identified one Well and Boring Record for the Site. The Well and Boring Record is for
13
~--'-----1'------'--'--'-"--"~,~-_.~'--"__."_m"'_"-'"'.."."_,,~.'.,.._.__....~...,__,,^_'.M'"_',,_"....h,,,..,-."..-
the elevator shaft at Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church. The document noted that the
elevator casing was drilled by Midwest Drilling to a depth of 20 feet on December 10,
2002. There were no other records for the Site on the database. However, it was reported
that there was a water supply well associated with the former farmstead on the Site. That
well was sealed by a licensed well contractor in 2001 as a provision to obtaining a
building permit for construction of the church. A well sealing record for this well is on
file with the Minnesota Department of Health. Any unused or abandoned wells
encountered at the Shepherd's Path site should be sealed by a licensed COntractor in
accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health well code to eliminate a potential
conduit to groundwater resources. However, site history suggests that it is unlikely that
any wells will be encountered.
The current Church has already been connected to the City of Prior Lake municipal water
supply. The City has also indicated that its municipal water supply system will be utilized
for the overall Project and that it is adequate for the projected growth of the City
including the Project. The proposed water distribution system expansion for the
Development would include review by the Minnesota Department of Heath. The nearest
municipal well for the City is located approximately one and one-third mile south of the
Site and the other municipal wells are approximately three miles south.
In the event that construction dewatering is necessary of less than one-year duration and
50 million gallons, a General Temporary Water Appropriations would be applicable. In
general, the primary concern for construction dewatering is often the receiving water
body; construction dewatering of this magnitude is not anticipated for the Project.
The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC) has prepared a Wellhead
Protection Plan (2002) for their water supply wells. Of their three wells, one of them, the
McKenna Well, is located approximately lA-mile to %-mile north of the Site. The other two
wells are located approximately one-mile to the southwest of the Site and as such are not
directly relevant to the discussion regarding the Project. The McKenna Well currently
provides water to 55 residences located north-northwest of the Site. It is completed as an
open-hole Jordan Sandstone bedrock well that terminates at a depth of 383 feet in the upper
portion of the St. Lawrence Sandstone. The well casing extends to 296 feet.
The DWSMA includes a Ten Year Time of Travel Zone for the McKenna Well that is
based on analysis of hydrogeologic conditions, well construction and well use.
Combined, The DWSMA and Ten Year Time of Travel Zone identify an area where land
uses could have the greatest potential to affect groundwater resources utilized by the
water supply well. Wellhead Protection Planning can then utilize this information as a
tool for landuse planning and zoning to preserve water quality by minimizing, to the
extent possible, potential contaminant sources (such that may be associated with certain
industries or land use activities). The groundwater flow direction for the area is noted as
being toward the north-northwest such that the Site is upgradient of the McKenna Well.
The McKenna Well DWSMA and Ten Year Time of Travel Zone include a portion of the
Site (see Figure 7). The SMSC Wellhead Protection Plan acknowledges the City's
projected land use for the Site as being urban high-density / office park.
14
'"_........._____ __~..__~_.__"_~...~w.,._.;..No_..._.__._,.._____,.----.-"-~-,.___.___,,_~._~_,,__.___--,______~_~_~m;__".~__"'___~_._
The SMSC Wellhead Protection Plan includes a potential contaminant source inventory
for the McKenna Well that depicts a septic tank and a 1,OOO-gallon underground storage
tank at the former farmstead on the Site. As previously stated, the underground septic
tank was previously located at the current Church location and was removed during
excavation for Church construction in 2002. Neither the County nor the City had any
specific information regarding the status of an underground storage tank.
The Wellhead Protection Plan discussed land use conversion in the City of Prior Lake
portion of the McKenna Well DWSMA and determined that the land use changes are not
expected to impact groundwater and, specifically, the McKenna Well.
According to representatives of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, the
existing Wellhead Protection Plan is scheduled to be revised and updated in 2006;
however significant changes are not anticipated.
14. Water-related land use management district. Does any part of the project
involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated IOO-year flood plain, or a state
or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? _Yes lNo
If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land
use restrictions.
15. Water surface use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on
any water body? _Yes lNo
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential
overcrowding or confficts with other uses.
16. Erosion and sedimentation.
Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved:
Approximately 44.5 acres of the Site will be disturbed through various phases of
construction, and approximately 22,847 cubic yards of soil will be imported.
Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map.
Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and
after project construction.
The Shepherd's Path site consists of a rolling topography with elevations at the Site
ranging from 860 to 915 feet. There are no steep banks or slopes at the Site, with the
exception of a small area on the southwest comer of the Site, where no development is
proposed.
Prior to construction a Construction Storm Water Permit Application will need to be
15
".,',.~ ,~-.-._._-- ...----~_.-....~---------r
completed and during construction silt fences will be installed and maintained at the
downstream end of the grading limits, around the perimeter of storm water ponds and
wetlands. Additionally, wood mulch fiber blankets are required by the City for graded
slopes exceeding 4: 1. Slope and sediment control structures are recommended to be
installed at all proposed catch basin inlets.
Any Storm Water Management Plans developed for the Site should include information
regarding grading and restoration plans in the wetland buffer areas. The success of
erosion control during and shortly after construction is dictated by proper installation and
maintenance of erosion control devices and seeding of areas once grading is complete to
establish an initial vegetative ground cover. Storm water management and erosion
control is further addressed in Item 17, below.
17. Water quality: surface water runoff
a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project.
Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm
water pollution prevention plans.
A primary required element of the proposed Project is the adequate control and treatment
of surface water runoff, both with regard to on-Site wetland water quality and discharge
to the Prior Lake outlet channel. Storm water management planning requires the review
and approval of the City and Watershed. Considerations used to locate and design storm
water control measures include catchment area, runoff rates and infiltration rates from
different surfaces, under varying storm event scenarios. The City and the Watershed
requirements restrict post-development storm water rates such that upon completion of
the Project runoff must be equal to or less than existing (pre-development) runoff.
Storm water management utilizes two storm water ponds and infiltrations areas as
discussed in Item 12; the design capacities and dead storage for each storm water pond
were based on calculations of impervious area and runoff rates under 2-year, lO-year and
100-year storm event scenarios. The east and west storm water management ponds and
associated infiltration basins are sized to accommodate enough dead storage for a 100-
year storm event. The western storm water pond discharges to the southeast into an
infiltration area, which in turn discharges to the wetland mitigation area. The east storm
water pond and infiltration area are situated in the southeastern comer of the Site and
discharge to a basin associated with the utility and drainage easement on the eastern
boundary of the Site.
A Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required by the
MPCA for the proposed Project.
b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include
major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters.
Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters.
Currently, most on-Site surface water drainage is to portions of wetlands on the Property.
16
The east-southeast portion of the Site drains to the wetland at the southeastern comer of
the Site. This wetland area on the southeast comer of the Property currently is associated
with the utility and drainage easement. Water that leaves the southeastern comer of the
Site contributes to the Prior Lake outlet that flows to Pike Lake. Pike Lake is located
approximately one-quarter mile east-northeast of the Site, and it ultimately drains to the
Minnesota River.
Storm water ponds and infiltration areas are designed to reduce sediment load and
improve water quality before waters reach wetlands on-Site wetlands or prior to leaving
the Site.
The Storm Water Management Plan to be prepared for the Project requires review and
approval by the City and Watershed. Incorporation of infiltration basins and storm water
(NURP) ponds, maintenance of green space, and wetland buffer areas are Project
elements that will minimize degradation of surface waters, or impairment of water use as
could occur from uncontrolled erosion, discharge of lawn chemicals and the like.
18. Water quality: wastewaters
a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and
industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site.
Wastewater generated at the Shepherd's Path site will consist of residential and
municipal/institutional sanitary waste from sinks and toilets, and condensation from
mechanical/furnace room drains in the larger residential and municipal/institutional
buildings. No other wastewater, or industrial discharges, are anticipated for the Project.
During site development and construction activities, portable sanitary facilities are
anticipated be provided to workers and maintained by an independent company.
Individual sewage treatment rules apply to portable sanitary facilities. Individual counties
implement these rules. According to Scott County, there are no specific permit
requirements associated with such facilities.
b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give
estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including
major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the
quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss
the suitability of site conditions for such systems.
The wastewater generated at the site will be directed to the Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES) system and no on-site sewage systems or discharges are
proposed.
c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify
the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability
to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements
17
necessary.
The proposed Project will be connected to the MCES sanitary sewer infrastructure and
final construction plans that illustrate connection of the Project to the MCES system will
be submitted to the Metropolitan Council and MPCA for review. No pretreatment
provisions are provided or are necessary based on the proposed landuse.
d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal
technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and
composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any
required setbacks for land disposal systems.
The proposed development at the Site does not include land disposal systems.
19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions
a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: minimum <5 average 15+
Depth to ground water at the Site varies due to the topographic relief on the Property. The
minimum depths to groundwater are associated with the lowland areas and the surface
water features on the Site; these surface water features are likely hydraulically connected
to the water table. Logs for the 16 geotechnical soil borings discussed below identified
groundwater in two of the 16 borings at depths of approximately 10 to 22 feet below
grade.
Approximate depth (in feet) to bedrock:
minimum >100 average 120
Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify
them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions.
Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these
hazards.
The Minnesota Geological Survey publication Geologic Atlas of Scott County Minnesota,
(the Atlas); the USGS publication Water Resources of the Lower Minnesota River
Watershed, South-Central Minnesota (Atlas HA-526), and well logs from the County
Well Index were reviewed to ascertain the hydrogeologic conditions associated with the
Site. The SMSC Wellhead Protection Plan also provided hydrogeologic information for
the area.
Based on information for the area there are no sinkholes or other karst conditions, or
shallow limestone formations at the Site.
The Atlas indicates the Site is located on the west side of a northeast-southwest trending
buried bedrock valley and that regional groundwater flow is to the north toward the
Minnesota River Valley. This groundwater flow direction is also referenced by the SMSC
Wellhead Protection Plan. The condition described for the area of the Site indicates that
18
.._.,_......~.__-----"'__~____'_a_~.'._".._~..>~_'___.__.__..__"",'~~~,_.___,~____~_,_.~,._._____,~,_,_.."__.M.._.__._.-_.
the unconsolidated deposits range from approximately 50 to 250 feet thick and are
primarily underlain by the Prairie du Chien group, although the southeastern portion of
the Property is in the proximity of the bedrock valley and may be underlain by the Jordan
Sandstone. Well logs near the Site suggest that the depth to bedrock at the Site will be
approximately 120 to 140 feet.
The Prairie du Chien group is comprised of limestone and dolomite with water movement
principally through fractures and solution cavities. The Prairie du Chien is approximately
150 feet thick and hydraulically connected to the underlying Jordan Sandstone. The
Jordan Sandstone, which is approximately 85 to 100 feet thick, is comprised of fine- to
coarse-grained, poorly cemented quartzose sandstone. These two bedrock units are
considered one aquifer and are a primary source for area water supplies, including the
nearby McKenna Well as noted in Item 13.
The Altas indicates that areas with less than 50 feet of unconsolidated material overlying
the bedrock aquifer are more vulnerable to potential contamination. The thickness of
unconsolidated material at the site is greater than 100 feet indicating that the bedrock
aquifer in the vicinity of the Site would not be classified as highly susceptible to
groundwater contamination from surface sources.
Improperly installed, damaged or abandoned wells represent potential conduits for
groundwater contamination. Proper sealing of the wells located on the Site that will no
longer be used, according to Minnesota Department of Health requirements will mitigate
against potential groundwater contamination.
b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known.
Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from
wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation
measures to prevent such contamination.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS; formerly the Soil Conservation
Service) Soil Survey for Scott County classifies the majority of the soils for the Site as
rolling light colored soils and low wet soils consisting of Hayden and Lester soils and
Peat bogs. Hayden Series soils are noted as having rapid runoff rates but a good moisture
holding capacity; Hayden Series soils are described as occupying approximately one-
third of the uplands of Scott County. It is noted that the NRCS information is considered
outdated (1955) and not adhering to modern soil taxonomy. Soil survey information was
also reviewed and as part of the wetland delineations discussed in Item 12.
A geotechnical investigation report was completed for the north-central portion of the
Site by American Engineering Testing, Inc. in December 2000 entitled "Report of
Geotechnical Exploration and Review, New Shepherds Path Church." The investigation
consisted of six standard penetration test borings in proposed building areas to depths of
21 to 24 feet, and ten standard penetration test borings in proposed pavement areas to
depths of 11 feet. The boring program was completed to aid in site design, preparation
and grading work, and to provide other geotechnical information relative to construction
19
"..___,~____.____ .-.-.--.....-.----.--..---..--------'1.---------'----...---- --...... '.M ...-.
design. The report was not intended to document the presence of any potential
environmental contamination at the Site.
The geotechnical report (see Attachment 5) notes that the area assessed was
predominantly composed of glacially-deposited till, classified as sandy lean clay and
clayey sand, usually containing a little gravel. The till was found to be overlain by
alluvium, which refers to soils deposited by water. Much of the alluvium is lean clay,
although more granular alluvium (sand with silt, silty sand and clayey sand) was also
present.
The primary soils identified for the Site have relatively low permeability in comparison
to granular sand and gravel deposits. Lower permeability soils minimize the potential for
the vertical migration of impacts from potential spills or releases. It is noted, however,
that the Project is primarily a residential/institutional development, and industrial or
processing facilities that could store or use large quantities of potentially hazardous
substances have not been proposed for the Site.
20. Solid wastes, hazardous wastes, storage tanks
a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes,
including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction
and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating
municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how
the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated,
indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous
waste reduction assessments.
The project will generate solid waste during the construction process and include typical
wastes such as scrap wood, pallets, wrapping materials, empty packages and containers,
scrap metal and plastic. The construction contractors are responsible for providing
temporary on-site storage and for arranging periodic collection and disposal of all
construction debris at a permitted facility in compliance with applicable regulations.
Potentially hazardous materials or substances at construction sites (such as glues or
solvents) are anticipated to be very limited in volume and generally consumed during
construction. The construction contractors are responsible for their use and for disposal
of containers in accordance with applicable regulations. Renovation of the existing
structures on the Site should take into account potentially hazardous materials that should
be identified and managed in accordance with applicable regulations.
Following development of the Project, household and office-type wastes will be
generated and managed by established municipal solid waste collection and recycling
programs. In the City of Prior Lake, solid wastes are managed by private solid waste
hauling companies. The City recycling program provides recycle bins and weekly
curbside recyclable material collection to residences. Scott County also manages a
household hazardous waste program. Routine and readily available waste disposal
options for the community greatly minimize the potential of illegal dumping.
20
The proposed Project plans do not include information pertaining to bulk chemical
storage or hazardous waste generation and none would be anticipated for the Project.
However, larger quantities of some materials (such as fuel oil) may potentially be
associated with various facilities at the Site as primary or backup fuel, and these types of
materials should be managed in accordance with all applicable local, State and federal
regulations for registration, labeling, storage, shipment and use.
b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and
identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater.
If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste,
discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or
eliminate the waste, discharge or emission.
Site development would not be anticipated to include any large quantities of toxic or
hazardous materials with the exception of fuels as noted above, and small quantities of
materials used for maintenance of buildings and green space. Use of such items at the
Site should adhere to label application rates and specific intended uses with only those
quantities that can readily be utilized should be stored on Site. Any generated wastes
should be managed through proper waste handling, recycling or hazardous materials
management programs.
c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground
tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any
emergency response containment plans.
No above ground or below ground storage tanks are included in the proposed Site Plans.
Although a generator for emergency lighting and elevator will likely be required as part
of Phase I construction. The generator would likely have a self-contained or internal,
double-walled tank for fuel.
21. Traffic.
Parking spaces added:
A large parking lot (approximately 427 spaces) is currently in place, having been installed with
the construction of the Church in 2002. This parking lot will remain, with the exception of the
easternmost portion (approximately 86 spaces) that will be used for the proposed skilled nursing
facility. The approximate overall number of parking spaces for the Project is as follows:
Town Center/Church!
Fitness Center
----- 368 spaces (inclusive of existing)
Youth Center/Soccer Dome
and Hockey/Soccer Field Parking(2) ----- 244 spaces
Park and Trail Parking
----- 36 spaces
Outdoor Parking associated with
Skilled Nursing Facility,
Assisted LivinglMemory Care Facility,
21
and Independent Living Facility
----- 223 spaces
Outdoor Parking associated with
Senior Housing - East portion of Site----- 152 spaces
Outlots A and B
----- unknown
Number of parking spaces listed excludes underground parking spaces/garages that are proposed
for beneath multi-level residential buildings as listed in Item 6.
Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 427 (Church lot)
Estimated total average daily traffic generated: Refer to below text and a detailed
traffic study provided in Attachment 1.
Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of
occurrence: Refer to below text.
Provide an estimate of the impact on tratlic congestion on affected roads and
describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin
Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation
system.
Attachment 1 provides the "Shepherd's Path Development Traffic Study" completed by
SRF Consulting Group (SRF) January 13, 2005. The Traffic Study takes into consideration
information contained in the May 2004 "CSAH [County State Aid Highway] 21 EIS Traffic
Study" and the September 2004 "Updated Jeffers Pond Traffic Study." Future roadway
improvements, proposed adjacent developments, and traffic forecasts are evaluated under
existing conditions, future no-build and future build scenarios with respect to the Project.
Both a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic operations analyses were conducted and the level of
service (LOS) determined. Potential means of mitigation are discussed where the level of
service may become unacceptable during peak a.m. or p.m. hour. Noise and air quality
issues are also included in the SRF report and discussed in Items 22 and 24, respectively.
Table 5 of the Traffic Study assumed a total of 477 living units based on an earlier
development plan for the Project; the revised and current General Development Plan
(August 11,2005) has a slightly reduced total number of living units (443).
An overview of the Traffic Study is provided in the following text portions of which are
excerpted from the SRF report.
Existing Conditions: Traffic operations for existing conditions were analyzed at the
following key intersections:
.
CSAH 42 and CSAH 83
CSAH 42 and McKenna Road
CSAH 42 and CSAH 21
.
.
Current traffic controls include a traffic signal at the CSAH 42/CSAH 83 and CSAH
42/CSAH 21 intersections, and side-street stop control at the remaining intersection. The
22
existing peak hour traffic volumes, geometries and traffic controls for the key intersections
are shown in Figure 2 of the SRF Traffic Study, and the existing Level of Service (LOS),
from the Traffic Study is summarized below.
Existing Peak Hour Capacity Analysis - Level of Service Results
(Table 1 from Traffic Study SRF January 13, 2005)
Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak PM Peak
CSAH 421CSAH 83 C D
CSAH 42/McKenna Road* NB* NC*
CSAH 421CSAH 21 B C
* Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS.
Future Roadway Improvements: Future planned roadway improvements and how they
may effect traffic and LOS are considered within the Traffic Study. Anticipated roadway
extensions I improvements include the Scott County plan to extend CSAH 21 north of
CSAH 42 to intersect with CSAH 18. This extension would provide a more direct route to
and from Trunk Highway (TH) 169, a major arterial route. Extension of CSAH 21 is
assumed to be completed prior to the 2009. The City of Prior Lake is also planning to re-
align "New" McKenna Road to eliminate the two ninety-degree curves that currently exist
at the Site. The current McKenna Road would remain in-place with the construction of
"New" McKenna Road
Proposed Adjacent Developments: The proposed Jeffers Pond development located south
of the Site, across CSAH 42 was assumed as background traffic for the Traffic Study. Also,
two currently vacant parcels located adjacent to Jeffers Pond were assumed by the Traffic
Study to be completed by year 2009. The first, located west of the Project, includes 100
single family homes associated with The Wilds Ridge; The Wilds Ridge is assumed to
intersect opposite "New" McKenna Road, and the primary access to The Wilds Ridge is
expected to be off of CSAH 42. The second future development is a business park located
on a 60-acre parcel situated in the southeast comer of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21.
Year 2009 No-Build Conditions: No-build traffic forecasts account for background
growth in the area excluding the Project. From this forecast, the added traffic of the Project
is then compared. For the analyses the projected growth was estimated for the year 2009 as
this time frame generally corresponds to the projected completion of the Project. A five-
percent traffic volume growth rate was applied to traffic volumes on CSAH 42, CSAH 21,
and McKenna Road based on a review of historical growth in the area and the forecast
shown in the "CSAH 21 EIS Traffic Study".
The LOS for 2004 "No-Build" conditions indicates that all key intersections will operate at
acceptable overall levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours.
23
Year 2009 No-Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis - Level of Service Results
(Table 4 from Traffic Study SRF January 13, 2005)
Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak PM Peak
CSAH 42/CSAH 83 C D
CSAH 421"New" McKenna Road A B
CSAH 42/"Old" McKenna Road* NA* NB*
CSAH 421CSAH 21 C D
.. Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS.
Proposed Development: Full access to the Site will would be provided at CSAH
42f'New" McKenna Road. Additionally, a %-intersection access would be provided at
CSAH 42f'Old" McKenna Road (right-inlright-out only from the Development), which is
consistent with the recommendations in the "Updated Jeffers Pond Traffic Study". A
second, additional access to the Site was assumed on CSAH 21, approximately 14-mile north
of CSAH 42 (right-inlright-out), to be developed by extending Thunderbird Circle from the
east. This access was assumed in the analysis based on Scott County's current access
spacing guidelines for 14-mile spacing between access points along County roadways.
Traffic forecasts / trip generation estimates for the Development and both AM/PM peak
hours and daily were calculated in the Traffic Study. Table 5 from the Traffic Study
provides a summary of the traffic added to the roadways by the proposed Development.
NOTE: as previously stated the below information is based on the original project proposal;
the revised Project (May 2005) has a reduced number of units.
Trip Generation Estimates
(Table 5 from Traffic Study SRF January 13,2(05)
Land Use Size Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Trips In Out In Out
Senior Independent Living 80 Units 162 3 2 7 6
Senior Assisted Living 64 Units 176 8 3 9 9
Skilled Nursing 80 Units 190 10 4 6 12
Senior Adult Housingt~) 253 Units 939 20 30 41 24
Fitness Center 25,000 fe 700 11 15 44 42
Daycare 5,500 ft~ 436 37 33 34 38
Office 5,500 ft2 61 8 1 1 7
Youth Center 5,500 ft2 126 5 3 3 6
Retreat Center 3,500 ft~ 80 3 2 2 4
General Retailt1) 3.6 Acres 1.431 21 13 60 65
4,301 126 106 207 213
(I) . -
lDcludes a 15 percent multi purpose trIp reduction
(2)rIousing units included in the SRF Traffic Study total only 477 units, while the Pope Associates General
Development Plan notes a total of 443 housing units.
Comparison of No-Build and Build Daily Forecast Traffic Volumes: Daily traffic
volumes were developed from forecast turning movement volumes, with the assumption
that the p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts consist of ten percent of the daily traffic volumes.
24
The following tables from the Traffic Study, compares projected 2009 traffic volumes under
the "No-Build" and "Build" scenarios and LOS under "Build" conditions.
Year 2009 No-Build and Build Daily Forecast Volumes
(Table 6 from Traffic Study SRF January 13, 2005)
Location Year 2009
No-Build Build
CSAH 42 west of "New" McKenna Rd 17,500 17,700
CSAH 42 east of CSAH 21 17,200 17,400
CSAH 21 north of CSAH 42 24,200 24,600
CSAH 21 south of CSAH 42 25,900 26,300
Year 2009 Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis - Level of Service Results
(Table 7 from Traffic Study SRF January 13, 2005)
Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak PM Peak
CSAH 42JCSAH 83 C D
CSAH 42J"New" McKenna Road B B
CSAH 42f'Old" McKenna Road* AIB AIB
CSAH 42JCSAH 21 D(C) E(D)
CSAH 21/proposed site access* A/B AlC
*Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach
LOS.
( ) Level of service shown in parenthesis includes the installation of a northbound dua1left-turn lane
Project LOS under Build conditions indicates that all key intersections are forecast to
operate at acceptable overall levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods with the
exception of the p.m. peak hour at the intersection of CSAH 42/CSAH 21. Assuming the
existing geometics and traffic control, CSAH 42/CSAH 21 is expected to operate at an
unacceptable LOS E during the p.m. peak hour. With the installation of a northbound dual
left-turn lane at this intersection, the level of service is expected to improve to an acceptable
LOS D or better during the peak periods.
Project Site Traffic Considerations: The Traffic Study includes comments to improve
traffic operations and safety withi~ the Site, based on a review of the proposed Site layout.
The comments consist of aligning the trail crossing on "New" McKenna Road, north of
CSAH 42, to help shorten the length of roadway that pedestrians use to cross; relocating the
fitness center driveway to the north side of that facility; realigning the intersection of "Old"
McKenna Road and the proposed extension of Thunderbird Circle to provide a 90-degree
intersection and align driveways for the Youth Center and Assisted LivinglMemory Care
directly across from each other; check turning radii to verify that emergency vehicles can
negotiate the turns; and provide sufficient spacing for the retail driveway on "Old"
McKenna Road to allow for adequate sight distance for vehicles turning to and from CSAH
42.
25
Traffic Summary and Possible Mitigative Measures
1. All key intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall level of service (LOS)
with existing traffic controls and geometric layout during peak hours.
2. Under year 2009 no-build conditions, all key intersections will continue to operate at an
acceptable overall LOS D or better; with the following baseline no-build intersection
improvements:
CSAH/"New" McKenna Road - installation of a traffic signal
CSAH/"Old" McKenna Road - modification to a %-intersection with right-in/right-
out only and left-in for westbound vehicles
3. Under year 2009 build conditions, all intersections are expected to operate at an
acceptable overall LOS D or better, with the following additional intersection
improvements:
CSAH 42/CSAH 21 - installation of a northbound dual left-turn lane
4. Due to Scott County's spacing guidelines, proposed access onto CSAH 21 was assumed
to be constructed as a right-in/right-out only. For safety purposes, a southbound right-
turn lane is recommended on CSAH 21 for this access.
· Since the location of future local roadway access on the extension of CSAH 21 has
not been determined, additional analysis was completed to determine how this
intersection would operate if it was constructed as a full unsignalized access, with
left- and right-turn lanes on CSAH 21. Results of this analysis show significant
delays during the peak periods on the minor approach due to the high volume of
through traffic on CSAH 21. Two lanes of approach are recommended for the
eastbound approach, to provide a left-turn lane and a right-turn lane to reduce delay
and improve safety at this intersection.
. As parcels develop along the new extension of CSAH 21, further discussions
regarding access spacing and future traffic signals should occur with County staff.
5. Comments and recommendations in the Traffic Study included elements to be
considered with the Site Development. These include aligning the trail crossing on
"New" McKenna Road, north of CSAH 42, to help shorten the length of roadway that
pedestrians use to cross; relocating the fitness center driveway to the north side of that
facility; realigning the intersection of "Old" McKenna Road and the proposed extension
of Thunderbird Circle to provide a 90-degree intersection and align driveways for the
Youth Center and Assisted Living/Memory Care directly across from each other; check
turning radii to verify that emergency vehicles can negotiate the turns; and provide
sufficient spacing for the retail driveway on "Old" McKenna Road to allow for adequate
sight distance for vehicles turning to and from CSAH 42.
22. Vehicle-related air emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic
generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of
traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note:
If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EA W Guidelines
about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.
The principal concern of vehicle emissions is carbon monoxide (CO) and the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has established a CO standard of 30 parts per million
(PPM) for a one-hour period and 9-ppm for an eight-hour period. The accumulation and
26
-..------.-- .----.w..-.---..------r
persistence CO can be greatly effected by ground-level turbulence, fluctuating wind
conditions, temperature and other factors. Concentrations of CO can occur at
intersections with a poor level of service where numerous vehicles may be idling.
SRF evaluated vehicle related air emissions for the Project and the results of their
analysis are provided within the Traffic Study (Attachment 1). The SRF evaluation
utilized an Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) model that incorporates assumptions
to account for a number of factors including wind speed and direction, road-surface
roughness and other factors. The analysis considered the worst-case 2009 build scenario
at the intersection of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 as discussed in Item 21.
The results of the modeling indicate that the vehicle related air emissions will not exceed
the State standards at the intersection modeled.
Carbon Monoxide Modeling Results
(Table 12 from Traffic Study SRF January 13,2005)
Factor Year 2009 - Build P.M. Peak Hour Scenario
I-hour 8-hour Wind Direction
CSAH 42/ and CSAH 21 7.2 5.0 260
Carbon Monoxide (ppm)
State Standard (ppm) 30.0 9.0
Federal Standard (ppm) 35.0 9.0
23. Stationary source air emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and
compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as
boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air
pollutants (consult EA W Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such
as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals
(chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur
hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and
proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality.
None anticipated.
24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during
construction or during operation? lYes _No
If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any
proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby
sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on
human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may
be discussed at Item 23 instead of here.)
. Some noise and dust will be generated during the construction portion of the project. No
odors are anticipated. Dust will be mitigated by minimizing the areas of exposed soil, re-
27
--~._.,-,-~----,-_., .--........_~"'_.."..-."..----_._..-~-~.......-._~
vegetating or paving as soon as practical after final grading and watering exposed soils
during dry and windy conditions. Construction noise is mitigated by using equipment that
is properly muffled. At a minimum, construction activities would be limited to hours of
operation identified in the City's Combustion Engine Ordinance (6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
weekdays, 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday and prohibited without special permit on Sunday).
At the completion of construction no odor or dust issues are anticipated. Noise will be
that typical of residential communities and as associated with a church, fitness center,
retreat and youth centers, clinic, and retail center. Thus, noise associated with the
completed project will be similar to surrounding residential (existing or future) areas.
Noise mitigation is provided by site layout and tree plantings. The primary potential noise
impact would occur with traffic at major intersections during peak traffic hours on CSAH
42 and 21. Noise impacts would be least on the western side of the Site.
Noise associated with traffic has been evaluated for the Project by SRF and is discussed
in the Traffic Study (Attachment 1). Minnesota Statues (116.07 Subdivisions 2 and 4)
provide noise standards for daytime and nighttime periods; however, Minnesota Statue
116.07 Subd. 2a. states that municipal and county roads (except in Minneapolis and St.
Paul) are exempt from the noise standards, and therefore the City and County roads
associated with the Project are exempt. Increased traffic resulting from the Project as
well as other adjacent development in the City will increase noise. The overall proposed
Project layout situates the retail and commercial development nearest to the major
roadway intersection (CSAH 42 and CSAH 21).
The noise analysis completed by SRF for the Project included monitoring existing noise
levels and predicting future noise levels with the use of computer modeling. However, it
is noted that the analysis considers current Site conditions that are typically open areas
and thus do not include any berms or landscaping, thus the modeled conditions present a
"worst-case scenario." The results of the analysis indicate that, considering the worst-
case scenario, some proposed residences are predicted to be slightly above State
standards. Incorporation of berms and other landscaping as mitigative measures are
anticipated to reduce the noise levels to below State standards.
25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the
site?
Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? _Yes lNo
Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? _Yes
lNo
Designated parks, recreation areas or trails _Yes lNo
Scenic views and vistas? _Yes lNo
Other unique resources? _Yes lNo
28
~-"''''--''^-~''-'"'--. "-~'-'~'~"'<~-"""-'-'._"-'-''''''''''~-'''''~------r"------~
If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the
resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
The Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was
contacted to determine if there are any archeological, historical and/or cultural resources,
which meet the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 and 36CFR800 at the Site. The SHPO response, provided in Attachment 2,
indicates that no archaeological sites or historic structures were identified in a search of
the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Inventory for the search
area requested. The SHPO response notes that the result of this database search provides
a listing of recorded archaeological sites and historic architectural properties that are
included in the current SHPO databases. The SHPO response continues by noting that
because the majority of archaeological sites in the state and many historic architectural
properties have not been recorded, important sites or structures may exist within the
search area and may be affected by development projects within that area.
Based on the historic Site uses, as primarily agricultural land as described in Item 9, and
the lack of any historic structures, the Site's potential to contain historic or archaeological
sites of significance appears negligible.
DNR protected waters are located on the Site, and are discussed in Item 12.
26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during
construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in
wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks?
_Yes lNo
If yes, explain.
27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an
adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other
applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional,
state or federal agency?
l Yes _No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the
project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain.
2020 Comprehensive Plan
The City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan (the 2020 Plan) was adopted by the
Prior Lake City Council and approved by the Metropolitan Council in 1999. The 2020
Plan is mandated by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and is a guide for the
development and redevelopment of the City; it establishes local policy in addition to
being a legal document required by Minnesota Statutes.
The focal point is the Land Use Plan element. Other elements include a Transportation
Plan, a Public Utilities Plan, a Park Plan, a Housing Plan, a Water Resources
29
.~,~~"""""""~",.-".._~."~,,-,,.....~ "._~
Management Plan, and an Implementation Plan. The 2020 Plan states that it was written
as a dynamic and flexible guide, thus, it is subject to change, which may be initiated by
land owners or by the City. The current version of the plan proposes a framework for
development through 2020, although in some cases the focus is on the ultimate
community design. The 2020 Plan includes overall objectives to meet the goals of its
various components and these objectives are generally compatible with the Shepherd's
Path project.
The City of Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance
As stated in Item 14, the City of Prior Lake is reviewing the development application
under its Planned Use Development (P.U.D.) Ordinances. The general objective of this
procedure is to establish development standards specifically formulated for the Site rather
than a strict enforcement of the City's Ordinances. A Preliminary P.U.D. Plan will be
prepared for the Shepherd's Path project and will be submitted to the City of Prior Lake.
Stormwater Management Plan and Wetlands
Item 16 and Item 17 identify the Storm Water Management Calculations for the
Shepherd's Path project. The Storm Water Management Calculations may meet some of
the requirements of the City of Prior Lake and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed
District. Because some existing wetlands will be altered by the Project, a wetland
mitigation plan and application needs to be submitted to the LGU in accordance with the
Wetland Conservation Act.
28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities,
roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project?
l Yes_No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services
needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the
project must be assessed in the EA W; see EA W Guidelines for details.)
Current stormwater infrastructure is anticipated to be modified and enhanced according
to the Storm Water Calculations and General Development Plan, and stormwater plans
will be reviewed for approval by the City and Watershed District. The Site will be
serviced by the MCES sanitary sewer system and the City of Prior Lake municipal water
supply. Other services necessary to serve the project include streets, power grid, gas
lines, police protection, and fire protection. Modifications to the roads in the vicinity of
the Site are noted within the Traffic discussion. The Project also includes trails on the
Site. City planning has accounted for increased growth, including the Project, and
infrastructure items, such as roads and water supply have been expanded to accommodate
the current growth.
