Loading...
11-25-19 PC Agenda REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes a. October 28, 2019, Regular Planning Commission Meeting b. November 12, 2019, Regular Planning Commission Meeting 4. Public Hearing – Major PUD Amendment Applicant: John Gabbert Address: 1801 Noble Drive Purpose: To subdivide properties within an existing PUD and incorporate some portions of adjacent properties 5. New Business – Site Plan Review Applicant: Webb Golden Valley, LLC Address: 5410 Wayzata Boulevard Purpose: To apply development standards and other City requirements to a parking lot reconfiguration --Short Recess-- 6. Council Liaison Report 7. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings 8. Other Business 9. Adjournment November 25, 2019 – 7 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Chair Blum. Roll Call Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Ari Prohofsky, Ryan Sadeghi, and Chuck Segelbaum Commissioners absent: None Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Planner Myles Campbell, and Finance Director Sue Virnig Council Liaison present: Steve Schmidgall Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Segelbaum, to approve the agenda of October 28, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. Approval of Minutes MOTION made by Baker, seconded by Pockl, to approve the October 14, 2019, minutes as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit Amendment Applicant: Borton Automotive Address: 721 Hampshire Avenue South Purpose: To allow for pre-owned vehicle sales in the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District Campbell introduced the Conditional Use Permit Amendment, which would allow for used auto sales at a location where auto repair was already taking place. He noted the property owner also owns the site to the south where they offer new vehicle sales. The site was temporarily used for vehicle sales while the showroom was under construction, and Borton would now like to use it for used vehicle sales. It is currently zoned for mixed use but is targeted to be returned to commercial zoning in the future. He stated that the current CUP, allowing for auto repair, would need to be amended to allow for auto sales. Campbell noted that the site is 2.27 acres and there is a building footprint of roughly 39,856 square feet. There are 120 parking spaces currently provided and an internal drive access with the property to the south. A cross-access agreement is recorded. He showed a photo from the street to point out the existing landscaping and noted that no exterior changes are anticipated beyond some cosmetic improvements to the façade. October 28, 2019 – 7 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 2 The existing nine bays used for auto repair would be retained and an indoor showroom would be added for auto display. He noted that staff analyzed the amount of square footage proposed for each of the individual uses and calculated the number of required parking spaces at 54. With the 64 spaces set aside for outdoor display, there would be 118 spaces used leaving a surplus of two spaces. Campbell noted that the proposed hours of operation were fairly typical with 8 am to 8 pm on Monday through Thursday, 8 am to 6 pm on Friday, and 9 am to 5 pm on Saturday. With no residential uses in the area, there were no concerns. He listed the 11 findings used to evaluate the CUP amendment and said that with conditions around limiting parking on Laurel Avenue, requiring vehicles to be loaded and unloaded on-site only, and adding some landscaping to comply with the I-394 Mixed Use Development Standards, that staff would be comfortable recommending approval. Campbell covered the parking screening standards associated with the mixed use district which would mean adding screening 3.5 to 4 feet tall along Hampshire Avenue. Segelbaum asked is staff had any thought on how much additional screening should be added. Campbell stated that the requirement is 50% opacity along any main frontage. Segelbaum asked why there was no screening requirement along Laurel Avenue. Campbell pointed out the issue of the parallel railroad track which does not leave room for screening to be installed. Brookins asked about the parking concerns on Laurel and if there would be enough space on the site for employees to park. Campbell replied that the division of parking spaces between customers, employees, and display spaces would leave sufficient spaces for employees to park on-site. Brookins asked if there was enough room for loading and loading to take place on-site. Campbell replied that he believed there was enough space for this to happen. Pockl asked about the proposed sign permit. Campbell noted that the sign would simply advertise the used car sales. Once the CUP Amendment was approved the sign permit could move forward. Pockl also asked about any other improvements to the exterior of the building or the site. Campbell replied that nothing else was planned at this time. Johnson asked about the sequence that resulted in auto sales taking place at this location. Zimmerman replied that while the showroom reconstruction was taking place, the Building Official gave permission for sales to be conducted out of the north lot. After the new car sales moved back, the used sales continued until it was noted that a CUP Amendment was needed to continue going forward. Johnson asked why the number of service bays were being limited in the proposed conditions. Campbell explained that the number of required parking spaces is partially dependent on the number of service bays so any addition of a service bay would impact the parking plan and would need to come back to the City for approval. Blum asked if the site needed to be brought into compliance with the City’s lighting standards. Campbell stated that no lighting changes were being proposed, but any future changes would need to comply with City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 3 the dark skies requirements. Segelbaum clarified that the lighting would be grandfathered in, but the use was changing so perhaps the lighting using might also change. Campbell agrees that the lighting for the auto sales use would need to meet the City’s requirements. Zimmerman noted that a condition would not be needed since the use would normally be required to comply. Blum asked about checking on the compliance regarding parking. Campbell stated that the concerns of Public Works would likely result in occasional checks and staff would respond to any complaints. Pat Sutter, applicant and owner of Borton Volvo, stated that they are trying to get employees off of Laurel Ave but some of those parking there are members of the public using the green space to the north. He asked why other dealerships in the area were not prohibited from parking on Florida Ave and also how screening for other dealerships would compare to what is being asked of him. Segelbaum asked if the parking on Laurel Ave was coming from Borton Volvo or from other businesses. Sutter replied it was a combination, and that it was convenient for some of his technicians to park there because it was close to their entrance. He acknowledged that future bike lanes would likely remove some or all of the parking. Segelbaum asked to clarify the questions regarding screening. Sutter replied it was not an issue if they should screen or not, but what the screening should look like. He said customers more often look online now instead of driving by the lot. Blum asked if changes were planned for the lighting on the site. Sutter stated that the current lights would remain and had been upgraded when the lights on the neighboring lot were upgraded in 2014. Pockl asked if any other changes would be made on the exterior of the building. Sutter said no, it was just paint and minor glazing. Blum opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing. Johnson asked about the screening at the neighboring site. Zimmerman replied the Commission had previously modified the language in that CUP because of limited space at that site. Blum asked when the City’s new lighting standards had been approved. Zimmerman replied he believed it would have been in 2010 or 2011. Blum asked if that meant the new lighting was compliant. Zimmerman agreed. Segelbaum commented that it is a dark corner and he would not want to restrict lighting any further. Pockl asked who would review and approve the screening. Zimmerman said that the applicant could provide information to staff for review. Segelbaum asked about the condition limiting parking on Laurel Ave. Blum stated he believed it was appropriate to require the applicant to provide enough parking on the site and keep cars of the street. Brookins agreed. Baker pointed out that the condition not only requires enough parking be provided on site, but that no employees park on Laurel. Segelbaum stated that if parking is being restricted in anticipation of the future bike lanes, it might be better to wait until that action took place in order to be fair to all businesses along Laurel. Baker agreed that there is a fair amount of parking along Laurel, but did not think it was appropriate to restrict use by the applicant only. Segelbaum suggested the condition be revised to state that the employer shall provide adequate parking on site. Brookins said he would prefer to leave the language at recommended as he has noticed the parking situation on Laurel. Johnson noted that if bike lanes remove parking then then proposed condition would be redundant. Pockl City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 4 pointed out that the business has shown enough spaces to be in compliance with code, and therefore it seems redundant to require the applicant to provide enough spaces. Zimmerman agrees that the proposed modification to the language would restate what is already required. Segelbaum said in that case he would favor striking the condition altogether. Blum expressed concern that employee and customer spaces could be replaced with display spaces, pushing other cars out onto Laurel. Baker pointed out that this would be in violation of the parking requirements and the applicant would then be risking the CUP and he didn’t think that was likely. MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Johnson, and motion carried 5-2 to recommend approval of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit 124 to allow for automobile sales and repair in the I-394 Mixed Use District at 721 Hampshire Avenue South, subject to the following findings and conditions. Commissioners Blum and Brookins voted no. Findings: 1. Demonstrated Need for Proposed Use: Standard met. Borton Volvo’s creation of a secondary location to complement their existing facility indicates there is a local market for the goods and services being provided. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: Standard met. In the City’s 2040 Future Land Use Map, this property is guided towards a Retail/Service Use. It is also in line with the City’s stated goals of locating redevelopment along major corridors and increasing the job and tax base within the community. 3. Effect upon Property Values: Standard met. Staff anticipates the new uses would have no impact on the surrounding property values, as it is isolated from any residential uses. 4. Effect on Traffic Flow and Congestion: Standard conditionally met. Staff does not anticipate a major change in the number of trips generated by the proposed use compared to former tenants. Trips generated from the proposed uses would not exceed the capacity of the roadways. All vehicle deliveries and storage of inventory would be required to take place on-site and not on the street. The number of service bays, which helps set the number of required parking spaces, may not be increased without City approval. 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: Standard met. The proposed uses may generate an increase in the number of employees and customers at the location compared to the past uses, but are consistent with the other properties surrounding the site. 6. Compliance with the City’s Mixed-Income Housing Policy: Not applicable. 7. Increase in Noise Levels: Standard conditionally met. The proposed uses are not anticipated to cause a significant increase in noise levels. Automobile repair work would be conducted within an enclosed building and would take place during normal business hours. No outside music, loudspeakers, or public address system would be allowed. 8. Generation of Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas, or Vibration: Standard met. The proposed uses are not anticipated to cause an increase in dust or odor. Minimal vibrations may be associated with the auto repair use but should not impact any adjacent uses. 9. Any Increase in Pests or Vermin: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 5 10. Visual Appearance: Standard conditionally met. The visual impacts of dealership inventory stored in the parking lot will be mitigated through the addition of screening. Any exterior dumpster or other disposal unit would be screening with material compatible with the building. 11. Other Effects upon the General Public Health, Safety, and Welfare: Standard met. Staff does not anticipate any other negative effects of the proposed uses. The location is surrounded by automobile, warehouse, and commercial properties and has adequate parking. Conditions: 1. All vehicle deliveries and storage of inventory shall take place on-site and shall not take place on the street. 2. No parking shall be allowed within any existing landscaped area. 3. The owner shall provide an adequate number of parking spaces for all employees to park on-site. 4. The number of service bays on-site shall be limited to nine. 5. Any exterior dumpster shall be screened from view and made of material compatible with the building façade. 6. No outside music, loudspeakers, or public address system will be allowed. 7. Additional screening shall be installed consistent with the Development Standards for parking screening listed in the Zoning Code for the I-394 Mixed Use District. If vegetative screening is used, the applicant must submit a landscaping plan (number of plantings, species of plantings, etc.) to be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. 8. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Presentation – Capital Improvement Program 2020-2029 – Sue Virnig, Finance Director Zimmerman told the Commissioners that one of their duties was to review the CIP and to find that it is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that while past plans have covered a five year time frame, the new plan covers a ten year time frame. Some of the anticipated projects will need to find dollars through grants or other sources if they are to be funded, but by plugging them into the CIP they can be planned for. Virnig stated that any expenditure of $5,000 is included in the plan. She reviewed an example of the Parks section of the CIP and how it tracks funding. She stated that the City moved to a ten year plan because it is better aligned with the Comprehensive Plan, and that the plan is rolling so that each year when it is reviewed a new year is added. Virnig outlined the sections, including Vehicles and Equipment, Parks, Golf Course, Buildings, Cable Casting, Storm Water, Water and Sewer, and Streets. She noted that the CIP includes the remodel of the City Council Chambers in 2020. Segelbaum asked about the off-leash pet area budgeted for 2020. Virnig stated that the pet area was being discussed that evening at the Park and Recreation meeting and that details would be forthcoming. It was anticipated to be in Medley Park. Brookins asked about how money from other groups was tracked. Virnig replied that expected revenues are included in the front section of the CIP. Johnson asked if there are any items from the Comprehensive Plan that are not included in the CIP. Zimmerman replied City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 6 that the broad goals of the Comprehensive Plan are matched up with the infrastructure projects of the City and that some obvious alignments include flood mitigation, sanitary left station reconstruction, and transportation projects. Some projects are not included until there is a better sense of where the money might come from. Other policy goals, such as support for affordable housing, fall outside of the CIP. Johnson asked if would make sense to list the goals from the plan that are not being funded. Zimmerman replied that it would be difficult to create a list of all of the unfunded projects. Baker agreed that the charge of the Commission is to review the consistency of the items being proposed, but not to review things that are not included. Zimmerman noted that the City Council has a chance every January during their goal setting session to add new priorities to the list for the year. Johnson asked about an increase in the sanitary sewer and water line repair/reconstruction between 2023 and 20204 when the Infrastructure Renewal Plan begins. Virnig replied that this marks a change from the Pavement Management Program to the IRP. Blum asked if the expenditures matched the financing for those projects. Virnig said it matched the projected financing. Johnson asked about a stormwater expenditure for Brookview and wondered if the golf course was self-funding. Virnig replied that this was not a golf course expenditure, but a stormwater expenditure that happens to be in the Brookview area. Johnson asked about the Douglas roundabout expenditure and if it included the proposed tunnel. Virnig replied that it did include all improvements, including the tunnel, but it was dependent on state funding. Johnson asked about hockey rink placement. Virnig replied that it involved replacing boards around the hockey rinks and that one rink would be replaced each year. Blum stated that he believes the expenditures are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that many of the Parks projects are great additions, but wondered if there should be a greater focus on passive open space in the future. MOTION made by Brookins, seconded by Sadeghi, to adopt a finding that the 2020-2029 Capital Investment Program is consistent with the goals and objectives of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and the motion carried unanimously. Discussion – Narrow Lots Zimmerman reviewed the City Council’s charge to the Planning Commission, which is to review the regulations around narrow lots and recommend any zoning code changes they think might be appropriate. He stated that narrow lots are 50 feet in width or less and that the conversation would involve some outside experts to provide input. The goal is to bring forward recommendations prior to the spring building season. Zimmerman said tonight’s conversation would cover existing regulations around setbacks in side yards and front yards of corner lots, height, and massing, and would compare similar regulations of peer cities. He noted that there are some other efforts going on, including the creation of background educational materials, community engagement with residents, and the development of a forum for December 9. He stated that there are approximately 600 narrow lots that have been developed with about 450 of them 55 to 65 feet wide and about 150 less than 55 feet wide. He displayed a map that showed where City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 7 the concentrations of these are across the city. There are approximately 720 combined lots throughout the city with about 300 that are made up of exactly two lots and 420 that consist of one-and-a-half lots and are therefore more challenging to redevelop. Zimmerman said a majority of these are 50 foot wide lots and that there is a cluster of 40 foot wide lots near Theodore Wirth Park. He displayed a second map that showed where the concentrations of these lots are across the city. He said if all of the combined lots were reestablished there could be approximately 500 new lots, though if only the most easily uncombined lots were reestablished there would be approximately 300. In the past six years there have only been five tax parcels divisions and only three of those involved narrow lots. Segelbaum asked if any of the lots being discussed tonight were R-2 lots or part of PUDs. Zimmerman said no, lots within PUDs were governed by different regulations and none of the lots being counted tonight were R-2 zoned properties. Zimmerman provided a review of where front, rear, and side yards are located on a lot, and what the zoning standards are for side setbacks in Golden Valley. He provided a table of side setback requirements for narrow lots in peer cities and concluded that Golden Valley has the largest setbacks compared to the other cities. He also discussed secondary front lots that are located on corner lots and showed how Golden Valley applies setbacks there and how it can make a lot unbuildable. In all other peer cities, exceptions to the setback in the secondary front yard provide relief and allow a larger buildable envelope. Segelbaum asked if these regulations were all for the narrowest lots. Campbell said yes, that was the case. Zimmerman said the lack of an exception in the Golden Valley code has led to a handful of variance requests. Blum asked if there is a minimum building width. Zimmerman said it is 22 feet wide. Zimmerman provided an overview of how height is measured and compared it to peer cities. Generally, Golden Valley has a stricter limit on maximum height. Most cities measure from the grade at the front of the building to the midpoint of the highest pitched roof, though Edina does have a hard cap on maximum height. He demonstrated how average grade is established if the grade changes across the front of the building and discussed the regulation that only allows the average grade to increase by one foot when a new home is built. This can cause problems when the lot has issues with drainage or other building code requirements. Edina requires a variance if the increase is proposed to be greater than one foot and there are additional requirements beyond the typical variance points of evaluation. Blum stated he is interested in learning more about those additional requirements as they seem relevant. Zimmerman provided a review of the tent-shaped building envelope the requires structures to step back as they rise above 15 feet and pointed out that the step back is slightly steeper for narrow lots compared to other lots. He said one potential change to the code could be to make the two slopes consistent, though it would be important to talk to architects and builders to understand how it might impact floorplans. He also pointed out that certain objects, such as bay windows, chimneys, air conditioning units, and other things, are allowed to extend into the side setback area and further restrict the space between homes. He discussed lot coverage and compared the Golden Valley standard of 40% to that of peer cities which are typically 30% to 35%. He also explained Floor Area Ratio and said that only Minneapolis uses it locally City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 8 for residential lots and it is probably overly complicated for Golden Valley to consider and establishing the correct height and coverage regulations would probably accomplish the same thing. Zimmerman directed the Commission to some questions to think about as the conversation around narrow lots continues. He asked for any general observations or comments. Segelbaum asked about what limits there are on regulating narrow lots. Zimmerman said if you regulate a lot until is unbuildable, it is likely a taking. However, the City certainly has rights to regulate in order to mitigate potential impacts. The challenge is to find the balance between letting people build a home and not impacting neighbors too much. Johnson asked if there could be a way to examine surrounding homes or lots and regulate based on averages. Zimmerman said that could be a possibility, but needing to survey all neighboring structures would be prohibitively difficult. Segelbaum stated that this approach has worked well in the past it he thinks it would be a good starting point for creating new regulations. Blum stated he felt the more important point was that people know what to expect when they read the regulations, and not providing openings to circumvent the regulations through variances or other means. He noted that there is some flexibility building into the zoning code, including a rounding provision. He added that based on the data, Golden Valley has larger setbacks and that it is a competitive advantage and that people appreciate this and it should be protected. Sadeghi agreed that this character is important, though in pockets with any narrow lots this may need some adjustment. Johnson noted that the two factors he thinks are the most important are height and the building envelope. Sadeghi commented that he was eager to hear from the realtors, architects, and builders to understand how the regulations play out. Segelbaum stressed he wants to primarily focus on narrow lots, however that is defined. Blum added that he thinks overlay districts could help manage the character of specific areas. --Short Recess-- Council Liaison Report No report was given. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings No other reports were discussed. Other Business Blum shared a recent experience as the Planning Commissioner representative on the Board of Zoning Appeals. He was concerned that the Board Members were overly lenient when it came to approving some variances, even when other options existed. Segelbaum noted that there is a regular education for the Board Members about the standard criteria for approving variances. Baker asked if there was agreement on how success should be measured – by keeping the number of variances to a minimum or by working with residents to find workable solutions? Johnson wondered if the two groups should meet City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 28, 2019 – 7:00 pm 9 to talk about the concern. Baker suggested at the appropriate time the Commission could send word to the Council and suggest they look at the topic more closely. Adjournment MOTION made by Baker, seconded by Johnson, and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:12 pm. ________________________________ Adam Brookins, Secretary ________________________________ Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Chair Blum. Roll Call Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Ari Prohofsky, Ryan Sadeghi, and Chuck Segelbaum Commissioners absent: None Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Planner Myles Campbell Council Liaison present: None Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Brookins, seconded by Sadeghi, to approve the agenda of November 12, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. Discussion – Narrow Lots Prior to the discussion on narrow lots, Blum noted that a previously scheduled meeting on an unrelated PUD Amendment had been postponed, and that interested persons should look at future meeting agendas for information on when the business would be brought back to the Commission. Zimmerman reminded Commissioners about the process and goals of examining the City’s regulation around narrow lot residential homes. The previous meeting discussed setbacks, height, and massing. Zimmerman explained that tonight’s discussion would include presentations by realtors with experience selling and marketing narrow lots. Discussion would also cover tree removal regulations and storm water management. Zimmerman discussed some changes to the schedule of meetings around narrow lots; he said the next discussion meeting would be in December, with a new engagement-focused meeting in January. In addition to the January event, Zimmerman highlighted additional materials for engagement, surveys, and education. Zimmerman introduced the realtor discussion. He noted that staff submitted some preliminary questions to the realtors to get some perspective from outside experts on the market. He noted Nancy Nelson was not able to attend the meeting but submitted a written memo instead. Zimmerman asked if there were any questions prior to bringing Karla Rose up to discuss the real estate market factors. Johnson asked how Commissioners should handle political or monetary considerations, and how it should potentially influence their decision-making. Zimmerman