29. Cumulative impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires
that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated
future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact
statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects
that may interact with the project described in this EA W in such a way as to
cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and
30
"-"-~".'"''''-'''~-'''''''''.'''''''''''''''',-'~~--~--'.......--,..
summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether
there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts
(or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this
form).
The Project and surrounding developments in the area have required appropriate planning
to account for increased traffic, potential impact to surface water resources, and other
environmental considerations as discussed in this EA W. The City of Prior Lake, Scott
County and the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District have recognized both traffic
and surface water as primary issues. Surface water runoff controls on the Site, as
stipulated by City and Watershed requirements, provide for storage and treatment of
runoff from the Site through the design and construction of infiltration basins and storm
water ponds. Similar surface-water requirements also apply to other off-site properties
that lie within the watershed. Cumulatively, surface water controls, properly designed and
maintained, mitigate potential impacts to the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed.
Similarly, increases in traffic of the area have been considered with respect to upgrades to
the roadways to effectively manage area growth including that associated with the
Project.
30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse
environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them
here, along with any proposed mitigation.
Potential environmental impacts have been addressed by Items 1 to 28.
31. Summary of issues. Do not complete this section if the EA W is being done for EIS
scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document,
which must accompany the EA W. List any impacts and issues identified above
that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any
alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for
these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as
permit conditions.
Planning and work completed for the proposed Project has been underway for the past
few years. The planning process has also worked to provide the necessary information for
permits and approvals that are required from the City of Prior Lake, the Prior Lake-
Spring Lake Watershed, Corps of Engineers, MPCA, MDH and Scott County. Primary
issues include surface water management and traffic.
Surface water features of the Site include protected waters and wetlands, including a
wetland on the southeast portion of the Property that contributes to the Pike Lake outlet.
Both the City and Watershed may require strict setback limitations to mitigate against
damage to this surface water feature. The Project proposes areas of wetland alteration for
which mitigation is provided on Site. Management of runoff during construction is
important and would utilize best management practices. Proper installation and
31
""""'---""~"""-+~'"-'-'-~"~""-"-;--'~'"r'-----~'-'-_._~._,-
maintenance of erosion control devices and the early and successful establishment of
vegetation of completed work areas dictate the success of erosion control during
constructi on.
Traffic related issues have been identified by a Traffic Study that measured existing
conditions and subsequently considered proposed development in the area, future
roadway improvements, and projected traffic volumes under both build and no-build
scenarios for the Project. Under the future build scenario, all key intersections are
forecast to operate at acceptable overall levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak
periods with the installation of a northbound dual left-turn lane at the intersection of
CSAH 42/CSAH 21.
Associated with increased traffic are potential noise and air quality issues. The Traffic
Study provided a review of both of these issues under a worst-case scenario. The air
quality analyses determined that air quality standards would not be exceeded. Noise
standards could be slightly exceeded for some residences of the proposed Project. The
noise analyses considered the current topography and noted that incorporation of berms
and landscaping would be anticipated to mitigate noise levels to below State Standards.
RGU CERTIFICATION. The Environmental Quality Board will only accept
SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB
Monitor.
I hereby certify that:
. The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to
the best of my knowledge.
. The EA W describes the complete project; there are no other projects,
stages or components other than those described in this document, which
are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined
at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively.
. Copies of this EA Ware being sent to the entire EQB distribution list.
Signature:
.~
Date: 9/19/ tJS
irector, City of Prior Lake
Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental
Quality Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EA W
Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155,
651-296-8253, or www.mnplan.state.mn.us
W:\env\70119\Shepherd's Path EA W Fina1.doc
32
;~
~~~;
'~('
.....
~ ~+. ~
~.w
>- c:: ro
ro:J... ~
>00-:1"
~lJ III 0
en ~O
J:~ c: N
ro O::E: "
~tX ~ ~
Q) ((~ ~
C> ,',
'.
.,.,.,,,.,
r(,~
,:'?" . \: '10 ;"':
",-. \~
.i ,:< ,1">,, r;~.[' ...: - -.
,.,\' .r i; x''':',':, '...'\.;: ""
'\ to;~~l ; ~~P'.. j\";;L,c', ii,
i," ~I~~j,;~ IiI.... '_ . . '
. '; "';',::;"!, . J~-., . ";1-/-". -I}j _..!. .11', -'. ;:0-'
. . ...,...' .'rl.
"Z\ll ~.' , \ . " ,1./
. , '~-JP~r;'ii;"i' .~~._~,j Q r:,
-~ . ~J;\{'P ~.~II' -. -""]~1'1~." ) L ~.
t1'. ,..;..' . )~~ ~. J' (1
~ s' - I I I tI ~l ~ , ('.,*
'_~::'~~ '.. . '.}Ir~~'
k-'.r! ,for..... ',~ '-- r/ ..
,. ~.- p ., r"J'~
for . : 1L... l'W;'-' . \ '/' l.P L','
,1_- .~~~. i"..o:.'i".fb.'''''\
~.; ..- ~_:"!I ~ ...... ~."lf'..._,
~ ~ 3 ~-~~. ~i__
ii ~I -
-- . I "-., ~ .: ~..')
..-Ii __ u_. lir~ ..J.,
:! T ~ -~_.
~: a: : \-:.,,; _~ -r'l.'; j\._--
'X1.. __~--' , .~.:. ~\ i 'J! - :37'}'}~ \.>+:
l'I'~' ; . J'; !F!!llir. : : : ~~.1!\ '....:.'...
~J!- ~ ~ ~ U ~\ : . ~ I I.~ ~ "/1 ~', ;,,-') },i'::',~'8 '. ,
.l!l.(!~i;..,~~~, .~,[:,/ ,X", __, ,..:J . ~;-;...;-
51 . 'r; ~':..,..: ,~ 'J 1;"'\ 1 'il;. -';;
..... .... '.".;'~ ~. III.'fi.l ~ ..-J ...{:r,..:~t'.
I To.. ..,:.:..... . . ......,. ~ . .c. ,
. I. .' .' ~ .~."2> ".: .'\1,: ~ir7- .. ,.,,,..., '!
'I' lil:~,Jl; I F, .~'-.lt5 -'-'r l.:.7' '-7r-~' U;'i1r'i\:l-~: . .;;-.>--
'. '-~.L_ r.-...,. 't" J;:I..;o..;. .......~'C... ~': .~....;~-~ :1 \'i:..r ~: .:.., !iwJ/l1.
, ~. '.' .!'fo'; -.~ - ~< '. :;, . '.1:. ';'
Y.i '--.- .- i'-~;~'~,::'~'~'-- ;,~
: g. ,.;-. r::.!!, '- !
I', IJ ,,':' ')~J~ '~("'i' .. 'l!;.....::;".
'.. i8('\\~.': " ~:"-l\.:' ,I . .: S j
-!'~H~'"" .~' -- .:: ' :. ".1: 15!
JFT~:"'=' ''t '>:l'~ ' 11Jf-f'~.~). '..."'Ii' ..t'.-, .:J.
:u__:,_,:,,{O.. .J\L~~t'!::t\,,!hi"?N '~F; r
.: Ik. If.. '\". 4: t." ;"''', [...i Y7' "'i' ....(,...'"
, ~,.~-~!.t'l-;~..'~: ~-'-1:' .,1' ;;'~. )....~..:.:f4_....~...j:_.. '. "'.-."" ":~~'7..'"
".'l"i' ,'. .d "'.;..j .... ", ~...I .:' i '-...
"'i . ': '.?'Ii,. 1 it \ .
.... h' .' 'I.','--r--' . i .j
~ ~'T ~ .~. IF i;f:"1l ~ ~,J_...J
; '. . - ..,.. I..
. .'~"~_'.I"'fJ..-- I,'
o "~;~ h._L~ :J__
I r- ~ , J:":,',, .. ~ _ -: '"
_ J -: ;(~": l. ~__ .-
\ . I '1)..,J .,-/:,,. il'.~.-
k.-'" 7r!".,! : .,~'~
':r - .. 1
'1~'~ \I~'~' ~~. :~
· ',-. . Af\-t1-~'----'
" \t, . ,.ii-.:~ . , . .I . L I "
~~,\~~~:~ --l':----~~:m/,,~~~ "''',f
...~. < , . . '_'" . . . v'<.
" \.. t <: 1 I . , .
:.(;.,:.-~ I?":': /-- .. ....:- ~'" . !~; ,.....
"{s: ('~'.'-:-:---~' _-\~_:..'
'.['.. . ,J' ~. ~'...'~
~ "..,,-.'.....-<'.... -.' ..&~.... .
-),i{ ~ ':{f::!.' ..... .
~.'. T~.
".:r-l ..'~
/~
.....
w
a:
~
"
u:
....-~-':f
'"
';',
': :;-
.."
..t'i
. .' .'
\ ;1
; "\t ·
r
';'!.n'~~
, "
I""
'f
.,
I,
:..0
U
" .in
I r .U
-~ I
z
o
....-
t:1-
I-
o
w
..,
o
a:
c..
u..
o
z
o
~
o
o
...J
...J
<
a:
w
z
w
"
"
Z
~
:%:
en
c..
<
:E
>
I-
Z
::>
o
o
>-
~ '0 '0
J: ~'O~ QI
:2 ~QI.>~:2>-
<>- "5.~i5:2C.:61ll ~
'0 QI III >-,-.- ~ > E ~ ~ 0
1ll1ii~~:I:O::JOIll::J~....~
O....s::..s:;,GJGJGJQ)a::Q)OClJa.
~Ul.2'Olii ~ ~ ~ >-~~ ~:E'O
~~~;:I:~~~~~~Qj~~~
'l;Cc:...... -GJ'-'- GJO> 3';:L..
:t55J9Ul....::>::>~QI~~~O~
UUIll::J.5~~I-I!:I-(!)UI-~
'"
III
QI
...
<~
'iiB>.
~~....
.2 ~'c
....Ill::>
:E~E
b~g
~~U
19" ",IID~ I
I I
..... _."'-_._~--_.._.............!'
I
t,
r
.j,;
. ;, .':\>
/'" 'b '..{~
'{~~.
) ;,
1"u
'"
~ z+~
D.
c(
:is
... J!!
.g : 8 I-
a.. 2 ~ 1&1
'0 ~ W
1>0 ~-
= I9"D'.~ -
I (,) i~ II ...
':'0 !/ U)
'0~"
w
z
i
~ S ~ ~
~ <i~ffi~~
~g~lilr~~::q
ig5~~~ii~
{c 0 <1 ~r2222:?2
i~
~ ~ g~
: - i ~ ~ I~ IIi
~ i L 13 ~~ ~PIJtl'
~.. ~ .t~ ~ fih: Wz .
5 i ~ n ~ Ii n !!.
LJI
z
o
ti
o
o
...J
W
t-
US
<C
....
W
a:
=>
CJ
ii:
=-j=-----_-=::-
I D .
I
... "l I
\ <;"
a I
+- ;_ __ 16,
-.""-' ,
\~ "
~.
~'....
~
-830-
- ....~_..-
---
c:::J - -
--
1
IMles
t
4.~ 5.000
- I
IGUAE 2 PROJECt BOUNPARIESource: USGS To;:;'~"::;phiC Quadrangle
1.000
......
500 0
~t-4I
1.000
I
2.000
I
3.000
I
6.000
I
7.000
I Feet
:11
_- E
--;: r.'Z.
\ I Iii III
J _
t1~
--I
- . ~ ~
a
z
I'
-i
la
~
z
~ ~
~ ~
0.: w
:IE
~ a.
oS
0::: w
w ~
~ Q
0.. ..J
W ~
~ W
V\ Z
W
C)
..
ng
"':'
$' + M
~JU
Q;t!;t
5ll!5
-~~a:-
Z
<l:
-I
Q.
I-
'z
+) ~
IV Q.
~1 9
0;, UJ
i/l: >
0; UJ
Il!; Q
~: ..J
fu \ c(
L a:
III UJ
Z
UJ
CJ
~
UJ
a:
:)
CJ
u:
~~ Eill Fli
~ ~ ~ Jh~
u' uu
2 ~~ I!l!
~ j
<(
~ ~ ~ ~1.llll'l
I E~ , II'III!I
~i~
I~
J
.
j
I
~ I]] 1
Ii LJ.
o
N
U
I
en
z
<C
-l
0.
>
I-
::i
i=
::>
Q
z
<C
oo,J
.
~ ;
I
W !
\~~~'''i. ~1,
~~ I
I'"
a-'-
d~!
U"
!ilJ
!!,:;;
~ ~ i ~1.1I1!11
~ ~ I , .,11111
~~~
i ~ t
I
I
II
'II
h Iii
III.,
I',il,'
I'! !
_:1/
i I'll
.
!I
Ii Lli
o
~
U
I
z ~ l5
~ ~ ~ ~
t;; E >-
;0 ~ ~~ 5
8 ~ ~~ ~
~ g~ ~~ 2
;! 3=~ lii:i ~
~DDD
i i 1i~1
in
nil
~ -- ell
~
:~~
e 86
,. . ,j'" ~.." "
"'''y '-' al' \ V
'l{" 0 h' i
, i ......
. ~,
~ ~1
~
.
,
,
.
.,
I
,
j
~,
tl~
Il~
"
'i
\
en
z
<C
...J
a..
>
I-
::J
i=
.,_ .' 1\ :)
.f';'1 C
I\.~ \.1. Z
, \' <C
'. I '
"',} I CJ
L ~i..Lt- " Z
"E~t:: ~
, CJ
?-
m
~
.0
~
w
a:
:)
CJ
u:
... ."~~_'""A.-~~.to'-'--~~'--r'________~N___.'~'_'~~_'__~_'~.__',.,'-
o
o
..-
-.:t
o
,
LO
('I')
LO
C'\l
,....
=l:*:
<(
a..
Q)
0)
.L:
en
~
Cll
.cE
c; E
a. ::J
C/len
=eE
CI) Cll
.c....
Q.Ol
CI) 0
.c ....
tJ)a..
0)
en
:J
"t:l
e:
Cll
...J
IC\I C'\lj ..-1('1') ('I') ('I') ('I') ('I') "-1"- 1 <{Icel 1 I
=l:*: .:.t. .:.t. .:.t.~ ~ .:.t. .:.t. ~ ~.:.t.
t) t) t) t) (.) (.) t) (.) (.) (.) 1515 I
(5 0 0 C'\l C'\l C'\l C'\l C'\l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :;::; :;::;
...J :J :J
I I I , , I I I I I 0 0 ,
..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..-
-
e:
0) en ('I')
"t:l :!:: -.:t 00 -.:t 0 LO LO LO co co
"in e: 00 ..- LO 00 -.:t -.:t ~ ('I') ('I') 0 0 ~
0) => ~
0:::
....
0 0
0 0) ~ to :;:;
u: I"- 0 00 C'\l (J') 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ('I') .... Cll
.... to LO ('I') ('I') ,.... LO C'\l 0 0 LO LO 0 0 0 ('I') 0 0 -.:t C'\l ~
Cll Cll 0 0 ,.... 0 0:::
"t:l ::J - to ,..... ~ LO. ~ 0 C'\l. LO oq, ~ LO. ":. ,.... 0 0 LO 0). 16 0 C'\l "': q ..- ""': C'\l
e: c- o cD 00 ..- ..- LO 0) 16 ~ 0 0 C'\l C'\l cD ci ~ ..- u: Cll 0 0 0 0 0 0
:J en 0 C'\l ('I') ..- C'\l ..- ..- ..- C'\l C'\l C'\l C'\l 0) to ('I') ('I') 0)
e u.. ~ ....
C> <{
u.. Cl =s ~
c
en 32 0) 0 0 -.:t to (J') I"- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol Cll 0 C'\l 0 C'\l
.... "t:l 0 0 LO LO I"- ('I') LO 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e: - 00 C'\l 0 0 0
ro ca :::J 0 LO C'\l """ to 0 r-- 0 C\!. LO LO LO LO 0 0 0 oq, 32 0 C'\l 0). 0 00. LO
.... Co 13 ci ~ ,....- N 16 ~ ,..... LO 16 16 cD ci LO 0 cD C'\l 0 LO ci
0) ~ .5 16 0) ..- ..- ('I') ::J u.. ~ ('I')
> """ ,.... C'\l ..- ..- """ LO LO to to -.:t -.:t 0) co ,.... co ce 0) ('I') to 0
'0 ..- Iq ('I') C'\l ,....
0 ::>
...... e: en
.:.t. ~ .:.t. ~ .:.t. .:.t. ~
.... .... .... .... .... .... ....
en Cll Cll Cll Cll Cll Cll Cll 0)
~ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0) to ('I') 0
~ Cll q LO ~ to ..- q
..- C'\l C'\l .PJ .PJ Ol ('I') ..- ('I') 0) 0) Ol 0) ..- ..- 0) (0 C'! ~
-- -- -- -- -- 0 ~ LO 00
0) ::J ::J :J ::J :J :J ::J C'\l .... ..- ('I')
....J ..- ..- ~ """ ..- to
+ + + + + + +
""" """ """ ('I') ('I') C'\l C'\l
0)
Ol ('I') ('I') ,.... 00 C'\l
0) 0) Ol Cll 0 ..- ..-
e: ~ e: 0) 0) - 00 0 ,.... C'\l 0 C'\l
en .... .... 0
32 Cll :::J :;:; :J ::J ~ ..- C'\l 0 0 N
en ..- ..- ..- ..- -.:t ..- ('I') C'\l C'\l ('I') ('I') C'\l C'\l 0 cti cD cti
'5 .L: - :2 :2 u.. -.:t 16 to
a.. .2 'x ":. ('I') r-- LO LO 0).
ce 0) -q ('I') to ..-
en ..- . C'\l
>-
:0
en E
e: Ii) 0)
.... 0 en
0) E ::=- Q3 en
- .... E 0) > Ol 0) Ol e: <{
e: 0) 0) > .S2 .... .5 .5 .5 .Q -- ]2
0) - 0 e: .S2 0) e:
() e: () 'S: ('I') - en en en ~ :J ~
0) - e: :J ::J ::J "0) "0) e: "E
en () -- ::J en 0. 0) 0 0 0 e: e: cr: :!:: "E 0)
en .... ..- ,g Ol () J: J: J: t)
0) e: 0) "E - e: 0 0 0) "t:l :~ 0) "t:l ~ ro
- .... .... - - E >- ~ "t:l '0
e: 0 - 0) 0) '0 .L: .... en en 0)
- e: .... Ol .Q .Q .Q - '0 0) (..) "0
:;:; .... - e: e: 0 ~ () ()
u:: ~ 0) "t:l Cll e: ::J :J e: e: e: ~ :: Cl (..) 0) 0::: ~ .... ....
0) () e: () 'S: Z 0 0) 0) 0) 0 -- ~ 0) 0::: .... 0) 0)
en ~ .0 0) ::J >- en en en e .... J: .:.t. en >- Cll E E
=> 0) e: 0. ~ "t:l .... 0) "E :J -- - a..
(..) ~ 0) e: ~ ~ e: '0 E E
Q3 0 "t:l ~ 0) "E - (..) ~ Cll en
:;:; "t:l 0) E e: (..) 0) ::J e: 0 0
Cll () E 0) > 0) 0) .... .... 0 ce - 0)
l- e: - :s2 0 0 "E 0 0 () ()
:J 0) en Cll 0 "t:l "t:l en ~ '8> 0
~ 0) 0) .... ~ '0 en .L: (..) e: e: 'c 'c 0) a..
.!: e: 0 ~ e: 0) 0) 0) 0) - "E Q3 .L:
en 0
en "S: 'c .... <{ 0. 0. en en .Ql
<{ 0) 0 Cll ~ 0) 0) a.. 0) 0:::
() 'x ::J en 'c .... en "t:l "t:l (5 0) I
~ W .... 0) .Q ...J e: e: a.. en
>- .Q en e: :J
e: 0)
0) en I "t:l
en 0)
.~
~
-- I--
e: I
c: .2 I <{ co
Cll Cij i ro ..- C'\l ('I') - ro
c: e: <{ ce () 0 w w u..1<.9 II- J ~ ...J I~ z 0 a.. (5 (5 - (5 g 0 (5
.~ 0 :;:::
0) I I- ...J ...J ...J :J ::J I-
/&3 en I I 0 0
0)
0 I I I
.._>0__._______.... .....-..,".~. ." -^."..~...-,..--...----..---'~.__1'
LO
o
o
~
N
..-
--
0)
o
..-
....
UJ
W
::J:
en
~
<C
:E
:E
~
en
"-
:E
<C
:: ex:
0) ~
e: 0
I
E ex:
Cll 0-
....
Ol
0 UJ
....
a.. en
0) ~
en
:J C
"t:l
e: Z
Cll
...J Ill(
.L: -J
Cij
a.. Lt)
en
"t:l W
....
0) ex:
.L:
0. ~
0)
.L: ~
en ii:
Q CJ)
We/) Q
~CtcZ
WWz<l:
~t::<...I
o~ ....
a::--- W
c. 3=
j i !
l ~ i
! J i
j .: ~
i! .'j 1
_ i ~
i ~ is
j- ~ t
jf i j
I; ~ .~
IJ~Jji
I I I
o
z
w
ffi
.....I
I
t
r
~
rrv.
~i
~j
~i
jl ~
il
~i
11
,.....
It
~
~
t:
J!
l
...
c
-
j
E
::l
c
Ii
I~
'f)" i~! lS ~
.1 &.! 8 J ti ..
-8!Z"'t:cZ.li
iJ~Sl"O:1
i)5~!1~!
lI!iJ!'i..tIl.c:
:€tl~li!,~
J ......lIi J II 0
1I!!-1iiii."~
!l"OoEJz,i]
2'i;lli~~
E.. -II
11 fJ !lilli
.E.8!l:<:~Jt~
"!J~ ;!i:€"'1~
f.S~!lJ:...i
oiis.s.,."!li
~~iji!l~j
I-! . .
1ii"S~
. =.li~ 0
~ Ii; S
i IJ~
1j ,.j-=
Sii~~
i~fj~
;~A!!
l~lg~
!!cZ"liS
! ... ~ 0
III"ilE:
J i~z
'2 JUC
Vtll~i:
lilijj
:j!
Iii
Jii!
J.!
II · Ii
19~
_illi
J'iil
e t:
1 i i .
j Jt!
jli~
....151-
~J.5&
2~
cC
I:
il.
Hul
Ii ti E
t -J~
.. ;I II ~
,ofJi
J1-
~!2
E!I
i"O ~
~I ,.
l~.li
i l~
. .
J.
;
tIl ,...
Q) .
I ~
~a:
Q-e
w.a '
Z 'as l!! \C
~!~
~i
'0 '0 ~
_ c:
55 .~
E 'S;
- .-
... 0
!
....
a
It
....
~
oC
~
.1
!::
Q.,
c(
IE
CD
o
Z
c(
......
t-
W
;:
Q
Z
c(
CD
ex:
w
&
~
Q
w
t-
O
W
t-
O
a:
0..
<0
W
a::
::)
"
-
u..
.
.
..=c:::r_=._.s=S
I . .
I
J ~.
\:;-, 16
~, "-
\~ ""
~,
~,
"
""
~-830.
,"-""
~
~ \1 Q
~ C~~
---.;0L A '-z ~3 r---
( \~\ ()
~ ,,-"," 'l~""__-"
1"".) ,)
-----....,
....--
1
I Miles
t
1,000 500 0
t-o-t.............
1,000
I
2;000
I
3,000
I
4,000
I
5,000
I
6.000
I
7,000
(Feet
1 :24,000
Source: National Wetland Inventory - US Department of Interior, USGS Topographic Quadrangle
McKenna Well Ten Year Time of Travel Zone and DWSMA
0.2
,
o
0.2 Mil.
McKenna Well Ten Year Time of Travel Zone and DWSMA
Shakopee Mdwakanton
Sioux Comnunity
~
.~.
....'
D 2lIO' __ ........ntZ-
. ......... -
-'n V..rllmoof T......Z-
D IlIInIdng_ Supply ","-11IOI1I_
SocIon
D 1HboI__
_ DIok u...._ PIDt 258220010
E.. ... SMIC SW1l4of swmof NE1I4of - 22
.".'. CIIIII_ P1D11259220012
-.. PIlla Pm 251220012
c.. llhIplInI of.. La'" PIDlJ 258220040
,.,,_ PIDlJ 2512_2
~E
T115N R22W Section 22
~ frem MItropo.... COWICII1997 Aerlll PhoIOCJllphy
Prollctlon z.nos ltam MN-OOH, 2000 S"'-Roglonli Modli
,tI projectiOnl.,. UTM Zone 15, NAD 83
Mlpby BlASC Land Cop........, M..2000
t-bte: Nuni>ets refer ID
description of DWSMA bolndaries,
Reference Direction Section Number Owner Location
Number T115N R22W Section 22
I West to East NE uarter of22 SMSC T115N R22W Section 22 SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 ofNE 1/4
2 North to South NE uarter of22 SMSC T115N R22W Section 22 SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of NE 1/4
3 West to East Border between SE SMSC and Border between SE and NE quarter of 22, Northern border
and NE uarter of22 Richard McKenna of Richard McKenna ro
4 North to South SE quarter of 22 Richard McKenna Property boundary between two parcels owned by Richard
McKenna
5 West to East SE quarter of22 Scott County Intersection of Richard McKenna property boundaries and
McKenna Road
6 North to South SE uarter of22 Scott Coun McKenna Road to Coun Road 42
7 East to West SE quarter of22 Scott County County Road 42 to eastern boundary of parcel 42-6
(She erd of the Lake Church
8 South to North SE uarter of 22 She herd of the Lake Eastern bounda of arcel42-6 (Eu ene Berens)
9 South to North SE quarter of 22 and Scott County McKenna Road from NE quarter of parcel 42-6 to
NE quarter of 22 NE quarter ofTlI SN R22W Section 22
SW 1/40fSW 1/40fNE 1/4
McKenna DWSMA Boundary Description
FIGURE 7 SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
MCKENNA WELL DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREA
. .."'.~_..,~---,."..__.+_."-__.,..__~..~......._...,'___________.~.~_...._""~"~_"'''~~_~____'__'_.__.~_...~....."'M....,_..".~u"_
o
o
..-
~
o
I
Ln
M
Ln
C\I
.....
=I:t:
<c
a..
Cil
0)
..c
(/')
~
CO
.c E
'ftiE
c.. ::J
en(/')
~E
CI) CO
.c....
CoOl
CI) 0
.c ....
cna..
0)
tJl
::::>
"0
c:
CO
...J
C\I C\I ..- M M M M M ..- ..- <i
.loI: .loI: .loI: .::i:. .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: a:l
~ (.) (J (.) (J (.) (.) (.) (.) (J (J .- g
0 0 0 N N C\I C\I N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 ==
...J ::J ::J
I I I I I I I I I I 0 0
..- ..- ..- ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,....
1:
CD tJl C'?
"tl :!::: "It CO "It 0 LO LO LO CO CO
c: 0 0 "It
'iij :::> 00 ..- Ln 00 ~ .:;t .:;t M M .:;t
CD
0:::
....
0 0
0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO :;::;
u:: ..... 0 00 C\I 0) 0 0 0 0 0 M .... CO
CO CO CO Ln M M ,... Ln 0 C\I 0 0 Ln Ln 0 0 0 0 ,... 0 0::: M 0 0 ~ C\I ~
"0 ::l 0 CO "': ~ Ln ~ 0 C\I. Ln ~ III Ln "': ...... 0 0 Ln 0). l{) 0 C\I I': ~ ..- "'= C\I
c: 0- cO 00 ,.... ..- Ln 0) l{) "It 0 0 C\I C\I cD ci r-: ..- u:: CO 0 0 0 0 0 0
::l (/') 0 C\I M ,.... C\I ..... ..... ..- C\I C\I C\I N 0) CO M M ~
0 LL. ~
.... <i
C)
LL. Cl :c ~
c:
(/') 32 CD 0 0 "It CO 0) ,... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol CO 0 N 0 C\I
... "0 0 0 L() Ln ,... M Ln 0 00 g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c: - 00 N 0 0 0
~ CO ::l 0 L() N "':. CO 0 "': 0 N III LO LO 0 0 0 ~ :Q 0 N 0). 0 00. III
c. 13 LO L() 0 cD 0 LO
CD c1 .5 ci r-: r-: N l{) r-: ,... l{) a; ..... ..... l{) l{) cD ci r-: M ::l LL. N r-: M 0
> ~ ,... N ..... ..... ~ Ln L() CO CO ~ "It 0) <0 CO a:l 0) C"') <0 0
- ..... ~ C"') N ,...
0 :) 0
-- c:
.loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI: .loI:
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... ~
en CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
~ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. <0 Ln M <0 0
~ CO 0 Ln ..- 0
Ol Ol .!2> 0> .!2> Ol Ol ~ C"! It:!
..... C\I C\I -- -- C"') ..... M -- -- -- ..... ..... 0) 0 It':i o:i
Q) ::J ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l C\I .... ,... ..... C"')
...J ,.... ..... (.) "It ..... CO
+ + + + + + + <i
~ "It .:;t C"') M C\I C\I
0)
0> M C"') ,... 00 C\I
Ol 0) Ol CO 0 ..- ,....
.!: CD c: CD CD - 00 0 ,... N 0 C\I
tJl .... .... .... 0 C\I 0
J2 CO ::l :;:::; ::J ::l ..,; ..- 0 N
tJl ..- ..... ..... ..- ~ ..... M N C\I C"') M C\I N 0 cri cD M
'S ..c :a 'x :a :a LL ~ l{) <0
c.. ,... C"') ,... L() L() 0)
a:l 0) ~ C"') <0 ..- N
.....
>-
:c
en E
c: - 0)
... 0 III III
0) E - Q) III
.- .... E 0) > Ol 0> Ol c: <i
c: CD Ol > ~ .... .!: .!: .!: 0 --
CD - 0 c: 0) 0) 'c 1ii
() c: () - M III III III .loI: 16 :;::;
0) '> .- 1: :::J ::J ::l .0) -0) c: ::::> :;::; c:
III () -- ~ III 0. 0) 0 0 0 ii:
c: c: - c: 0)
III .... ..... .9 Ol () I I I :0 .2
CD c: .$ .- - c: 0 0 0) >- CD "0 tij tij
c: - .... .... .... - .- E 0) .!: :2 'Ci)
.s 0 c: CD ~ Ol 'iij ..c 0 0 0 III III CD .... ~ '0 .~
:;::; "0 .... .- c: c: 0 .loI: () () III
u: CO CD CO c: ::J ::J 'c 'c 'c ~ ~ 0 (.) CD .loI: ...
0) ... () c: () '> Z 0 CD 0) 0) 0 -- ~ CD c:: ... CD 0)
en ~ .0 0) ~ ~ >- (/') (/') (/') e ... I .loI: III ~ CO E E
::> 0) c: 0. "0 ... CD C ::::> -- a..
.2 ~ CD ~ ~ c: 'Ci) E E
(j) "0 Jg c: CD .- C (J tij CO en
15 () 0 "0 E CD 0) E c: (J a:l CD ::J c: 0 0
c: > 0) CD ... ... 0 :;::; .- 0)
::l I- 0) iij 32 CO 0 "0 "0 0 0 (/') c: 0 0 0 () ()
!l. Ol 0> .... ~ 'Ci) (/') ..c (.) c: c: 'c 'c CD tij a.. '0
.!: c: 0 en ~ c: 0) CD 0) 0) 0 :;::; Q) ..c
iij .> .c .... <i 0. 0. (/') (/') c: 0>
<i CD 0 CO ~ 0) CD a.. 0) c:: I
() 'x ~ (/') 'c ... (/') "0 "0 "0 CD
~ W ... 0) .Q ...J .E c: a.. III
>- 0 (/') c: ::::>
'c 0)
CD (/') "0
(/') CD
X
~
c: I I
c: 0 "It <i co
CO :;:::
c: CO I tij ..... N C"') - - ro
c: <i en () 0 W WLLC) ~ ...J ~ Z 0 a.. .- .- - "0 g 0 "0
Ol 0 0 0 ==
.$ 'Ci) I- ...J' ....J ...J :::J :::J I-
Ci5 0) I II 0 0
0 i I
-.-.........-.......---,
L()
o
o
~
N
.....
Cl
o
~
0)
c:
E
CO
...
Ol
e
a..
0)
en
::J
"0
c:
CO
...J
..c:
-
CO
a..
III
"0
....
0)
..c
0.
0)
..c
(/')
t-
W
W
~
en
~
<I:
:E
:E
::)
en
.........
:i
<C
a:
to
o
a:
0-
LU
C/)
::)
o
Z
<C
....I
II)
LU
a::
::)
to
u:
rn ,...
I ... . J t i~ I g . . .: . . ~1: ~a: ~ I:
.3 . 1] ! JiJ il~~g _z
C ~ - 'G cO i -
en c ~I
: ~ '" ~ -3~:"~-I,.zJi! sij;:; 11&
. J J ,. .. Ii .
WCI) Q 1 .! tliSI'O:! WWj "i.! ;
i .. ;!tI:
:I I l J S-I
. .j.s",Wa: ij!Jj i ! g
0 j " :i$ I;z <) .. i'i
I-a:CZ J: . Jl !~l u;
~ :€
Z g J : il=ff!~t !!~i.::! [0.: ~ ~ ~ w~
fdUJz<S: c " J " . cao. JII! J';j- """ Z 'CCl ~ \C
. ~ i c i:lf~ .
w :€ . \sif!JS~ dI.'s . lljJ/
c j : :: .i. I f~1 """ - tll-
~l<<<t...l ffi J . c ::l'O{ J ~I J~5:1 ~i -I 1
;r :; ~ e . 0
! !.I sIII~ e W .!j- ~ .~
O~ t- - Ii ! Ii ljjgj 1 i I.
.. j :I : Ijf!llii f I! '0 '0 ~
t%: W ..J J ..! .. tZ ~ !Ji! i'O I
E ~ !! .i t 1<1=.l! f !. 10 ~ - 5
a. ~ JI"; :i .l!! ;."-31 ;11 i ilt~ I i I ~ '0
I~ Ii gll!:.::;; i J 0 '>
~it~ imAlI1 11~ - is
...
I I I ~!!iltl~! ill ij !J.el i ~ !
J. .1
.
...
.
..
Q.
<C
:IE'
CD
c
Z
<C
..J
~
UJ
~
C
z
<C
U)
a:
w
R..'.'.'.:.:
~.
m
11..1
~
o
w
I-
o
a:
0-
CD
W
cr::
~
"
iI:
-<B
fVj
1,000 &10 0
...................
1,000
I
2;000
I
3.000
I
4.000
I
5.000
I
8.000
I
7,000
I Feet
t
1 :24,000
Source: National Wetland Inventory - US Department of Interior, USGS Topographic Quadrangle
McKenna Well Ten Year Time of Travel Zone and DWSMA
0.2
o
0.2 Illes
McKenna Well Ten Year Time of Travel Zone and DWSMA
Shakopee Mdwakamon
Sioux Canmmity
~
.\iW.
'e ,,'
D 2lIO' Innor w.m-d M.........nlZone
. ........ w.a
Ten Yeo.lIIM ofT.....Zane
o DrInIdng_S...,pIy ~mont_
-
11I1bII--
DIck M"'n.. PIDlI2Il823lO10
SMSC swm of swm of NE1I4 of _on 22
>".'Y CMlI Mcd_ P1Cll12!18220012
RIchonI PIlI.. PICllI25122ll012
".. lihIpInI of... ~"PlllU5l220040
_po 251122DCM2
N
~E
T115N R22W Section 22
00Cl from MItropolten Cotnci11997 Aerilll PmtDtrlPhy
ProlldiDn ZoMS ham 1fi.DOH, 2000 sw-Regtonlll Model
/ill pRljectionl ere UTM Zone 15. NAO 83
Mop by SIASC Ltnd Clop....... MlI\'2000
lIble: NLntlers refer to
description of DWSMA bou'1daries.
Reference Direction Section Number Owner Location
Number Tl15N R22W Section 22
I West to East NE uarterof22 SMSC T\ 15N R22W Section 22 SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of NE 1/4
2 North to South NE uarterof22 SMSC T\ 15N R22W Section 22 SW 1/4 ofSW 1/4 ofNE 1/4
3 West to East Border between SE SMSC and Border between SE and NE quarter of22, Northern border
and NE uarter of 22 Richard McKenna of Richard McKenna ro
4 North to South SE quarter of 22 Richard McKenna Property boundary between two parcels owned by Richard
McKenna
5 West to East SE quarter of22 Scott County Intersection of Richard McKenna property boundaries and
McKenna Road
6 North to South SE uarter of 22 Scott Coun McKenna Road to Coun Road 42
7 East to West SE quarter of 22 Scott County County Road 42 to eastern boundary of parcel 42-6
(She herd of the Lake Church
8 South to North SE uarter of 22 She herd of the Lake Eastern bounda of reel 42-6 (Eu ene Berens)
9 South to North SE quarter of 22 and Scott County McKenna Road from NE quarter of parcel 42-6 to
NE quarter of 22 NE quarter of T115N R22W Section 22
SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 ofNE 1/4
McKenna DWSMA Boundary Description
FIGURE 7 SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
MCKENNA WELL DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREA
~'-'~-""-'~-"""""--'~'--------~'~-'"'-~""'''--'~-'~''<-~".,...
fll~1 CONSULTING
GROUP,
I N C.
Transportation + Civil + Structural + Environmental + Planning + Traffic + Landscape Architecture + Parking
SRF No. 0055266
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
TO: Ward Isaacson
POPE ASSOCIATES
FROM: Carla Stueve, P.E., PTOE, Associate
Carolyn Brown, Engineer
DATE: January 13,2005
SUBJECT: SHEPARD'S P A rn DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
Introduction
As you requested, we have completed a traffic study for the proposed Shepard's Path
development located in the northwest quadrant of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 in the City of Prior
Lake (see Figure 1: Project Location). The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic
impacts on the adjacent roadway system related to the proposed development. This traffic study
includes an a.m. and p.m. peak hour operations analysis for existing and future no buildlbuild
conditions. In addition, the study includes a noise and air quality analysis for the proposed
development.
Existing Conditions
To detennine how traffic is currently operating in the study area, traffic operations for existing
conditions were analyzed at the following key intersections:
. CSAH 42 and CSAH 83
. CSAH 42 and McKenna Road
. CSAH 42 and CSAH 21
Current traffic controls includes traffic signals at intersections of the CSAH 42/CSAH 83 and
CSAH 42/CSAH 21. The intersection ofCSAH 42/McKenna Road currently operates with side-
street stop control. Current peak hour turning movement counts were collected at the
intersection of CSAH 42/CSAH 83. Existing traffic counts for the remaining key intersections
were obtained from previous studies. The existing peak hour traffic volumes, geometries and
traffic controls for the key intersections are shown in Figure 2.
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
Telephone (763) 475-0010 + Fax (763) 475-2429 + htto://www.srfconsulting.com
An Equal Opportunity Employer
--.......------ ~'-,..,--,.._--,.--"._>~-..-.....,.~-_r
~
-
~............~!!)
----~~
-.~:~,~",.
'-
.......-.
------
-~~.i--
i
I
i
~I
~'
~I
,\
_~..___.~ ~ I
, _J~~~
.." \" __j I,
." . " " ~I
m. "." ,-,,"" ~
""~~
f
"'---,
!
I
@!
i
I
i
!
I
I
i
~I
1\
I
"
,
I
;
I
i
i
",I
,,'
.:-..
Prior Lake
Indian Reselvation
@
i
!
1
~
d
).
,
PRIOR LAKE
2000 POP. 15,917
i \
. ,
\<:Ip
"
"~
-,
",
...."
,
"-
\
'......, '~~ \"
,
""-~
'"
ING LAKE .r:::-.
\(f-~~,
ONAL PARK \\,\ ,\\
'~sdJ) \,~
/ "-
\
\
'.
~
nNe GIlOUP,lNC.
0045266
January 2005
Figure 1
~!
I ~l~
@Vr~
~J ~Jtr:
/ Jii '
,/-i (~y~.
. \i~~a 1)' (9) 40 J i tt i
,~~..)ij (166) 147 ~ co co co
11 ~/ (33) 14 =: ... r-- r--
\ 0AKE8 lA. .~
r-~, 11lL 1
I i
\ il
RLAKE' I
! J
(ii'\ ~I
~.\ @ I
~ '
~_/ >- 5\
I
~
(~)l
\
-~
i
i
!
;
'''~,~'~'
I
i
,,~, ,....,1 ",\
,,, ",,' '1 ",,' ,~~
o pOP. 15.917
!t,
'......
.~
""
"
-.---
-~--
\
~l
~I
!!!l
,--t
'"*' ~s:---,-
;! r- '--
;5/
~ ~hl"VE.S.
22lld1llE.~.
'"
':'.~ "'...; ~~
~ "~
,; r
ST. d
~
~ ". .".
~
@
HIlLS, r: ,~,
~~r;.~/tf I ~ -..~., "'~Q,..
tJ vii""'...It;';1fo \_, 'l;)
I ~\i I ,.~1>
~\ilill.l>j/ ;;:.
~,l"~, %~ I.
~ l"~ (jI.\ i \; __EH
Hl!.S _. ~ .~, \ \1 ~
/(:.BrVO'5 ~, . / S ~ (~EMU)CI( #"
,~~sm Uf'lA. ~li\~' #
liuil I! ~1.~' i~~/
{.....:: f 1;' ~ __0
~t~~~Il.~~..i/l}
!l:1 ~ :/l"'-""(J; i ~,
~'I JIJ~~~, ~
@ . I ST. ~ (" ~-7/rl1.J Reod's
70, EAlJCLAlRECIl. LC"O\~cu~_l/(l iii ~~ ~ ~'(j};)"l8rvl
~'\.. ,/ ~r -~)(( )j~ )')';\ a:__SR\83,FORESTC1:
~\i) ) ; !l!i,le I'" 4'/'0'. 1;-:::::=:::::::1' ,~/ ~(I/(""''--~\'\'
WlLOHOA8E<-~I~ '. WIND ClR.! iffJl}) f((r-- II; ?c\~\~
,,... ST. CIR. WI '[ <i2'J-, '" S',/I\'\( /(/Ij; ~ ././) ,~'i~f ~:l"'\'~'~~
l i . ""--.. F ,...\ (~{V~ / '1/;-' 72.\ ,~~,(
8ROOKlllDE. $j GLeN~~""Y jl~f ~I~. I ~IST'1 10~'.~\\\::::- :$. nil&. ~/'1>/~r1~\~
'.....t"'...-/ r;:> ,~..., 11O,~ \,~ amwil6~ ~I '*'-.'-
'-.,.~ ~ ~'.fI. (t~~<~.".~,~)'~ ~EAIJ:0 \~!(( (~2. d j\ut\-f' '!Ii ----rrr'~
~ ~ ~ \\ J2,~'\:' ~ · ).....-c:I'-i\\.~ --;-, \.,\ / '< i\
V.I)\)\) ~ /; il \g;;;II/!1;~~'<'~~~rr':~~ ~ i ~
\\/~,//.' '6 Cl ~I /j( ~j '(fr0/11' /\(~(-./~I -.::;/ ~
~;~\!2f;J),,~~/C~~~~~I,}ST' ~=e:..CIR. )~' 73.4\
'" 8 .. l \.1 ..!' ~;~/ ",,'d/\c\~! ~ 73.GATEWAYBT. --;
>- !< ?!+ ~ ~~'<=:..\'w~ U I:r'\O ~y;J{d......@, ~ \
CIR. ~~l~~~~"X" ~ /~"_iVII(( J)\) \~~L)~ ",,111.,) ~ tj! I
I. /. /V//"'" ,';':Y I ..//:-? u/T' i ".......- OTJi !/ / j.r~ ~
.. L C'j.' /A -::;::;- /' <::::! /-Y/ ~I r..... ~1lT: ~ ..!T:, '""Sf. '"
~"!.;J' /:?i/' Prior Lake /;;-fj"~1 'iilO'--r:JJJ!f7-'" ~~ 5 F
.. _'I CIR.. I I II' I long T.... ~-;::=:;\ ( ;;'/;/ f--g.j COUlAAllO ,ST."', ----L "- l l;
0:.' I Ii l---... ~! !C\\\ I 'f! I I:r>.: : ~- I ...- . 2
! i 11=-::,\ UO)I; I f(! L.L. 1Il!'< Pl.EASAIIT ST. 7 .,~, Iii ! i I
, \..1 \_ ! _y ....~:-... J e: .
~
i
@
L
In ~ 245 (86)
co ~ ~ ~ 151 (198)
.J ~~ L. f 112 (158)
~
R
~
LEGEND
XX = A.M, Peak Hour
(XX) =: P.M. Peak Hour
S =: Traffic Signal
. =: Side-Street Stop Control
fa
CoNsuLTINC G&OUI'.INC.
0045266
January 2005
EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
SHEPHERD'S PATH TRAFFIC STUDY
Pope Associates
Figure 2
^..o-.,_.._....~.,..,...._,._,.___....~____~._____...,_u,~._"~~,.~~_.,,._.^"',..,-,--,.,.,-
Ward Isaacson
-4-
January 13, 2005
An a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic operations analysis was conducted for each of the key
intersections to determine how traffic currently operates within the project area. The
unsignalized intersection was analyzed using the Highway Capacity Software and the signalized
intersections were analyzed using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. Capacity analysis results
identify a Level of Service (LOS), which indicates the quality of traffic flow through an
intersection. Intersections are given a ranking from LOS A through LOS F. LOS A indicates the
best traffic operation, with vehicles experiencing minimal delays. LOS F indicates an
intersection where demand exceeds capacity, or a breakdown of traffic flow. LOS A through D
are generally considered acceptable by drivers. LOS E indicates that an intersection is operating
at, or very near its capacity and that vehicles experience substantial delays.
For the analysis of side-street stop controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to
providing an estimate for the level of service of the side-street approach. The traffic operations
at an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control can be described in two ways. First,
consideration is given to the overall intersection level of service. This takes into account the
total volume entering into the intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these
volumes. Second, it is also important to consider the level of service on the side-street approach.
Since the mainline does not have to stop at an unsignalized intersection that has side-street stop
control, the majority of intersection delay can be attributed to the side-street approaches. It is
typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay
(poor levels of service) on the side-street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level
of service during the peak hour periods.
The analysis results in Table 1 indicate that all key intersections currently operate at an overall
LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, with existing traffic controls and geometric
layout. It is important to note that existing signal timing, obtained from Scott County, was used
for the analysis of the signalized intersections.
Table 1
Existing Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
Level of Service Results
Intersection Level of Service
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
CSAH 42 and CSAH 83 C D
CSAH 42 and McKenna Road * AIB AlC
CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 B C
* Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS.
Ward Isaacson
- 5 -
January 13, 2005
Future Roadway Improvements
Under existing conditions, CSAH 21 terminates as the south leg of the CSAH 42 intersection.
Prior to year 2009, Scott County plans to extend CSAH 21 north of CSAH 42 to CSAH 18 to
provide a more direct route to/from TH 169. The extension of CSAH 21 to CSAH 18 was
assumed for the analysis of future conditions. Future peak hour traffic volumes from the CSAH
21 EIS Traffic Study dated May 3, 2004 were used. Because the extension of CSAH 21 is
assumed to be completed in year 2009, the traffic volumes were modified so that no additional
development was assumed along the new roadway segment. As a result, only trips that would
initially divert to the new CSAH 21 connection from existing roadways are included in the year
2009 traffic forecast volumes.
Currently, McKenna Road extends south from CSAH 16 in the City of Shakopee, curving to the
east before intersecting with CSAH 42, west ofCSAH 21. The City plans to construct a (New)
McKenna Road that would continue straight north-south (without curving to the east),
intersecting with CSAH 42 west of the existing (Old) McKenna Road alignment. (Old)
McKenna Road would remain in-place with the construction of (New) McKenna Road. For the
analysis of future conditions, both the (Old) and (New) McKenna Roads were assumed.
Proposed Adjacent Developments
The proposed Jeffers Pond development located in the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42 and
CSAH 21 was assumed as background traffic (no-build conditions) for this study. The proposed
development consists of a mix of residential, commercial and office uses, in addition to an
elementary school, fire station and a transit station. It was assumed that there would be one
access on CSAH 42, directly across from (Old) McKenna Road. This access is assumed to be
constructed as a 3/4-access (no left-turn out).
Two vacant parcels adjacent to Jeffers Pond were also assumed to be developed by year 2009.
West of Jeffers Pond, 100 single-family homes were assumed to be constructed. With the
construction of these single-family homes, the extension of Wilds Ridge to the north was
assumed. Wilds Ridge was assumed to intersect CSAH 42 opposite (New) McKenna Road,
which would be the primary access for the single-family home development. The vacant 60-acre
parcel in the southeast quadrant of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 was also assumed to be developed as
a business office park. One access to this development was assumed along CSAH 21 south of
CSAH 42.
Year 2009 No Build Conditions
Traffic forecasts for no build conditions were developed for year 2009. In order to account for
the growth of background traffic volumes for future conditions, a five percent annual growth rate
was applied to traffic volumes on CSAH 42, CSAH 21 and McKenna Road. This growth rate
was developed based on a review of historical growth in the area and the forecast ADTs shown
in the CSAH 21EIS Traffic Study.
--..-.....-..__.~-".,...- ,,- .. ._-*--"."."......".._-~.,--..,..~-_."......-..,_._-'-_.._".._.._.._""'",~.,.~~'"--_..~,-~---_._-~-"...,~-
Ward Isaacson
-6-
January 13, 2005
In addition to background growth in the area, trips from the proposed adjacent developments
were included in the year 2009 no build traffic volumes. Trip generation estimates for the a.m.
and p.m. peak hours and on a daily basis were estimated for the adjacent developments based on
land use type and size using the 2003 ITE Trip Generation Reports. The trip generation results
for these developments are displayed in Tables 2 and 3. The combination of background traffic
and trips generated by anticipated adjacent development resulted in the year 2009 no build traffic
volumes shown in Figure 3.
Table 2
Trip Generation Estimates - Jeffers Pond Development
Land Use Size Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Trips In Out In Out
Jeffers North PUD
Residential Condos 114 units 668 9 42 41 20
General Office 174,290 SQ. ft. 1,919 238 32 44 224
Retail tl) 265,845 SQ. ft. 10,015 103 66 269 343
Drive-In Bank tl) 14,200 SQ. ft. 2,975 83 66 276 276
High-Turnover Restaurant tl) 28,700 SQ. ft. 3.102 146 135 162 104
Subtotal 18,679 579 341 792 967
Deanovic Property
Single-Family Homes 78 units 746 15 44 50 28
Townhomes 124 units 727 9 45 45 22
Senior Rental Townhomes 47 units 174 4 6 7 5
Senior Rental Apartments 204 units 710 7 9 14 9
Trail Parking 28 spaces n/a 14 14 14 14
Transit Station 40 spaces 180 24 6 6 20
Subtotal 2,537 73 124 136 98
Wensmann Property
Single-Family Homes 39 units 373 7 22 25 14
Townhomes 87 units 510 7 32 31 16
Elementary School 750 students 765 128 89 22 26
Fire Station tll) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Trail Parking 14 spaces n/a 7 7 7 7
Subtotal 1,648 149 150 85 63
GRAND TOTAL 22,864 801 615 1,013 1,128
Notes:
(1) Includes a 15 percent multi-purpose trip reduction.
(2) Trips generated by the fire station are assumed to be negligible.
..... .......-....--,.-----'.............--...---..............
Ward Isaacson
- 7 -
January 13, 2005
Table 3
Trip Generation Estimates - Other Adjacent Developments
Land Use Size Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Trips In Out In Out
Single Family Homes 100 units 957 19 56 65 36
Business Office Park ~I) 588.06 ksf 6,538 858 106 115 705
1)
Assumes 45 acres of developable land and a floor area ratio of 0.30.
To determine how well the existing and future roadway system will accommodate the year 2009
no build traffic forecasts, an a.m. and p.m. peak hour operations analysis was conducted.
Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Software and the
signalized intersections were analyzed using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. SRF recently
completed an Updated Jeffers Pond Traffic Study dated September 14, 2004, which included
various recommended intersection improvements. These improvements were assumed as
baseline no build improvements. These improvements are shown in Figure 3 and include:
. Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of CSAH 42/(New) McKenna Road.
. Construction of a 3/4-intersection at CSAH 42/(Old) McKenna Road, to allow right-in/right-
out only and left-in for westbound vehicles.
The analysis results in Table 4 indicate that all key intersections will operate at acceptable
overall levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under year 2009 no build
conditions, with the assumed base intersection improvements.
Table 4
Year 2009 No-Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
Level of Service Results
Intersection Level of Service
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
CSAH 42 and CSAH 83 C D
CSAH 42 and (New) McKenna Road A B
CSAH 42 and (Old) McKenna Road * AlA A/B
CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 C D
* Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS.
<_...."~~.._---~ --_..~"--''''"'''''.'''''-''.''--'-''''~''.'.'^'-""'~----r
~~~ ,.: i--...J
~ \\\~l()f':
I ~I~ FOX ~~ ......
@~~~~ /f'
~I /~~ ~~,~\
7 i;f?~ :r-~.~~
~.-l 'I/MYs~ o.ii ",.\ 5" 5" it)
~~/ \ ![l LaWf ,.,'":~ !!1 ~ e
\\~ I}} 0Ii. "". 0 LO
r~~. " ~~ JOIN
~ r ..
CW<ES LA. --. I 4-
) ,01. 101. ~,' (25) 50-1
1 (725) 670 ~
OR LAKE' il \J>y (30) 25 =; ~ 0 ~
00 POP. 15,917 1
\ ."
, l\!1
1':'.',.\ ~
/.
/.
ElltJ
140th ST.
a~. ';'./~\ Ji/.-' ..~' ". rfi/
~~ ,,\ I J LJ.-.--.?,
\:_~\" ~-~~''''' Pl.,^.'" \ )
'\\". 't-~"'~'I' b~ '''-Sll/
\~~,
'".
h_'h
-.:,~,
~~
~.
11". DEVIN LA..
120. HAMPTON LA.
'2,. YORKIIHIRf LA.
122. PRESTON LA
123. DERIrf LA.
@
L
o LO 0 ~ 375 (260)
.....C')'<;I"
C\l N ~ 225 (330)
j~~L. F205(350)
(10) 50 -' ~tti
(260) 255 -.. I
-.. 000
(40) 20 -. :.~~
OLOLO
'<;I".....LO
-~~
---,'_--
",: -----r--____ '"
.q. i -- F
Z,' I ~-a----
3;'. I -r' -'-
~ ~ I
~. ~ I ~ldA'U
~. II!
fJ. fl
'5;: f"
.,.
~.
l:
~"'<:
.....0
'/'
~
. i
%\ o/'o\$~;
\ "",}-~ ~~
! ') ",/
___J ,..$ J 1< .
\01 ,{h. /'11 ,I a .
1':;/ . '- "/Ic- - .
);~~Ik~rn"~ll '"
l?d[~~) III
(<~ Wildt
\\'~'~ ,j~
~i /
~r
1
'",
i
I
1
i
"I
,.. I '
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~ I, .
"", !? :
,"",,_ I
.
,. .,
~l TR. ,,~~.., ,,;'"
SWEETORASS4\.\'~Y
~ ~\ I
~~ 9
~ 11 I
j: (/ @ ~
@
'.,
Prior Lake
Indian Reservation
@
L 70 (30)
::: 490 (775)
.. 15 (50)
1i
LEGEND
XX =A.M. Peak Hour
- (XX) = P.M. Peak Hour
S = Traffic Signal
. = Side-Street Stop Control
"
~
CoNSUl.TINe CROUP.1NC
YEAR 2009 NO BUILD PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FORECASTS
SHEPHERD'S PATH TRAFFIC STUDY
Pope Associates
Figure 3
0045266
January 2005
Ward Isaacson
- 9 -
January 13, 2005
Proposed Development
The proposed development is to be constructed in the northwest quadrant of CSAH 42 and
CSAH 21. As shown in Figure 4, the proposed development consists of senior housing, a fitness
center, daycare, office, community center, and retail. No new access onto CSAH 42 is proposed
for this development. Full access to the site would be provided at CSAH 42/(New) McKenna
Road. In addition, a 3/4-intersection access would be provided at CSAH 42/(Old) McKenna
Road. This access would allow right-inlright-out only from this development, which is
consistent with the recommendations in the Updated Jefftrs Pond Traffic Study.
An additional access to the site was also assumed on CSAH 21, north ofCSAH 42. This access
would be developed by the extension of Thunderbird Circle from the east. Although this
roadway extension is not shown on the current site plan, this access was assumed in the analysis.
Scott County's current access spacing guidelines indicate that one-quarter mile spacing is desired
between access points along County roadways and one~halfmile spacing of traffic signals will be
preserved where possible. Since it is assumed that the access to this development would be
approximately one-quarter mile north of CSAH 42, we assumed this access would be restricted
to right-inlright-out movements.
Traffic Forecasts
The proposed development is expected to be completed by year 2008. Traffic forecasts were
developed for year 2009 (one year after construction). These forecast volumes include the
adjacent development trips and four percent yearly background growth, plus the estimated trips
generated by the proposed development. Trip generation estimates for the a.m. and p.m. peak
hours and on a daily basis were calculated for the proposed development based on trip generation
rates from the 2003 ITE Trip Generation Reports. Table 5 displays a sUmmary of the trip
generation calculations.
In addition to the uses shown in Table 5, a 30,000 square-foot Town Center/Commons area is
also proposed as part of the development. This is not reflected in the table, since no new trips
were generated for this use. It is expected that the majority of the trips to this area would be
made internally from the residents.
A 15 percent multi-use reduction was included in the trip generation estimates for the proposed
fitness center and retail use. The multi-use reduction accounts for internal trips that are made
using the on-site roadway system between the commercial and residential uses and are subtracted
from the trip generation estimates. In addition, a 25 percent pass-by trip reduction was applied to
the through traffic volumes on CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 for the proposed retail use. This
reduction accounts for vehicles already on either road that will stop at the site. Since these
vehicles would already be using the roadway, they are not considered to be new trips. These
trips are subtracted from the through volumes, but are accounted for entering and leaving the
site.
~
c;::r
l1_-..:Q
~
D
<"'
---...--or --- -~--..-.~
'OI:t
e
::s
.~
u:
:c::
0:::(
-J
0..
~
Ci)
fa
CI)
o
0..
o
g:
>-
a
=>
~
en
U
u::
I..L.
~
~
:I:
!:;( en
a.: Q)
enro
0"[5
c:t:: 0
w ~
:I:<(
c.. Q)
UJe.
:I: 0
enc..
i.~.
!l
11
o
c
"
5
ii:
"
o
U
'"
o
o
",'"
",e:-
N..
"'''
g:ij
0...,
Ward Isaacson
- 11 -
January 13, 2005
Table 5
Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use Size(l) Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Trips In Out In Out
Senior Independent Living 80 Units 162 3 2 7 6
(Congregate Care)
Senior Assisted Living 64 Units 176 8 3 9 9
Skilled Nursing (Nursing Home) 80 Units 190 10 4 6 12
Senior Adult Housing 253 Units 939 20 30 41 24
Fitness Center(Z) 25 KSF 700 11 15 44 42
Daycare 5.5 KSF 436 37 33 34 38
Office 5.5 KSF 61 8 1 1 7
Youth Center (Community Center) 5.5 KSF 126 5 3 3 6
Retreat Center (Community Center) 3.5 KSF 80 3 2 2 4
General Retail~ll) 3.6 Acres~3) 1431 21 13 60 65
Totals 4,301 126 106 207 213
Notes:
(I) KSF denotes 1,000 square feet
(2) Includes a 15 percent multi-use trip reduction.
(3) Acres were converted to square-footage using a floor-area ratio (FAR) of 0.25.
The directional trip distribution for the proposed site-generated trips is based on existing travel
patterns in the area, as well as the forecasted daily traffic volumes shown in the Scott County
CSAH 21 Scoping Study and CSAH 21 EIS Traffic Study. Figure 5 displays the directional
distribution percentages for the proposed development. As shown, the commercial/retail land
uses have a more local attraction than the residential/office land uses. The combination of
background traffic and trips generated by the proposed and adjacent developments resulted in the
year 2009 build traffic volumes shown in Figure 6.
Daily Forecast Volumes
Daily traffic volumes were developed from forecast turning movement volumes, with the
assumption that the p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts consist of ten percent of the daily traffic
volumes. Table 6 displays the daily forecast volumes for year 2009 no build and build
conditions.
Table 6
Year 2009 No Build and Build Daily Forecast Volumes
No Build Build
CSAH 42 west of (New) McKenna Road 17,500 17,700
CSAH 42 east ofCSAH 21 17,200 17,400
CSAH 21 north ofCSAH 42 24,200 24,600
CSAH 21 south of CSAH 42 25,900 26,300
__..,_"...~,,_..,___.__ ~,__,..~~___.______~~___-.......-....,'_~-.......~"_~_~...".._..._.~___..._'_'M'_,','~4.__'~_"_"'>'~_'_~"""~~'."'''~"~_~_"''___"_'._______~,__.,_,,_._
~
~
~
~
~
~I
!Iii
Ii:!
!' "
~
h:'
22M AIlE. S.
-
,,~'~"" ,~",>'~).~i"
'/ \ll
i
~
'-I aT
"" ..0) ~I..'e.~
,~, '.. '",'" '\,'. '\ ,,\ 1..-/. s,\ ~ ~~
/' ,,", ""' ... ... \",\ "'~" ';~.\ ,R-"( -
f/, ~\, "" ',\, I '.. \ ~~/'\
~ ..I .~'":eR ST. / ..... l-- 1
~ CROW DR. :=J ~---c: i ,; 50% \ ''<,.- - ~ .
d ~'Ir ~I ~~;) / ~,/ (30.~)./ ~ / ~
"I '". ",,,,,,,\,,<,,., '-'.<"<' /b .(J 1:;'-- ~ ",>'" "'<' ",,~~' r;:: 1~,Q)P'lk~<7LL ( ~
I "" " >e', I : i i, ~~~' I'
SWEETGRASS ~: ~~Ail .. ct~~~~ / I})
w. '1;\~ Ii! : \i I(R'~ )//j
elR ~' .~ :' (~~J() i~~
11 11 .~~) 150{
~:,' (/..-:-\ hp'l (150/0)
i,0 ~ I(
!4il
@ ~ 1~~
I r=---. e:'\ 1\1\ ~Iu.s I r- \ ~~"
[. I,~ 20010 _'./ II ~ >l. I --..<9" 'fe,
j'r--::. I( 1111.~) #t-F-Q~""ltf I~ .,,~ '
. ((( ((20%) @' .Ii ~ iJ 'i~;C\l'<. 91;' j'O
I ~I \~~~ \~~ ~I\ ! ~\i~~)~
;i:1~ FOX ,,(j/.."!l\.k\I. ~ '- (}j!~ I III ~ ~\~\i II $J/ t..,
[) ~l !\.sf;';--.....~ R~ j ~c;.'1P:;.. (1 r II! K u~Q) ~'t.\ \ '&~
Z~~..y-o 11z, Jeffet~ "'~~\ l!' y~ /u~ ~ \ -
f/;;\ \~ ~ o,.<>"2! ~ ) Pan: \ \;~\ ifi ~'3I: tIIU.S PKWY. I -a ~ 0 t\ \ \ ~
) /J /~) ,\~icii~\ '\.;, ~: \'\>'>) A.-= ~ I . -{ ~
1 ) /;~ "it %\ ~ \\(\\\ \~, /// II ~~5 I! v.:l CT. /S ~( i/-H'EMLOC
/(~ij-y~/~~, <...,/;r 'qp\".~~,~ \\\ ill. \~/ I ~(~~.VO,.:r ffi ai' ~~, EllJITERFlELD-J III ( elR.
M /" " .__u t .. ~ \,'~ \\. I ,~/ ~ et-~ LA. CT. i 1:::1\ ./
. La<< "'IV~ l1~lV ~ ........~~ 1'\ I? ~\ ~ %1) i a ~'\ Jh~~~
1\\" 'IIi 0""......... 6ii') ~ <:.)(. ~ /~
\ ":\-\ if) \ I Ii t;co,t,CH , ~ ,~;:..
Q\' '<"'2@ .J')\~ PRIOR LAKE III':#'\' r 7i- ~
i ,,~-------1 ~I,::TREE Ilf 8- Fe. '?Yfi1,~~~ )1;
'1 ES,.o--l--<> e>-/ J 2000 POP. 15,917 ~\~/~P' ""-0.-.../////1 ~
OAK "'" . 106. 101. I 150lc {Tj.p~'S1~ ~.~. /' -.....
\ " ,I/KOO ~ 0 ~ ~/7l/p ~ 0- !J i-.f) {~rr'\-;~~
I I r <<;.,'....... ,.---.!..\~ (35%) l,p;:~~Jr~8~ il~l.~ ~h
I .1 \ ~ ~,1' I ~~G '1 ,/.'.::=.__/ -' ro.,
I ~I v"'../' (sOUcY."!l\.'<J @,I . ST. .: ~0, ---~,f:0~
I ..........z:.. lIE ~ \..OfID'S \' \ ( '71( j\ \ \\h \ \-:::::-'1 I
\ I ~UlS' ~~.,~ : )\ctJ*~&~( ~ \~\ .~!Y:~~~
\ ~Il. 1"\) ~:~ \~ I ~\r /~\~ k~) I~r/"~:?\:\\<
\ ~ ~\'~.J!.!I i WltlO 'CtR.' i I/;,r---))I 1((;;"--- Iii. /~6>r. \~
~\\",,' WILo Hop.8ECIR~ ;W/#'/ '\ II J 15(1/(1 /II a)))) //i/(~/ \ ) ~ \
@ I ~I ~ ~r::::-, 'I '" lU,!, \ //1/ /~. ,///101---. '-./ ,'Tz"
154lh 8T. ,\ \g.J.__",:' F :\\\\ (~'S~P /~I//#/-rO....L T2:...i~)
~ KNQ" ~~ u.i MARSH ST. \!I \ \ \ ,~ ~I IIS/ Cl'''AH i' I
r- ...--. I l;.,.4".O::>- I ii: 'I ~..u \ \ \.....-- .. · I/~dll It
LEGEND I GLEN CIR.j DR.,..... I" \ '.. I, ~ \'i.ll.-:::::, aID n., ....~'" s
~ I 1; 'r.", \ ~ '. 70. ~\ ~\'\I.--"_" I '~c.':)"-
,~>~ N%.f;/~~fi?>:::2:~:." ~~-f,,:'\~ I EAU~ QV~ :'((( ((0) R\JtV
...tl- ~.I;b ~.I,~ ,II ......'..., .~~.,IOJ ~ \ .I \,;,\ ""1/1
, ~): "\\\ ""'-"', ~ ~JJ1 ...;.----;...o\\.~.. \ 1\
'" / 4il) ",1 ,'.",....., /!/t........ ..-.-~u"'"\\'~.,', III
C}~,~ / li,l) r:-?':Si\\\) /.1':' /::' "'-\~~~:-=))1((~:\'\';')))\)
/ " (I !:' III I' / ......,\ / /j II \ ,../.
Prior Lake
Indian Reservation
XX% = Residentialf Office
(XX%) = Commercialf Retail
g
DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION
SHEPHERD'S PATH TRAFFIC STUDY
Pope Associates
Figure 5
CoNsuLttNC GROUP. IHe
0045266
January 2005
0-
~
oR. '\,"\:. ~(~ \,~ '\ ~J
0;, 1'" .J ~~_._~"
_~ ',,>. "l:lrt-' (F".." 1'\..'/ \ I
-. "', ..-~.r"~lf \-1Jll)
, ~~';. ,-;--~. i 6~ '- /
L 55 (95) w, i
::: 540 (800)
.- 205 (220)
"\\} ,
~~
~
'---.
"'~...
"
I
i
@I
I
i
,
~
,
;
,
o
~
or-
119, DEVIN LA
120. HAMP'TON LA.
121, YORKSHIRE LA
122.. PRESTON LA
123. DERBY LA.
o
N
j
I
'>--
.fj.: ---------I'
:g,
S'
>(' .
:,' ~I
"',
.l:.
0'
U'
'e'
,..
l:
,
,
---------J
:/llo,~_
tFB. -----
Prior Lake
Indian Reservatfon
. \
~ TR. _,'
BWEETGRABS CO<. :5, \J~Y
W. ~j ~,QR. i
1>~
CIIt I'
: r~'
11;: l/ G\
,. v
"
, '.
,',
@
/
/
I
I' J?fT~ ~
!i ((,UIr,N/V. /~jJI:f .
\\ ~ S\l)~~O
, If) ".......'"
! ~I" ~" \.. " co \l) or-
I :t C5 FOX 11'1'- \,::::/ , ' ' NO>.....