stated that residents’ questions and concerns are very market-related, and that understanding the impacts regulatory actions will have on the market is important. He felt it was better to try to understand what works for residents and builders. November 12, 2019 – 7 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 2 In the end, after examining this market angle as part of its research, the City’s eventual actions would be done through its zoning regulations. Johnson asked if discussion could then be limited to market demand for types of homes, as opposed the resale or demographic factors. Zimmerman noted that Commission could determine which questions or angles of discussion they chose to pursue, and eliminate lines of questioning as well. Segelbaum responded that it was still useful to understand impacts of actions on property values and neighbors’ property values. Pockl commented that the demographics are also important to understand to get a grasp on the topic and the demands of broader population groups. Segelbaum asked if Johnson could clarify what he may want removed from discussion. Johnson stated that the questions seemed overly political and outside the realm of their usual actions and responsibilities and that commenting on them would be beyond the scope of the Commission’s responsibilities. He stated he was not for expanding into these areas of discussion but that he would abide by the will of the rest of the Commission. Zimmerman responded that this is different from the Commission’s usual activity when compared to cases where a strict set of rules needs to be applied. He explained this was a relatively flexible process that sought to better understand residents’ desires and motivations in the use of small lot residential properties. With that being said, Zimmerman noted that Planning Commission had full control over what exactly they included within the narrow lot study. Blum directed Johnson to identify the questions he felt were appropriate or inappropriate to cover. Jonson identified the question of how residents used narrow lots differently as the only one that was related to their usual scope of analysis. Johnson felt that the Planning Commission is the expert in consistency in land use regulations, and should not take on issues around market or demographic factors. Zimmerman responded that while with certain tasks the Planning Commission must follow a strict set of standards such as with a Conditional Use Permit or PUD, in a case like the narrow lot discussion, the Commission had more room to define their own scope of research and what they felt was relevant to discussion. Blum asked Zimmerman for clarification on the rules and responsibilities of the commission in its quasi-judicial vs. its legislative role. Zimmerman answered that quasi-judicial is the role played when examining an application against the City’s standards, where consistency is the top concern. The legislative role gives Commissioners more flexibility to advise the City Council in making decisions that are in the best interest of the community. Blum asked if Johnson would like to make a motion to strike a question. Johnson answered that he will go along with questions as written, but with concerns as to whether any good will come of it. Segelbaum asked for further clarification about Planning Commission’s role and whether there is a limit to legislative power in cases where they may create legal conflict. Zimmerman replied that when a lot is made totally unusable, there are issues regarding takings law, but that staff are aware and take steps to avoid such issues. He said the goal is to find a potential solution to issues currently facing narrow lots without making them unusable. Segelbaum clarified that he only meant that tonight’s discussion was meant to figure out the conditions, so that later on those regulatory concerns are avoided. Zimmerman agreed, and added that the Commission was also trying to determine if the market was working for narrow lot homes within the city. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 3 Karla Rose approached the podium and asked if another real estate agent would be allowed to come up and speak. No staff or commissioners objected. Karla Rose and Vicky McGinty introduced themselves. McGinty noted that this discussion is about the concern of Golden Valley residents who have lived in the area long-term as well as the new residents arriving. McGinty referenced city codes and regulation that she believed were recently adopted but which were now not being enforced. She expressed an interest in preserving property owners right to use their property as they saw fit, but while acknowledging the necessary role of zoning and regulation. She said development changes and impacts the surrounding properties. She noted that established residents are longtime taxpayers, compared to new residents or builders flipping homes. Rose noted that Golden Valley is a larger lot community and that builders like building bigger houses. McGinty noted that the City’s role is in crafting ordinance and then enforcing those ordinances. Johnson clarified that Rose and McGinty can bring any information to the meeting they would like since the Commission decided not to strike any areas of discussion. Rose mentioned she would be happy to go over the questions with the Commissioners in person, or send her answers to Commissioners later. Segelbaum asked Rose and McGinty if there are any areas of the city with slower market conditions where narrow lots could help. Rose mentioned that it is difficult to think of a stagnant area in the city; generally properties in Golden Valley sell quickly. She noted that location and surrounding amenities have a major impact on sale price as well as how long the property is listed. She noted that she is seeing multiple offers on most properties she has listed within the city. McGinty mentioned that the definition of affordable housing is different for many people, but she thinks of a single-family starter home. Many newer families are interested in buying existing older properties and putting money into them through renovations. She reiterated that location is key. Segelbaum asked for clarification on property location information in regard to distance from a highway or other examples. Rose answered that she did not think there would be major difference in impact on a narrow versus a larger lot. Both would be impacted by the nearby infrastructure. Segelbaum asked if this would be true even with it being new construction. Rose answered that it may potentially sell better if it is new construction, but that it is hard to make that forecast. Both realtors confirmed that location was a key influence on price and that home-buyers seemed to love the older mid-century modern homes that are in Golden Valley. McGinty reiterated the need to consider both new and existing residents and the impact of changes to the regulations surrounding narrow lots. Baker said the general note he had taken from the realtors’ discussion thus far was the value of character. He asked both realtors whether they had heard of instances where a person bought combined lots with the knowledge that the home could be split into multiple developable lots. Rose responded that she’s sold homes that include land to be split off in the future, however those typically are larger lots that may have included an outlot originally. These properties were typically over an acre. Baker then asked if she had ever seen a similar situation but with a smaller lot. Rose and McGinty said they had not. After further discussion on the subject, Commissioners as well as the speaking realtors asked staff for clarification on the topic of discussion and the definition for a tax-parcel division. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 4 Zimmerman clarified that the discussion is not solely focused on tax parcel divisions, but on all narrow lots. The regulations that come from the study will impact all home on existing narrow lots, in addition to any combined 80 foot lots that are split at some point in the future. The rules will regulate the limits and allowances for new construction, but it will be applied to all narrow lots. Rose returned to Baker’s initial question and noted that while she has not handled such properties, she has occasionally seen those types of lots advertised as being splittable. Buyers though still often choose to purchase and live in the home rather than split them. McGinty said she did not have a specific example to answer the question but offered that a survey of residents may help to find the motivation to split lots. Blum asked Rose and McGinty what is driving activity on narrow lots and if it is an organic activity. Rose answered that it primarily investors and developers who are buying lots; families and small buyers are less common. Blum asked whether this development is starter homes or larger homes. Rose noted that to make money on a project the product needs to be worth a certain amount of money to meet costs and make a profit for parties involved. McGinty stated that she has had clients that paid over $500,000 to demolish homes and put in new larger homes. Rose said she heard of some tear down activity, but heard of less of it occurring on narrow lots. Johnson commented that he felt the discussion had gotten into what he had hoped to avoid. Discussion of individual cases would give them different outcomes and circumstances based on their variables. There was discussion between Commissioners and presenters about the definition of an affordable home. Johnson asked presenters what the cost of building a new home on a narrow lot was. Rose answered that it is tough to pin down but on average around $400,000. She noted it is hard to build anything new with costs under $300,000. McGinty asked whether Johnson would place limits or restrictions on the narrow lots. Blum clarified that this is an informal discussion; however, the Commission does not normally answer questions from presenters. Baker noted that the question and answer format was being effective thus far and Segelbaum agreed. Zimmerman checked if the other presenting realtor was at the meeting to make sure he had a chance to speak, but he was not in attendance. After some further discussion, the presentation continued. Johnson asked for further clarification on the baseline cost of building a home on a narrow lot, and whether the cost of development would even allow it. Rose stated it is difficult in terms of cost, especially since there are not many lots to build on in the first place. The cost ratio when building a new home on an empty lot would usually have the lot at around 25% of total build cost. With these combined lots, you have the cost of buying the existing home, the tear down, splitting the lots and putting in utilities on both, and the eventual cost to build the new homes. Blum asked realtors to clarify, does the cost of land in Golden Valley completely rule out locating affordable development on narrow lots? Realtors agreed that new construction is expensive and there are ways to save on costs but it’s challenging. Discussion continued and there was some disagreement about whether single-story development would reduce build cost and whether there is a market for new single-story homes. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 5 Baker asked for clarification. If height is restricted to one-story, does that make it a non-market friendly property given the cost of new construction throughout the city. Rose agreed that it is not common in the market in most cases. McGinty agreed with Rose, but did not see enough evidence to fully comment since she did not see cases of individual homeowners undertaking the project. Baker argued that it did not seem economically feasible whether it was a homeowner or a developer undertaking the work. Sadeghi agreed that from the economic standpoint it did not make sense. Rose clarified that it could happen with the right motivated party who was less interested in their return on investment. Rose commented it is more common to see renovation work on existing single-story homes rather than new- build ramble-style homes. Blum asked about the marketability of a two-stories house that was built narrowly due to larger side setbacks. Rose mentioned a lot on Boone that sold recently but it was closer to 60 feet wide. Blum argued that might show that there is still value after enforcing stronger setbacks. Brookins stated that the word character had been mentioned through the night and specifically Golden Valley’s character. He asked how does the local character differ amongst the core areas of the city with narrow lots and how should that impact zoning decisions? Both realtors agreed the value of those areas are completely different. School districts, surrounding home values, and more would all have different characters. McGinty mentioned that overlay districts could have different regulations to match the area’s character. Discussion continued on the topic of character and what it meant in the city. Blum stated that a theme he was hearing was that Golden Valley’s diversity of housing brings value to the city. Rose clarified that when she was discussing character she was referring to the era of the home, its materials, layout, etc. She asked whether she was missing the point of the character question. Blum acknowledged that this was still to the point of character. Rose elaborated that many of her clients are moving to the city because they like the character of the home, but that it did not preclude them from making changes. She felt that new development feels slightly out of place for the city, and that those are different from established neighborhoods. Segelbaum asked whether teardowns will become more common in Golden Valley generally in the future. McGinty stated she did not know, but that some of the older homes are getting to the age that the cost to renovate is higher than new construction. Rose said she has not gotten a sense that there is anything big on the horizon. There is not much change recently. Sadeghi noted that teardowns were probably uncommon citywide due to the usability of the post-war home stock today in terms of their style and layout. Rose foresaw little change in terms of teardowns, and reiterated that renovation was still more economically logical rather than full teardown. Segelbaum asked the realtors to talk a bit more about buyers’ intent to renovate and add on to homes. McGinty mentioned that almost all of the homes she has sold on Glenwood recently saw renovation after purchase. A lot of the renovation work being done is interior. Segelbaum clarified that he wondered about renovations that expand the home they purchase. Rose mentioned she has a client looking into it currently, but that it is somewhat location specific. They do not see major renovations that add height however. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 6 Pockl asked for clarification on the cost to build a rambler vs. a two-story home. Rose clarified that building tall is cheaper than building wide due to the cost of foundation to install. A larger foundation is a higher cost to build. Johnson added that it is important to consider the cost added for one-story. There was further discussion as to whether there is a builder and a buyer for a small single story home at the cost it would take to build one in Golden Valley. Rose noted that she had seen similar type projects with townhome developments but not as infill for existing narrow lot residential areas. She stated that there is a potential for that type of market, but that she has not seen a reason to anticipate it happening for that size of new construction. McGinty asked the Commission whether zoning ordinance regulation could be applied differently depending on adjacent properties’ conditions. Blum noted that a response to the question could be in what he saw as a gray area of it being a legal opinion. Baker answered that something similar had been done previously during their rework of the subdivision ordinance. Johnson noted that from what he had heard from realtors, new single-story homes were not feasible to be built given market conditions. He asked then if it was in the Commission’s interest to restrict lots to undesirable market conditions for their use. Rose noted that with deeper lots there might be a market for builders if the building pad could be increased to certain levels. 1,200 square feet not including a garage is around the minimum to make practical work for builders. Pockl asked if there was an ideal amount of square footage that Rose and McGinty’s clients prefer. They replied that it was dependent more so on other factors such as location, size of the family, and price point. Segelbaum asked whether it makes economic sense for someone to build a 1,800 square foot home for $450,000. Rose and McGinty agreed. Sadeghi pointed out the sale price of that home, considering costs, would have to be over $500,000 to make a profit. Rose pointed out that while true, this price point could make sense in a neighborhood with higher home values and prime location. However, it would be less likely in an area with lower average home values. Sadeghi noted that the build cost could go down if the development went up rather than outward. Commissioners had no further questions for the presenters. Blum thanked them for their time and both agreed to share their statistical analysis with the Commissioners. Rose did note that smaller lots on average took slightly longer to sell on the market, but not significantly more than larger lot homes. Zimmerman stated that after the real estate discussion he wanted to cover a few other topics of review in regard to narrow lots. He stated that mapping staff had updated the figures for currently combined lots, which are now further delineated by lot width for more accuracy. Segelbaum asked for clarification on the term “lot-and-a-half”. Zimmerman stated that he did not know the exact mechanics of how the transaction was handled at the time, but that often two parties bought lots with one spare in the middle, and then split this empty lot in half to add on to their own properties. Zimmerman described the City’s regulations on tree protection and regulation when modifying a lot. A permit is required in cases where significant construction or additions are occurring. The permit should City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 7 identify tree types, locations, and replacement types. Zimmerman described that the requirements differ based on the scale of development. Segelbaum asked a question about when mitigation is required for a property. Zimmerman stated that under a threshold, no mitigation would be required, but after a certain level of removal is met, mitigation becomes required. Johnson asked Zimmerman to describe what the lookback period was for mitigation. Zimmerman stated that the lookback is meant to capture the cumulative amount of tree removal during a two-year period. Zimmerman noted that staff reviewed peer city tree protection regulations. He noted that the various cities have different degrees of intensity in terms of mitigation and removal. Zimmerman discussed stormwater regulations and standards. He noted that some of the issues with residential stormwater management are magnified on narrow lots where there is less pervious surface and area for drainage or treatment. Zimmerman also presented some takeaway questions for Commissioners. Segelbaum asked whether there was a significant difference between the amount of pervious surface between narrow or wider lots given the City’s current regulations. Zimmerman noted that by code, the narrower lots are allowed a higher ratio of impervious surface and land coverage in order to allow for a reasonable sized home. The secondary issue would be that with narrower side yards, there would be less room for filtration and treatment systems. Segelbaum asked if there was anything unique to tree preservation in regard to narrow lots. Zimmerman answered that there was nothing in code currently. Johnson commented that when talking about limiting height, Commissioners should consider the impervious surface limits, since a wider rather than tall home would take up more land area. He stated that their actions could remove the ability to build a reasonable home. Blum clarified that there is a distinction between being unable to build any structure, and being able to build what Commissioners thought of as a reasonable structure, specifically relating to the takings standard. Segelbaum added that there is also the impact on the existing homes, which become non-conforming via changes to regulation. Zimmerman agreed that there are a number of thresholds to consider in revising the regulation. There is the legal takings threshold but then there is the reasonable or usable threshold that is what makes sense for a residential property. --Short Recess-- Council Liaison Report No report was given. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings Zimmerman stated that Board of Zoning Appeals would have the continuation of an item from the previous meeting and two new items as well. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 2019 – 7:00 pm 8 Other Business Commissioners continued a discussion from the previous Planning Commission meeting regarding the expected role of the Board of Zoning Appeals. There was some discussion as to how the work of the Board of Zoning Appeals may or may not be related to the Planning Commission’s work specifically around narrow lots. Commissioners expressed interest in potentially creating a work session once new City Council members are introduced in January. Commissioners also agreed to begin drafting a document or communication, which they would then forward to the City Manager. Adjournment MOTION made by Baker, seconded by Segelbaum, and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 pm. ________________________________ Adam Brookins, Secretary ________________________________ Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager 1 Date: November 25, 2019 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: Informal Public Hearing – Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120, Amendment #1 – John Gabbert, Applicant Summary Civil Site Group, on behalf of John Gabbert as applicant, is seeking approval of a Major Amendment to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in order to modify the current boundary of the Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 and to incorporate portions of additional adjacent properties. Doing so would expand the area within the PUD, reconfigure property lines, and create two new lots while consolidating others. The end result would be a net increase of one in the number of residential parcels available for development. A new plat would be needed in addition to other agreements and permits with the City. Background PUD No. 120 was created in 2015 and continued the transformation of a large area of land along the western edge of Sweeney Lake. Two vacant lots – one 3.27 acres and a 0.2 acre lot containing a driveway – were approved for a private residential development consisting of three single-family lots accessed from Noble Drive to the north via a private street. Previously in 2014, two additional single-family lots (1700 Noble Drive and 1750 Major Drive) had been created to the north of the PUD boundary and were subsequently developed. A large area of vacant land – 2.98 acres – remains to the west and is the primary focus of this proposal. Water and sanitary sewer lines run underneath the private street within the PUD and are protected by a public drainage and utility easement. Conservation easements cover much of the shore along Sweeney Lake, though one of the three properties within the PUD is currently without a recorded document. As part of the approval of the original PUD, the property at 1700 Noble Drive was granted the ability to utilize the shared private street, rather than construct a long parallel driveway north to Noble Drive. This did not occur, however, and only three properties currently share the entire 2 length of the private street. A residence at 1807 Noble Drive that predates the PUD utilizes approximately the northernmost 50 feet of the private street. The private street was constructed and paved to support the weight of large fire vehicles and includes a cul-de-sac with a fire hydrant at the southern terminus. Existing Sweeney Lake Woods PUD Existing Conditions Since 2015, three single-family homes have been constructed in the area – two outside of the PUD (along Sweeney Lake) and one of the three lots within the PUD. The private street serves the home within the PUD at 1620 Noble Drive and partially serves the residence at 1807 Noble Drive. The 3 homeowners association owns and maintains the private street, including responsibility for snow removal. Conservation easements have been recorded all along the Sweeney Lake shoreline, with the exception of 1640 Noble Drive where a draft easement still needs to be finalized and recorded. The properties involved in the proposed PUD amendment include not only the original three lots and private street, but also two vacant parcels to the northwest, an underutilized portion of a lot to the west (1550 St. Croix Circle), and the residential lot immediately to the north (1700 Noble Drive). A majority of the area within the two vacant parcels is open field with some mature trees at the periphery. The underutilized portion of 1550 St. Croix Circle contains a number of mature trees as well as a small delineated wetland of approximately 9,000 square feet. Additional Properties Included in the Proposal 4 There is a large (16 inch diameter) sanitary sewer line that lies roughly southwest to northeast beneath portions of both vacant parcels. This line eventually runs under the private street and continues underneath Noble Drive as finds its way to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) main north of Sweeney Lake. The entire area sits within a Single-Family Residential (R-1) zoning district and across the lake from the Hidden Lakes PUD. Proposal The applicant is proposing to modify two parcels within the existing PUD – increasing the size of one and splitting the other in order to combine the two halves with the adjacent properties on either side. In addition, the new PUD would incorporate vacant land to the west of the private street, creating two new residential lots within the PUD. Finally, an existing residential lot outside of the PUD and accessed from Spring Valley Road would be reduced in size. Overall, this would add one buildable residential lot to the area. (See images on following pages) Of concern to staff is the management of stormwater runoff and drainage throughout the area – especially with the addition of new impervious surfaces resulting from the construction of new homes and driveways. Generally, topography directs water from the northwest to the southeast and into Sweeney Lake. In order to address the runoff rate and volume, and water quality treatment, the applicant is proposing to construct a filtration basin to the west of the existing wetland. Access to all four of the properties within the PUD would continue to be through the shared private street. This street is currently non-conforming with respect to width and the applicant requested a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals in October. The request was denied. Without approval of a variance via an appeal to the City Council, the proposal will need to be revised to provide a conforming street design. 5 Existing: Red Properties within the PUD, Blue Properties outside the PUD 1 2 3 1 2 3 6 Proposed: Red Properties within the PUD, Blue Properties outside the PUD In concert with the changes to the plat, the applicant is proposing to change the name of the PUD from Sweeney Lake Woods to Sweeney Lake Shores. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 7 Neighborhood Meeting Notices regarding the proposal were sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site and a neighborhood meeting was held on October 16, 2019. Roughly 10-12 residents attended. After a brief overview of the development, questions were asked regarding the number of lots being created, how stormwater would be handled, and the pending variance for the width of the private street. Staff Review Lot Requirements As a PUD, the City can offer flexibility from the regular zoning requirements in order to achieve a better development. The original PUD allowed three residential lots to be created without the usual minimum amount of frontage on a public right-of-way. All three lots met the minimum lot area and lot width requirements. Under the proposed changes, the four lots within the PUD will continue to have sufficient area and width, but will still only have access via the private street. The existing private street is paved to a width of 18 feet and sits within a parcel that is 20 feet wide. The standards for private streets within a PUD are a minimum of 20 feet of paved width approximately centered within an easement that is at least four feet wider than the street. This is a PUD standard and one that is not subject to the flexibility offered other regulations. Therefore, the proposed PUD amendment is constrained by the existing nonconformity of the driveway; the PUD cannot be modified or expanded unless either (a) a variance is obtained to allow the driveway to remain at 18 feet wide or (b) the driveway is widened to meet the 20 foot standard. The following table describes the size of the existing lots and those proposed under the PUD amendment. It should be noted that the lot on St. Croix Circle extends across Sweeney Lake and includes a small amount of land on the peninsula. Lots Within the PUD Lots Outside the PUD Existing Square Feet Existing Square Feet 1601 Noble Dr 43,962 1550 St. Croix Cr 199,634 1620 Noble Dr 41,700 1700 Noble Dr 97,316 1640 Noble Dr 40,820 Spring Valley Rd 104,096 Tract H 25,557 Proposed 1601 Noble Dr 105,023 Proposed 1620 Noble Dr 63,365 1550 St. Croix Cr 153,771 Unassigned lot 3 39,425 1700 Noble Dr 117,132 Unassigned lot 4 42,739 Spring Valley Rd 42,073 8 Each of the three lots being modified and remaining outside of the PUD (1550 St. Croix Circle, 1700 Noble Drive, and the unassigned Spring Valley Road property) must be evaluated against the City’s minimum subdivision requirements found in Chapter 109 of the City Code: 1. A minor subdivision shall be denied if the proposed lots do not meet the minimum area and dimensional requirements for the Zoning District in which they are located, or if vehicular access is not provided from an abutting improved street. Standard met. All of the proposed lots continue to meet the requirements of the R-1 Single Family Zoning District and have access from improved streets. 2. A minor subdivision may be denied upon the City’s determination that a resulting new lot is encumbered by steep slopes or excessive wetness. Standard met. Two of the three lots have been developed with single-family homes in recent years. The third lot appears to be buildable, but has a steeper slope that will need to be addressed as part of the overall grading and stormwater plan. 3. A minor subdivision may be denied if sewer and water connections are not directly accessible by each proposed lot. Standard met. Two of the three lots are already served with sewer and water; connections are directly accessible for the development of the third lot. 4. Approval shall be conditioned on the granting of easements for necessary public purposes. Standard conditionally met. New utility easements will be dedicated as shown on the preliminary plat and as may be modified pending further review by the City. 5. Approval shall be conditioned on the requirements of outside public agencies with jurisdiction. The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission will review the PUD grading and stormwater plans. The PUD plans must be sent to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for review prior to City approval, and the DNR may comment on the PUD, final plat, and the easements proposed to be vacated and dedicated due to the proximity to Sweeney Lake. 6. Approval shall be conditioned on the resolution of any title issues raised by the City Attorney. Standard conditionally met. The City Attorney will determine if such a title review is necessary prior to approval of the final plat. 7. Minor subdivisions of nonresidential parcels may be denied if new development will cause undo strain on adjacent roads or on public utilities or will adversely affect adjacent uses. Not applicable. 8. Approval shall be conditioned on the payment of a park dedication fee, sewer and water access charge, and pending or levied deferred assessments. Standard conditionally met. A park dedication fee of $34,560 (6% of the estimated land value of the unplatted areas) is required for this development. This includes all unplatted land within and outside of the PUD. Deferred 9 assessments from a past pavement management project will need to be paid prior to the release of the final plat. 9. The conditions spelled out shall provide the only basis for denial of a minor subdivision. Approval will be granted to any application that meets the established conditions. Standard met. Engineering and Fire Safety Considerations As is standard practice for development proposals, plans were reviewed by the City’s Engineering Division. Staff had comments in the following areas: Grading/Stormwater Plan • The elevations of low floors and low openings of homes on adjacent properties are needed to evaluate potential flood risk • Revisions to the drainage area map and stormwater calculations are required to include runoff from the properties at 1700 Noble Drive and 1807 Noble Drive • Revisions are needed to the design of the filtration basin in order to meet the required separation from the groundwater table below • The proposed swales at the north end of the site and portions of the west side of the site are steeper than the maximum allowable grade • Revisions may be needed to address the manner in which water flows from north to south across the driveways west of the private street and then on to the filtration basin • The proposed grading plan and proposed drainage easements need to be modified so they align • More discussion will be needed about the phasing of the development (i.e. what infrastructure and landscaping will be installed and which areas of the site will be mass graded as part of a first phase of development, and which areas will be graded, restored, and planted as each home is built in the second phase of development) Utility Plan • Wider easements are needed over portions of the sanitary sewer line to ensure safe trenches and work areas when maintenance or replacement is required. • Existing easements will need to be vacated so that new easements can be dedicated concurrent with the approval of the final plat Landscaping Plan • The tree inventory must be completed in order to calculate potential tree mitigation • Native plantings may need to be expanded into additional swales across the site • Buckthorn and other invasive and noxious species listed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture must be removed from the site The Fire Department reviewed this proposal and strongly supports the approval of the requested variance with a condition that sprinkler systems be required in all new homes subsequently 10 constructed within the PUD. The Fire Department has expressed belief that this level of fire protection is more effective than widening the private road. They had no other comments or concerns. Fees and Assessments A park dedication fee equivalent to 6 percent of the estimated land value of the currently unplattted properties will be required prior to the release of the Final Plat. There are also deferred assessments from the City’s 2006 Pavement Management Program for the three undeveloped properties in the area. Staff will work to determine the assessment amount that must be paid prior to the release of the final plat. Evaluation At this time, Staff is unable to make a final recommendation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment to Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 (Sweeney Lake Shores). While the adjustment of the PUD boundaries and the incorporation of the vacant and underutilized properties as new residential parcels are consistent with the findings necessary to support the proposal, a number of questions around stormwater management remain to be addressed. Staff anticipates including conditions of approval with a future recommendation, including: 1. Approval of the PUD Amendment is contingent on receiving a variance from the minimum width standard for private streets or revising the preliminary plat to achieve the minimum width required by City Code. 2. The conservation easement for 1640 Noble Drive must be signed and recorded prior to the release of the final plat. 3. The impervious surface area on each of the four undeveloped lots (three within the PUD, one outside of the PUD) shall be limited to 10,000 square feet in order to remain consistent with the stormwater calculations that determined the capacity of the filtration basin. Recommendation Staff recommends opening the Public Hearing to take testimony and tabling the item to a future Planning Commission meeting. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Plans submitted November 8, 2019 (13 pages) SUBJECT PROPERTY Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:43 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET............SWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUDGOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC0.0TITLE SHEETSITE LOCATIONSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE SURVEYV1.0UTILITY PLANC4.0ISSUED FOR: PRELIMINARY PLAT / PUD AMENDMENT SUBMITTALMASTER LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALCURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURB (GUTTER TOP)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALLSOIL BORING LOCATIONSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALLEMERGENCY OVERFLOWPROPOSED MANHOLE STORMPROPOSED GATE VALVEPROPOSED SANITARY SEWERPROPOSED STORM SEWERPROPOSED WATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING LIGHTEXISTING GAS METEREXISTING MANHOLEEXISTING CATCH BASINEXISTING GATE VALVEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING GAS VALVEEXISTING ELECTRIC BOXEXISTING STOPBOXPROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARYPROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORMPROPOSED SIGNEXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATIONINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROWDEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:JOHN GABBERT312 FERNDALE ROAD WESTWAYZATA, MN 55391ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416612-615-0060SURVEYOR:GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:SWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0C5.0L1.0CIVIL DETAILSLANDSCAPE PLANSWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0SITE PLAN / PRELIMINARY PLATSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING INC.1970 NORTHWESTERN AVE. SUITE #200STILLWATER, MN 55082651-275-8969Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.5HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES2825 CEDAR AVENUE SOUTHMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55407DYH EOF=1135.52SB-1TOPROPOSED LIGHTEXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING GAS MAINEXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRICEXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMIT ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86PROPOSED 30'UTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED NEW PROPERTY LINESPROPERTY SETBACK LINESPROPOSED BUILDINGFOOTPRINTPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINTPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINTPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINT358.1'50.5'72.2'89.4'316.0'32.5'104.9112.4'210.4'85.2'273.4'164.0'113.3 160.2'283.2LOT 1AREA = 42,073 SFTBD SPRING VALLEY ROADLOT 2AREA = 42,739 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 3AREA = 39,425 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 1AREA = 105,023 SF1601 NOBLE DRIVELOT 5AREA = 48,845 SF1550 ST. CROIX CIRCLELOT 6AREA = 63,365 SF1620 NOBLE DRIVELOT 7AREA = 117,132 SF1700 NOBLE DRIVEEXISTING SHED TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE237.9'30.0'31.7'59.1'48.5'300.6'100.0'357.6'363.5'328.6'86. 5 '15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK25' REAR SETBACK25' REAR SETBACK35' FRONT SETBACK35' FRONT SETBACK25' REAR SETBACK35' FRONT SETBACK25' REAR SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK35' SIDE SETBACK15' SIDE SETBACK35' FRONT SETBACKEXISTINGBUILDINGAND DRIVEFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINT160.0'3 0 . 