@I ~~ 4~~ 11" i2~:g L 60 (135)
L5" ~----'-"Y""'- l ..... \l)..... ~
!!IIJ~\\\"--' ~""~--) j~~L. ~465 (555)
31 J \~\ \-~';,.,"""! ~
//;;./ l:f~) {"':""oa~, ~~ .- 170 (200)
n r/&1ysll;9 ,,-Ii ~" 0- 0- in (360) 265 J ~ i i r+
~ .. Ifl La~<< "'~ ~ '-'" ~ (470) 300 ~ I I I
\~~" ),) "'" "" ~ __ 0 LO 0
,,-,,, IJ/ \ \l) 0 0 .... (200) 240 ~ ~ ~ ~
~\l ~~ ,r/i ..... I !+r-.. .! ",.6 ... in ~ in
, ...\$)5-----/' ~ ~ I w #" '- M g ~ . ItGH11NQAU!
i cw<ESLA.~ oJ I' ~\ot~'t~.v,,:"_, ~~~
II \1, '08, '1lT. L' (60) 70 ... W'~/" ~ .~
-' 't -;L<@'/.S~/J1t/{{i' (,-;;::::~ /::
\ I \ (735) 675 =: ~-<~ /11/ l~tl!~, I~
I ~I v (30) 25 e 0 LO I ~ ~"J /f..----::::: ;\ V---" \ ~ >-
OR LAKE I 'i "-'<:, --. ,- ~ @ 1.? f/ 1ft L..~(<-;::::... ~~7;-~'-. '-:-2...
I lO 0 0 ~ /~''1 \D )1\ . ((<)J
00 POP. 15.917 I III ~ ~ t") IR. ~aJ_ i 1m '0< 'II \ ~'0}'larld
""'"" - ,'I: ;.-:=-\ \,,\" lliI \ \" r~./
l!l!, ~ f.(' t':~)(()j '~))) ,gJrF:';:,'-'~\ ... FOREST
S :E: ~\ ~,,\~, ~/~~"\\\\
I'IltD 1lORse~ '\. WIND '~IClR.) Iz///~-;.})) \~/ !t@! l' (')~~~~~
1_ ~ ! ,I @---.J ~ ~\\(,\ /(t/J}/ A/J{;9~-, v :r..\",'~C';" (
I 0 ~IICNOlLS~:~ ,MARSHI"', H \\\\ \ ~./:'/ ~J~/"'~~ T2..i!&? . ~~:\\'
BROOKSIDE 0 OtENClR.! JiDR./:.,~,,< \ '- i ~"'~\,\i\'./:'~/. .,lIP!. 'lit !'lc!oNO'\ON'S S
, .."......4-./ I ';>"'- ,~-....., 110...., \~-:-..uramwu~...."" ST ~,"o'\.
,~~ %.t'lj?""~, ~~\~ /EAU'O; \,"""" \'11 ((O'J flut\.E.~ 'ul~...,~
'11'- ';\0.. 7'~ l,'\ "~::,~'''L --. \..: \\\L_ \"Ei) ~l "
/~ Cl.~ <P'/ )\\ r;:;:;--;:.:;-., l \" ...-o""""CCi'-\\L.--=:::,,, "II ~I iii' -
)/~'\ '1" v ~/ ,) (?r'))" I 'y'""':"~~"" --",\ j'\\ I ;c:' r
/? )')' FREMONT!.f"/ 1;/ \\~/ Ii! ;"/..;3J~0 ,~v-- 'J7((F-"'~:,~J) wi ~ L'
(/ I I , ....:::.--- ,......-//,," .....t ,.-.-.... I . '.=.-r ~ ::l
YEAR 2009 BUILD TRAFFIC FORECASTS WITH ' ~- ,., /'
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
SHEPHERD'S PATH TRAFFIC STUDY
Pope Associates
/":::'\
/
/
;,
LEGEND
XX = A.M. Peak Hour
(XX) = P.M. Peak Hour
S = Traffic Signal
. = Side-Street Stop Control
.
Figure 6
CoNsut.nNc GROUP, INC.
0045266
January 2005
Ward Isaacson
- 14 -
January 13, 2005
Year 2009 Build Conditions
To determine how well the existing and future roadway system will accommodate the year 2009
build traffic forecasts, an a.m. and p.m. peak hour operations analysis was conducted.
Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Software and signalized
intersections were analyzed using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. Consistent with the no build
analysis, the intersection geometrics and traffic controls shown in Figure 3 were assumed for the
analysis. Results ofthe year 2009 build analysis are shown in Table 7.
Table 7
Year 2009 Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
Level of Service Results
Intersection Level of Service
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
CSAH 42 and CSAH 83 C D
CSAH 42 and (New) McKenna Road B B
CSAH 42 and (Old) McKenna Road * AIB AIB
CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 DeC) E(D)
CSAH 21 and proposed site access * AIB AlC
* Indicates an unsignalized intersection. The overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS.
() Level of service shown in parenthesis includes the installation of a northbound dualleft-tum lane
at CSAH 42/CSAH 21.
As shown in Table 7, the intersection of CSAH 42/CSAH 21 is expected to operate at an
unacceptable LOS E during the p.m. peak hour for build conditions with the existing geometrics
and traffic control. With the installation of a northbound dual left-turn lane at this intersection,
the level of service is expected to improve to an acceptable LOS D or better during the peak
periods. All other intersections are expected to operate at an overall acceptable LOS D or better
during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods with no additional improvements.
Due to Scott County's spacing guidelines, the results of the 2009 build analysis shown in Table 7
assume that access onto CSAH 21 would be constructed as a right-in/right-out only. For safety
purposes, we recommend that a southbound right-turn lane would be constructed on CSAH 21
for this access. Since the location of future local roadway access on the extension of CSAH 21
has not been determined, additional analysis was also completed to determine how this
intersection would operate if it was constructed as a full access. For safety purposes, left- and
right-turn lanes would be recommended on CSAH 21. With full, unsignalized access onto
CSAH 21 for this development, the proposed access is expected to operate at an overall
acceptable level of service. However, motorists on the side street will experience significant
delays during the peak periods due to the high volume of through traffic on CSAH 21. Two
lanes of approach are recommended for the eastbound approach, to provide a left-turn lane and a
right-turn lane. This will help reduce the delay on this approach, which will also provide
increased safety at this intersection. As parcels develop along the new extension of CSAH 21,
further discussions regarding access spacing and future traffic signals will need to take place
with County staff.
'---.-------r--~-.._.--..-'--..---...-...........-.....--..........--.....
Ward Isaacson
- 15 -
January 13, 2005
Site Circulation Review
A review of the site layout for the proposed development has been completed. Based on this
review, we offer the following comments to improve traffic operations and safety within the site:
. The trail crossing on (New) McKenna Road, north of CSAH 42, should be aligned to help
shorten the length of roadway that pedestrians use to cross. This will improve pedestrian
safety, which may be particularly important in a development planned for older adults, which
typically have slower walking speeds and reaction times.
. The driveway on the south side of the fitness center is suggested to be relocated to the north,
directly across from the access to the senior housing. This will provide a more direct
connection to the fitness center, daycare and office, and will help to consolidate the driveway
locations along (New) McKenna Road. However, as traffic volumes increase on this
roadway, the City may want to consider providing access on the north side ofthe site only.
. The intersection of (Old) McKenna Road and the proposed extension of Thunderbird Circle
should be realigned to provide a 90-degree intersection. South of this intersection, it is
recommended that the driveways on (Old) .McKenna Road for the youth center and the
Assisted LivinglMemory Care center be aligned directly across from each other.
. Generally on the site, the turning radii should be checked to verify that emergency vehicles,
such as fire trucks, can negotiate the turns. Specifically, this may be an issue on the east side
of the site on the circular roadway which provides access to the senior housing.
. Sufficient spacing should be provided for the retail driveway on (Old) McKenna Road, to
allow for adequate sight distance for vehicles turning to/from CSAH 42.
Traffic Noise
. Regulatory Framework
Traffic is a common source of noise in a suburban setting and is regulated in Minnesota by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) under Minnesota
Statute 116.07 Subdivisions 2 and 4. The MPCA is the governmental regulatory agency
responsible for implementing regulations controlling traffic noise in Minnesota. Minnesota
state noise standards have been established for daytime and nighttime periods. Minnesota
Statute 116.07, Subd. 2a. states that, excluding the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul,
municipal and county roads are exempt from state noise standards (with the exception of
roadways for which full control of access has been acquired). All the roads in the project
area are county or city roads; therefore they are exempt from state standards. For reference,
the State Standards are summarized in Table 8.
..... .._--~---.. _.......... ....--.....-......---'----r---...--------.--.-...---...---......
Ward Isaacson
- 16 -
January 13, 2005
Table 8
Minnesota State Noise Standards
MPCA State Noise Standards
Land Use Code Day (7 a.m. -10 p.m.) dBA Night (10 p.m. -7 a.m.)
dBA
Residential NAC-1 LIO of 65 Lso of 60 LIO of 55 Lso of 50
Commercial NAC-2 LIO of70 Lso of 65 LIO of 70 Lso of 65
Industrial NAC-3 LIO of 80 Lso of75 LIO of 80 Lso of75
Noise is defmed as any unwanted sound. Sound travels in a wave motion and produces a
sound pressure level. This sound pressure level is commonly measured in decibels. Decibels
(dB) represent the logarithmic increase in sound energy relative to a reference energy level.
To approximate the way that an average person hears sound, an adjustment, or weighting, of
the high- and low- pitched sounds is made. The adjusted sound levels are stated in units of
"A-weighted decibels" (dBA). In an outdoor setting, a sound increase of 3 dBA is barely
perceptible to the human ear, a 5 dBA increase is clearly noticeable, and a 10 dBA increase is
heard as twice as loud. For example, if the sound energy is doubled (e.g., the amount of
traffic doubles), there is a 3 dBA increase in noise, which is just barely noticeable to most
people. If traffic increases, producing 10 times the original sound energy level, then there is
a 10 dBA increase and it is perceived to be twice as loud.
In Minnesota, traffic noise impacts are evaluated by measuring and/or modeling the traffic
noise levels that are exceeded 10 percent and 50 percent of the time during the hours of the
day and/or night that have the heaviest traffic. These numbers are identified as the LIO and
Lso levels. For example, an LJO value of 65 dBA means that the noise level was equal to or
greater than 65 dBA during 10 percent of the measurement period (more than six minutes per
hour).
. Noise Analysis
The proposed project is located in a developing suburban setting with agricultural and
residential land uses surrounding the project site. High speed, high traffic roads such as
CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 are located adjacent to or in the vicinity ofthe project site.
A detailed noise analysis was completed to assess existing traffic noise levels in the project
area and to determine what effect the proposedproject will have on future noise levels, since
the proposed development will increase traffic volumes in the study area. Increases in traffic
can result in increased noise levels, which can be perceived as an annoyance by adjacent
residents. The noise analysis consisted of modeling noise levels at existing and proposed
residential areas within the project area using computer modeling.
- ..-...."_.....~...__..--_---<., ._-,."'_."...,-_....--.~~----,."'....------'!'...._-...._._-""""".-~."-"...__._",-,~~~-~_._~_.,..._........~-~_.~~--,~_._..._-,,.-'.,--~~~._,..".",..~,...._,."_.~_...,,---"._.------
Ward Isaacson
- 17 -
January 13, 2005
. Noise Modeling Methodology
Traffic noise impacts were assessed by modeling noise levels at "sensitive" receptor sites
(i.e., residences) likely to be most affected by changes in traffic volumes resulting from the
proposed project. Two noise modeling receptors (Rl and R4) were selected at existing
residential properties in the project area to represent those sites most sensitive to potential
project-related traffic noise impacts. Four additional modeling receptors (R2, R3, R5, and
R6) represent proposed residential sites within the Shepard's Path development. Figure 7
shows the modeled receptor sites. All receptor sites are classified within the definition of
State of Minnesota Noise Area Classification One (NAC-l, residential).
Noise modeling was completed using the noise prediction program "MINNOISE," a version
of the FHW A noise model "STAMINA" adapted by Mn/DOT and approved by the MPCA.
This model uses traffic volumes, traffic speed, vehicle classification, and the typical
characteristics of the roadway being analyzed. The computations for the model run to predict
noise levels were based on existing and projected 2009 No-Build and Build peak daytime
hour traffic volumes, traffic speeds, and vehicle classifications.
. Noise Modeling Results
Noise modeling results for existing (2004) conditions and for the year 2009 are presented in
Table 9. Daytime peak LIO and Lso noise levels are shown for the existing (2004) condition
and for year 2009 No-Build and Build conditions. Since State Standards do not apply to City
and County roadways in the project area, they are shown for comparison purposes only.
Table 9
Noise Modeling Results - Daytime Peak Hour
Modeled Existing Modeled 2009 Modeled 2009
Receptor (2004) No-Build Build
LlO Lso LIO Lso LlO Lso
Rl 57 49 58 50 58 50
R2 NA NA NA NA 63 58
R3 NA NA NA NA 66 61
R4 63 57 64 58 65 61
R5 NA NA NA NA 62 59
R6 NA NA NA NA 65 61
State Standards 65 60 65 60 65 60
- ----~---"'~-,---"._~..,--~~~-,."~._._-"..".,-,...,.._.,--_..._---,..,,-,._,.._.,-~-----"~--~--
i . r::::::::--. ~
I i~;:.~ \Q @
rr'1: {(( I/fr(~'\\) R4 f0 ~ II
15 \\' Ill) vI 1l5. CARRIAGECT. /A~\ ~
, II) \~~( ((Q))
,: ~~1lS ---~ ~., 1\'\
~ FOx .".,.~~.. ()I'
~ PIn._ '"--.- .~O". I () r\
\W~,~. RUN Y" $, VO'" \'1 Yfi
1lI1 (,,p-'\I\__, ~,,}Oa."'-~ __ \ Jeffe~:~\ i
~3) . /',/)!!J~@.~) ~.~~:~.' :S'~~\'JA ~~\ \~>~.
/,~)/f (=-' I "t..' ....(~ \'~?\\I\ \'~_J~>7'
~ 1m YSr' ..fo; 'fI>"'-J ~<'" \\\1,\ ~~/
~~ . r I L PINt; , .~ ,:--~ \\..
s+r ,,/ ,. a VIEW : VIEij;'. ~-~ ''-''',
1,1. " ~ ~
\"~ l} J Oft ''\ ~:: ~=:o ~ .\
~ I' "~ I~ 71. WAGON BR. erR.
~ '" r\ 78. QUINCY ST.
VlI\JlS _/ (OAKTREE 79. SUNFlSH'IR.
, OAKES LA~"":: -l I OR. ~: ~~NE. ~-)'<IT/' 1tfi
! ,106. lor. ! 106. MYSTIC VIEW ~f J''4J S~ llt.0 i' (,~.
i 1 ~ ~~-\ 107.MYSllCRlDGE I' ~f;' f/ ~~l!~:
gl 'V' ;.--~~~ I .~~~~ / (' )It ~
PRIOR LAKE' I ""( (8 . &@IQIID'S' /~. / \~V~ r
'-'- I~ Q TO EAUCUJRECIR L uI 1(1 I p,.
I IYtLOS ~" fox:;r' " \~QU ,I ~\') !lll \ \\"
I :.-~--,~ : r' 'TR. 15\\ \( )>- '~\'
II) ~~ \ ~i~ \1 ~~i I~(\ ~jj
LE G END WILD HoR~ "'~/ kj C, WIND SONll!I'1 ClR.) 1 /~ IIJf ~
~''<~' '. ';si((! II/U/ ))
" NOISE MODELING 1541h ST. . I ~~ Ii WII\ \ li(C..-:://'
'" · RECEPTOR I SF ,'9AYI:KNOU.s~ ~ I ~~: ST~I' ;r~\~\\\---_\G\BP ;:
BRooKSIDE~, GLEN C1R I ~ DR/::_..o I '" \' I::" \ at I~ - :pam"'"
, ~<3':_~../ / r....... ,-'S-~', 70.';\ \,~, -.I ",
.\ ,._~~~/~ 1.fi(Y'::'~', ~L:.~ \~ IEAu6J \:-1 f((( :((-':..~,
"\'\" \(!i> ~ ''';t /<,. \ \\ ..':;':;..' -'" ',e> I "" r-- $ ~ \ \ . '---- \,::.;71
'. ~ ~ / rJ':- ,,\\ '-:':--<'-..<' 7i.i;'.. -- C\~\\\.., .::-~, \\\\
~
RD.
" '''-'
, ,,'.
v'
q~
1
/Ar
J.
' ,
/'l'
~:
)
~
~
/1/
I
~
!
~
/~
'/
/
,',
2000 POP. 15,917
~
CoNSULTtNC GaOlll',lNC
0045266
January 2005
----~ ilL
---......~.
...'----.
-...--
--
~)
~
~
ci
0:
~
Z
~
:E
w
z
Ii:
'''';...
"~
'"
1 ",'" , :"
~
" V
','. .~
","...
"
',~'
, ,
\
I
~) ~/~)
't01 (~r7/j
,~ 'vii I
n Pik ~_,I
\ " I K=:.....-"')) I
/rl&a~! Ii!
~7~~L 1,/'
')1 f(jT,Q) )/"
<\~f}) J:l~~.~'
'\ \--.:-!s v.:::/'/
--... \/
,.....'.
I "
I
~I R5
I: ~.R6
Prior Lake
Indian Reservation
~
@
I
NOISE MODELING RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
SHEPHERD'S PATH TRAFFIC STUDY
Pope Associates
Figure 7
._.... .,... --~.."-_.~,.-'t-"--~"-'~~-~-------"--~------=~-'"---'"~.'-'"-._-,,-.," - __"-,_.,._<,~,_'._"N"",,,~___~",,~_,,,_,_,~_,.,, ......." .
Ward Isaacson
- 19-
January 13, 2005
. Results
Existing Residential Receptors (RI and R4)
The increases in background traffic volumes between existing and 2009 No-Build conditions
result in a predicted increase in modeled traffic noise levels of 1 dBA. Increases in traffic
noise between the 2009 No-Build and 2009 Build conditions range from 0 to 3 dBA.
Increases in noise of 3 dBA or less are imperceptible to most people in an outdoor setting.
Noise levels at the existing receptors would be within the state standards for the build
condition, except for the Lso for Receptor R4, which would be I dBA above the standard.
Proposed Residential Receptors (R2. R3. R5 and R6)
The traffic noise modeled for the proposed residential receptors within the Shepard's Path
development represent "worst case" conditions because no break in the line of sight between
CSAH 42 and the receptors was assumed. Proposed residential buildings 250 feet or more
from CSAH 42 (Receptors R2 and R5) are predicted to experience noise levels at or below
state standards. The residential buildings represented by Receptors R3 and R6 are
approximately 200 feet from the high speed roadway, and noise levels are predicted to be
slightly above state standards at these locations. However, if berms or other dense
landscaping are placed between the residences and the roadway, traffic noise could be
reduced.
. Conclusions
Construction of the proposed project will result in increases in noise of 0 to 3 dBA for
existing residences near the project area (comparing No-Build to Build levels). This increase
would be imperceptible to most people.
The roadways adjacent to the project are exempt from state noise standards; however, noise
levels at several of the proposed residences are predicted to be slightly above state standards.
Noise mitigation measures such as berms would lower the noise levels.
Air Quality
On a project level scale, carbon monoxide (CO) is the traffic-related pollutant of most concern in
the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Concentrations of CO are generally highest at intersections
with poor levels of service, due to the higher number of idling vehicles. The Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has established state standards (or maximum permissible
average concentrations) for CO of30 parts per million (ppm) for a I-hour period and 9 ppm for
an 8-hour period. The MPCA I-hour standard is more stringent than the federal standard of
35 ppm.
The analysis presented below includes modeling future CO concentrations at the project-area
intersection expected to have the worst air quality, CSAH 42 and CSAH 21.
Ward Isaacson
- 20 -
January 13, 2005
. Carbon Monoxide Modeling Methodology and Assumptions
Carbon monoxide concentrations near the intersection were predicted using forecasted traffic
volumes, proposed intersection geometries, optimized signal timing, and computer models,
including the U.S. EPA MOBILE6 emission model and the U.s. EPA CAL3QHC dispersion
model. MOBILE6-based emission factors used in this analysis were approved by the MPCA
in Fall 2004. The modeling assumptions used in this analysis are as follows:
Table 10
Carbon Monoxide Modeling Assumptions
Analysis Year: 2009
Cruising Speed: 55 miles per hour
Traffic Mix: National Default Values
Vehicle Age Distribution: Minnesota Distribution from Fall 2004
Wind Speed: 1 meter/second (3.3 feet/second)
Temperature: 16 to 38 degrees Fahrenheit daily
Surface RoughnesstlJ: 108 centimeters (42.5 inches)
Stability Classt.tJ: D
Inspection Maintenance: No
Oxygenated Fuel: Ethanol with 2.7% Oxygen Content by Weight
8-Hour Persistence Factor(3): 0.7
Wind Direction: 36 directions at 10 degree increments
Notes:
The Surface Roughness, Stability Class and 8-Hour Persistence Factor are discussed in Guidelines for Air
Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis Volume 9 (Revised): Evaluating Indirect Sources, U.S. EPA, 1978,
and are summarized below.
(I)
Surface Roughness indicates the initial ground level turbulence into which the exhaust plume will be
released. Generally, the higher the roughness, the lower the concentration. The number used here is
conservatively low (results in a worst-case).
(2) Stability Class characterizes the mixing potential of the atmosphere. Stability Class D is used as a worst-
case in suburban and urban areas.
(3) The 8-Hour Persistence Factor is used to detennine 8-hour localized CO contributions, and takes into
account fluctuating wind directions, temperature and traffic, which are more likely to occur over eight
hours than during one hour. The factor is multiplied by the I-hour modeling result.
. Background Carbon Monoxide Concentrations
Background CO concentrations are necessary for air quality analysis purposes to represent
conditions without the influence of nearby vehicles. By definition, the background CO
concentration in any particular area is that concentration which exists independently of direct
contributions from nearby traffic. The background concentrations are added to intersection-
scale modeled results to yield predicted CO levels.
...__...",'~._w~_.~__~~. ,~_.~"-'- ~--~""""''''""'''''''''--~-''"-''''''''-'~----r'
Ward Isaacson
- 21 -
January 13, 2005
No project specific background CO monitoring data was available; therefore MPCA-
provided 2004 default maximum background concentrations (3.0 ppm and 2.0 ppm for 1-
hour and 8-hours, respectively) were used for this analysis.
For purposes of the CO analyses, the background concentrations were adjusted for region-
wide increases in traffic volumes and vehicle emissions. The adjustment factor for traffic
growth was based on the regional travel forecast model. The adjustment factor for vehicle
emission was based on the MOBILE6 emissions model, which incorporates anticipated
decreases in CO emissions from motor vehicles due to emission controls. As recommended
by the MPCA, no Holzworth (temperature) correction factor was required as the background
concentrations were assumed to represent winter conditions. The results are summarized in
Table 11.
Table 11
Calculation Of CO Background Concentrations
2009
Factor I-Hour 8-Hour
MPCA Default 2004 Concentration (ppm) 3.0 2.0
Background Traffic Volume Adjustment Factor 1.22 1.22
Emission Adjustment Factor 0.72 0.72
Holzworth (temperature) Correction 1.00 1.00
Worst-Case Background Concentration (ppm) 2.6 1.8
. Intersection Carbon Monoxide Modeling
A detailed air quality analyses was perfonned for the year 2009 at the worst-case (worst level
of service) intersection of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 for the p.m. peak hour.
The sidewalk averaging technique was used to calculate worst-case intersection CO
concentrations at the modeled intersection. The modeling "sidewalks" are located adjacent
to each approach leg and departure leg at the location closest to the vehicles stopped at the
traffic signal. Each sidewalk location is represented by two receptors: one receptor 10 meters
from the intersection and one receptor 50 meters from the intersection. In this method, the
CO concentrations from the two receptors are averaged. The worst-case wind direction (of
the 36 directions modeled) for each pair of sidewalk receptors was used to detennine the
maximum concentration for each pair of sidewalk receptors. The reported result is the
maximum concentration for all of the sidewalks.
Carbon monoxide concentrations modeled for 2009 build peak hour traffic volumes are
shown in Table 12. The CO concentrations shown are the predicted maximum CO
concentrations taken from the results of all modeled wind angles.
_,,,",,,_,,_"'<~_'____'''<'' ._.-",',._'" "'~'_."_"_"~'_"""'~V"_____...,.,.".-..--._.........-~
Ward Isaacson
- 22-
January 13, 2005
Table 12
Year 2009 Build P.M. Peak Hour
Carbon Monoxide Modeling Results
I-Hour 8-Hour Wind
Direction
CSAH 42/CSAH 21
7.2 5.0 260
Carbon Monoxide (ppm)
State Standard (ppm) 30.0 9.0
Federal Standard (ppm) 35.0 9.0
. Summary of Carbon Monoxide Study Results
The worst-case carbon monoxide levels (7.2 ppm and 5.0 ppm for I-hour and 8-hour
concentrations, respectively) are predicted adjacent to the studied intersection.
These concentrations are below both state and federal standards. Because all other
intersections in the project area operate better in terms of total intersection delay, the
analyzed intersection represents the highest expected carbon monoxide concentration in the
proj ect area.
Summary and Conclusions
The Shepard's Path development is proposed in the northwest quadrant ofCSAH 42 and CSAH
21 in the City of Prior Lake. The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts on the
adjacent roadway system related to the proposed development. In addition, the traffic noise and
air quality impacts were reviewed.
Based on the traffic analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations are offered for
your consideration:
. All key intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS D or better during the
a.m. and p.m. peak hours, with existing traffic controls and geometric layout.
. Under year 2009 no build conditions, all key intersections will continue to operate at an
acceptable overall LOS D or better, with the following baseline no build intersection
improvements:
o CSAH 42/(New) McKenna Road - Installation of a traffic signal.
o CSAH 42/(Old) McKenna Road - Modification to a 314-intersection with right-in/right-
out only and left-in for westbound vehicles.
Ward Isaacson
- 23 -
January 13,2005
. Under year 2009 build conditions, all intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable
overall LOS D or better, with the following additional intersection improvements.
o CSAH 42/CSAH 21- Installation ofa northbound dualleft-tum lane.
· Due to Scott County's spacing guidelines, proposed access onto CSAH 21 was assumed to be
constructed as a right-inlright-out only. For safety purposes, a southbound right-turn lane is
recommended on CSAH 21 for this access.
o Since the location of future local roadway access on the extension of CSAH 21 has not
been determined, additional analysis was completed to determine how this intersection
would operate if it was constructed as a full unsignalized access, with left- and right-turn
lanes on CSAH 21. Results of this analysis show significant delays during the peak
periods on the minor approach due to the high volume of through traffic on CSAH 21.
Two lanes of approach are recommended for the eastbound approach, to provide a left-
turn lane and a right-turn lane to reduce delay and improve safety at this intersection.
o As parcels develop along the new extension of CSAH 21, further discussions regarding
access spacing and future traffic signals should occur with County staff.
. Based on our review of the proposed site plan, the following comments and
recommendations are offered:
o Align the trail crossing on (New) McKenna Road, north of CSAH 42, to shorten the
length of roadway that pedestrians use to cross. This is particularly important in a
development planned for older adults, which typically have slower walking speeds and
reaction times.
o Relocate the driveway on the south side of the fitness center to the north, directly across
from the driveway for the senior housing, to consolidate the driveway locations along
(New) McKenna Road. As traffic volumes increase on this roadway, consider providing
access to the commercial/office uses on the north side of the site only.
o Realign the intersection of (Old) McKenna Road and the proposed extension of
Thunderbird Circle to provide a 90-degree intersection. South of this intersection, align
the driveways for the youth center and the Assisted LivinglMemory Care on (Old)
McKenna Road directly across from each other.
o Check the turning radii throughout the site, but particularly on the east side of the site for
the circular roadway with access to the senior housing, to verify that fire trucks can
negotiate the turns.
o Provide adequate spacing from CSAH 42 to the retail driveway on (Old) McKenna Road
for sufficient sight distance.
Ward Isaacson
- 24-
January 13, 2005
Based on the noise analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations are offered for
your consideration:
. Construction of the proposed project will result in increases in noise of 0 to 3 dBA for
existing residences near the project area (comparing No-Build to Build levels). This increase
would be imperceptible to most people.
. The roadways adjacent to the project are exempt from state noise standards; however, noise
levels at several of the proposed residences are predicted to be slightly above state standards.
Noise mitigation measures such as berms would lower the noise levels.
Based on the air quality analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations are offered
for your consideration:
. The worst-case carbon monoxide levels (7.2 ppm and 5.0 ppm for I-hour and 8-hour
concentrations, respectively) are predicted adjacent to the intersection of CSAH 42/CSAH
21, which are below both state and federal standards.
H:\Projects\5266\ TS\Report\Draft _ ShepardPath.doc
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, Box 25
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-40_
Phone: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651)'296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dm.state.nm.us
March II, 2005
Ms. Suzanne Johnson
Liesch Associates, Inc.
13400 15th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Shepard's Path Church Complex,
T115N R22W Section 22, Scott County
NHNRP Contact #: ERDB 20050615
Dear Ms. Johnson,
The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or
animal species or other significant natural features are lrnown to occur within an approximate one-mile
radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there
are 2 known occurrences of natural communities in the area searched (for details, see enclosed database
printout and explanation of selected fields). However, based on the nature and location of the proposed
project I do not believe it will affect any known occurrences of rare features.
The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research
Program, a unit within the Division of Ec.ological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is
continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on
Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its
purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features.
Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or
otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by-
county survey ofrare na~ural features is now underway, and has been completed for Scott County. Our
information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because
survey work for rare plants and animals ~s less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey
of all areas oft.l}e county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the
project area.
The enclosed results of the database search are provided in two formats: index and full record. To
control the release of locational information which might result in the damage or destruction of a rare
element, both printout formats are copyrighted.
The index provioes rare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted,
unaltered, in an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, municipal natural resource plan, or report
compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the index for any other
purpose, please contact me to request written permission. The full-record printout includes more
detailed locational information, and is for your personal use only. If you wish to reprint the full-
record printouts for any purpose, please contact me to request written permission.
Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only
on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources
as a whole., If you require further information on the environmental review process for other natural
resource-related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Wayne
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 · ]-888-646-6367 . TrY: 651-296-5484 · 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer
~ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
.11' Minimum of Ill"k Post-Consumer W<lSle
'-----,
Barstad, at (651) 772-7940.
An invoice for the work completed will be mailed to you under separate cover within two weeks of
the date of this letter. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Thank.
you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources.
Sincerely,
Sarah D. Hoffmann
Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator
~
end: Database search results
Rare Feature Database Print-Outs: An Explanation of Fields '
....
~
III
JJ
o
III fJ
o CIl
o <=
N l::
....
. :E:
o
.... ....
o
o CIl
i~
t/)
>; III ~
III 0
'00
.. N
I-l
:l JJ t:l
..c:..c: r<I
E-< ~ 1(2
~ ~
.. 0.
'" 0
....U
,JZ; ,
o
H
~
~
r<I
t/)
[:!
~
0:
o
H
0:
Do
6
III
I-l
8'
I-l
Do
~~
o CIl
U III
Gl
~o:
i58~
t/) III .. ....
.0: en ... ...
'" . l:: ........
N 0 *' *'
t/)NZ
~~-g 'iii'iii
t:l t:l
H III 00
~tCll ta 00
:E :E
r.l en ~
t/) Ul III 0(2
JJ HH
a:::.... ee
N I-l
N Gl ~
0::= '"' '"'
I t/)Ul
Z.... ~~
III III
.... I-l
.... :l r..r..
E-t JJ
III U t:l 0
Z 0 88
'0 :E ~
! l:: UlCll
III ~~
I I I
~~
~~
r<I
:<:
~
NN
en UlUl
Ul
Gl ~
III
III
..Q ~l;;
III
JJ
III
0 CIl
CIl ., t:l~
en '0 N
III I-l r.lE-t
JJ 0 r..CIl
.... t>
I-l Gl
CIl ~
:= >tZ
CIl
.... t> ~g
III l::
I-l CIl Ht ~
:l I-l
JJ I-l a:r<l Nl'-
~ a Dot/) N N
H
t> :E ~ I>:
III 0 ~ N N '"
... N N
o JJ I>: a: CJl
.. l:: ~
CIl CIl z :z:
E ~ III III 8
'" ... ....
.... .... :E ... .... gJ
:E:r.:I Eo< Eo< E-<
.-< .2:
c:.....
~ .., i5 . .., ~i5
.... ...:~~ .-<
ID ID ,jI@...:!
III III .. ~c:S III .. <O~
., o ., :i!~~ o ., ><a.
0 ID U ID U t: ...
III III .., i:l ~..:l ...,0 rn~~
o II .. .. .. ..
~ a \D III JJ 0 ~ \D III JJ OM
Il III g;~oo Il III 2:<
.... c~E c~E '"
.:E .....0::1><: 000
0 0 ::Bl ~ 0 1>0 a.
.-< .... tj,:: i7 '" .... Il >. '" ><a.~
0 ., I>Q l=l t7\.... k Il @is
Ei llJ cu or! ., I:: ><..: . II) or4 JJ I::
0::.-< III .... 0::.-< III .... GOOrll
i~ "0 II 5 il~~~ "0 Il ~
~:;:: M .. ~.-i" '" CiS
., .... 0 Il .~ gl ~
rIl o~'" ~ ;;:l-~", o~'" ..,
., llJ ....rIlS
>.Ill '" .~ ~ ~ 1>0 '" .... 5
III 0 k .
"00 I: Ilfg Ci I: Il<Ci
lIlN . 4l > ~~ . II > ::.H:l ~
~ ., o Il 0:: ~ ... llJ
N.o crn<m ....0 .' I--oot UJ
.r:l.r:l '" 1::........ .
Eo< tn en ., ~ e r.. . II ~~~:s
.... en ... > \D >
;!; ~ ... N~ ~~~~ \D N III JJ r<I
'" .r:l 1Il::!2:i
.. '" 1-1 '" en '" U 0 ~
en 0 ., en III .... OAo ... '" III ;;:lglo::
....u .g ., .... Orll Il
_.. .rot ];Gs Il -...... i::0::~0
.., altnl-l ~ al t7\ k
tl ID = III ID I:: III Ilrn ~
0 83] >~~ ....3'" >eii!
0 ClJ5 .., t: S 0:: U
... 0 N 0 ~=o
~~.Q .o:5H ~~.Q 08 .
Il III . Il ... . OtrJ
.., >: trJE-< .., >: ~~i
III - 0 0'1: . ~ . 0
0 0: ... k ~~S 0: ... k
o ... '" 0"""",
'tl ..... '" 'tl ..... '" ~r>i~
Il 0: """ III o'I:CIJ Il 0: ... III
~ a. """ <~~ ~ a."""
u~o
e Il I:: Il .1:: .. t1i 8
III III '" llJ 0 ....... >< III '" Il 0
k ~ ~"'.... ~:Hl6 ~ Ill"'.... k a. ~
t7\ ;:l III :E ;:l III IlCioo
0 JJ.... .r:lE-<t!l1>Q ........ g~j~
1-1 .... 'tl..-lt) t) ~ 0 .... "O..-It)
Ao III III ~ Il g ~ . III g~1l
~~ :g &j~ >~~~ j :g~ ~~ ~
.....I>O~
~""'oo o~,
o Il oj rill
U III ~tli~
llJ ..,....r"
!:::o:: 6r..j 00::
...1>0
iS8~ ,.,~ ,><trJ
rn III ~!3~ ~::S'"
tS .8' 0
Q.U ~~~
N 0 >~g
OON2:
~z"O 0 ~~
III UO:: III
o I: ;:l """ o r<I ;:IN
~ III ....Ill ~ . ~ ....... t:3~
~ ~ llJ III III
.... .. ...< .... ..
1>0 t7\ trJ# -><0.. trJ# 01>0
trJ 00 to t:6: 5"''''
.... '" llJ "0 llJ
:1:.... llJ .... Il ~ 00 .
N k "0.... o 00 "0 .... ~~!
~:tl I:: 00 5 ..... C::OO
II oo~ llJ
....00 eo: ..,CIJ 8=
z'" ,sf! ,sf!
III III ><C:~ . ~ 1>0
... k Ao~
... ;:I ~o rIIlO...:!
E-<.... 8tlil:
III t!l .
Z . l:l ra ....z....
1>:.......:1
l III ~~~ III tli~..
;:l ;:I
.... .... 8rn~
III III
.... ~~S ..,
00 rn ,jI ...:!
r..
.... ~i~ .... Orlll><
... I:: ... I:: rIIl~~
'" Il ....0 '" Cl
.-< k o..O:trJ ... k 0.. rill
# .. S9~ # k Sl=l~
a ;:I
Ui _oo~... Ui U "O_OO2:i~
0 Ill><o..< 8 kIDtliE..:I
0 z"'ioo.. o"'z H
0 0'" ...... 0 t)"'....Ooo
~ ......... O:~ :0: Cl.-<U
U E-< 0 U k .0:..
tli ::><t!l c: t!l ><r..trJtrJ
.... ~ o::~oci~ .... O~'tlir<l
Il ~ ~ ~ c:: fg Z U
III
~ ~E-< 1lll!l'tlgjg;E-<1 ~E-< kg; ~:s
1>:81::~rn..:l 0: o rIlZ 0..0..
CIJ O~~ ..:I~. ~ rIl "O..:l 0 t1iz
.... .W . ~ 0
III ~~ I>QZI:[;2g~~o ~O I>Q 1l0E-< H
0 tnH 00 0:
Il III >:O~:Sal2:it::~ 13'" l< ~al~tl~
tn'll 00 o~.... OO~ 88 0 1Il00'::~
III k UO k k I>: U . k eur.. .::
.... 0 0 0. llJ 0 -... .0: It '"
..-I tl !:::~ 0. 5.... 00 I>Q !:::~ .... 000
k Il lIl~o'I:reuir:aci~ III Ilgui8><~
1l0: 8~ 8~
= ~~ ~ ..ci2[;2", ~:;;':-J ..ci~@~
Gl mal rIlal
... tl I k ....-.0:0 , .. > - . ~ H :0:
III I:: 1>0 tll>O....Olgl=lO 1>0 tl w.... 01 g ~
k Gl N..:l 1Il1>01Il- 8"'rIl .....:l III 1>0 k - III .
;:I k ~~N Ao Z III r<I No.. Ao a. III , 0:
~ .. III Oil> :0: 2:i 15 W~ 00 llJ>r<lO:r<I
III ;:l N :0: ".!il 0 CIJ r<l rn NN~""O..:lr<l><
Z tl rn ::a.!t :o:~t!( :I:..rn.. .!t<:o:~~:s
tl ~ ..
III 0 N J.J .. Il 00 .r:l "0 .. al 0 a. N.... .. llJ 00'<: '" ..
.., ~ ~ ~ -= .. ~ ~ ~ ~ CJ) r:rJ N c:: -a N tI'J Q.l Q.l c::
o .., t>:: Il ...... k t7\ tl t!l [g I>Q
01 c:: e III rIllllllllk..:lWrIl z~~"'~~~~!!5Ci!::
Il Il 2:i llJ c: .... I:: I:: ;:I a. r:a z
a ~ Ill'" 0"" :c III 0 ~ I>Q Ill'" O..-l:ClllOO=H
....r<ll/) r<lOOO:ErIl E-<O .-<l>OrIlr<looo:ErIl:><rn...:!
....... .... ....
:Er<l ... E-<
Rare Features Database Print-outs: An Explanation of Fields
The Rare Features database is part of the Natural Heritage Information System,
and is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program.
a unit within the Division of Ecological Services.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
**Please note that the print-outs ate copyrighted and may tu:Jt be reproduced without petinission**
Field Name: [Full (non-abreviated) field name, if different]. Further explanation of field.
-c-
CBS Site; [County Biological Survey site number]. In each county, the numbering system begins with 1.
CLASS: A code which classifies features by broad taxonomic group: NC = natural community; SA = special animal; SP'=
special plant~ GP = geolbgic process; GT = geologic time; OT = other (e.g.. colonial waterbird colonies, bat hibernacula).
Qy: [County). Minnesota counties (ordered alphabetically) are numbered from 1 (Aitkin) to 87 (Yellow Medicine).
CURRENT STATUS: Present protection status, from 0 (owner is not aware of record) to 9 (dedicated as a Scientific and
Natural Area).
-D-
DNR Relrion: I=NW, 2=NE. 3=E Central, 4=SW, 5=SE, 6= MinneapolislSt Paw Metro.
DNR Ouad: [DNR Quadrangle code]. DNR-assigned code of the U.S. Geologic Survey topographic map on which the rare
feature occurs.
-E-
ELEMENT or Element See AElement Name (Common Name)@
Element Name (Common Name): The name of the rare feature. For plant and animal species records, this field holds the
scientific name, followed by the common name in p,arentheses; for all other elements (such as plant communities, which have .
no scientific name) it is solely the element name.
EO RANK: [Element Occurrence Rank]. An evaluation of the quality and condition of natural communities from A (highest) .
to D (lowest).
EO Size: [Element Occurrence Size). The size in acres (often estimated) of natural communities.
-~- ' -
FED STATUS: [Federal Status]. Status of species Under the Federal Endangered Species Law: LE=endangered,
LT=threatened, C=species which have been propos~ for federal listing.
Federal Status: See APED ST ATUS@
Forestrv District; The Minnesota DNR=s Division of Forestry district number.
-G-
GLOBAL RANK: The abundance of an element globally, from Gl (critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on,a world-wide
basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks are determined by the Conservation
Science Division of The Nature Conservancy. .
-1-
INTENDED STATUS: Desired protection status. See also ACURRENT STATUS.@ If a complete list of protection status
codes is needed, please contact the Natural Heritage Program.
-L-,
LAST OBSERVED or Last Observed Date or Last Observation: Date of the most recent record of the element at the location.
. Latitude: The location at which the occurrence is mapped on Natural Heritage Program maps. NOTE: There are various
levels of precision in the original information, but this is not reflected in the latitudelIongitude data. For some of the data,
particularly historical records, it was not possible to determine exactly where the original observation was made (e.g. "Fort
Snelling", or "the south shore of Lake Owasso"). Thus the latitudelIongitude reflect the mapped location, and not necessarily
the observation location.
Legal: Township, range and section numbers.
Long: [Longitude]. See NOTE under ALatitude@
-M-
MANAGED AREA or Managed Area( s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or pri vately managed park, forest. preserve, etc.,
containing the occurrence, if any. If this field is blank. the element probably occurs on private land. If "(STATUTORY
BOUNDARY)" occurs after the name of a managed area, the location may be a private inholding within the statutory boundary
of a state forest or park. '
MaD Svm: [Map Symbol].
MN STATUS: [Minnesota Status). Legal status of plant and animal species under the Minnesota endangered species law:
END=endangered, THR=threatened, SPC=special concern, NON=no legal status, but tracked. This field is blank for natural
communities and colonial waterbird nesting sites, which have no legal status in Minnesota, but are tracked by the database.
-N-
NC Rank: [Natural Community Rank].
-0-
Occ #: [Occurrence Number]. The occurrence number, in combination with the element name, uniquely identifies each record.
OCCURRENCE NUMBER: See AOee #@
# OF OCCURS: The number of records existent in the database for each element within the area searched.
Ownership: Indicates whether the site is publicly or privately owned; for publicly owned land, the agency with management
responsibility is listed.
-p-
Precision: Precision oflocational information of be currence: C (confirmed) = known within 114 mile radius, U (unconfirmed) =
known within 1/2 mile, N (non-specific) = known within 1 mile, G (general) = occurs within the general region, X
(unmappable)=location is unmappable on USGS topographic quadrangles (often known only to the nearest county), 0
(obscurelgone)=element no longer exists at the location.
PS: [primary Section]. The section containing all or the greatest part of the occurrence.
-Q-
Quad Map: See ADNR Quad@
-R-
Rec #:[Record number J.
RNG or Rng:[Range number].
-s-
SECTION or Section: [Section number(s)]. Some records are given only to the nearest section (s), but most are given to the
nearest quarter-section or quarter-quarter-section (e.g., SWNW32 denotes the SW1I4 of the NWl/4 of section 32). A "0" is
used as a place holder when a half-section is specified (e.g., ON03 refers to the north 1/2 of section 3). When a occurrence
crosses section boundaries, both sections are listed, without punctuation (e,g., the NEl/4of section 19 and NWl/40f section 20
is displayed as ANEI9NW20"). .
Site: A name whiCh refers to the geographic area within which the occUrrence lies. If no name for the area exists (a locally used
name, for example), one is assigned by the County Biological Surveyor the Natural Heritage Program.
Source: The coUector or observer of the rare feature occurrence.
S RANK: [State Rank]. A rank assigned to the natural community type which reflects the known extent and condition of that
community in Minnesota. Ranks range from 1 (in greatest need of conservation action in the state) to 5 (secure under present
conditions). A "?" following a rank indicates little information is available toranIc the community. Communities for which
information is especially scarce are given a "U", for Arank undetermined@. The ranks do not represent a legal status. They are
used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research, inventory and conservation planning.
The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available.
State Status: See AMN STATUS@
-T-
TWP or m: [Township number].
-V-
Verification: A reflection of the reliability of the information on which the record is based. The highest level of reliability is.
"verified," which usually indicates a collection was made or, in the case of bird records, nesting was observed. Plant records
based on collections made before 1970 are unverified.
Voucher: The museum or herbarium where specimens are maintained, and the accession number assigned by the repository. In
the case of bald eagles, this is the breeding area number. .
-w-
Wildlife Area: The Minnesota DNR=s Division of Wildlife administrative number.
Data Security
Locations of some rare features must be treated as sensitive information because widespread knowledge of these locations could result in harm to the rare
features. For example, wildflowers such as orchids and economically valuable plants such as ginseng are vulnerable to exploitation by collectors; other species,
such as bald eagles, are sensitive to disturbance by observers. For this reason, we prefer that publications not identify the precise locations of vulnerable species.
We suggest describing.,fu~.J.(;lC;ation Q!Jly to tb.e nearest. s~ction: ;If this. is nOt acceptable for ~our.purposeS;:.please c:llll and <disouss this issue with the
Environmental Review Specialist for the Nalllral Heritage and Nongame Research Program at 651/296-7863.
Revised 912002
~-~-- "_~..'_'.___"_"'^"._4'_~_W'___''''''"_,_~_+,___'____,,_,____~------__'........~....--.........__,_"_,,__,_'.e.~'.,",.,._~ . _._.__._._...__.....~.__.,
IlCPCUU:S ri::llll rIUJCL,;l Ui::lli::lUi::l:st::; :SCCUL,;1l
ri::ll:;c I VI 1.
Suzanne Johnson
From: Cinadr, Thomas [thomas.cinadr@mnhs.org]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 9:21 AM
To: suzanne.johnson@liesch.com
Subject: Shepard's Path Project database search
10 archaeological sites or historic structures were identified in a search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and
Iistoric Structures Inventory for the search area requested.
'he result of this database search provides a listing of recorded archaeological sites and historic architectural properties that
re included in the current SHPO databases. Because the majority of archaeological sites in the state and many historic
rchitectural properties have not been recorded, important sites or structures may exist within the search area and may be affected
y development projects within that area. Additional research, including field survey, may be necessary to adequately assess the area's
otential to contain historic properties.
Vith regard to Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EA W), a negative known site/structure response from the SHPO databases is not
ecessarily appropriate information on which to base a "No" response to EA W Question 25a. It is the Responsible Governmental Unit's
R.GU) obligation to verify the accuracy of the information contained within the EAW. A "No" response to Question 25a without
fritten justification should be carefully considered.
F you require a comprehensive assessment of a project's potential to impact archaeological sites or historic architectural properties,
ou may need to hire a qualified archaeologist and/or historian. Please contact the SHPO by phone at 651-296-5462 or by
mail at mnshpo@mnhs.org for current lists of professional consultants in these fields.
am Cinadr
iurvey and Information Management Coordinator
~innesota State Historic Preservation Office
~innesota Historical Society
;45 Kellogg Blvd. West
it. Paul, MN 55102
i51-205-4197 (voice)
;51-282-2374 (fax)
H7 n()().:;
,.----.,.
a
Pinnacle
Engineering
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc.
11000-93rd Avenue North
Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369
Tel: 6123154501
Fax: 612315-4507
pinnacle@scc.net
1500 First Avenue NE
Rochester, MN 55906
Tel: 507280.5966
Fax: 507 280-5984
October 4, 2000
Mr. Kermit Mahlum
Shepherd of the Lakes Lutheran Church
15033 South Highway 13
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
. 1f$
Fax #
RE: Wetland Delineation and Ev.aluation
Prior Lake Church Community Site
County Road 42 & McKenna Road
Prior Lake, Minriesota
Pinnacle Project Number: MN00228.00
".
Dear Mr. Mahlum:
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc. (Pinnacle) was retained by you to conduct a Wetland
Delineation of the U-shaped 60-acre parcel located at the intersection of County
Road 42 and McKenna Road in Prior Lake, Minnesota (Site). The Site is located in
the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 22, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, as
depicted on the Prior Lake/Eden Prairie, Minnesota Quadrangle maps (Figure 1).
The Site consists of 60 acres w:hich is comprised of bean fields, woods, wetland and
an abandoned farmstead, all of which surrounds a Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) wildlife management area: The field work was conducted
on September 18,2000, in accordance with our proposal dated August 29,2000. The
scope of work for this phase of the project included the following items:
. A site visit to determine the presence of anyon-site wetlands. The Site visit
included a walkover of the Site to identify the presence of hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, hydrology, and placement of survey markers around
any identified on-Site wetlands
. Records search for documentation of recognized wetlands including; DNR
protected waters inventory maps (PWI), Scott county soil survey, and
National wetland inventory (NWI) maps
. Compilation of assessment findings in a written report.
The Minnesota DNR has designated protected waters in Minnesota. One area
located in the northeast portion of the Site, just east of McKenna Road is identified
as protected wetland #247W on the PWI map for Scott County (Figure 3). This area
was flagged as a suspect wetland area. The vegetation in -this area consists of reed
canary grass, eastern cottonwood and one black willow. It appears that this suspect.
wetland has been bisected by a driveway, altering the hydrology. After a on-Site
Mr. Kermit Mahlum
Pinnacle Project No.: MN00228.00
October 4, 2000
Page 2
meeting with Lanol Leichty, the wetland regulator for the City of Prior Lake, he
determined that this area is not wetland. A data sheet for this area is included in the
Appendix.
Wetland Delineation
A wetland delineation was conducted for potential wetland areas. During the Site
visit, one shrub swamp wetland basin was identified in the southwest comer of the
property, just north of County Road 42. The wetland/upland transition was
determined using the change from a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation to a
dominance of upland vegetation, change in topography, change in soil types, and
site hydrology. All three wetland criteria were met and the edge of the basin was
flagged and surveyed. .
The identified wetland was classified on the NWI map as palustrine emergent
seasonally flooded (PEMC) shallow marsh and palustrine scrub-shrub deciduous
seasonally flooded (PSSIC) shrub swamp, which equates to a Circular 39 Type 3/6
(Figure 4). 'the basin was inundated with approximately two inches of water near
the center of the basin, while the soils were saturated to the surface in the outer
areas. Primary hydrologlc indicators included inundated and saturated soil
conditions, water marks, and drainage patterns in wetlands. Secondary indicators
included local soil survey data and low topographic position.
The herbaceous stratum withip. the basin was vegetated by reed canary grass
(Phalaris arundinacea) FACW+, broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifoIia) OBL,
beggartick (Bidens cernua) OBL, water plantain (AIisma subcordatum) OBL and a
species of arrowhead (Sagitta ria sp.). The shrub and tree stratum consisted of
sandbar willow (salix exigua) GBL, black willow (salix nigra) OBL and green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylanica) FACW. The upland vegetation consisted of red raspberry
(Rubus strigosus) , staghom sumac (Rhus typhina) and Canada goldenrod (Solidago
canadensis) .
Soils within the basin were examined to a depth of eighteen to twenty-four inches
using a push probe to examine soil profile and hydric soil indicators. The test pit
revealed peat soils with a matrix color of 10 YR 3/3 within the wetland. According
to the Scott County soil survey, soils within the basin consist of Marsh soils (Ma)
(Figure 2). These soils occupy lakes and ponds that may be dry at times. Most areas,
however, remain wet all year. This soil type is generally vegetated by cattails,
rushes, sedges, willows and other water tolerable plants. The mapped soil type was
consistent with our field observations. One upland and transition soil pit was
performed in our transect. The upland soils consisted of 10 YR 3/4 loamy sand with
no hydric soil indicators being present. .
Mr. Kermit Mahlum
Pinnacle Project No.: MN00228.00
October 4, 2000
Page 3
Conclusion
Pinnacle has performed a wetland delineation of the 60-acre parcel located at the
intersection of County Road 42 and McKenna Road in Prior Lake, Scott County,
Minnesota. One wetland was determined to have met the three wetland criteria of
dominance of wetland plant communities (hydrophytic), hydric soils and wetland
hydrology. The estimated wetland boundaries were flagged and mapped.
The suspect wetland area in the northeast portion of the Site was also flagged and
mapped.
The flagged wetland w~s verified by the local governmental unit. No construction
activities should be conducted in the wetland until the proper permits have been
applied for and received. No impacts should occur in the suspect wetland area until
a Technical Evaluation Pannel (TEP) determines the jursidictional status of the area.
If you have _ any questions or wish to discuss any particular aspect of th~ project,
please contact us at (763) 315-4501. We look forward to being of continued service to
you.
Sincerely,
PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC.
~Q~
Matt Bartus
Environmental Scientist
Enclosure
Figures
~Pinnacle
YEngineering
Figure 1.
Site Location Map
Co. Rd. 42 & McKenna Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc.
11000 93rd Avenue North
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Phone: (763) 315-4501
Fax: (763) 315-4507
Date:
September 25, 2000
Prepared By:
M. Bartus
Scale:
1:24,000
Reviewed By:
M. Hultgren
--.----,
~Pinnacle
YEngineering
Figure 2.
Soils Map
Co. Rd. 42 & McKenna Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Pinnacle Engineering. Inc.
11000 9Jrd Avenue North
Maple Grove. MN 55369
Phone: (612) 315-4501
Fax: (612) 315-4507
Date:
September 22, 2000
Prepared By:
M. Barhls
Scale:
No Scale
Reviewed By:
M. Hultgren
"c'l
.~...~
""-
.
"
.
.
....
... - --
I ·
" ~
- - 'If-J'-
PRiOr
. I
~JH
"'-'j .
. ,,-......... 33
....,;.,.1~
.
Ir!!4Pinnac!e
YEngineering
Figure 3.
DNR Protected Waters Map
Co. Rd. 42 & McKenna Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc.
11000 93rd Avenue North
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Phone: (612) 315-4501
Fax: (612) 315-4507
Date:
September 22, 2000
Prepared By:
M. Bartus
Scale:
1 "=1 mile
Reviewed By:
M. Hultgren
.~
G .~" E\ 2 ~~:~. ~~i~
, )' -.11;, < .. ""~~. ~;-,f;'~
.. ......., cau ... ~~-~....,...,.'fi ,/.4
"C~. ". ,,( 7l."( "'J ....). -""" I ~ ~.i".....
" . .' '\, \.. !;.,,' ~ -,!-J-~~" "';",' 1i?~~~Jr/S:.
~, . ....... 'j , f' ~ 1 ~ ->
. ..':':",\.' .,,;', \'i / 1(' 'I' 'oJ
.'. \.. 8.!~_....",.. .... ' I; .
~~":\ -....... i'... J \~ ,..-- c....; ..,; ~ ",:;':,:.':
) y '\ ___ I "--^-J : ,,/ 001&&-, /!~,~ . /, :./ . ,.
.- . 1\ . , """.:!'",-..a--.. . - ,...) - -. ..'./~.. .... .~. . ,
./ ". .' \ ,. 0 ...r.... :-:-.~--:- -::"~~...~:::r~;::;;;.--Jl.. oj,;
~\ I 0,.\>.'<:>.~_ ..' .. h..' ) \...: .....~- ~~~{~ ~"
:.f" ' , . --;~ 8~ '" 'I ~ ~ .
/)~ ~ ;""..;.~ '-:-:-..:~--""':~- ~ (I .;..,. 'J r"'.) ..
- '0...1., F' J . .' ![y~ '1". 1'5>0
. .. q~ ~~>~~~~ . ,,' ~~:
~).S:)~ ':':~(.~.D ~ 0.. .. (.., 'r.::::::
~ ~l))-\ ~ .
'-':; , ~f~ ~;I .~A ~~~ . .. . ..,
~ =- tia1 -)1 2
!\;.,.. """'"'" ,.
I. ('. ~\'"
~-)'--) ~--.
:--...
~ \(z "1" - ..J
_p faQ', vI,... .
; -\' , ".-
C Jr(~ '"
, '\ .........
~". ~-
~ ~ ~,~-. ~Mi
l ~r'~
l 1Il&t~ ~ ~
~~ rf 4f$4:J"" ~i::-l/~.~r.1, ~
":. ,." ~/(lj'V~:)~
. )~. ~~/\~Ie:~C~\l 0
. ) ~ ~ ..,./ II WI S '
. ii.~. ~,::, ~ \)\~~ U ,r ~ . .'~
ji".' ['~ ~c-;::~I ~~~\'i,\'N"'" N:\. p;' ~WJ
~ ~ "-:::-~~)) ~ )\10 v . -)...
- ~ L~ \II _j~". \~. ::---~,;.0'"f=)irc.;. \I:a.-~~Ili
fPll\~ ~~~. _..J I ,r-...,f PEM~. )f,J . '''~ '{
...
A
16
i~
d
~, Ii.
"( : ,
~t....1 r
.~;(~ ~
~~,.~~..f. (
J )/ljU{ll
. . ~ r;~'5.\'j
. .. .; .~ ..
~ ;jc '~'\ '"
..~ t n ,1.-..;;:;.
. " ':'~ ~ ~ '~" R
Pi"." ~ ~~~ '\~' ,..
((~J
I .. a""
t04{1
~
1:.'
~l
I
-
~
~Pinnacle
YEngineering
Figure 4.
National Wetland Inventory
Co. Rd. 42 & Mckenna Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc,
I 1000 93rd Avenue North
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Phone: (612) 315-4501
Fax: (612) 315-4507
Date:
September 22, 2000
Prepared By:
M, Bartus
Scale:
No Scale
Reviewed By:
M. Hultgren
Appendix
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: County Road 42 & McKenna Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota Date:9-18-00
Applicant/Owner: Shepard of the Lakes Lutheran Church Countv~ Scott
Investigator.Matt Bartus - State: MN
Do Nonnal Circumstances Exist on the site? ~ No Transect ID: I-A
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes~ Plot ID:Type 3/6
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No # Of Flags: 17
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Snecies Wetland Common name Stratum Indicator
Phalaris arundinct.cea Reed canary grass Herb FACW+
Typha latifolia Broad-leaved cattail Herb OBL
Bidens cernua . Beggarticks Herb OBL
Salix exigua Sandbar willow Shrub OBL
Salix nigra Black willow Tree OBL
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash Tree FACW
Dominant Plant Soecies Uoland . Common name Stratum Indicator
1. Solidago canadensi~ Canada goldenrod Herb - FACU
2. Rhus typhina Staghorn sumac Shrub
3. Glycine willd Soybeans Herb
4. Rubus strigosus Red raspberries Shrub FACW-
5.
6. -
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks: .~
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
XXX Aerial Photographs X-Inundated
Other X-Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_No Recorded Data Available _Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Field Observations: _Sediment Deposits
X-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: L:(in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _Water-Stained Leaves
K..LocaI Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface(in.) K..FAC-NeutraI Test
XXXOther (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Low topographic position
".~".~".~-~--_.~---------_._,..----_._._~-
SOILS
Transect ID: I-A Plot ID: Type 3/6
# Of Flags-.ll
Map Unit Name Marsh ,
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class: Poorly Drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes (Nq)
Profile Description: Wetland:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-18 A 10YR 3/3 Peat
Profile Description: Upland~
0-18 A 10 YR 3/4 loamy sand
Hydric Soil Indjcators:
XXX Histosol Concretions -
Histic Epipedon , High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
XXX Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
XXX Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain: in Remarks)
Remarks:
'--..,
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No (Circle) ~le)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland'Q3>No
Hydric Soils Present? es No
Remarks:
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manua))
Pro'ecVSite: Count Road 42 & McKenna Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota
A licant/Owner:She ard of the Lakes Lutheran Church
Investi ator. Matt Bartus
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, ex lain on reverse.)
Date: 9-18-00
County: Scott
State: MN
Transect ID:2-A
Plot ID: Sus ect area
# OfFla s: 10
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Snecies Wetland Common name Stratum Indicator
1. Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass Herb FACW+
2. Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood Tree FAC+
3. .
4.
5.
6.
Dominant Plant- Snecies Uoland Common name Stratum Indicator
1. Glycine willd Soybeans Herb - -
,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).100%
Remarks: '-<
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
XXX Aerial Photographs _Inundated
Other _Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_No Recorded Data Available _Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Field Observations: _Sediment Deposits
_Drainage Patterns in WetIands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
_Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: No hydrology at time of delineation. Wetland appears to have been bi-sected by a driveway,
possibly altering the hydrology of this area.
~~,",,----,.,~,>~"'~,,""~'-'-'_._'-'"~'-'--~~-~'-"'-'--------~.~,~_._-
SOILS
Transect ID: 2-A
Plot ID: Suspect Area
# Of FlagsJQ.....
Map Unit Name Hayden loam, 6 to 12 % Slopes
(Series and Phase): Moderately eroded Drainage Class:
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confinn Mapped Type?(YeV No
Profile Description: Wetland:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches ) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-18 A 10 YR 3/1 None Loam
-
Profile Description: Upland;
0-18 A 10 YR 3/1 Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon , High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture. Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
XXX Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain: in Remarks)
Remarks: -
. '-<
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?C ves)'io (Circle) (Ci@
Wetland Hydrology Present? ~No) Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?Ye No
Hydric Soils Present? ~o
Remarks: This area was determined to be non-wetland in a previous delineation by another
consultant. Pinnacle called this a suspect area and met with the LOU at the Site. Lanol Leichty of the City
of Prior Lake determined this area to be non-wetland.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
._------_.,-,----...-_..._.__.---_._-_._~"
APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, LLC.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
13400 15th Avenue North, Suite B · Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 · Tel: 763.383.1084 · Fax: 763.383.1089
November 12, 2004
Sunde Engineering
4200 West Shakopee Road
Suite 230
Shakopee, MN 55437-2967
Attn: Brian Mundstock
RE:
Project Name:
Comm. No.
Project Location:
Sunde McKenna Road
11118
Prior Lake, MN
Section 22
T 115N, R22W
Project Description: Wetland Delineation Report
Dear Brain:
As discussed, Applied Environmental Services, LLC. (AES) visited the above referenced site to
perform an official wetland delineation in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual.
Adjacent site use includes farmlands, woodlands, wetlands, and farmsteads.
This parcel is a combination of farmland, woodlands, and wetlands. Figure 1 is a site location
map of the property. All figures referenced by this report are presented at the end of the text.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the project area, identify areas meeting the technical
criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins and classify the
wetland habitat.
This wetland delineation was performed November 8-11, 2004 by Benjamin Hodapp, Staff
Scientist.
WETLAND DELINEATION AND PERMITTING · NATURAL RESOURCE INv:ENTORY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS · EAW's · GPS MAPPING · SURVEYING
Methodoloav
Topographic maps, National Wetlands Inventory maps, the Scott County Soil Survey, and DNR
Protected Waters maps were consulted to locate potential wetland habitats.
The hydric soil assessment procedure of the Routine On-site Determination Method was used on
this site. In this method, the following procedures were used:
1) The vegetative community was sampled in all present strata to determine
whether 50% of the dominant plant species were hydrophytic.
2) Soil pits were dug using a Dutch auger to depths of 18"-36". noting soil profile
and any hydric soil characteristics.
3) Signs of wetland hydrology were noted and were compared to field criteria such
as depth to shallow water table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil pits.
Wetland edges were marked with sequentially numbered pin flags. 4-foot wood lath marked with
orange "wetland boundary" flagging tape or flagging tied on vegetation may be used if site
conditions warrant. The wetland was mapped by Applied Environmental Services using a Trimble
Pathfinder Pro XR unit accurate to 0.5 meters in the horizontal plane.
Wetland classification follows the methods used by the National Wetlands Inventory. The circular
39 classification is also given.
At least one sample point transect crosses each delineated wetland edge. These transects
consist of an upland sample point, and a wetland sample point. Other sample points may be
located in areas which have one or more of the wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrologic
characteristics present, or where questionable conditions exist. Sample points are marked with
blue and white striped flagging. Sample data sheets are found in Appendix A.
Results
Eight wetlands were delineated on the parcel (Figure 5). Appendix B contains the Farm Services
Agency (FSA)/WETS slide review data of the property performed according to the Wetland
Mapping Conventions agreed to by the 1985 Food Security Act and the Section 404 Clean Water
Act promulgated by NRCS-Minnesota in August 1994. Hydrology indicators used for review of
FSA slides are as follows (1-7).
1. Hydrophytic vegetation in the area.
2. Flooded or drowned out crop (mud flat).
3. Surface Water.
4. Inclusion of non-cropped area within a cropland field if supported by an additional
indicator.
5. Stressed crop production due to wetness (yellow).
6. Color of crop in dry or wet years (green or yellow).
7. Differences in color due to different planting dates.
The eight delineated wetlands on the parcel were described as follows:
2
Basin 1
Basin 1 was a Type 2 PEMB fresh wet meadow with 90% reed canary grass. Other herbaceous
plant species noted were lake sedge and giant goldenrod. The underlying soils were Glencoe
silty clay loam and hydrology was provided through precipitation, groundwater, and runoff.
Basin 2
Basin 2 was a Type 3/4 PEMC/PEMF shallow-deep marsh with 30% open water and an
herbaceous layer of 25% reed canary grass and 30% narrow-leaf cattail. Other herbaceous plant
species noted were river bulrush, soft-stem bulrush, water plantain, giant goldenrod, and water
smartweed. Tree and shrub species noted included black willow, green ash, and box-elder. The
underlying soils were Palms muck and hydrology was provided through precipitation,
groundwater, and runoff.
Basin 3
Basin 3 was a Type 213 PEMB/PEMC wet meadow/shallow marsh with 50% narrow-leaf cattail
and 40% reed canary grass. Other herbaceous species noted included giant goldenrod and
Canada thistle. The underlying soils were Webster silty clay loam and hydrology was provided
through precipitation, groundwater, and runoff.
Basin 4
Basin 4 was an exempt Type 4 PEMF constructed storm water pond with 60% open water, and
an herbaceous layer of 40% narrow-leaf cattail. The underlying soils were Webster silty clay
loam and hydrology was provided through precipitation and runoff.
Basin 5
Basin 5 was a Type 6 PSS1C shrub/scrub swamp with a shrub layer of 30% Bebb willow and an
herbaceous layer of 35% reed canary grass and 20% lake sedge. Other shrub and tree species
noted included black willow, common buckthorn, and red-osier dogwood. The underlying soils
were Houghton muck and hydrology was provided through precipitation, groundwater, and runoff.
Basin 6
Basin 6 was an exempt Type 4 PEMF constructed storm water pond with 90% open water. The
underlying soils were Glencoe clay loam and hydrology was provided through precipitation and
runoff.
Basin 7
Basin 7 was a Type 1 PEMA seasonally flooded basin with an herbaceous layer 90% barnyard
grass. The underlying soils were Webster clay loam and hydrology was provided through
precipitation, groundwater, and runoff.
Basin B
Basin 8 was Type 2 PEMBd drained fresh marsh with an herbaceous layer of 80% reed canary
grass and a tree layer of 50% eastern cottonwood and 30% black willow. The underlying soils
were Webster silty clay loam and hydrology was provided through precipitation, groundwater, and
runoff.
3
The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (Figure 2) does identify wetlands on the subject site.
According to the MN DNR Protected Waters Map (PWI) (Figure 4) of Scott County two protected
waters exist on the subject site, DNR # 70-148W (Basin 2) and DNR # 70-24 W (Basin 8).
According to the Scott County Soil Survey (Figure 3) the following hydric soil series existed on the
parcel:
Glencoe
Houghton
Palms
Webster
Photographs were taken of the site and are being retained at Applied Environmental Services,
LLC.
4
Conclusion
This wetland delineation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual for an on site determination and the results reflect the
conditions present at the time of the delineation.
If unavoidable impacts are planned for this project, permits would be necessary from the LGU
(City of Prior Lake) and other agencies.
I certify that I performed the field analysis and wrote the report for this wetland delineation. Thank
you for the opportunity to provide wetland services on this important project.
~4~
/;// ;J. /~t'Jt) cr-
t
Benjamin J Hodapp
Staff Scientist
Applied Environmental Services, LLC.
Date
5
FIGURES
"'C
co
o
Q)~
'"Ceo
c c
::J C
OOQ)
~
(.)
::E
~QM ~
f(
Q)
~
CIlLO
z.....J....