0 'PROPOSED DRAINAGE ANDUTILITY EASEMENT6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' D&U EASEMENT, TYP.25' REAR D&U EASEMENT, TYP.WETLAND #1DELINEATED 10-1-2018NOD APPROVED 11-8-2018ANDERSON ENGINEERING0.02 ACRESPROPOSED 25' WETLAND BUFFERFILTRATION BASIN 1BOT=836.50TOP=839.50EOF=839.50100-YR HWL=839.40VOL (836.50-837.30)=6025CFFILTRATION BASIN TO BELINED WITH IMPERMEABLELINER (CLAY OR PLASTIC IFGROUNDWATER IS WITHIN 3'OF THE BOTTOM OF THEDRAIN TILE.30.0'337.7'PROPOSED 40'UTILITY EASEMENT7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K ACCESS EASEMENT40.0'30.0'EXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTINGEASEMENT TO BEVACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTSTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:43 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN /PRELIMINARY PLAT............SITE AREA TABLE:SITE PLAN LEGEND:CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY01" = 50'-0"50'-0"25'-0"N1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPROPERTY LINEPRELIMINARY PLAT NOTES:1.PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION: SWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD2.LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY: PID #: 1802924310002, 1802924340058, 1802924420036, 1802924430019,1802924430020, 1802924430021, 1802924420050.3.SITE ADDRESS: ADDRESSES ASSOCIATED WITH PID NUMBERS LISTED ABOVE.4.PROPERTY OWNER: BRET AND DAWN WEISS, JOHN GABBERT, J D HAINES AND H J C HAINES AND SARAH BLACK.5.SUBDIVIDER: JOHN GABBERT6.ENGINEER: CIVIL SITE GROUP, 4931 W 35TH ST, SUITE 200, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 554167.SURVEYOR: CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING INC., 1970 NORTHWESTERN AVE. SUITE #200, STILLWATER, MN 550828.CURRENT ZONING: R-1/PUD9.PROPOSED SETBACKS: PER R-1 OF THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY; 35' FRONT, 15' SIDE, 25' REAR.10.THE GROSS LAND AREA IS 563,528 +/- SQUARE FEET OR 12.94 +/- ACRES.PROPOSED EASEMENTPROPOSED SETBACK ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86SB-1 (2015)SB-2 (2015)SB-3 (2015)SB-4 (2015)SB-5 (2015)SB-1 (2018)SB-2 (2018)SB-3 (2018)SB-4 (2018)x 978.3x 839.50840841 847843845844842846 846845845844843842844843842841840839836x 843.0x 869878875870869864 X 879878875870865866867868864 5%5%3%2%847x 853.63%7%DROP 1'5%x 845.0x 845.0x 845.0x 844.4x 841.07%5%854853852851850849853852851850848847846845844844843 8 4 3841840844 8428418448458468498488474%843 844842.5 X2.5%x 836.5033%6%33%4%8%10%6%5%6%5%PROPOSED 30'UTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED NEW PROPERTY LINESPROPERTY SETBACK LINESCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSLOT 1AREA = 42,073 SFTBD SPRING VALLEY ROADLOT 2AREA = 42,739 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 3AREA = 39,425 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 1AREA = 105,023 SF1601 NOBLE DRIVELOT 5AREA = 48,845 SF1550 ST. CROIX CIRCLELOT 6AREA = 63,365 SF1620 NOBLE DRIVELOT 7AREA = 117,132 SF1700 NOBLE DRIVEEXISTING SHED TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGEPROPOSED DRAINAGE ANDUTILITY EASEMENT6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' D&U EASEMENT, TYP.25' REAR D&U EASEMENT, TYP.WETLAND #1DELINEATED 10-1-2018NOD APPROVED 11-8-2018ANDERSON ENGINEERING0.02 ACRESPROPOSED 25' WETLAND BUFFERFILTRATION BASIN 1BOT=836.50TOP=839.50EOF=839.50100-YR HWL=839.40VOL (836.50-837.30)=6025CFFILTRATION BASIN TO BELINED WITH IMPERMEABLELINER (CLAY OR PLASTIC IFGROUNDWATER IS WITHIN 3'OF THE BOTTOM OF THEDRAIN TILE.PROPOSED 40'UTILITY EASEMENT7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K EXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTACCESS EASEMENTEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTINGEASEMENT TO BEVACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTSTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:43 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN............1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOTLIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION, EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTINGSHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILSENGINEER.3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THENATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS &PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED.5.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1% MIN. AND2% MAX. CROSS SLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS.MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:17.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPESGREATER THAN 4' IN HEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAININGWALL ENGINEER. DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUTTHE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.9.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALLEXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORTSUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.10.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE INAREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FORRESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENTAREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLSUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREADTOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.11.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREASWITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTHFINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPESBETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTINGGRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENTCONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOMERUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALLAREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL ORBETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.12.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THESTREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADEDTANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THEDIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THESOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET ORPARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. NO TEST ROLL SHALL OCCURWITHIN 10' OF ANY UNDERGROUND STORM RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEMS.13. TOLERANCES13.1.THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN0.30 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHEREMEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.2.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARYBY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OFANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.3.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE ORBELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.13.4.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.14.MAINTENANCE14.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION,AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.14.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTEDAREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURINGTHE WARRANTY PERIOD, ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BERESEEDED AND MULCHED.14.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTIONOPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE,AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSGROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:01" = 50'-0"50'-0"25'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TOPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS BY HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES, DATED 06-18-2015 AND11-21-2019. GROUNDWATER WAS OBSERVED AT ELEVATIONS RANGING FROM 833.50 TO 836.50.THE BORINGS & GROUNDWATER ARE AS FOLLOWS:SB-1 (2015)836.50SB-2 (2015)835.00SB-3 (2015)836.50SB-4 (2015)833.50SB-5 (2015)833.50SB-1 (2018)833.00SB-2 (2018)834.50SB-3 (2018) -SB-4 (2018)834.50SPOT GRADE ELEVATION MATCH EXISTINGGRADE BREAK - HIGH POINTSPROJECT SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES:1.GRADING FOR NEW HOMES IS CONCEPTUAL. HOMES SHALL BE CUSTOMGRADED.TREE REMOVAL NOTES:1.TREE REMOVAL SHALL BE ON A LOT TO LOT BASIS. TREE PRESERVATIONPERMITS WILL BE PULLED AT TIME OF BUILDING PERMITS. ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86EXISTING SANITARYAND WATERSANITARY ANDWATER SERVICECONNECTIONS, TYPSANITARY ANDWATER SERVICECONNECTIONS, TYPSANITARY ANDWATER SERVICECONNECTIONS, TYPCBMH 1RIM=837.30IE=835.00DT IE=835.0074 LF 15" HDPESTORM @ 0.34%EX. MHCORE-DRILL NEWCONNECTIONRIM=840.30EX. IE=834.75PR. IE=834.75COORD. w/ CITY PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION165 LF 6" PERF.DRAINTILE @ 0.00%PROPOSED GATEVALVE AND VALVE BOX170 LF 6" PERF.DRAINTILE @ 0.00%SB-1 (2015)SB-2 (2015)SB-3 (2015)SB-4 (2015)SB-5 (2015)SB-1 (2018)SB-2 (2018)SB-3 (2018)SB-4 (2018)PROPOSED 30'UTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED NEW PROPERTY LINESPROPERTY SETBACK LINESCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSLOT 1AREA = 42,073 SFTBD SPRING VALLEY ROADLOT 2AREA = 42,739 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 3AREA = 39,425 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 1AREA = 105,023 SF1601 NOBLE DRIVELOT 5AREA = 48,845 SF1550 ST. CROIX CIRCLELOT 6AREA = 63,365 SF1620 NOBLE DRIVELOT 7AREA = 117,132 SF1700 NOBLE DRIVEEXISTING SHED TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGEPROPOSED DRAINAGE ANDUTILITY EASEMENT6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' D&U EASEMENT, TYP.25' REAR D&U EASEMENT, TYP.WETLAND #1DELINEATED 10-1-2018NOD APPROVED 11-8-2018ANDERSON ENGINEERING0.02 ACRESPROPOSED 25' WETLAND BUFFERFILTRATION BASIN 1BOT=836.50TOP=839.50EOF=839.50100-YR HWL=839.40VOL (836.50-837.30)=6025CFFILTRATION BASIN TO BELINED WITH IMPERMEABLELINER (CLAY OR PLASTIC IFGROUNDWATER IS WITHIN 3'OF THE BOTTOM OF THEDRAIN TILE.PROPOSED 40'UTILITY EASEMENT7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K EXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTACCESS EASEMENTEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTINGEASEMENT TO BEVACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTSTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.0UTILITY PLAN............GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:UTILITY LEGEND:CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY UTILITY NOTES:1.ALL SEWER AND WATER SERVICES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE TIME OFTHE BUILDING PERMIT.01" = 50'-0"50'-0"25'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCATCH BASINGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLEFES AND RIP RAP1. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES ANDTOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELYNOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS.3. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONECALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT AREDAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION" AND "SANITARY SEWER ANDSTORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OFMINNESOTA (CEAM), AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AND THEPROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.5. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED OR PLACED AT THEDIRECTION OF THE OWNER.6. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) AWWA C151, ASME B16.4, AWWA C110, AWWA C153 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) ASTM D3034 & F679, OR SCH40 ASTM D1785, 2665, ASTM F794, 1866) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE ASTM F714 & F2306 WITH ASTM D3212 SPEC FITTINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OF FLAREDEND SECTION.10. UTILITIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THECONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BUILDING LINES.COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS.11. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCHBASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THISPLAN DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED.13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CONNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS.HYDRANT EXTENSIONS ARE INCIDENTAL.14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATERMAIN, UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 18" VERTICALSEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTH WATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL.15. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATIONIS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITIES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS ANDCOORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.17.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SHALL BE CORE-DRILLED.18. COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICALDRAWINGS.19. COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES WITHADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF.20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THECITY. ALL PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE SAWCUT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BEPROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THEMINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THISSHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS ASNEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURESSHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADES WHEREREQUIRED. THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH. STRUCTURES BEINGRESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES.COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOT IMPACTINSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND SUBMITTHESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK.25.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT.APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TOMANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES.26.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING ORWATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULES, CHAPTER 4714,SECTION 1109.0. Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.0CIVIL DETAILS............GV-SS-03GV-ST-05GV-WM-0327" I.D.PRECAST"RIM ELEVATION"PRECAST CONCRETESECTIONGROUT SHELF ANDCHANNELS @ 2" PERFOOT SLOPENEENAH R-2502-D CASTINGMIN. 2 AND MAX. 5 ADJUSTINGRINGS. GROUT BETWEENRINGS, CASTING, AND ALONGOUTSIDE.STORM SEWER PIPE - SEE PLAN FOR LOCATION,INVERT, AND SIZESBASES SHALL BE 8"STANDARD PRECASTWITH 2" LEAN GROUT,OR POURED 8" SLABREINFORCED WITH6" x 6" 10/10 MESHCATCH BASIN - 27" DIA.N T S6-1/2"1TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVEWAY (NO CURB)Profile Grade2/1 2/11.5" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE, SPWEA340B - SPEC. 2360BITUMINOUS TACK COATCenterline2.5%9.0'R.O.W.R.O.W.2.5%1.0'2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE, SPNWB330B - SPEC. 23609" AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5 100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE, MNDOT SPEC. 3138(THICKNESS TO BE SPECIFIED BY INDEPENDENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER)EXISTING COMPACTED SUBGRADE20.0' CORRIDORE9.0'TYPICAL NOTES:GRADING NOTES:1.0'BITUMINOUS LIFT THICKNESS TOBE SPECIFIED BY INDEPENDENTGEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERDLTREE PROTECTIONN T S25'DRIPLINE WIDTHFURNISH A AND INSTALL TEMPORARY FENCE AT THE TREE'S DRIP LINE ORCONSTRUCTION LIMITS AS SHOWN ON PLAN, PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. WHEREPOSSIBLE PLACE FENCE 25' BEYOND DRIP LINE. PLACE TREE PROTECTION SIGN ONPOSTS, ONE PER INDIVIDUAL TREE (FACING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY), OR ONE EVERY100' LF ALONG A GROVE OR MULTI-TREE PROTECTION AREA.POSTS AND FENCINGEXTEND FENCE 25'BEYOND DRIPLINEWHERE POSSIBLETREE PROTECTION SIGN, TYP.TREE DRIPLINE, ORCONSTRUCTION LIMITS2PIPE BEDDING - RCP & DIPN T S4PIPE BEDDING - PVCN T S5D18"3H:1L MAX.BIO-FILTRATION BASIN (RAIN GARDEN - TYP.)N T STYPICAL SECTION VIEW1.INSTALL SILT FENCE AND/OR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TOPREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THE PRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENTLAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.4.INSTALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC, ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINALGRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.ROUGH GRADE THE SITE. IF BIORETENTION AREAS ARE BEING USED AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINSLEAVE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET OF COVER OVER THE PRACTICE TO PROTECT THE UNDERLYING SOILS FROMCLOGGING.6.PERFORM ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.7.PLANT ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE.8.CONSTRUCT BIORETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA.9.IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.10.PLANT AND/OR ROCK MULCH BIORETENTION DEVICE.11.