CO.... N
J!! ::J 'C Q. N N
o 0 a.. ._ N ..
UlU-iiiG>5
l!! :::: 0 C 0>:;:::
coz.~cu
.- U.- 0 CII Q)
~CI)UFO::::CI)
~
z.~
~
(l)
L..
:J
C)
U.
~
s
c..~~
a.
m
:E
c:
o
:.;:::::;
ctl
U
o
....J
c
u
,-,
.~
"'...
;::
c
(I)
ctJ
+oJ
o
CJ)
Q)
C
c
:E
Q)
~
CO
...J
L-
o
'C
c..
"l:t
0
0 CO
N
..-
CO ..-
..-
.... ..-
Q) :t:t::
.c
E .c
Q) 0
> -,
0
z
u
-' '''I
-.J VJt 0-
~ I-! ~
(f) z' ~
w <( ~
~ I- ~
~ :1 i
W -' -
~.
(J) tIl ~
-' Z ~
<( 01 ui
I- 01 ~
z ;1;
W ...J ~
~ <(I;ci
z I- ~
o Z ~
0:: I.LJ I 0::
:> ~I~
Z Z 5
I "'
w ol~
o Ct:it
1J.J -\~
- >;15
-' z,;-
11. . I :::
11. Wi:!:i
<(
"'0 ..c:
III
.... ..c:
CO c ~ ro III
0 ~ ....
0 .+:; m ro
~ ~ co c: ;: :!
(]) 't:J i:: o ro .Q a. c'O
ro 0) III 0)
ro .... ro 0) 0) c
"'0 CO r::: '0 Q) III Q)<t: ..c: Q) 0.0
c>> C ~Q) (J)'O (J) Cl o a..
C ~ roO::
C C) 0 ...Jc .....0) ('I') "it LO....
:J C Q) [II .... ro 0)'0 0) 0) 0) 0)
en ...J 0) 0,- 0.0 a. a. 0.(6
(]) - .- '0 :>.0 ~ ~ ~~
i:i5 .... c
a.._ I-LL
~ D I ~[J I
u
~
~ -
~ g
z~~!
~ T-
Q,)
'-
:::::s
.2>
LJ.
"0
Co.
ca ca
Q):E
S:~
-0
ct:l-
C c
.2 ~
.....c
ct:l_
Z
N
,i)
as
.....
e
CJ)
Q)
c
c:
~
Q)
~
as
.....J
l-
e
.~
a..
"it
0
0 co
C\I
......
"it ......
......
.... .....
0) =1:1:
..0
E ..0
0) 0
> -,
0
z
u
:::J (fJ ~
. I- 8
If)Z~
W <l: ~
~ I- ~
>...J ;:;
0::: I;);
~ Q
W -' ;;:
(f) 1Jl. ~
I~
Z, :>
..J 0\ ~
~ u' ~
Z 13;
lLJJ~
~ <t\ ~
z I-! ~
o z!~
0::: w' ~
;:; :EO' ~
Z Z?'
W 0 ~
o ~ ~
w '"
- > if;
..J ..
D.. Z .~
D.. W :J]
<t
"'C
rn
o
Q)~
-ern
c: c:
::J C
OOID
~
(.)
~
~
m
'0
c
::3
o
II!
.s!
i:i5
o
en
o
'C
"0
>.
:r:
f&1
~
~ 0
~ 0
z~~~
~ "I"""'
"
C
CI)
0')
CD
..J
\.1'
Q)
....
;:j
0>
i.i:
C'?
.0
en
~g-
c~
::s
o
()
co
+-I
o
CJ)
Q)
c:
c:
~
Q)
~
co
....J
L....
o
"C
c..
""'"
o
o
N
co
L-
a>
..a
E
a>
>
o
Z
co
~
~
~
~
:1:t:
..0
o
.
U
..J (I)'
..J i"
o 1-\, !!
(J) z :iJ
w .A'il ~.:.
U .... v
I- ~
- '"
>...J ::;
0:: ,;1,
W :JI ~
(j) (J)l ~
..J z\! r
<( 0 ui
f- U:;
z : :!.
W ...JI ~
0;:: "'
~ <( i
Z I- ~
o Z ~
0:: w ;;;:
- ,;
> ~ ~
z z ~
W 0 ~
00:: ?
W - l:!
- > iiJ
..J z ..
0.. ..c;
o..W;:;
<{
"0
eo
o
Q)a::
""0 eo
c: c:
::J c:
Cf)Q)
~
(.)
~
.!:?
:0
~ ::l
co l:L
-0 -0
C 0)-0
~ '0 c
o 0) n:J
a:l (5 -0)
2 k'::>
en .....:>
~ b
Z.~!
?:: T""
"C
C
CD
C)
CD
-J
[fJ
LJ
,..~._'_.,.,~~"~.~-~-~~---~
CD
~
:::l
0>
u:
~
.2
.0 a.
:::l co
a..~
"OC/l
(J) ~
-u (J)
...
~~
~
n..
m
......
o
en
Q)
c
c
~
-
Q)
~
m
-..J
s-
O
"C:
a..
~
o
o
N
LO
~
L.-
(1)
.0
E
(1)
>
o
Z
co
.....
.....
.....
.....
=!:t::
..0
o
-,
u
-{ U'll .
-l :-' !!
iG ~II;
\.) I- 'c.
_ :>0:
>...J ::
a::: OJ;
w :J\ J.
(j) l/) I ..
z ~
..J \ ~
<( 01 '-'
~ UI~
Z I J.
W...Ji7.
~ <'l::i~
Z I-! ~
o Z!&
a::: Wi".
_ ,'ttJ-
> z:~
Z Z:,~
W 0.:i!i
~,'rx:
o X:?'
l1J-;~
- >'iii
..J >
a.. Z',;
a.. w '"
<(
APPENDIX A
RODM Data Sheets
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP1-1UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
ApplicanUOwner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
IxI Do norrTlliil circumstances exist on thes1ter-.--------.--.-
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
R.Q!!!IDaI1L_~p_~_~t~~.______________._____________._~Qm.mQ!:L~~!!!!n______.______._.__._.______
Date: November 09, 2004
County: Scott
State: MN
--.----.----..----ConimunltYlD:.nNieadow----.....-..
Station 10:
Plot ID:
___n%J~9.Y!L__Jmt!.!;~QL_.
Herbaceous
X Ribescynosbau
X Solidago altissima
~
_2L..____ Rhu.~sM.P.@......_.____.__.___..____.___ Sta.9bgm _~.!:I.m.l!Q._____.______.___________._.____.____~~.____.__..._.IlP1______.___...
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 0 Cowardin Classification:
Remarks
Prickly Gooseberry
Golden-Rod,Tall
20
20
UPL
FACU
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth Hor. Matrix
(in.) Color
0-6 A 1 OYR 3/1
6-18 B 10YR 4/3
Mottle I 2nd Mottle Texture,
Color _______~bundal]_~__J1..Qntrast ___. Structur~tc. ____________n._
Silt Loam
Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
] Listed on Looal Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glossic Hapludalfs
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ I This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 19 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP1-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12, 2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[XTOo.norrnalCTrcumstances existon theslte'r-.-.-. ...-----------------.--.---.------.----..- Community ID:--PEM---.-.--...--.-----.-.-.
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
.P.omina!lL_..$.M!!'-~_.___________.__.___.__.___..__.____J~.QmmQ!I_~~m.~.__.___ .__.__.__._._.___________m_.__._.____%J~QY.!L_J.n~~@.~.QL_.
Herbaceous
X Pha/aris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary >90 FACW+
% Species that are OSCFACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 100 --.-------.-Cowa-raTnClassmcatlor;:-PEMB --.---------
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ 1 Inundated
[ 1 Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ 1 Water marks
[ 1 Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ 1 Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ I Oxidized root channels
[ I Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[Xl FAC-Neutral test
[Xl Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks
Spring hydrology present
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18 A
Hor. Matrix
Color
10YR 3/1
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Silt Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Glencoe
Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[Xl Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Cumulic Endoaquolls
[ I Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ 1 Hydric Soils Present
[ J Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 21 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP2-1UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 10,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[xTOonormaTCircumSta-ncesexist Orltiie.sitei----.--.-------.--------.-.....---------.-.------.Commun"iiY.-ii5:rleadOw .---
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
Dorni.D_a._..JL_J!p~~i.~~____..___________________.__.___G.9..mm9IL!-!a.m!L___ .______________.___________.__D{Lc;_9..Y..~_!n~!!:_~tQr::.__.
Herbaceous
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 20 FACW+
X Bromus inermis Smooth Brome 60 UPL
%. Spe-cies thafare-OaC;. FACW, or TAC(excepri=Ac:j:5o.------.-----------CowardTil-CfassiflciiiHcii1:---.---.---------.
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ I Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-12
12-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 4/2
/VB 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Loam
Clay Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
I Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: G10ssic Hapludalfs
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophylic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 18 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 1111 B
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP2-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 10,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[XIOon.ormarcircumstanceseXlst on-fhe.slte 7-.---..--.-------------------------------- Community Tj):...-PEM-.----.--..-----.--
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
Q_Q.mlll~I!L_$p.!tc.i~~L_____.______.
Herbaceous
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 90 FACW+
%specles-thatareOBL, FACW, or FAC (exceprFAC:j:"iOo--------------------- CowardinCTassificiiilon:--PEMF---'---
Remarks
...G.omm-'>.!1.N_a!T.!.!iL____.__.._____.__
....'}''!..9._9..Y~.LJJ!.Q.I~~!QL...
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >10
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 2
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[X] Local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
o 10YR 4/1
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure , etc.
Muck
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[X] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Palms
Drainage Class: Very Poorly Drained
Remarks
[ ] Concretions
[X] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Terrie Haplosaprists
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[Xl Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 17of21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point SP2-2UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 10,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
fXrOonormal circumstances-eX-liton the site?--...------.---.-----.--..-.-.----------Co.mmunitYID:Meadow----
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
Q..Q.mJn~_!JL~~~i!ts.___m__._m_____.__._m_._.___....__. mm._~9.mm_Q!:tN~m~______
Herbaceous
X Poa pratensis Bluegrass,Kentucky 20
X Cirsium averense Canada Thistle 20
_._X____ Solid!l!1o altl~simL_____.___________.Iall__G..Q_~_nJ:2fL...._______________.__.__qO
% Species that are OBl, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 0 Cowardin Classification:
Remarks
m. ...%_G.QV_~L_!!!!l!y.~t9_L._._
FACU
FACU
FACU
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 16
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 4/2
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure. etc.
Clay loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ) Histic Epipedon
[ I Sulfidic Odor
[ I Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
I High Organic % in Surface layer
I Organic Streaking
) Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glosslc Hapludalfs
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ) Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 16 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP2-2WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
fxIDo"norm-arcircum'siancesexfsfo'n'~thesTte?"'--"-"~ ..__._.~.~_._._._.........._.__.........-_..__.._.__..
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ I Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
QQmmanJ__~PJ!J!.i~~____ ._..__._____.____.___.__..____...___C;;9-'!lmQ!L~_1J1!!L___ ._______.__________........._~L~._G.QY~L..JmU~.!.!QL__
Herbaceous
X Typha angustifolia Cattail, Narrow-leaf 40 OBl
__?S.._.______ Ph~laris !JlY..!1g1f1lJQ~!L___________...Q~B~~ Cana!Y___.________.__.__.?_Q.__._.__fN~.yv+ ._.__
% Species that are OBl, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 100 Cowardin Classification: PEMF
Remarks
Date: November 11, 2004
County: Scott
State: MN
------...CommunTtYlj);-PEM-..---....---..-------
Station 10:
Plot ID:
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 6
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ I Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ I Water-stained leaves
[X] local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
o 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure , etc.
Muck
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ I Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ I Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Houghton
Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Remarks
[ ] Concretions
[XI High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Haplosaprists
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[Xl Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 15 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP2-3UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 11, 2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
In\f!stigator:...~J.~__.___.____m____...._..__.___._..__.m.__.m..._.__._._.___.__.._.._.__.__~~te: M~_..__.._____.___.__ . _.
[X] Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Community ID: Upland --....--.
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
.1?Q.mlnMlL~Pfi!!!J~l.liL.._.__._......._..__...__....._...__._......_.__..~Qm.mQ!l.~!mL_._.__._.__._.____.__..__...___%_C;:_Qy.!~r..._jn~l~~JQL_.
Herbaceous
X Poa pratensis Bluegrass,Kentucky 40 FACU
___~_____.__~Q!l~p ~lisslm!L_.___._.._.....____.___rall_Gol.9~mQ.L_._.__.___.__________.___...?Q_____fACJL_..__
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 0 Cowardin Classification:
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-10
10-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 4/2
B 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Loam
Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: G10ssic Hapludalfs
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ I Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 14 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP2-3WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: Novem ber 11, 2004
ApplicanUOwner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[X] Do normal circumstances exiS-fon thEl-Site?-------------.------.-.----.-----Community ID:-PEM--.--.---.--.--.-'-
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
Q_Qm!",anL__~..m!~i~~___._.__.______._. ...._.____..._._.......___ ...______~9.m!!!.Q!L~ii!m~L__...___._____.__.._ ._____.___._.'Y-'L.G9.y_~L_J!:I.91"@!QL_
Herbaceous
X Pha/aris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary >90 FACW+
% Species that are OSCFACW;orFAC(exCept FAC-): 100
Remarks
-.----.---.--.--..-.Cowardincfi:issification: PEMF"-
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ I Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 0
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[X] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
o 10YR 4/1
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Muck
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Palms
Drainage Class: Very Poorly Drained
Remarks
[ ] Concretions
[X] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Terrie Haplosaprists
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 130f21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP3.1 UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 11, 2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[X] Do normal circumstances exist o.i1-t:hesiie?---------------------------.-------.---.-Community ID:Mea-aow-.-----.--.-.--
[ J Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
.Doml'l@.m___~.R!cie!L..__________.__.. .__._._______._____.___~QmID..Q!L~!.@!!tIL_.._____m____._._.._.____._.__.__.~~J:!9...YeLJ1!!!!~!Qf_.
Herbaceous
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 20 FACW+
X Solidago altissima Tall Goldenrod 25 FACU
X Bromis inermis Smooth Brome 45 UPL
% Species thatareOSL, FACW, or FAC(excePt FAC-): 33-------.------.-..-Cowardin Classification:---.--.----------
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ J Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ I FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glossic Hapludalfs
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 12 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP3-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12, 2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
investigator: BJH State: MN
[X] Don'ormal "Circumstances e'xiSt on "fheshe? _.._-~----_....._._...._._---_...__...__._._-_._...~_..._--Community-iO:--'PEM" .....__m....................__..._....._.......
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station iD:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
Q-2m!!H!..I1L.__$.R~~!~1iL__.__._________._______.___.________._. ..g_Q.mmQ!l_N.~!:nL_.._._..__ ..--.--.---.---------.....---..-._%J~.Q.y~..L__!n~!C;;~lQL_.
Herbaceous
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary >90 FACW+
oi~-Species thatare-OSCFACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 100
Remarks
--..--.------ cowiir:dlnClassiflcatior;:PEMC --------.--
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 6
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ I Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[Xl FAC-Neutral test
[X] Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks
Spring hydrology present
Soils
Depth Hor.
ill1.L
0-2 A
2-18 A
Matrix
Color
10YR 2/1
10YR 3/1
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Silty Clay Loam
Silty Clay Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Webster
Drainage Class; poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy; Typic Endoaquolls
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 11 of 21
,"----,.
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point SP4-1 UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
IX-fOo normal.clrcumsian-ces-exlstoii- thesite?----.---
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
P.Qm!ll~_!It__$P~~!~_~...__._.._... ...._...
Herbaceous
X Bromus inermis Smooth Brome
X Setaria glauca Grass,Yellow Bristle
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary
X Poa pratensis Bluegrass,Kentucky
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 50
Remarks
Date: November 12,2004
County: Scott
State: MN
......-.----...--.---...------.-----.---.----CommunitiTD:Meadow-------..-.-....
Station 10:
Plot 10:
.....c;.9mmQn_M!m~._
.....___.___.__._._._.._.__%J~.QY~L. J.nf!.l~~t.9r
20
20
20
40
Cowardin Classification:
UPL
FAC
FACW+
FACU
Hydrology
[ I Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ I Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle I 2nd Mottle Texture,
{!I)J.._..__.._______ Co~__________ColQI._______.___.AQ"'.f.I.9~D~____gon!!1l~_L___.__.$1ryctUI.~~t.c::_'__.__._.___.______.___.__._____.__
0-6 A 10YR 5/1 Clay Loam
6-18 NB 10YR 2/1 Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ I Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Glencoe
Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Cumulic Endoaquolls
[ I Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 9 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point SP4-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
tXTDo n-o-rmafclrcumstances -exi"sronthesite?------..------..-.---..-.---------.--.----.----CommunitY-iO:.-PEM-...-.----.--------
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
DO!11il'!~.nt~~9.~~____..._._____ ._..___._.___._________._.__f;_C?mmQ!l N!lJ!!~_____.__.________._.__._..__._______ ..___~~_9_Qy!l_L_!mtl~ii!~9.L_.
Herbaceous
X Typha angustifolia Cattail, Narrow-Leaf 60 OBl
o/~-Speclest1i.aTare.OEfCFACW :-or-FAC(except-FAC:)":100---.------- Cowardin Classificiiuo.n:PEMF
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 6
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 0
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[X] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[Xl Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ I Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure. etc.
Silty Clay loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Webster
Drainage Class: poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Endoaquolls
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page10of21
,....--- ---"~"-~~------._'-'-""""'-----r
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP5-1 UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12, 2004
ApplicanUOWner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[XfOo normBi circum.stancesexistonthe sitei...--....---........-...-.....----..-....--....-..ComiTiuniiYT5: .Forest..-..--.'-
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ I Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
P..Qm!r.'-@!:!~p..!.~l~!L..__.._.___.___._._.._......._.._.._._.GQmm9JLN~rr.HL..__...___.___.___._.___.__.___%_G.Qy@t....!ns!!.!<!i!lQL....
Herbaceous
X Rhamnusca~art~a
~
X Ribescynosbau
X Rhamnus cathartica
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAG-):
Remarks
Common Buckthorn
25
FAG-
Prickly Gooseberry
Common Buckthorn
o
25
30
Cowardin Classification:
UPL
FAC-
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle 12nd Mottle Texture,
!!!:!.:L-_____CoIOL__._._._..-9..Q!.QI____._.._ Ab_I!.n.9.!!lCjL_.__G.Q!J!r..l:I~L__...___~!r~_9.!.ureL~!~.'-.__..._.___.__..___.____.0__..._..
0-18 A 1 OYR 4/2 Sandy Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ I Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
I Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glossic Hapludalfs
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 7 of 21
T
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP5-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
[XHSo-normal circumstances eXistontheslte"?----.-...-----.--....---.--..-.--
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
9_omlnant_~.~g.!~L.._._....___.._____.__._.____._....._.___.____.__..___._9QmmQ.r.!N~m!L._.____ ......________.._._ _.__._....._%_9.Q.Y.~L_ID.!!i..~~~QL_..
Herbaceous
X Pha/aris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 80 FACW+
% Species that are OSL, FACW-:Or FAC (except FAC- V-"1iio------..-----.----..--C-owardiii-.Ciassification:Fis51C---'-'.-.---'..-
Remarks
Date: November 12, 2004
County: Scott
State: MN
----....Comm.uriity-ii5:..ShrubiScrub-...-........... .
Station 10:
Plot ID:
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ I Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 0
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Primary Wet/and Hydrology Indicators
[X] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[X] Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks
Spring hydrology present
Soils
Depth
(in_)
0-18 0
Hor. Matrix
Color
10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Muck
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Houghton
Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Remarks
[ ] Concretions
[X] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Haplosaprists
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[Xl Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 8 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP6-1UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
ApplicanUOwner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
[j*[)o-normal circumstances.-exlst.onthe...site?i-.--._..._...._....--...-.--.....- .-.--.. ......--........-.-.-.-.-.-.....-...-.....,-.....-.
[X] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
Q..QmiOjlJlLJ~p-Q~lQ.lL._____ ..._m......_..........._.__...9.Q.m.I)1..QD..t!!J.,m~._..........__._.._...._.._._..__._._....._...'}'I!..9.9.."l[!;!1..__.!!1~J~ii!tQL....
Herbaceous
X Trifolium pratense Red Clover
ii;. Species that are OBl,-FACVV,orFAC(excepH=Ac..y-O-..-.------....-...-....--.'Cowardin clss.sificatlon:-.----.------.--
Remarks
Date: November 12, 2004
County: Scott
State: MN
...C.ommuni!Y-iO:-UplanCi-------.--.
Station 10:
Plot 10:
80
FACU+
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle / 2nd Mottle Texture,
(in.) Color Color Abundance Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 10YR 3/2 Loam
2-18 AlB 10YR 5/1 7.5YR 4/6 common distinct Clay Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Webster
Drainage Class: poorly drained
Remarks
Constructed pond
Wetland Determination
[ ] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
] Concretions
I High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Endoaquolls
[ ] Field Observations match map
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 6 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP6-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
Ix"] Do-normal circumstanCes eXlston'the's"lte?--"'-'" ...mM"'~"'_~"'_"'__"_'_'~"'__"""'_'_'_'_'____'_""--..-.....
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
P..Q!ll!n~!:!t_Jl"p-ec;.i~J!.______._mm_..._ _....____.m_.._...G.Qm!.mm.N.~m.fiL___.._.............._..._........... ....._......._....%_.G.QY-~L._t!1~!!;@!.QL.._.
Date: November 12,2004
County: Scott
State: MN
.......Comm un.itiiii.....Open"V"iater ..-....--.--.
Station 10:
Plot 10:
.%-Species that-are OBL, FACW, or .FAC(exceptFAC--~o....-._.-._------------.-Cowaraii1-ciiissiftcation:-PUSH------
Remarks
Submergent algae present
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 4
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 0
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[X] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[X] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
Qrl.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
C 2.5YR 5/3
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Clay Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Glencoe
Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Cumulic EndoaquolIs
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[iq This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 5 of 21
. -~.~_...-..-~--~-,.---._.'--_.-,.,~_.,._....."..~"'-_.~..._.,~_.~--,-"-"._-,-_.--_._----------'-'"._~,----,."_."'-_.~_.
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point SP7-1UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12, 2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
IX-roo norii1a"iCTrcumstances exiSt on the site?---..-..--..---------.....-.------..--.-..-----.Communit)-T6:-Cropland
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
.p..Qmlll~nt .___~..P_!!J!.!~L....._______________..___.________.g,9lD.m.Q!1J~i!m!!..__.----.--.-._..._______.___..._.__._.!.~_<;;Q.Y-~L_
Herbaceous
X Setaria glauca Grass,Yellow Bristle
_~__.____.-IJjfoliu!!1.J2[!jten~~______.______.__._.___g!W_QIQ."'~L
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 50
Remarks
_..!m~Il;;~lQ.!:'..._
20 FAC
20 FACU+
-...-.----.-C.owardin Classlfication:-----------------
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wet/and Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Inundated
[ ] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage pattems in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[ ] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
(in.)
0-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR 3/1
Mottle / 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
] Organic Streaking
I Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
I Listed on National Hydric Soils List
] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glosslc Hapludalfs
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[Xl Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 4 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior Lake
Wetland Data Point: SP7-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[X]~ Do normal circum-stancesexTSfon ttiesHe?..."._~_.H..__..__._~~'~_.__.__.__._._h.___..-'"'''H'--'''''-----''''-'--'-CommunrtY'T5:PEM'--'-''' .-...--...--.....................-
[ ] Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area? Plot 10:
Vegetation
Q.Q.!!!in~.!:!L_~p~cielL-____._________________._.___._..______C;;.QIDl!1J?JL~m~_._____._.__.__.______ ..........%__~.QY-~L_J.rn!i'"-~I~Qr
Herbaceous .
X Echinochloa crusgaJli Barnyard Grass 80 FACW
% Species that are OSL, FACW, or FAC(excePtFAC:y-~--_..-----_._- Cowardin CiassificatlOn:..-PEMA--.--._--
Remarks
Hydrology
[ ] Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ ] Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 2
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 0
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 0
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[X] Inundated
[X] Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ ] Sediment deposits
[ ] Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ ] Water-stained leaves
[ ] Local soil survey data
[X] FAC-Neutral test
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Remarks
Soils
Depth HOL Matrix
(in.) Color
0-8 A 10YR 3/1
8-18 B 10YR 4/2
Mottle I 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Clay Loam
Silt Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ I Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[X] Reducing Conditions
[X] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Webster
Drainage Class: poorly drained
Remarks
] Concretions
] High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ ] Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Endoaquolls
[ ] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[X] Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[X] Hydric Soils Present
[X] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[X] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 3 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point: SP8-1UP
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road Date: November 12,2004
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers County: Scott
Investigator: BJH State: MN
[XfDo norrt1alCircumstances exiSt on theslifi?f-.-.- ----------.---------------- CommunitY-lD: --cropj.amr.-----..----
[ 1 Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Station 10:
[ 1 Is the area a potential problem area? Plot ID:
Vegetation
pomman! ~~cie!>_____________._._____.__._._.._______G..Q.mm..Q!1.NJ!!tle__.___.._____._.__._..._.__.__..________.__~L.G.Q.~L_!!1.C!i~~1.o.L._
Herbaceous
X Setaria glauca Grass,Yellow Bristle 25 FAC
__K___.. Pha/~ris artJflsJj!1.ace!!.___._.__..______________<3ras~,J3_Et~S1_!'IDj![Y____.______________~~__.J:ACyy~_._
% Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC-): 100 Cowardin Classification:
Remarks
Hydrology
[ 1 Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ 1 Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ 1 Aerial Photograph
[ 1 Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ 1 Inundated
[ 1 Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ 1 Water marks
[ 1 Drift lines
[ 1 Sediment deposits
[ 1 Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ 1 Oxidized root channels
[ 1 Water-stained leaves
[ 1 Local soil survey data
[ 1 FAC-Neutral test
[ 1 Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth
ill!L
0-8
8-18
Hor. Matrix
Color
A 10YR3/1
A1B 10YR 4/2
Mottle 1 2nd Mottle
Color Abundance
Contrast
Texture,
Structure, etc.
Loam
Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ 1 Histosol
[ 1 Histic Epipedon
[ 1 Sulfidic Odor
[ 1 Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ 1 Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Hayden
Drainage Class: well drained
Remarks
I Concretions
1 High Organic % in Surface Layer
1 Organic Streaking
1 Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
1 Listed on National Hydric Soils List
1 Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Glossic Hapludalfs
[Xl Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[Xl Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ 1 Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ 1 This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 2 of 21
Data Form
Routine Wetland Determination
Job Number: 11118
City: Prior lake
Wetland Data Point SP8-1WET
Project/Site: Sunde McKenna Road
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineers
Investigator: BJH
fXjDo normaicircumstancesexlst on the-sTte?-----.--..--.--.--
[ I Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
[ ] Is the area a potential problem area?
Vegetation
Pom.!n!nL~"!!;;'!!!'ljL.____..__..___.___._____.___.____.GQm!!l_Q!:I__~!!m!!._________...__._____._._______..__'Y.LG.QY~___Jlli!!~~!9!__.
Herbaceous
X Phalaris arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 65 FACW+
% Species that are OSL, FACW, or FAC(except FAC=y;1-OO----------CowardinClassifi-caUon: PEMS----------
Remarks
Date: November 12,2004
County: Scott
State: MN
--..-..-.-.--.-.--.-.-.-.-.-..-..-.-.---....-Comm-unityI5:-PE~f.-------.---._--._-
Station 10:
Plot 10:
Hydrology
[ I Recorded Data (describe in remarks)
[ I Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
[ ] Aerial Photograph
[ I Other (describe in remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0
Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >18
Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >18
Remarks
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
[ I Inundated
[ I Saturated in upper 12 inches
[ ] Water marks
[ ] Drift lines
[ I Sediment deposits
[ I Drainage patterns in wetlands
Secondary Hydrology Indicators
[ ] Oxidized root channels
[ I Water-stained leaves
[X] Local soil survey data
[XI FAC-Neutral test
[ I Other (explain in remarks)
Soils
Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle I 2nd Mottle Texture,
ililJ Color Color Abundance Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 A 10YR 3/1 Loam
8-18 A 10YR 3/2 7.5YR 4/4 few faint Loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
[ ] Histosol
[ I Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ I Probable Aquatic Moist Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
[ ] Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Unit Name: Webster
Drainage Class: poorly drained
Remarks
I Concretions
I High Organic % in Surface Layer
[ I Organic Streaking
[X] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[X] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
[ ] Other (explain in remarks)
Taxonomy: Typic Endoaquolls
[X] Field Observations match map
Wetland Determination
[ I Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
[ ] Hydric Soils Present
[ ] Wetland Hydrology Present
Remarks
[ ] This Data Point is a Wetland
Page 1 of 21
APPENDIX B
WETS Analysis I FSA Aerial Slide Review Data
WETS Analysis
Project: Sunde McKenna Road Date reviewed: 11/12/2003
Comm #: 11118 Weather Station: Chaska, MN
WETS Basin
Year Designation * W7
1979 W yes
1980 D yes
1981 N yes
1982 D no
1983 W yes
1984 N yes
1985 N yes
1986 D no
1987 D no
1988 D no
1989 N no
1990 W no
1991 W no
1992 N yes
1993 W yes
1994 N no
1995 N no
1996 N no
1997 D no
1998 W yes
1999 W yes
2000 N yes
# indicating hydrology in normal years: 5
total # of normal years: 9
Wetland determination: YES
based on hydrology indicators
in 50% of the normal precipitation years
* WETS Precipitation Designation
N = Normal
W = Wet
D = Dry
- c:
.Q
ro ~ Q Z Q ~ Z Z Q Q Q Z ~ ~ z ~ z z Z Q ~ ~ z ~ ~z
m eI) ::l
C ro
:2 = >
en .., w
- I
~:c -
u
= ~ ::l
.., '0 co 0> ..q- 0> LO ..q- C> co co ..... N ..... LO ..- ..... ..- N ..- 0> co co C') LO LO ..-
e ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..-
a..
~
-
I/)
~ N N (\') N ..- (\') (\') (\') N (\') N ..- ..- N (\') N N ..- (\') N N ..- N (\') ..-
::l
~
I--
C
0 >-
i :; ..- ..- N ..- N N ..- (\') (\') ..- N (\') N (\') (\') N N ..- (\') N N N ..- (\') ..-
= ..,
ia
- > B
w c
/I) ca Q)
LO If .c
to 0 c: (\') N (\') ..- (\') (\') ..- ..- ..- ..- N (\') N N (\') N N N N (\') (\') N N (\') ..-
-=:t C ::l
..- a; ?ft ..,
I Q) Q)
..- ~ U U
N 0 - -- -- I-- . I/) c: c:
M Q) CO CO
=Ii: >. ::l .c: .c:
:c ~ - (ij U U
Q)
c: - (\') N N N N (\') (\') N (\') N N (\') (\') (\') (\') N (\') ~ > cf. ~
0 c ::2: ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..... ..... 0
;; 0 II Q) 0 0
CO U (\')
- :ai: c: (\')
C/) (\') CO .... ....
- f-- -- .c: .8 .8
CO U "0 "0
E ~ c: c:
'C .... 0 ::l ::l
a. ..- ..- (\') N N (\') (\') (\') ..- N N N (\') ..- N (\') N ..- ..- (\') (\') ..- (\') N N 0 0 0 0
<( Z (\') .c .c
II Q) .... ....
"0 ~ Q)
r- N - -- 'w a.
'i .s .2 a.
- ::l
Z III CO ..- to ...... to 0 -=:t (\') N 1.0 ..- 0 1.0 (\') ..- CO to 0> -=:t 0 0 0> ...... N ...... Q v ^
::2: ::l (ij
C> ~ 0 (\') -=:t IX:! ..... N ...... ..- N CO """: 1.0 ~ N 0 CO CO 1.0 1.0 ...... ...... 0 ~ """:
10 cO c<) oj 10 10 c<) 10 c<) cO 10 ~ N ~ ~ M II E
::l 1.0 N ..- N 1.0 CO N 0> ..- ~ Q)
~ ~ ..- ....
0
c: Z Q ~
::l
0
() N CO 1.0 ...... N -=:t 1.0 0> ...... 1.0 N 0 0 -=:t ...... 0> CO 0 -=:t -=:t ...... ...... (\') 0 (\')
.... >. CC! "":
Q) :; It:! ~ CO 1.0 ...... N IX:! to CO ...... -=:t 1.0 CO N N 0> ~ ..- ...... N -d: ...... -d:
~ .., N N ~ N c<) ~ ..- 10 -=:t 0 c<) r-.: ~ 10 r-.: ~ N ..- ..- M ~ ~ ..- 10 ..-
co ..- ..-
Q
... "
If Q) 0 ..-. N 0> 0> -=:t ...... ...... 1.0 0 N 1.0 to CO N (\') to 0 (\') -=:t 0 CO to ..- (\') r!- ei) C N ..- 0> N ......
c: 0> ..- 0 ~ IX:! CO CO ~ ~ C\! ~ to CO IX:! '<t ~ -=:t It:! ..- ~ N ..- en CO CC! Q, ::::I ~ (\') 0> (\') ..-
::l 10 ~ cO cO N r-.: N cO M c<) u? ~ r-.: 0 Q, ~
.c .., ..- to N N 0 (\') (\') N (\') to (\') N M 0 N ~ 10 u?
to) ::) OJ
c: c
::2: .5
cO >. to to 0> 0 co ...... 0 (\') 1.0 (\') 0> '<t 1.0 ..- ..- 0 ..- co 0 ..- co ...... ..- 1.0 ..- 0 1.0 ..- (\') co
.:.t. ! co ~ N 0 0 ..- N IX:! ..- (\') ~ 0 (\') ...... "": ~ N ~ ..- It:! 0> ~ ...... ..- ..- ..- Z ~ co N ~ -=:t
III ::2: N N ~ ~ N N ~ cO ~ ~ 10 M 10 c<) ~ ~
co -=:t N N ..- -=:t N 1.0 N (\') (\') ..- co N '<t
.c: C
U .;
- -- 0:::
>. ..."
:c 'c N 0 1.0 1.0 ...... ..- ...... co co ...... (\') '<t to co co 0> ..- (\') LO coco co 0 0 ...... r!- ei) C -=:t 0> (\') 1.0 en
- a. ~ IX:! 0> C\! (\') ..- ...... -=:t ~ (\') 1.0 IX:! N ~ IX:! ~ 1.0 C\! C\! ~CC! ~ ~ -=:t N 0 ~ ::::I ~ CC! "": ...... ~
C ~ ..- 0 N N N ('I') (\') 10 0 ..- N N M 0 N -=:t N 0 ..- (\')(\') ..- ...... N N M 0 0 ..- N N N N
0 ..J OJ
co :ai: .1-
-
co
Q
.... 0> 0 ..- N (\') -=:t 1.0 to ...... co en 0 ..- N(\,) -=:t 1.0 to ...... coo> 0 ..- N (\') .c
- -
~ co ...... co co co co co co co co co co 0> en 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> en 0> 0 0 0 0 C III
Q) en 0> en 0> en 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> en 0> 0> en 0> en 0> 0> 0> 0>0> 0 0 0 0 0 Q) ::l
c: >- ..- ..- ..- ..... ..- ..... ..- ..- ..- ..- ..... ..- ..... ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- N N N N :ai: "C >. >. C>
'm a. co c: :; ::l
::l
c:: ~ ::2: .., .., ~
'--
c:
0
II)
ro
Q)
(/)
0>
c: a
'3: (/) (j)
0 ~ 0
....
(!) z ~
"ffi ro
1:: - Z .:J1f:.
<( II)
ro ro
0.. :r: ..c:
I U U
(/) ..... N
(!) 0 0
0 0
0- N N
N
N
N
.....
Rl
(0 ~
C'! "
~I 'Q
Q
Q
N
-I- I --
"""
....
(0 en
"": """
....
(0 .e
- - l!! --
., Cl:l
~ III
4= (ij
E
(/) ..
(!) 0
0.. Z
....______._ _..,~_.."'w.~'__~___....,..-____...,.
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
APPLICATION FOR
CERTIFICATE OF NO LOSS OR EXEMPTION*
APPLICANT AND PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION
Street Address
LGD: City of Prior Lake
Project Location: 1/4 SW S 22_T 115N R 222W
UTM Coordinates: X: Y:
County Name/Number: Scott
Minor Watershed NameINumber: MN River 33122
Size of entire wetland: acres
Wetland type: Circular 39 Type 4 ; NWI PEMF
Check one: X <50% 50%-80% or > 80%
Check one: X A . cultural land; Non-a . land
Name(s) of Applicant
Gity, State, Zip Code
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Describe the nature and purpose of the proposed project: proposed commercial development
(attach additional pages if needed)
Timetable: proiect will begin on 4 I I I 05 (mo/day/yr) and will be completed by 12 I 15 I 05
The wetland activity at the above site qualifies for the following under the Wetland Conservation Act (yVCA) (check one):
No Loss Determination (attach plans)
Exemption incidental (per MN Rule Chapter 8420.0122) (Note: Applicant is responsible for submitting the proof
necessary to show qualification for the exemption claimed.)
Description of Exemption Claimed:
Actions taken by private entities for pw.:poses other than creating a wetland. basins 4 & 6 are constructed storm water
basins
APPLICANT SIGNATURE
The information provided for this determination is truthful and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I ensure that, in draining
or filling the subject wetland under an exemption noted above, appropriate erosion control measures will be taken to prevent
sedimentation of the water, the drain or f111 will not block fish passage, and the drain or fill will be conducted in compliance
with all other applicable federal, state and local requirements, including best management practices and water resource
protection requirements established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter I03H.
(Signature of Applicant)
(Date)
Certificate of No-Loss or Exemption (2000)
Page I of2
Note: Any approval is not effective until signatures below are complete. No work should begin until the I5-day appeal
window has lapsed, or, in the event of an appeal, until the appeal has been finalized.
*APPROVAL OF THIS CERTIFICATE ONLY APPLIES TO THE WCA. Permitsfrom local, state, andfederal agencies
may be required. Check with the appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. The Combined Project
Application form can be used for this purpose.
Within 10 days of the decision, notice ofthe above decision must be mailed to:
Landowner/Applicant
Members of the Technical Evaluation Panel
Department of Natural Resources Regional Office
DNR Wetlands Coordinator @
Ecological Services Section
500 Lafayette Road, Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155
Corps of Engineers Project Manager @
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District
ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East
81. Paul, MN 55101-1638
Members of the public who have requested to receive notice.
Certificate of No-Loss or Exemption (2000)
Page 2 of 2
,
1-.,
.
I .
, .
'"'----.---.
,
I
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL
EXPLORATION AND REVIEW
New Shepherds Path Church
McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42
Prior Lake. Minnesota
AET #01-00590
Date:
December I, 2000
Prepared for:
Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church
15033 Highway 13 .
Prior Lake. MN 55373
December I, 2000
Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran Church
15033 Highway 13
Prior Lake, MN 55373
Attn: Kermit Mahlum
Project Manager, Shepherds Path
RE: Geotechnical Exploration and Review
New Shepherds Path Church
McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42
Prior Lake, Minnesota
AET #01-00590
Dear Mr. Mahlum:
This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering
review for the new Shepherds Path Church in Prior Lake, Minnesota. We are submitting two
copies of the report to you. Copies are also being submitted on your behalf to Mr. Steve Erickson
of BWBR Architects and Mr. Dan Malecha of McGough Construction.
Please contact me if you have questions about the report. Mr. Mike McCarthy (651-659-1364) can
be contacted for arranging construction observation and testing services.
Very truly yours,
~.~y~;-
Vice President, Geotechnical Division
Phone: (651)659-1305
Fax: (651) 659-1379
ivoyenOJ)amengtest.com
CC: (2) - BWBR Architects - Attn: Steve Erickson
(1) - McGough ConslIUCtion - Attn: Dan Malecha
JKV fak:
~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Purpose ..........................,........................... 1
Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III . . . . . . '0' . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 1
Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Scope of Services . .. .... .. .................. . ....... . . ... .. . . .. .3
PROJECT INFORM A TION .......................................... 3
Foundation Design Assumptions ..................................... 4
SI1'E CONDmONS ............................................... 5
Subsurface Soils/Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Water I..eveI Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Review of Soil Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
~C()~~N])A1rIO~S ............................................ jr
BuildingGrading ............................................... jr
Spread Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . 9
Floor Slabs .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10
Building Backfilling ............................................ 11
Pavement Subgrade Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Pavement Thickness Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14
Construction Difficulties ......................................... 14
Excavation Sidesloping .......................................... 14
Observation and Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
General .................................................... 15
Drilling Methods .............................................. 15
Sampling Methods ............................................. 15
Classification Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Water Level Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16
Sample Storage ............................................... 17
LIMITATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
. ----.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STANDARD OF CARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18
SIGNATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18
STANDARD DATA SHEETS
Floor Slab Moisture/Vapor Protection ............................ .. 19
BasementlRetaining Wall Backfill and Water Control .................... 20
Freezing Weatber Effects on Building Construction ..................... 21
Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design .................. 22
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 - Boring Locations (North Portion)
Figure 2 - Boring Locations (West Portion)
Soil Boring Logs
Boring Log Notes
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
General Terminology Notes
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND REVIEW
FOR
NEW SHEPHERDS PATH CHURCH
McKENNA ROAD NW & CSAH 42
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
AET #01-00590
SVMMARY
Purpose
You are proposing to construct a new church facility at a site in Prior Lake, Minnesota. The
purpose of our work on this project was to explore subsurface conditions at the site and provide
preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations to assist you and the project team in design
and pJal1ninf.
Scope
To accomplish the above purpose, you have authorized our firm to drill sixteen test borings at the
site and prepare this geotechnical engineering report.
Fincling.~
Primary site geology is clayey sand/sandy lean clay glacially deposited till. Alluvial lean clay or
sandy layers overlie or are interbedded within the till. Fill and/or topsoils are often present at the
surface. Water levels only entered two of the borings, and appears to be well below proposed
floor grade.
RecommendJltions
These recommendations are condensed for your convenience. Study our entire report for detailed
recommendations.
· General grading for building support should include excavating fill, topsoil, and soft
and/or dark colored fine alluvial soils.
. Grades can then be attained where needed with engineered fill. Except for the organic
soils, the on-site soils can be reused provided they can attain compaction. Many of the on-
site soils will likely be wet or dry at the time of excavation, and moisture conditioning of
these soils will then be needed to attain compaction.
· The building can be supported on conventional spread foundations, designed for an
allowable soil bearing capacity of 2,000 psf.
. You may wish to consider increasing the allowable bearing pressure to 3,000 psf,
particularly in the larger. more heavily loaded portions of the building. Additional
excavation to provide 3,000 psf would involve removal of medium consistency alluvial
clays where they are present within 5' of the footing grade.
AET #01-00590 - Page 2
· To prepare pavement subgrades, the topsoil layer should be stripped. Unstable clayey soils .
present within the upper 3' subgrade zone should be subcut or reworked as needed. Our
primary recommendation is to include a }' thick sand subbase as the top of subgrade,
although this could be eliminated if you have budget limitations and you are willing to
accept the reduced perfonnance.
.#
AET #01-00590 - Page 3
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering
review for the proposed Shepherds Path Church in Prior Lake, Minnesota.
To protect you, American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET), and the public, we authorize use of opinions
and recommendations in this report only by you and your project teani for this specific project. Contact us
if other uses are intended. Even though this report is not intended to provide sufficient infonnation to
accurately determine quantities and locations of particular materials, we recommend that your potential
contractors be advised of the report availability.
Scope of Services
The scope is outlined in our October 31, 2000 proposal letter to Shepherd of the Lake Lutheran
Church. Authorization to proceed with these services was received through the signed acceptance
of the proposal by Mr. Kermit Mahlum, dated November 6. The scope of services performed
includes the following:
· Six standard penetration test borings in proposed building areas to depths of 21' to 24'
· Ten standard penetration test borings in proposed pavement areas to depths of II' .
· Soil laboratory testing (water content and pocket penetrometer).
· Geotechnical engineering analysis based on the above and preparation of this report.
PROJECT INFORMATION
The project site is located to the south and west of McKenna Road NW, and to the north of County
Road 42.
~"-------~--------,.
AET #Ol..()()590 - Page 4
The project involves the construction of a new church. The proposed layout appears on Figure 1.
We understand the currently planned building is located towards the east side of the site (generally
around Boring #9, 11, 12, 13 and 14). We understand the "dashed" building area shown to the
west is a potential expansion area.
We understand the main building will have two levels, with the upper level proposed at elevation
907.0' , and the lower on-grade slab level proposed at 894.0'. We assume much of the lower level
will be below exterior grade. At this time, specific building loads are not known. However, we
understand portions of the building will have relatively large spans, and we anticipate loads may
get as high as 250 kips.
A bituminous surfaced parking lot is also proposed to the north of the building (see Figure 1).
We anticipate that traffic will be relatively light in type (automobiles and passenger-type trucks).
Truck traffic is anticipated to be minimal.
A new roadway is also proposed on the west side of the site, extending southerly to County Road
42. Based on the plans, this road appears to be an extension of McKenna Road to the north, and
we assume the road will be open to public traffic, possibly including increased truck loadings.
Foundation Design Assumptions
Our spread foundation design assumptions includes a minimum factor of safety of 3 with respect
to a shear or base failure of the foundations. We assume the structure will be able to tolerate total
settlements of up to 1", and differential settlements over a 30' distance of up to 1h".d
The presented project information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This
information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are
changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are
appropriate.
AET #0 1'()()590 - Page 5
SITE CONDITIONS
Subsurface SoiIs/Geoloay
Logs of the test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs contain information concerning
soil layering, soil classification, geologic description and moisture: Relative density or consistency
is also noted, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N-value).
The boring logs only indicate the subsurface conditions at the sampled locations and variations often occur
between and beyond borings.
Geologically, the site is predominantly glacially-deposited till. classified as sandy lean clay and
clayey sand, usually CODtaining a little gravel. The till has become overlain by alluvium, which
refers to soils deposited by water. Much of the alluvium is lean clay, although more granular
alluvium (sand with silt, silty sand and clayey sand) is also present.
Much of the natural surficial soil has developed into a topsoil layer. Fill soils also overlie the
natural profile at some locations. appearing to consist of native soils.
Water Level Measurements
The boreholes were probed for the presence of ground water, and water level measurements were
taken. The measurements are recorded on the boring logs. A discussion of the water level
measurement methods is presented in the SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION section of this report.
Ground water levels usually fluctuate. Fluctuations occur due to varying seasonal and yearly rainfall and
snow melt. as well as other factors.
~,.._._..._-~...,...~
AET #01-00590 - Page 6
Water levels only appeared within two of the boreholes at the time of drilling. The measured
water level was 10.4' at Boring #12 and 22.4' at Boring #16, corresponding to approximate
elevations 884' and 873' , respectively. Most of the soils at this site are relatively slow draining,
and it would take extended monitoring within piezometers to reliably establish the ground water
level at the site. It does .appear that the hydrostatic ground water table is a significant depth below
proposed floor grades. However, because site soils are mostly clayey, with some interlaying with
more permeable soils, perched water conditions can appear at shallow and varying depths
throughout the site during times of wetter weather.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The following geotechnical considerations are the basis for the recommendations presented later
in this report.
Review of Soil Properties
Strength/Compressibility
The fill soils are poorly compacted, and are unsuitable for strUctural support. The topsoil layers
have some organic content, and are also considered unsuitable. Of the inorganic natural soils, the
fine alluvial lean clays are the poorest soils in terms of strength and compressibility. Surficial
weathered zones of till are also somewhat soft. Generally, soft clay~ (N-values of 4 bpf or less)
are weak. The remaining soils can remain for building support, although due to the presence of
the medium consistency lean clays, allowable bearing pressures will need to be limited to 2,000
psf. Bearing pressures can be increased to 3,000 psf, if the marginal clays are removed where
present within 5' (vertical feet) of footing grade.
-----r
AET #01-00590 - Page 7
Drainage
The minor amount of coarse alluvium present is silty sand or sand with silt, which are moderately
fast to fast draining materials. Otherwise, the soil types encountered are moderately slow to slow
draining materials. Granular lensing and other more penneable seams within the till can appear
to allow for some lateral migration of water through the site deposits.
Frost Susceptibility
For the most part, the soils present at this site are judged to be moderately frost susceptible.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Building Grading
Excavation
To prepare the building area for foundation and floor slab support, we recommend excavating the
fill, topsoil, and soft clay alluvium/weathered till (N-value of 4 bpf or less). In addition, we
recommend excavation of alluvial lean clays which have a black or dark coloration such as that
found at Borings #9 and 12.
In those areas where the foundations are designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf
(instead of 2,000 pst), we recommend additional excavation be performed, at least in foundation
areas. The additional excavation should include removal of medium consistency alluvial clayey
soils, where they are present within 5' of bottom of footing elevation. If the site is mass graded,
and specific footing locations/elevations are not apparent during grading, removal of these soils
would be needed throughout the entire building area. However, if footing locations are accurately
staked and elevations determined, this additional clay removal can then be limited to the footing
areas only.
AET #Ol"()()590 - Page 8
The above recommended excavation should result in the following minimum excavation depths
(for 2000 psf design loads) at each of the test boring locations in or near the building area:
Boring Number Minimum Depth of Excavation Cft) Elevation of Excavation (It)
9 - 5 891 :i:
11 2 895'h :f:
12 5 890 :i:
13 1 905 :f:
14 2 904112 :f:
15 'h 893 :t
16 2 893'h :t
The above table does not include the additional excavation in foundation areas designed for a
3,000 psf. The actual elevations in this case will depend on finaI footing grade. Additional
subcutting will likely be needed in the vicinity of Borings #1 I and 12.
Where engineered fill is needed to establish foundation grade, the excavation bottom and
subsequent fill system should maintain 1: 1 lateral oversizing. That is, for each vertical foot of fill
placed below the footing/foundation pad, the excavation bottom should be extended laterally
beyond the foundation edges an equal distance.
. Filling
We recommend fill placed below building areas where footings are designed for 2,000 psfbearing
pressures be compacted in thin lifts to a minimum of 9S % of the Standard Proctor density
(ASTM:D698). In those areas where foundations are designed for 3,000 psf, the fill placed below
the footings should be compacted to 98 % of the Standard Proctor density. The fill lift thicknesses
AET #01-00590 - Page 9
should be thin enough such that the entire thickness of fill placed can meet the minimum specified
compaction level.
The upper soils containing sod and roots, topsoil and the dark colored or overly wet clays should
not be reused as compacted fill.
The remaining inorganic site soils can be used, although will be difficult to reuse as engineered
fill. It will likely be necessary to moisture condition (wet or dry) some of the soils to attain
compaction. It will be difficult to consistently distribute moisture throughout the conditioned soils.
Proper moisture conditioning take a conscience attempt to spread out, disk, and blend the soils.
This process can be time consuming and labor intensive, and does require favorable weather. The
contractor should be aware of the difficulties which arise with these soils, and should not claim
that the wet or dry condition was not anticipated.
Some of the excavation bottoms will be sensitive to disturbance. In order to prevent disturbance
of these soils during overlying filling activities, it may be necessary to use more granular soils as
the initial lift of fill.
Where fill is placed on sloping ground (4: 1 or steeper), we recommend the excavation bottom be
benched or terraced into the slope (parallel to the ground contour) prior to fill placement.
Spread Foundations
The structure can be supported on conventional spread foundations placed directly on the
competent natural soils, or on new engineered fill overlying the natural soils. We recommend the
perimeter foundations for heated building areas be placed such that the bottom is a minimum of
...,
AET #01-00590 - Page 10
42" below exterior grade for frost protection. Interior foundations in heated areas can be placed
directly below the floor slab. Exterior foundations (those foundations not bordering heated
building areas) should be extended to a minimum of 60 " below exterior grade. Canopy foundations
would be considered "exterior" foundatioDS requiring the 60" soil cover depth.
It is our opinion the building foundations can be designed based on maximum allowable bearing
pressures of either 2,000 psf or 3,000 psf, depending on which grading approach is used. These
design pressures are associated with a minimum factor of safety of at least 3 against a shear
failure. We judge that total settlements will be less than 1 If, and differential settlements
represented by the conditions on the boring logs should not exceed Yl".
For your design of sliding resistance, we estimate a coefficient of friction between the on-site soils
and mass concrete to be 0.35.
Floor Slabs
Any new fill placed to attain tIoor slab subgrade, including utility and foundation trench backfill,
should be compacted to a minimum of 95 % of the Standard Proctor density.
We estimate the clayey soils should provide a Modulus of Sub grade Reaction (k-value) of at least
150 psi per inch.
For recommendations pertaining to moisture and vapor protection of the floor slabs, we refer you
to the attached standard sheet entitled "Floor Slab MoistureNapor Protection".
AET #01-00590 - Page 11
Bulldine BacldUlina
Our recommendations for backfilling the structure appears on two standard data sheets which we
have attached to this report. These sheets are entitled:
· " Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction"
. "Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water'Control"
Pavement SublVade Preparation
The on-site soils are slow draining and moderately frost susceptible. This condition can lead to
premature pavement distress due to build-up and freez~g of water within the aggregate base layer
and/or the upper portion of the subgrade. To reduce the potential for this to occur, it is beneficial
to place a sand subbase drainage layer directly below the aggregate base, which we consider to
be part of the subgrade. Obviously. cost is a factor in your decision whether or not to use a
subbase. Although the use of a sand subbase has a higher initial cost. longer term costs can be
reduced by the improved performance, lower maintenance, the use of thinner pavement. sections
and the improved constructability.
To prepare pavement subgrades, we recommend stripping the surficial organic topsoil and fill
layers. Except where grade is already sufficiently low, additional subcutting should be performed
as needed to attain subgrade elevation, which would be at bottom of aggregate base grade if no
subbase is used, and at bottom of subbase if the sand is used. It is anticipated that the fine alluvial
lean clays will be quite unstable, and will be difficult to prepare to proper stability. In addition.
these soils have the lowest R-value. Therefore, we recommend the alluvial lean clays be subcut
where they are present within the upper 3' subgrade zone. The sandy lean clays would then be
the limited soils in tenns of R-value for the pavement section thickness design.
AET #01-00590 - Page 12
Soils present in the bottom of the subcut should be evaluated for stability, preferably by means of
test rolling. Test rolling is described on the attached sbeet entitled "Bituminous Pavement
Subgrade Preparation and Design." Where excessive rotting or yielding is noted under the test
roll, additional subcutting and replacement, or in-place scarification, drying, and recompaction
should fake place until stability can be gained. If there are areas where th~ exposed soils are
greater than 3' beneath final subgrade elevation (figured as the contact with the bottom of the
aggregate base), then scarification and drying should not be necessary. The exception would be
in the case of excessive instability, where the poor condition limits the ability to compact the fill
placed above these soils. We should caution that most of the alluvial clays and weathered tills (and
perhaps some of the non-weathered tills) can be expected to be relatively unstable, and significant
stability correction may be needed. This will somewhat depend on the season in which the work
is performed and the amount of rainfall just prior to the work.
We recommend the sand subbase material at least consist of a "Select Granular Borrow" per
MnlDOT Specification 3149.2B2. This specification requires that the soils contain less than 12 %
by weight passing the #200 sieve (SP or SP-SM designation). If available at a reasonable cost, it
would be preferable to use a "Modified Select Granular Borrow." We define this materials as a
sand having less than 5 % by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40 % passing the #40
.
sieve. This would be a mostly medium grained (SP) sand. This soil is more free draining and
maintains better stability when saturated.
Compaction of new fill should meet the requirements of MnlDOT Specification 2I05.3Fl
(Specified Density Method). This specification requires soils placed within the upper 3' of
subgrade be compacted to a mininium of 100% of the Standard Proctor density (ASTM:D698).
This specification also includes water content range requirements (65 % to 102 % of the optimum
water content condition). Soils placed below the upper 3' zone can have a reduced minimum
compaction level of 95 %.
AET #01-00590 - Page 13
The sand subbase layer should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage. The use of
Modified Select Granular Borrow will allow more favorable migration of water to low elevation
areas. With sufficient sloping, and the freer draining sand, draintile lines in low elevation points
should be sufficient. With slower draining sands and less sloping, more extensive draintile lines
would be needed.
Pavement TJUckness Desi&n~
If a subbase layer is not used, we estimate the limited sandy lean clays will have an R-value of20.
If a 1 t thick sand subbase is used, we judge the composite subgrade will have an equivalent R-
value on the order of 35.
We assume the north parking lot will mainly be devoted to "automobile only" parking, which we
refer to as light duty pavements. We assume the west drive area will experience more significant
truck traffic, and are also providing a "heavy duty" design intended for the higher axle loads
associated with the trucks. Below, we are providing recommended light and heavy duty pavement
thickness designs, based on a "20-year" pavement life.
Subgrade with I' sand Subgrade with No
Material Subbase Subbase
Light Duty Heavy Duty Light Duty Heavy Duty
Bituminous Wear (Type 41) 1~" 2" 1~" 2"
Bituminous Base (Type 31) 1W' 2" Jlh" 2"
Class 5 Aggregate Base (MnIOOT 3138) 5" 7" 7" 10"
If the west roadway area is going to be a municipal street, you should check with the City of Prior
Lake to determine if they have any additional specifications which need to be followed.
AET #01-00590. Page 14
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
Construction Difficulties
Many of the on-site clayey soils available for fill may be wet or possibly dry, thereby requiring
moisture conditioning if they are to be reused as engineered fill. Soils containing organic content.
roots, or other debris, should be avoided.
The on-site soils can contain cobbles and boulders which can complicate excavation and filling.
Because of the poor draining condition of the on-site soils, water will tend to collect within open
excavations, during times of wet weather. We recommend positive dewatering be performed as
needed to allow filling and/or building construction in a non-standing water condition. The
presence of available water greatly increases the potential for soil disturbance.
Excavation Sidesloping
If unretained, the excavation should maintain sideslopes in accordance with OSHA Regulations
(Standards - 29 CPR), Part 1926. Subpart P, "Excavations" (see www.osha.gov). Even with the
required OSHA sloping, ground water can potentially induce sideslope erosion or running which
could require slope maintenance.
Observation and .Testing
The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found at our test boring
10catioDS. Since the soil conditions can be expected to vary away from the soil boring locations,
we recommend. on-site observation by an AET geotechnical engineer/technician during
construction to evaluate these potential changes. Soil density testing should also be performed on
. new fill placed in order to document that project specifications for compaction have been satisfied.
AET #01-00590 - Page 15
Sl)BSURFACE EXPLORATION
General
The geotechnical exploration program for the project consisted of sixteen standard penetration test
borings which were drilled at the site on November 8, 9 and 10, 2000. The boring locations
appear on Figures 1 and 2 in the appendix. During our field activities, we did not have a sea level
datum benchmark available. Therefore, we used an assumed benchmark of 100.0' for the fire
. hydrant located in front of house #13690 located to the north of the northwest comer of the site.
The surface elevations based on this assumed benchmark appear on the individual boring logs.
Based on contour plan information provided to us, it appears that our assumed benchmark roughly
correlates with elevation 814.3' (based on averaging of apparent contour elevations). Based on
this apparent correlation, we have also included sea level datum elevations in parenthesis on the
logs. However, because of the method used for determining the correlation. these elevations
should be considered approximate.
Drilliog M~hods
The standard penetration test borings were drilled using 3.25 n inside diameter hollow stem augers.
Samplinlf Methods
SpOt-Spoon Samples (SS)
Standard penetration (split-spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with
ASTM:D 1586. This method consists of driving a 2 no. D. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil
with a 14()..pound hammer dropped from a height of 30". The sampler is driven a total of 18" into
the soil. After an initial set of 6 n , the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12 "
is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value.
AET #01-00590 - Page 16
Sampling Limitations
Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the
spacing of samples and the action of drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects
generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present in the ground even if
they are not noted on the boring logs.
Classification Methods
Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USC)
system. The use system is described in ASTM:D2487 and D2488. Where laboratory
classification tests (sieve analysis or Atterberg Limits) have been performed, classifications per
ASTM:D2487 are possible. Otherwise, soil classifications shown on the boring logs are visual-
manual judgments. We have attached charts (Appendix A) illustrating the use system, the
descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs.
The boring logs include judgments of the geologic depositional origin. This judgment is primarily
based on observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding
topography, vegetation and development can sometimes aid this judgment.
Water LeveL Measurements
The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following
information appears under "Water Level Measurements" on the logs:
· Date and Time of measurement
. Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement
. Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement
. Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole
AET #01-00590 - Page 17
. Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is eDCOUDtered
. Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drllJing fluid
The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels
measured in the boreholes. This is possible because there are several ractors that can affect the
water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include: permeability of each soil
layer in profile, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings, presence
of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing.
Sample Storale
We will retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30
days. The samples will then be discarded unless you notify us otherwise.
LIMITATIONS
The data derived through the exploration program have been used to develop our opinions about the
subsurface conditions at your site. However, because no exploration program can reveal totally what is in
the subsurface, conditions between borings and between samples and at other times, may differ from
conditions described in this repon. The exploration we conducted identified subsurface conditions only at
those points where we took samples or observed ground water conditions. Depending on the sampling
methods and sampling frequency. every soil layer may not be observed, and some materials or layers which
are present in the ground may not be noted on the boring logs.
If conditions encountered during constrUCtion differ from those indicated by our borings, it may be
necessary to alter our conclusions and recommendations. or to modify construction procedures. and the cost
of construction may be affected.
. The extent and detail of information about the subsurface condition is directly related to the scope of the
exploration. It should be understood. therefore. that information can be obtained by means of additional
exploration.
AET #01-00590 - Page 18
STANDARJ> OF CARE
Our services for your project have been conducted to those standards considered normal for
services of this type at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty. either express or
implied. is intended.
SIGNATURES
Report Prepared by:
Report Reviewed by:
/( ~~
jc{) .
Steven D. Koenes, PE
Principal Engineer
Jeffery K. Voyen. PE
Vice President, Geotechnical Division
MN Reg. #15928
AET #01-00590 - Page 19
FLOOR SLAB MOISTURE/V APOR PROTECTION
Floor slab design relative to moisture/vapor protection should consider the type and location of two elements, a granular layer
and a vapor membrane (vapor retarder, water resistant barrier or vapor barrier). In the following sections, the pros and cons
of the possible options regarding these elements will be presented, such that you and your specifier can make an engineering
decision based on the benefits and costs of the choices.
GRANULAR LAYER
In American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302.1-96, a "base material" is recommended, rather than the conventional cleaner "sand
cushion" material. The manual D'llljlltainll that clean sand (common "cushion" sand) is difficult to compact and maintain until
concrete placement is complete. ACI recommends a clean. fine graded material (with at least 1096 to 30% of particles passing
a #100 sieve) wbich is not contaminated with clay, sUt or organic material. We refer you to ACl302.1-96 for additioDal details
regarding the requirements for the base material.
In cases where potential static water levels or significant perched water sources appear near or above the floor slab. an underftoor
drainage system may be needed wherein a draintile system is placed within a thicker clean sand or gravel layer . Such a system
should be properly engineered depending on subgrade soil types and ratelbead of water inflow.
VAPOR MEMBRANE
The need for a vapor membrane depends on whether the floor slab will have a vapor sensitive covering, will have vapor sensitive
items stored on the slab, or if the space above the slab will be a humidity controlled area. If the project does not have this vapor
sensitivity or moisture control need, placement of a vapor membrane may not be necessary . Your decision will then relate to
whether to use the ACI base material or a conventional sand cushion layer. However, if any of the above sensitivity issues apply,
placement of a vapor membrane is recommended. Some floor covering systems (adhesives and flooring materials) require a vapor
membrane to mJlint~in a specified maximum slab moisture content as a condition of their warranty.
VAPOR MEMBRANE/GRANULAR LAYER PLA~EMENT
A number of issues should be considered when deciding whether to place the vapor membrane above or below the granular layer.
The benefits of placing the slab on a granular layer. with the vapor membrane placed below the granular layer, include reduction
of the following:
· Slab curling during the curing and drying process.
· Time of bleeding, which allows for quicker finishing.
· Vapor membrane puncturing.
· Surface blistering or delamination caused by an extended bleeding period.
· Cracking caused by plastic or drying shrinkage.
The benefits of placing the vapor membrane over the granular layer include the following:
· The moisture emission rate is achieved faster.
· Eli",in.!ltes a potential water reservoir within the granular layer above the membrane.
· Provides a "slip surface", thereby reducing slab restraint and the associated random cracking.
If a membrane is to be used in conjunction with a granular layer, the approach recommended depends on slab usage and the
construction schedule. The vapor membrane should be placed above the granular layer when:
· Vapor sensitive floor covering systems are used or vapor sensitive items will be directly placed on the slab.
· The area will be humidity controllecJ, but the slab will be placed before the building is enclosed and sealed from rain.
· Required by a floor covering manufacturer's system warranty.
The vapor membrane should be placed below the granular layer when:
· Used in humidity controlled areas (without vapor sensitive coverings/stored items), with the roof membrane in place,
and the building enclosed to the point where precipitation will not intrude into the slab area. Consideration should be
given to slight sloping of the membrane to edges where draintile or other disposal methods can alleviate potential water
sources, such as pipe or roof leaks, foundation wall damp proofIng failure, fIre sprinkler system activation, etc.
There may be cases where membrane placement may have a detrimental effect on the subgrade support system (e.g., expansive
soils). In these cases, your decision will need to weigh the cost of subgrade options and the performance risks.
AET #Ol~590 - Page 20
BASEMENTIRETAlNING WALL BACKFILL AND WATER CONTROL
DRAINAGE
Below grade basements should include a perimeter backfill drainage system on the exterior side of the wall. The
exception may be where basements lie within free draining sands where water will not perch in the backfill.
Drainage sYstemS sbould consist of perforated or slotted PVC drainage pipes located at the bottom of the backfill
trench, lower than the interior floor grade. The drain pipe should be surrounded by properly graded filter rock.
The drain pipe should be connected to a suitable means of disposal, such as a sump basket or a gravity outfall.
A storm sewer gravity outfall would be preferred over exterior dayligbting. as the latter may freeze during
winter. For non-building, exterior retaining walls. weep holes at the base of the wall can be substituted for a
drain pipe.
BACKFILLING
Prior to backfilling, damp/water proofing should be applied on perimeter basement walls. The backfill materials
placed against basement walls will exert lateralI01lding.ct. To reduce this loading by allowing for drainage, we
recommend using free draining sands for backfill. The zone of sand backfill should extend outward from the
wall at least 2' . and then upward and outward from the wall at a 300 or greater angle from venical. The sands
should contain no greater than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. which would include (SP) and (SP-5M)
soils. The sand backfill should be placed in lifts and compacted with portable compaction equipment. This
compaction should be to the specified levels if slabs or pavements are placed above. Where slab/pavements are
not above, we recommend capping the sand bacldill with a layer of clayey soil to minimize surface water
infiltration. Positive surface drainage away from the building should also be JYI11illtaiJled.
Backfilling with silty or clayey soil is possible but not preferred. These soils can build-up water which increases
. lateral pressures and results in wet wall conditions and possible water infiltration into the basement. If you elect
to place silty or clayey soils as backfill. we recommend you place a prefabricated drainage composite against
the wall which is hydraulically connected to a drainage pipe at the base of the backfill trench. High plasticity
clays should be avoided as backfill due to their swelling potential.
LATERAL PRESSIlBES
Lateral earth pressures on below grade walls vary, depending on backfill soil classification, backfill compaction
and slope of the backfill surface. Static or dynamic surcharge loads near the wall will also increase lateral wall
pressure. For design. we recommend the following ultimate lateral earth pressure values (given in equivalent
fluid pressure values) for a drained soil compacted to 95 % of the standard Proctor density and a level ground
surface.
Soil Type
Sands (SP or SP-SM)
Silty Sands (SM)
Fine Grained Soils (SC, CL or ML)
Equivalent Fluid Density
Active (pel) At-Rest (pet)
30
40
70
4S
60
90
Basement walls are normally restrained at the top which restricts movement. In this case. the design lateral
pressures should be the "at-rest" pressure situation. Retaining walls which are free to rotate or deflect should
be designed using the active case. Lateral earth pressures will be significantly higher than that shown if the
backfill soils are not drained and become saturated.
American Engineering Testing, Inc.
AET #01-00590 - Page 21
FREEZING WEATHER EFFECTS ON Bun.DING CONSTRUcnON
GENERAL
Because water expands upon freezing and soils contain water, soils which are allowed to freeze will heave and
lose density. Upon thawing, these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave
and density/strength loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition. Heave is greater in soils with higher
percentages of fines (silts/clays). High silt content soils are most susceptible. due to their high capillary rise
potential which can create ice lenses. Fine grained soils generally heave about %" to 3/8" for each foot of frost
penetration. This can translate to 1 " to 2" of total frost heave. This total amount can be significantly greater if
ice lensing occurs.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Clayey and silty soils can be used as perimeter backfill, although the effect of their poor drainage and frost
properties should be considered. Basement areas will have special drainage and lateral load requirements which
are not discussed here. Frost heave may be critical in doorway areas. Stoops or sidewalks adjacent to doorways
could be designed as stmctural slabs supported on frost footings with void spaces below. With this design,
movements may then occur between the structural slab and the adjacent on-grade slabs, Non-frost susceptible
sands (with less than 12% passing a #200 sieve) can be used below such areas. Depending on the function of
surrOunding areas, the sand layer may need a thickness transition away from the area where movement is
critical. With sand placement over slower draining soils, subsurface drainage would be needed for the sand
layer. High density extruded insulation could be used within the sand to reduce frost penetration. thereby.
reducing the sand thickness needed. We caution that insulation placed near the surface can increase Ihe potential
for ice glazing of the surface.
The possible effects of adfreezing should be considered if clayey or silty soils are used as backfill. Adfreezing
occurs when bactfill adheres to rough surfaced foundation walls and lifts the wall as it freezes and heaves. This
occurrence is most common with masonry block walls, unheated or poorly heated building situations and clay
backfill. The potential is also increased where backfill soils are poorly compacted and become saturated. The
risk of adfreezing can be decreased by placing a low friction separating layer between the wall and backfill.
Adfreezing can occur on exterior piers (such as deck. fence or other similar pier footings), even if a smooth
surface is provided. This is more likely in poor drainage situations where soils become saturated. Additional
footing embedment and/or widened footings below the frost zones (which includes tensile reinforcement) can
be used to resist uplift forces. Specific designs would require individual analysis.
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
Foundations, slabs and other improvements which may be affected by frost movemems should be insulated from
frost penetration during freezing weather. If filling takes place during freezing weather, all frozen soils, snow
. and ice should be stripped from areas to be filled prior to new fill placement. The new fill should not be allowed
to freeze during transit, placement or compaction. This should be considered in the project scheduling,
budgeting and quantity estimating. It is usually beneficial to perform cold weather earthwork operations in small
areas where grade can be attained quickly rather than working larger areas where a greater amount of frost
stripping may be needed. If slab subgrade areas freeze, we recommend the subgrade be thawed prior to floor
slab placement. The frost action may also require reworking and recompaction of Ihe thawed subgrade.
American Engineering Testing, Inc.
ART #01.00590 - Page 22
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND DESIGN
GENERAL
Bituminous pavements are considered layered "flexible" systems. Dynamic wheel loads transmit high local
stresses through the bituminouslbase onto the subgrade. Because of this, the upper portion of the sub grade
requires high sttengthIstability to reduce deflection and fatigue of the bituminouslbase system. The wheel load
intensity dissipates through the subgrade such that the high level of soil stability is usually not needed below
about 2' to 4' (depending on the anticipated traffic and underlying soil conditions). This is the primary reason
for specifying a higher level of compaction within the upper subgrade zone versus the lower portion. Moderate
compaction is usually desired below the upper critical zone, primarily to avoid settlements/sags of the roadway.
However. if the soils present below the upper 3' subgrade zone are unstable, attempts to properly compact the
. upper 3' zone to the 100% level may be difficult or not possible. Therefore, control of moisture just below the
3' level may be needed to provide a non-yielding base upon which to compact the upper subgrade soils.
Long-tenn pavement performance is dependent on the soil subgrade drainage and frost characteristics. Poor to
moderate draining soils tend to be suscepnble to frost heave and subsequent weakening upon thaw. This
condition can result in irregular frost movements and "popouts," as well as an accelerated softening of the
subgrad.e. Frost problems become more pronounced when the subgrade is layered with soils of varying
permeability. In this situation, the free..draining soils provide a pathway and reservoir for water infiltration
which exaggerates the movements. The placement of a well drained sand subbase layer as the top of subgrade
can minimize trapped water, smooth frost movements and significantly reduce subgrade softening. In wet,
layered and/or poor drainage situations, the long-term performance gain should be significant. If a sand subbase
is placed, we recommend it be a "Select Granular Borrow" which meets MnIDOT Specification 3149.2B.
PREPARATION
Subgrade preparation should include stripping surficial vegetation and organic soils. Where the exposed soils
are within the upper "critical" subgrade zone (generally 2Y.z' deep for "auto only" areas and 3' deep for "heavy
duty" areas), they should be evaluated for stability. Excavation equipment may make such areas obvious due
to deflection and rutting patterns. Final evaluation of soils within the critical subgrade zone should be done by
test rolling with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck. Soils which rut or
deflect 1" or more under the test roll should be corrected by either subcutting and replacement; or by
. scarification, drying, and recompaction. Reworked soils and new fill should be compacted per the "Specified
Density Method" outlined in MnlDOT Specification 2105.3Fl.
Subgrade preparation scheduling can be an important consideration. Fall and Spring seasons usually have
unfavorable weather for soil drying. Stabilizing non-sand subgrades during these seasons may be difficult, and
attempts often result in compromising the pavement quality. Where construction scheduling requires subgrade
preparation during these times, the use of a sand subbase becomes even more beneficial for constructability
reasons.
SUBGRADE DRAINAGE
If a sand subbase layer is used, it should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage to prevent water
build-up. This can be in the form of draintile lines which tap into storm sewer systems, or outlets into ditches.
Where sand subbase layers include sufficient sloping, and water can migrate to lower areas, draintile lines can
be limited to finger drains at the catch basins. Even if a sand layer is not placed, strategically placed draintile
lines can aid in improving pavement performance. This would be most important in areas where adjacent non-
paved areas slope towards the pavement, Perimeter edge drains can aid in intercepting water which may
infiltrate below the pavement.
American Engineering 'festing, Inc.
Figure 1 - Boring Locations (North Portion)
Figure 2 - Boring Locations (West Portion)
Soil Boring Logs
Boring Log Notes
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
General Tennin.ology Notes
--.-
: o~
~8
o..!,.
~o
~
c
Cl
~
~
'H~ 'E
a ~ Cl
.- :z
~~ ~
t:1. ci Cl
.;g ~ .-
...,::j i1
u CJ
-as Q
u'C ....:l
~~ 01)
c
oc
Cl
=
~
o
rf
C;'
~~
~ ..
U~C;
~~~
~~~
i;
Q
~I
~
>>
=~
z....
~
~
Q
,
""-
+
~
It')
-
II
~
....
~
CJ
en
.........,~---...~ .
------ - -- ~
I'" - ~
.. ... -'.
------=--- .
-----.....:..~... ..
. ....--=-..~ ..--;:.-=.::~
.... . "'-----.. .
~. - -
- II ,....
------
PROJECf
Shepherds Path Church
Prior Lake, Minnesota
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBJECf
Borin Locations. West Portion
SCALE
1"= 154' +/-
DRAWN BY
lKV
CHECKED BY
AET JOB NO.
o I.()()S90
DATE
November 30 2000
I
figure 2
n AMERICAN
r1J ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
ABT JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DEPTH SURFACBBLEVATION: 100.3 (914.6:!:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBe. FIELD&LABORATORYTESTS
Fl~ MATERIAL DESCRIP110N TYPE IN. WC DEN II PL ~
Lean clay with sand, trace of roots, brown. very 2 M SS 6
soft (CL)
2
3 11 M ss 14
4 Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, stif(to
medium. lenses of sand below about 4' (SCISM)
5 6 M SS 10
6
7
8 9 M SS 18
9
10 Clayey sand, a little gravel. brown mottled, stiff
(SC) 10 M SS 14
II END OF BORING
o..9W 3.25" USA
DATE
TIME
11:40
W ATBR LBVEL MEASUREMENTS
~t..LBD CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING
D...... aH DEPTH DBPTH UlD LBVE
11.0 9.S 11.0
WATER
LEVEL
None
NOTB: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD
11/9/00
COMPLETBD: 11/9/00
cc: DA CA: MH ': 68
2/99
11 AMERICAN
i . ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BO~G LOG
ART JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 2 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJBCT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DWH SURFACE ELEVATION: 93.6 (907. 9:t) GEOLOGY N Me SAMPLE REC. FIBLD" LABORATORY TESTS
FBET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL ~ 2
Lean clay, brown, soft (eL) FINE
ALLUVIUM 3 M 55 20
2
3
Silty sand, fine to medium grained, brown,
moist, loose, a lense of silt at 3' (SM)
4
5
6
7
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
stiff to very stiff(CUSC)
8
9
10
It
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlLUNG METHOD
6-9Vz '
DATE
11/9/00
TIME
11:10
3.2S"HSA
COMPLETED: 11/9/00
cc: DA CA: MIl Ri: 68
2/99
.'
. .
18
. o. ~
. .'
.' COARSE
.' ALLUVIUM
10 M
58
18
13 M
4
S5
TILL
14 M
S8
16
22 M
SS
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILUNG
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVE
11.09.5 11.0
WATER
LEVBL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
THEATfACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS WG
II AMERICAN
i . ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING WG
ART JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 (p. 1 or 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church, McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake, MN
DEPTH SURFACBBLEVATlON: 92.1 (906.4:1:) GEOLOGY N Me SAMPLE ROC. FIBLD&LABORATORYTES'I'S
~T MATERIAL DBSCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN LL PL %
Sandy lean clay, brown, soft (CL)
2
3
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
medium (CUSC)
4
5
6
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown mottled, stiff
(SC)
7
8
9
10
11
DEPTH:
DRILLING METHOD
0-9JA '
3.25" BSA
DATE
1118100
TIME
Z:SO
COMPLETED: 1118100
cc: DA CA: MH Ri: 68
2/99
._.~A~_~~__~.'_.~___.=--._".~__---,-
SS 22
WEATHERE 4 M
TILL
ss
]8 20
ss
12
8 M
10M
SS
18
TILL
14 M
SS 16
13 M
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlWNG
DEPI'H DEPI1I DEP'IlI FLUID LEVE
11.0 9.5 11.0
NOTE: REFER TO
r:Jlt THBATfACHED
None SHEETS FORAN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON TInS LOG
11 AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
Clayey sand, brown, mediwn (SC)
2
3
Lean clay, brown to light gray, soft (CL)
4
5
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
soft CL
6
,.
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown mottled,
mediwn (SC)
8
9
10
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown mottled, stiff
(SCISM) .
END OF BORING
II
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
S M
18
AET lOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 4 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
D~~ SURFACBBLBVATION: 89.0 C903.3:t:) GEOLOGY N Me SAMPLE REC. PlELD&LABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERlALDESCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN LL PL %
Sandy lean clay, includes roots, dark brown (eL)
S8
12
3 M
88
20 33
4 M
88
16
7 M
S8
20
15 M
88
0-9% I
3.25" USA
DATE
TIMB
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CA VB-IN DRIlliNG
DEI'I'H DBP11I DEPTH PLUID LEVE
11.0 9.5 11.0
WATER
LEVEL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
TIlE ATTACHED
SHBBTS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON 11115 LOG
DEPTH:
DRlUJNG METHOD
11/8/00
2:10
COMPLETED: 11/8/00
cc: DA CA: MB ': 68
2/99
11 AMERICAN
1 ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
2
3
4
s
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
medium to stiff, lenses of sand (CUSC)
6
7
8
9
10
II
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlLUNG METHOD
~9'A'
DATE
TIME
3.25" HSA
11/8/00
1:30
COMPLETED: 11/8/00
cc: DA CA: MIl Ri: 68
2/99
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
.OR FILL
II M
II M
7 M
ss
AET JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 5 (p. 1 of 1)
PROJEer: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
Di~ SURFACE ELEVATION: 93.1 (907.4:t) GEOLOGY N Me SAMPLE REC. FIELD&: LABORATORY TESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN LL PL ~ 2
Sandy lean clay, includes roots, dark brown, soft
CL ma be fill 3 M S8 16
Sandy can clay, brown, soft (CL) (may be fill)
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown, medium,
laminations of sand (eL)
ss
7 M
88
S8
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlWNG
DEPTH DEP1lf DEPnI FLUID LEV
lI.O 9.5 11.0
12
18
22
22
NOTE: REFER TO
~~iE THE ATTACHED
None SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANA nON OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
11 AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
ART JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 6 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DiU" SURFACE BLEV A TJON: 94.0 (90S. 3:1:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC. FlBLD & LABORATORY TESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIP110N TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL % 2
Sandy lean clay, dark brown, soft (eL) (may be
fill)
2
3
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, bro~, medium
(CUSC) (may be fill)
4
s
6
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
medium (CUSC)
7
8
9
10
Ii
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlWNG METHOD
3 M
SS
55
8 M
58
9 M
SS
7 M
S5
8 M
o-9lh'
DATE
TIME
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlWNG
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVE
11.0 9.5 11.0
3.25" HSA
11/8/00
U:lS
COMPLETED: 11/8/00
cc: DA CA: MIl Ri: 68
2/99
16
10
18
20
20
WATER
LEVEL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
THE AlTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
n AMERICAN
rlJ ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 7 (P. 1 of 1)
PRomcr: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
D'iU" SURFACE ELEVATION: 92.7 (907.0:!:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBC. FIELD&: LABORATORY TESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 'Ai 2
Clayey sand, a little gravel, li~t brownish gray 12 M SS 16
and brown mottled, stiff, laminations of sand
(SC)
11 M SS 16
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
stiff (CUSC) 9 M S8 18
END OF BORING
Fill, mostly lean clay, trace of roots, black and
dark brown
2
3
Lean clay, black to dark brown, soft (eL) (may
be fill)
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
II
DEPTII:
DRlLIJNG METIIOD
o-91h'
3.25" USA
DATH
1118100
TIME
11:20
. COMPlBTED: 1118100
cc: DA CA: MB Ri: 68
2/99
, -----.
FILL
S 24
3 M
58
12
4 M
ss
WATER
LEVEL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
THEATIACHED
SHEETS POR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
11 AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
ABT JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church, McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake, MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 88.9 (903.2:!:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLB REC, FIELD&LABORATORYTESTS
~T MATBRlALDESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL ~
2
FiI~ mostly lean olay, dark brown, brown and
black
3
Sand with silt, ime to medium grained, light
brown, moist, very loose (SP-SM) (may be fill)
4
S
6
7
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, stiff (SC)
8
Sandy lean olay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
9 stiff (CUSC)
10
II
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlWNO MBTHOD
0-9~1
DATE 11MB
3.25" USA
11/10/00 11:45
COMPLBTED: 11/10/00
cc: DA CA: MB Ri: 68
2/99
FILL
5S 20
4 M
5S
12 2S
S8
..:. -:.: COARSE
..:.. -:.: ALLUVIUM
4 M
14
II M
16
58
TILL
9 M
5S
18
II M
WATER
LBVEL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
nIB AITACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON TIllS LOG
9.5
11.0
1].. .
AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING WG
AETJOBNO: 01-00590 LOG OP BORING NO. 9 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church, McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DIjUH SURFACE ELEV AnON: 81.7 (896.0:1:) GEOLOGY N Me SAMPLE REC. FIELD &: LABORATORY TESTS
FEET MATBRIALDESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN ~ PL $
Lean clay. includes roots. black, mediwn (eL)
2
3
Lean clay. dark gray and black, medium (CL)
4
5
6
Lean clay with sand, dark gray to brownish gray,
medium (eL)
7
8
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, grayish brown.
stiff(CL)
9
10
Clayey sand, a little gravel. brown mottled,
medium SC
END OF BORING
11
TOPSOIL
FINE
AlLUVIUM
FINE 8 M
ALWVIUM
OR
WBAnfERE
TILL
9 M
TILL
S M
S M
20
S8
6 32
S M
S8
14 18
8S
12
S8
4
S8
0-9sn '
3.25" HSA
DATE
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
TIME SAMPLED CASING CA VB-IN
DEPTH DBPTH DEPTH
3:05 11.0 9.5 11.0
WATER
LEVEL
None
DEPTH:
DRD...LING METHOD
11/10/00
co PLBTBD: 11110100
cc: DA CA: MR Ri: 68
21'>>
NOTE: REFER TO
THE AITACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
11 AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
mm~ACEBOmNGLOG
AETJOBNO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 10 (p.1 of 1)
PR.OJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42: Prior Lake. MN
DBPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 91.8 (906.1) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC. FlBLDIc.LABORATORYTESTS
FrET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN l.L PL %
Fil~ mostly lean clay with sand. brown
4 M
SS
5 16
S8
18
2
Fll.L
3 Fill, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel and
organic material, brown, a little dark brown
11 M
4
5
6
Clayey sand. a little gravel, brown, stiff(SClCL)
11 M
S8 20
7
8 Clayey sand. a little gravel, brown mottled, stiff,
lenses of silty sand (SCISM)
TILL
15 M
58
14
9
10
II
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, stiff(SClCL)
END OF BORING
14 M
S8
22
0-91h I
3.25" USA
DATE
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRIWNG
DEYI'H DEPTH DEPTH UID
DEPTH:
DRILUNG METHOD
11/10/00
2:30
11.0
9~S
11.0
WATER
LEVEL
NODe
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATI'ACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
COMPLBTED: 11/10/00
cc: DA CA: MH Ri: 68
2/99
I) AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
ABT lOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 11 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAB 42; Prior Lake. MN
Di\{H SURPACEELEVATION: 83.3 (897.6:1:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC. PIELD&LABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN LL PL qp
Lean clay with sand, brown. soft (eL) (may be
fill)
2
3 Clayey sand, a little grave~ brown, stiff (SC)
4
s
6
Lean clay, light gray and brown mottled, stiff to
medium (CL)
7
8
9
10
11
12
Sandy lean clay. a little gravel, brown mottled,
stiff to medium (CUSC)
13
14
IS
16
17 Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown mottled to
gray. medium to stiff (SC)
18
19
20
21
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRIWNG METHOD
6-19W
DATE
3.25" BSA
11/10/00
COMPLETED: 11/10/00
cc: DA CA: MH ':68
2/99
TIME
1:55
FINE
ALLUVIUM
OR FILL
WEAlHERE
TILL
FINE
ALLUVIUM
4 M
ss
SS
9 M
SS
6 M
SS
9 M
SS
6 M
SS
6 M
SS
10 M
SS 20
WATER LBVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING
DBPTH DEP11I DBPTH UlD LEVE
%1.0 19.5 11.0.
18
14
16
16 24
14
14
10
WATER
LEVEL
None
1.8
1.0
NOTE: REFER TO
THE AlTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPlANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON TInS LOG
n AMERICAN
rlJ ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
mm~ACEBOmNGLOG
ABT JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OP BORING NO. 12 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DIjVH SURFACBBLEVATION: 79.') (894.2:!:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBe. FIBLD&:LABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRImON TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL % 2
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFBR TO
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlLUNG WATER THE ATIACHED
DEPTH DEPTH DBPm FLUID LEVB LEVBL
11/10/00 12:45 16.0 14.5 14.0 10.4 SHEETS FOR AN
11/10/00 12:50 21.0 19.5 19.5 17.1 EXPLANATION OF
11/10/00 2:45 21.0 None 13.0 10.4 TERMINOLOGY
ON nlls I.DG
Lean clay, includes roots, black (CL)
2
3 Lean clay, dark brown, dark gray and black
mottled, medium (eL)
4
s
6
7
Lean clay, light gray, brown and gray mottled,
stiff to mediwn, lenses of silt and clayey sand
with gravel (CL)
8
9
10
II
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown and light
gray mottled, medium (CL)
San sit brown mottled mois
12
13
Weathered boulder, gray
14
IS
Sand, a little gravel, medium grained, brown,
waterbearing, loose, lenses of clayey sand, loose
SP
16
17
18 Clayey sand, a little gravel, gray, medium (SC)
19
20
21
END OF BORING
DEPTH: DRlWNG METHOD
0-19W 3.25" HSA
COMPLETED: 11/10/00
cc: DA CA: MH ': 68
2/99
TOPSOIL
ss
20
S8
12
S M
FINE
ALLUVIUM
7 M
ss
16 24
9 M
SS
14
MIXED
ALLUVIUM
8 M
ss
16
ss
14 19
MIXED
ALLUVIUM
OR
WEATIlERE
. TILL
. FINE'
TILL OR
COARSE
ALLUVIUM
22 M
ss
14
. ::' :.: COARSE
.:.;.:-: ALLUVIUM
.:.::-:.:
lOW
TILL
8 M
ss
12
'ALLUVIUM
11. AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
TESTlNG,INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 13 (p. 1 of 1)
PROJBCT: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAB 42; Prior Lake. MN
D~H SURFACE ELEVATION: 93.1 (907.4f:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBC. FIBLD&LABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. we DEN LL PL %
Clayey sand, dark brown, medium (SC) (may be
fill 6 M 55 6
Clayey sand, brown, medium (SC)
2
3
4
6
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, very stiff to
hard, lenses of silty sand (SCISM)
S
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlLUNG METHOD
o-19W
DATE TIME
11/10/00 10:15
3.25" USA
COMPLETED: 11/10/00
CC: DA CA: MB R1: 68
2f99
23 D
S8
16
30 D
S8
10
28 D
S8
10
19 M
S8
14
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CA VE.IN DRIWNG
DEPTH DBPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVE
21.0 19.5 21.0
WATER
LEVEL
None.
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
"I) AMERICAN
I ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
mm~ACEBOmNGLOG
ABT lOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 14 (D. 1 of 1)
PROSSCf: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
D~ SURFACSBLEVATION: 92.6 (906.9:!:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE DC. PlBLDkLABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERIAL DBSClUPI'ION TYPB IN. we DEN LL PL %
Fill, mixture of silty sand. clayey sand and
gravel, brown and dark brown
2
3
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, medium,
lenses of sand (SC)
4
S
6 "Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown, stiff(SClCL)
7
8
9
10
II
12
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
medium to stiff, laminations of sand (CUSC)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRlLUNG METIlOD
o-19W
3.25" USA
DATE TIME
11/10/00 11:15
COMPIEI'BD: 11/10/00
cc: DA CA: MH '. 68
2199
FILL
10 M
10 M
12 M
13 M.
15 M
S. M
8 M
9 M
ss
12
88
16 15
ss
16
ss
18
ss
16
S8
14
S8
18
SS
8
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRIWNG
DEPTH DEPTII DEPTH FLUID LEVE
21.0 19.5 21.0
WATER
LEVEL
None
NOTE: REFER TO
TIlE ATIACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS lDG
I) AMERICAN
i ENGINEERING
. TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OF BORING NO. 15 (D. 1 of 1)
PROJECf: Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 79.2 (893.St) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBC. FIELD &LABQRATORYTESTS
FrET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL '.I.
7 M SS 20
2 Sandy lean clay, brown mottled, medium to stitT WEATHERE
(CL) TILL
3 9 M S8 16
4
5 10 M S8 20
6
7 Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
stiff (CUSC) 10 M 55 18
8 TILL
9
10 12 M 55 16
11
12
13 II M S8 22
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, gray, stitT
14 (CUSC)
IS 10 M S8 18
16
17 Clayey sand, a little gravel. gray, stiff(SC)
18
19
20 10 M 55 20
21
22
23 13 M S8 24
24 END OF BORING
DEPTII: DRILUNG METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILUNG WATER THB AITACHED
0-22' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVE LEVEL
11/9/00 1:55 24.0 22.0 24.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
COMPLETED: 11/9/00 TERMINOLOGY
CC: DA CA: MIl Ri: 68 ON THIS LOG
2199
Il
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
mm~ACEBOmNGLOG
ABT JOB NO: 01-00590 LOG OP BORING NO. 16 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJBCI': Shepherds Path Church. McKenna Road NW & CSAH 42; Prior Lake. MN
D~ SURPACBBLEVATlON: 81.3 (895.6:t:) GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REe. FIELD&.LABORATORYTESTS
FEET MATERIAL DESCRJPTlON TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL $ 2
Lean clay, black, medium (CL) TOPSOIL 6 M 8S 16
Sandy lean clay, grayish brown and brown WEATHERE 7 M S8 18
mottled, medium (CL) TILL
9 M S8 14
Sandy lean clay, a little gravel, brown mottled,
stiff to medium (CUSC)
7 M S8 18
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
IJ
Clayey sand, a little gravel, brown mottled, stiff
(SC)
12
13
14
IS
Qayey sand, a little gravel, gray, stiff, lenses of
wet silty sand and waterbearing sand below
about 22' (SC)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRIUJNG METHOD
o-2Z'
3.25" HSA
DATH
TIME
1119100 1:05
COMP1BTED: 1119/00.
cc: DA CA: MB Ri: 68
2/99
22.4 SHEETS FOR AN
BXPLANATlON OF
TERMINOLOGY
ON THIS LOG
20
11 M
58 20
14 M
S8
18
10M
S8
S8 22
S8 24
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLE CASING CA VB-IN DRILLING WATER
DBPl1I DEPTII DEPTH FLUID LEVE LEVEL
24.0
22.0
23.2
NOTE: REFER TO
THE AlTACHBD
BORING LOG NOTES
Symbol
B,H,N:
BX:
AC:
CA:
CAS:
cc:
COT:
DC:
DM:
DS:
FA:
HA:
HSA:
JW:
MC:
N (BPF):
NQ:
PQ:
RD:
REC:
REV;
SS:
TW:
WASH:
WAT:
WH:
WR:
94mm:
T.
\1:
DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS
Deftnitfon
Size of ftush-joit,u casing
ax double tube core barrel
At completion of boring
Crew assistant .
Pipe casing, number indicates nominal
diameter in inches
Crew chief
Clean-out tube
Drive casing; number indicateS diameter in' inches
Drilling mud or bentonite slurry
Disturbed sample from auger flights
Flight auger; number indicates outside
diameter in inches
Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter
Hollow-stem auger; number indicates inside
diameter in inches
Jetting water
Column used to describe moisture condi~on of
samples and for the ground water level symbols
Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in
blows per foot (see notes)
NQ wireline core barrel
PQ wireline core barrel'
Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit
In split-spoon (see notes) and thin-walled tube
sampling, the recovered length (m inches) of
sample. In rock coring, the length of core
recovered (expressed as percent of the total
core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered.
Revert drilling fluid
Standard split-spoon sampler (steel; 10/8" is
. inside diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless
indicated otherwise
Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside
diameter in inches
Sample of material obtained by screening
remming rotary drilling fluid or by which
has collected inside the borehole after
"falling" through drilling fluid
Water
Sampler advanced by static weight of drill
rod and 140-pound hammer
Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod
94 millimeter wireline core barrel
Water level directly measured in boring
Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance
Symbol
CONS:
DEN:
DST:
E:
HYD:
LL:
LP:
PERM:
PL:
q,,:
q.,:
q,,:
R:
RQD:
SA:
TRX:
VSR:
VSU:
we:
%-200:
TEST SYMBOLS
Dermition
One-dimensional consolidation test
Dry density, pcf
Direct shear test
Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf
Hydrometer analysis
Liquid limit, %
Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf
Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field;
L - Laboratory
Plastic limit, %
Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf (aooroximate)
Static cone bearing pressure, tsf
Unconfined compressive strength, psf
Electrical resistivity, ohm-ems
Rock Quality Designator in percent (aggregate
length of core pieces 4" or more in length as a
percent of total core run)
Sieve analysis
. Triaxial compression test
Vane shear strength, remoulded (field), psf
Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf
Water content, as percent of dry weight
Percent of material finer than #200 sieve
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES
The standard penetration test consists of driving the sampler
with a 140-pound hammer and counting the number of blows
applied in each of three ~" increments of penetration. If the
sampler is driven less than 18" (usually i~ highly resistant
material), permitted in ASTM:DI586. the blows for each
complete 6" increment and for each partial increment is
on the boring log. For partial increments, the number of
blows is shown to the nearest inch below the slash.
The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC"
colwnn, may be greater than the distance indicated in the
N column. The disparity is because the N-value is recorded
below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defmed
inASTM:DI586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample
recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even
extend more than 18").
OlFLD012(6/00)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES AMERICAN ENGINEERING
ASTM Designation: D 2487 TESTING, INC.
(Based on Unified Soli Classification System)
Sotl C1aslificaliOll
CrIteria for AssignIng Group Symbols and Group NIlI'IlIII UsIng LabonllOly Tells" Group Group NameS
Symbol
Coarse-Grained SolIs Grsvels Clean Gravels Cul:4 and l$Ccs:tE GW WeD grlded gravelF
More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse Less than 5% linesC
No. 200 sieve fraction retained on Cu." and/or 1>Cc>3l GP Poorty graded grave'"
No.4 sieve
Gravels wI1h Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silly grave,F.O.H
More than 12'llt finer:
FInes classify as CL or CH GC Clayey grave""G.H
Sands Clean Sands ClP.:6 and 1$ Ccs:tE SW Wel!.graded sand'
SOlMl or more or coarse Less than 5% linesD
IraC1ion passes No. Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc~3E SP ~oorly graded sand'
4 sieve
Sands with FineS Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silly .enclo,lf.'
- More !han 121111 f1nesD
FInes cllllllllty as CL or CH SC Clsyey aandG,HJ
F1ne-Grelned Soils sats and Clays Inorganic PI>7 and plots on Of above CL Lean clayK-L.AI
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 "A" 6n8"
No. 200 sieve
Plc4 Of plots below "A" ML SilrK.L.AI
liner'
organic liquid limit. lMIn dried <0.75 OL Organic clayK.LAI,N
liquid Omit. not dried Organic .iltll',L.AI.o
Slits and Clays inorganic PI p/oIs on or above "A" Dne CH Fat aat-L.AI
Liquid limit 50 or mote
PI plots below "A" line MH elastic s111lC.UI
organic liquid Omit . oven dried <0.75 OH Organic clay'tL."""
Liquid IImil - nol dried Organic sltrK.L.M.o
Highly organic solis Primarily organic matter, dark In color. and organic odor PT Peal
"Sued on the materiel passll1l/ lhe :l-lrI. (75-mm) eI_, Ecu - 0. /0'0 (OJ "Ir AllerDertll1mhs pial In h.1CII8d ..... eoI1ls I CL-ML
elf 1.1d eampIe -.teinecf cobbles or IloIIldenI. or bDIh. .ad t:e- silty clay.
"with cabbI.. or boulders. Of boIll" 10 gtOUP......... 0'0,011I ", 8011 can",l... 15 10 2MlI plus No. ZOO. acid "wilh sand"
cGrl_ wllh 5 10 12... fines rtqIIlrl dual ByI\"boIs: Fir 1011 canIIIlns;?:15'Ml aancI. add "willi And" to voup or "willi gf8VBl." wI\idlner Is pl'1lll0minanL
GW-GM welJ.tr.decl gravel wllh elll name. r." eoI1 COIlIainI~3O'Ml plus 00. 200, predamlnantly sand.
Gw-GC w8l1lradecl gravel wllh clay lit.llnes ctaully .. CL-ML. use dual symbol GC-GM. or , add "sandy" 10 lD group name.
GP.oM pocrly gnIdecl gravel wfth IIII 8C-SM. "'II eofl canl8i1ls~30'Ml plus No. 2OCI. preclaminlnlly
GP-GC poorly graded gravel wflh cl.y HIf Ones U8 organic. lIlld "wilh organic OIlllS" la group gravel. .ad "gravelly" lD 9"'I'P nlme.
D~ wllh 5 lD 1~ Ilnes tlQUlnI duel symbols: nlme. 1IpJ~4 end plots on or ablMl "A" ~...,
SW.sM _l1IradBd sand wItII silt ' ~I so}I COftllllnaa!:15'Ml gravel. Ildd "willi gravel" to group OPlC4 or plats below ..,," One.
SW.SC weIJ.graded Anct wl1h clay _. "PI ploIs an or IIlove "A" 11M.
SPoSM poorly gradICl aancI wllh lilt "PI plots below "A" line.
Sp.sC ~ IIredecl sand with Cl8y
SIEVE ANALYSIS 60
I ,CIIEl"-'. I .,EY! "0. I For clalllficotiOR of fine-troinecl soils / / V
S In". I ... .... 0 10 10 00 so 140 zoo and f me"1JI'Cllned f1'act .011 Iff COGrse-t1'lllDecl "
100 I" 0 ."
- 10111. ,.
H SO Equation of "A" -11M ./ ~~ /'
II..
010 to 0 -
)( Horizontal at PI-4 to LL-Z5.5. ~~ O~ #$
! '" III tllen PI-O.13ILL-ZOI
z ~~
.., Q 40 Equa1ion of "U"-Iilll '7 ;1'
UI 10 0.. - IS... 01( Z V~l
'0 ... - Verticol at LL -16 to PI-T. " /
: 11\ I '" "
II: >- thell PI K O.9ILL-el
l- I I- 30 "
~ '0 ... / V
10 Z ~ "
u '" D.- LI.. 11/ /
0: U l- " 0" ~
r II: U)
'" ......... 11/ "
A. 10 < to
r-.. 10 A. oJ / " ~ ./ MH OR OH
~ D.-o.on II.. " V:"
0 I ~/
100 10
... I . , I. . I.. A /' IZ
so 10 S 1.0 0.$ 0.'0 71-- MLj OL
P4RTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 4 - I I I
01/
c...~-&.._ Cc-~-~-U 0 10 1620 30 40 $0 60 70 BO 90 100 110
.& .. . LIQUID LfMIT C1.Ll
GENERAL TERMINOLOGY NOTES FOR
SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION
GRAIN SIZE
Term
ASTM
Boulders Over lzn
Cobbles 3" to 12"
Gravel #4 sieve to 3"
Sand #200 to #4 sieve
Fines (silt & cIa ) Pass #200 sieve
CONSISTENCY OF PLASTIC SOILS
GRAVEL PERCENTAGES
Te~
Percent
A Little Gravel
With Gravel
Gravelly
3%-15%
IS %-30%
30%-50%
RELATIVE DENSITY OF NON-PLASTIC SOn.S
Term N-Value. BPF Term N-Value, BPF
Very Soft less than 2 Very Loose 0-4
Soft 2-4 Loose 5-10
Medium 5-8 Medium Dense 11-30
Stiff 9-15 Dense 31-50
Very. Stiff 16-30 Very Dense' Greater than SO
Hard Greater than 30
MOISTIJREIFROST CONDmON
(MC Column)
D (Dry):
Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to
toUch.
Damp, although free water not visible.
Soil may still have a high water content
(over .optimum"),
M (Moist):
W (Wet!
Waterbearing): Free water visible. Intended to describe
non-plastic soils.
Soil frozen.
LAYERING NOTES
Laminations: Layers less than 'h" thick of differing
material or color.
Lenses:
Pockets or layers greater than ~" thick of
differing material or color.
FIBER CONTENT OF PEAT
Term
Fiber Content (Visual Estimate)
Fibrie:
Hemic:
Sapric:
Greater than 67%
33-67 %
Less than 33 %
ORGANIC DESCRIPTION
Non-peat soils are described as organic, if soil is judged
to have sufficient organic content to influence the soil
properties.
01CLS0l1(4/96)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.