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA ISADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWINGEXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUINGCONSTRUCTION.2.GRADING OF BIORETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USING LOW-COMPACTION EARTH-MOVINGEQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OF UNDERLYING SOILS.3.ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED BIORETENTION DEPTH (ELEVATION) SHALL BE UNDISTURBED,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCINGRIBBON CURB OR CURB CUT, SEESITE AND GRADING PLANSGRASS PRE-TREATMENT STRIP ORPRE-TREATMENT STRUCTURE, SEEUTILITY AND LANDSCAPE PLANSUNDISTURBED, UNCOMPACTED INSITU SOILNET LESS EROSION BLANKET IN BOTTOM OFBASIN. SLIT BLANKET TO ALLOW PLANTMATERIAL SURFACE IF PLUG PLANTING IS TOBE USED, SEE GRADING AND LANDSCAPEPLANSMIN.PLANTING MEDIUM DEPTH 24"WITH A WELL BLENDED MIXTURE (BY VOLUME):80% HOMOGENOUS CONSTRUCTION SAND20% ORGANIC COMPOSTSEE GRADING PLAN FOR DEPTHPLANT MATERIAL, SEE LANDSCAPE PLANSIDE SLOPE TREATMENTS, SEE GRADING OR LANDSCAPE PLANS6"4"1.5'UNDERDRAIN GRAVEL BLANKET1-1.5" DOUBLE WASHED STONE(NON LIMESTONE OR CONCRETE MATERIAL)NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE (MnDOT 3733, TYPE 1 - HIGH FLOW RATE)AROUND GRAVEL BLANKET - EXTENDING 1.5'FROM UNDERDRAIN PIPE SIDESPERFORATED UNDERDRAIN OUTLET PIPE6" DIAMETER RIGID, PERFORRATED PVC.SEE UTILITY PLANMUST OVER EXCAVATE DOWNTO SUITABLE SOILS. FIELDVERIFY WITH SOILS ENGINEER1FILTRATION - CLAY SOILS - NO LINER ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86CBMH 1RIM=837.30IE=835.00DT IE=835.0074 LF 15" HDPESTORM @ 0.34%EX. MHCORE-DRILL NEWCONNECTIONRIM=840.30EX. IE=834.75PR. IE=834.75COORD. w/ CITY PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION165 LF 6" PERF.DRAINTILE @ 0.00%PROPOSED GATEVALVE AND VALVE BOX170 LF 6" PERF.DRAINTILE @ 0.00%LANDSCAPESCREENINGLANDSCAPESCREENINGLANDSCAPESCREENINGCONCEPTUAL WILL BEDETAILED WITH CUSTOMHOME LANDSCAPE PLANS.CONCEPTUAL WILL BEDETAILED WITH CUSTOMHOME LANDSCAPE PLANS.LANDSCAPESCREENINGCONCEPTUAL WILL BEDETAILED WITH CUSTOMHOME LANDSCAPE PLANS.DRAINAGE SWALE TOFILTRATION BASIN SHALL BENATIVE SEED MIX, NO MOWFOR PRE-TREATMENTGRASSY SWALE.PROPOSED 30'UTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED NEW PROPERTY LINESPROPERTY SETBACK LINESCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSLOT 1AREA = 42,073 SFTBD SPRING VALLEY ROADLOT 2AREA = 42,739 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 3AREA = 39,425 SFTBD NOBLE DRIVELOT 1AREA = 105,023 SF1601 NOBLE DRIVELOT 5AREA = 48,845 SF1550 ST. CROIX CIRCLELOT 6AREA = 63,365 SF1620 NOBLE DRIVELOT 7AREA = 117,132 SF1700 NOBLE DRIVEEXISTING SHED TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGEPROPOSED DRAINAGE ANDUTILITY EASEMENT6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' D&U EASEMENT, TYP.25' REAR D&U EASEMENT, TYP.WETLAND #1DELINEATED 10-1-2018NOD APPROVED 11-8-2018ANDERSON ENGINEERING0.02 ACRESPROPOSED 25' WETLAND BUFFERFILTRATION BASIN 1BOT=836.50TOP=839.50EOF=839.50100-YR HWL=839.40VOL (836.50-837.30)=6025CFFILTRATION BASIN TO BELINED WITH IMPERMEABLELINER (CLAY OR PLASTIC IFGROUNDWATER IS WITHIN 3'OF THE BOTTOM OF THEDRAIN TILE.PROPOSED 40'UTILITY EASEMENT7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K EXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTACCESS EASEMENTEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTINGEASEMENT TO BEVACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTSTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDEXISTING EASEMENTTO BE VACATEDREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.0LANDSCAPE PLAN............Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 24904Patrick J. SarverLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PM01" = 50'-0"50'-0"25'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGENDROCK MULCH/RIP-RAP, SAMPLES REQUIREDPROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON PLANLAWN - SODSEED TYPE 1 - MNDOT 34-262 WET PRAIRIE, PERMNDOT SEEDING MANUAL SPECIFICATIONS (2014)1" DIA. ROCK MAINTENANCE STRIP OVER FILTER FABRIC,SAMPLES REQUIRED. PROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON PLANGEOTEXTILE (ADD TO SEED MIX HATCH)PROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESSEED TYPE 2 - MNDOT 35-221 DRY PRAIRIE, PERMNDOT SEEDING MANUAL SPECIFICATIONS (2014)SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH, SAMPLES REQUIREDPROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON PLANPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGDECORATIVE BOULDERS (ROUNDED & BLOCK STYLE), 18"-30" DIA. ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPCONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.x 978.3x 839.50840841 847843845844842846 846845845844843842844843842841840839836x 843.0x 869878875870869864 X 879878875870865866867868864 5%5%3%2%847x 853.63%7%DROP 1'5%x 845.0x 845.0x 845.0x 844.4x 841.07%5%854853852851850849853852851850848847846845844844843 8 4 3841840844 8428418448458468498488474%843 844842.5 X2.5%x 836.5033%6%33%4%8%10%6%5%6%5%CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITS7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K EXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS............01" = 50'-0"50'-0"25'-0"N1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. ST. CROIXCIRCLEMHMHEXISTING STORMSEWERSW E EN E Y LAK E PRIVATE DRIVESPRINGVALLEYROADNOBLE DRIVEΔS27°39'45"E158.86INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPCONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTION LIMITS,TYP.x 978.3x 839.50840841 847843845844842846 846845845844843842844843842841840839836x 843.0x 869878875870869864 X 879878875870865866867868864 5%5%3%2%847x 853.63%7%DROP 1'5%x 845.0x 845.0x 845.0x 844.4x 841.07%5%854853852851850849853852851850848847846845844844843 8 4 3841840844 8428418448458468498488474%843 844842.5 X2.5%x 836.5033%6%33%4%8%10%6%5%6%5%x 978.3x 839.50840841 847843845844842846 846845845844843842844843842841840839836x 843.0x 869878875870869864 X 879878875870865866867868864 5%5%3%2%847x 853.63%7%DROP 1'5%x 845.0x 845.0x 845.0x 844.4x 841.07%5%854853852851850849853852851850848847846845844844843 8 4 3841840844 8428418448458468498488474%843 844842.5 X2.5%x 836.5033%6%33%4%8%10%6%5%6%5%PROPOSED BUILDINGFOOTPRINTCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINTPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINTPROPOSEDBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGAND DRIVEFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINT6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.6' SIDE D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' FRONT D&U EASEMENT, TYP.10' D&U EASEMENT, TYP.25' REAR D&U EASEMENT, TYP.FILTRATION BASIN 1BOT=836.50TOP=839.50EOF=839.50100-YR HWL=839.40VOL (836.50-837.30)=6025CFFILTRATION BASIN TO BELINED WITH IMPERMEABLELINER (CLAY OR PLASTIC IFGROUNDWATER IS WITHIN 3'OF THE BOTTOM OF THEDRAIN TILE.7 5 ' OHW L S E T B AC K EXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTEXISTINGBUILDINGFOOTPRINTCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS............01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS............OVERFLOW AT TOP OFFILTER ASSEMBLYOVERFLOW IS 12 OF THE CURBBOX HEIGHTHIGH-FLOW FABRICFILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER, 6"ON-GRADE 10" AT LOW POINTEXISTING CURB, PLATE, BOX,AND GRATENOTES:1. REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEMAFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT.3. REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ERO-4C.CURB INLET FILTERN T S1PROFILE6" MIN CRUSHED STONE75' MINIMUMPLANFINISHEDGRADETO CONSTRUCTION AREA35' REXISTINGUNDISTURBEDROADWAYN T S30' FROM EDGE OF ROADTO FRONT OF SPEED BUMPGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC4" HIGH, 18" WIDESPEED BUMPSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ACCESS24' (MIN)NOTES:1.PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND UNDISTURBEDROADWAY.2.THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENTONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE OR ADDINGSTONE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE.3.REPAIR AND CLEANOUT MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT.4.ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY SHALL BE REMOVED ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.5.FINAL LOCATION AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6.CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIA. CLOSE GRADED, AND IN ACCORDANCE TO MNDOT SECTION 2118.EXISTING UNDISTURBED ROADWAY35' RTO CONSTRUCTIONAREA2TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S3FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.4FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24" 24" 24" MIN. 6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S5 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE............OWNER:JOHN GABBERT312 FERNDALE ROAD WESTWAYZATA, MN 55391OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING SECTION 21PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMCONTACT:PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE THE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA ISLESS THAN ONE ACRE.. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSEDSTORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES:SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS SPLITTING THREE EXISTING PROPERTIES INTO FOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOME PROPERTIES. PLAT AND PUD OF THE FOUR NEWPROPERTIES AND THREE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WILL ALSO OCCUR.NATIVE BUFFER NARRATIVE:PRESERVING A 50' NATURAL BUFFER AROUND WATER BODIES IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WATER BODIES ARE LOCATEDON SITE.INFILTRATION NARRATIVE:INFILTRATION IS NOT FEASIBLE DUE TO CLAYEY SOILS WHICH ARE CLASSIFIED AS HSG D, NOT CONDUCIVE TO INFILTRATION.SOIL CONTAMINATION NARRATIVE:SOILS ONSITE HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTAMINATED. AN MPCA SOILS ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THATTHIS SITE IS APPROPRIATE FOR INFILTRATION.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE AND DISCHARGES TO BOTH SWEENEY LAKE AND BASSETT CREEK. SWEENEY LAKE AND BASSETT CREEK AREIDENTIFIED AS IMPAIRED WATER BODIES PER THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST. SWEENEY LAKE IS IMPAIRED FOR CHLORIDE ANDNUTRIENTS. BASSETT CREEK IS IMPAIRED FOR CHLORIDE, FECAL COLIFORM, AND FISHES BIOASSESSMENTS. NUTRIENT EUTROPHICATIONBIOLOGICAL INDICATORS. BECAUSE THESE WATERS ARE LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE SITE, BMPS AS DEFINED IN THE NPDES PERMIT ITEMS23.9 AND 23.10 APPLY. THESE ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.DURING CONSTRUCTION:A.STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETEDLATER THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASED.B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 14. MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THATSERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE (5) OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.DESIGN ENGINEER: MATTHEW R. PAVEK P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 5/15/2011 - 5/16/2011TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12RE-CERTIFICATION: 3/16/2017 (8 HOURS), EXP. 5/31/2020THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHOIMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) MUSTCOMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERAL PERMIT (DATEDAUGUST 1, 2018 # MNR100001) AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND SEDIMENTATIONCONTROL.STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPPTHE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) FORADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENTEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS.4. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL5. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (SECTION 14)6. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE7. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL8. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE9. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES10. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES11. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S12. INSTALL STREET SECTION13. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER14. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS15. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH16. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND17. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)18. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING, REMOVESILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION:THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT ATTHE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THE SITE. THE SWPPPCAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARS AFTERSUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 4. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 11, INSPECTIONS ANDMAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY,CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL OFTHE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSION PREVENTIONAND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BMPS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THESWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCTINSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEREQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURSUPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BYTHE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OFCONSTRUCTION OR AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER SECTION 21 OFTHE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER IS EXPECTED TOFURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSSWPPP AMENDMENTS (SECTION 6):1.ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.A OR ITEM 21.2.B OR ANOTHER QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL MUST COMPLETE ALLSWPPP CHANGES. CHANGES INVOLVING THE USE OF A LESS STRINGENT BMP MUST INCLUDE A JUSTIFICATION DESCRIBING HOWTHE REPLACEMENT BMP IS EFFECTIVE FOR THE SITE CHARACTERISTICS.2.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMSIDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE,WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERSOR GROUNDWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMSIDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER INSPECTIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS BY THE SITE OWNER OR OPERATOR, USEPAOR MPCA OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE IN ELIMINATING OR SIGNIFICANTLY MINIMIZING THE DISCHARGE OFPOLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER OR THE DISCHARGES ARE CAUSING WATER QUALITY STANDARDEXCEEDANCES (E.G., NUISANCE CONDITIONS AS DEFINED IN MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) OR THE SWPPP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITHTHE OBJECTIVES OF A USEPA APPROVED TMDL.BMP SELECTION AND INSTALLATION (SECTION 7):1.PERMITTEES MUST SELECT, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN THE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP AND IN THIS PERMIT IN AN APPROPRIATEAND FUNCTIONAL MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVANT MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS AND ACCEPTED ENGINEERINGPRACTICES.EROSION PREVENTION (SECTION 8):1.BEFORE WORK BEGINS, PERMITTEES MUST DELINEATE THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED.2.PERMITTEES MUST MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR DISTURBANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT WITH STEEP SLOPES. WHEN STEEPSLOPES MUST BE DISTURBED, PERMITTEES MUST USE TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PHASING AND STABILIZATION PRACTICES DESIGNEDFOR STEEP SLOPES (E.G., SLOPE DRAINING AND TERRACING).3.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS, INCLUDING STOCKPILES. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELYTO LIMIT SOIL EROSION WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY OR TEMPORARILY CEASED ON ANY PORTION OF THESITE AND WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS. STABILIZATION MUST BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON CONSTRUCTED BASECOMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON TEMPORARY STOCKPILESWITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETESTOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) BUT PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF THE STOCKPILE.4.FOR PUBLIC WATERS THAT THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS PROMULGATED "WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS" DURING SPECIFIED FISHSPAWNING TIME FRAMES, PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THEWATER'S EDGE, AND THAT DRAIN TO THESE WATERS, WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING THE RESTRICTION PERIOD.5.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF THE LAST 200 LINEAR FEET OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTDRAINAGE DITCHES OR SWALES THAT DRAIN WATER FROM THE SITE WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATEROR PROPERTY EDGE. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF REMAINING PORTIONS OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENTDITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE ANDCONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASES.6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION(WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK-DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILT DIKES, ETC.) DO NOT NEED TO BE STABILIZED. PERMITTEESMUST STABILIZE THESE AREAS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THEIR USE AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM CEASES7.PERMITTEES MUST NOT USE MULCH, HYDROMULCH, TACKIFIER, POLYACRYLAMIDE OR SIMILAR EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICESWITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALESECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS SLOPE OF GREATER THAN 2 PERCENT.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT ALL PIPE OUTLETS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTERCONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER OR PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM.9.PERMITTEES MUST NOT DISTURB MORE LAND (I.E., PHASING) THAN CAN BE EFFECTIVELY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED INACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 11.SEDIMENT CONTROL (SECTION 9):1.PERMITTEES MUST ESTABLISH SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS OF THE SITE AND DOWNGRADIENTAREAS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO ANY SURFACE WATER, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS. PERMITTEES MUST LOCATESEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROLPRACTICES BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN AND MUST KEEP THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESIN PLACE UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER.2.IF DOWNGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE OVERLOADED, BASED ON FREQUENT FAILURE OR EXCESSIVE MAINTENANCEREQUIREMENTS, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS TOELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING AND AMEND THE SWPPP TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN ITEM 6.3.3.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENTSYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK-CHECK DAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITECONDITIONS.4.A FLOATING SILT CURTAIN PLACED IN THE WATER IS NOT A SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP TO SATISFY ITEM 9.2 EXCEPT WHEN WORKINGON A SHORELINE OR BELOW THE WATERLINE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT TERM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (E.G.,INSTALLATION OF RIP RAP ALONG THE SHORELINE) IN THAT AREA IS COMPLETE, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL AN UPLANDPERIMETER CONTROL PRACTICE IF EXPOSED SOILS STILL DRAIN TO A SURFACE WATER.5.PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ADJUSTED OR REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERMACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGE OF VEHICLES, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY ISCOMPLETED. PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IFTHE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.6.PERMITTEES MUST PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS USING APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THEYESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER ON ALL AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET.7.PERMITTEES MAY REMOVE INLET PROTECTION FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (E.G. STREETFLOODING/FREEZING) IS IDENTIFIED BY THE PERMITTEES OR THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY (E.G.,CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER). PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE NEEDFOR REMOVAL IN THE SWPPP.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF STOCKPILES ON THEDOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER.9.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE STOCKPILES OUTSIDE OF NATURAL BUFFERS OR SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATERCONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACE FOR THE STORMWATER. 10. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A VEHICLE TRACKING BMP TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK OUT OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITEOR ONTO PAVED ROADS WITHIN THE SITE. 11. PERMITTEES MUST USE STREET SWEEPING IF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT TRACKINGONTO THE STREET. 12. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 14. 13. IN ANY AREAS OF THE SITE WHERE FINAL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WILL OCCUR, PERMITTEES MUST RESTRICT VEHICLE ANDEQUIPMENT USE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. 14. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE TOPSOIL ON THE SITE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 15. PERMITTEES MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 16. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR, IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE ON THE SITE, PROVIDE REDUNDANT(DOUBLE) PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS WHEN A SURFACE WATER IS LOCATED WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE PROJECT'S EARTHDISTURBANCES AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL PERIMETER SEDIMENTCONTROLS AT LEAST 5 FEET APART UNLESS LIMITED BY LACK OF AVAILABLE SPACE. NATURAL BUFFERS ARE NOT REQUIREDADJACENT TO ROAD DITCHES, JUDICIAL DITCHES, COUNTY DITCHES, STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS, STORM DRAININLETS, AND SEDIMENT BASINS. IF PRESERVING THE BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE, PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE REASONS IN THESWPPP. SHEET PILING IS A REDUNDANT PERIMETER CONTROL IF INSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT RETAINS ALL STORMWATER. 17. PERMITTEES MUST USE POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS IN ACCORDANCE WITHACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED BYTHE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS PRIOR TOCHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATED STORMWATER TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEM FOR FILTRATION ORSETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (SECTION 10):1.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING (E.G.,PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENT BASIN ON THE PROJECTSITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MAY DEWATER TO SURFACE WATERS IF THEY VISUALLY CHECK TO ENSURE ADEQUATETREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS (SEE MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) WILL NOT RESULT FROM THEDISCHARGE. IF PERMITTEES CANNOT DISCHARGE THE WATER TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING A SURFACEWATER, PERMITTEES MUST TREAT IT WITH APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THESURFACE WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.2.IF PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE WATER CONTAINING OIL OR GREASE, THEY MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR OR SUITABLEFILTRATION DEVICE (E.G., CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.3.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOTCAUSE EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS OR INUNDATION OF WETLANDS IN THE IMMEDIATEVICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.4.IF PERMITTEES USE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THEY MUST HAUL THE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURNTHE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THESITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (SECTION 11):1.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE A TRAINED PERSON, AS IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 21.2.B, WILL INSPECT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION SITE ATLEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATERTHAN 1/2 INCH IN 24 HOURS.2.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS.3.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND POLLUTION PREVENTIONMANAGEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS. PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENTALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY UNLESSANOTHER TIME FRAME IS SPECIFIED IN ITEM 11.5 OR 11.6. PERMITTEES MAY TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME IF FIELD CONDITIONS PREVENTACCESS TO THE AREA.4.DURING EACH INSPECTION, PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CONVEYANCESYSTEMS BUT NOT CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, FOR EVIDENCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITION. PERMITTEES MUSTREMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHERDRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABILIZE THE AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED SOIL. PERMITTEES MUSTCOMPLETE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL,REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMITTEES MUST USE ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IFPRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OF OBTAINING ACCESS. PERMITTEES ARERESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLEPERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK IN SURFACE WATERS.5.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS, STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS WITHINAND ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT FOR SEDIMENTATION FROM EROSION OR TRACKED SEDIMENT FROM VEHICLES. PERMITTEESMUST REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES WITHIN ONE (1) CALENDAR DAY OF DISCOVERY OR, IF APPLICABLE, WITHINA SHORTER TIME TO AVOID A SAFETY HAZARD TO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS.6.PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONALOR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE.7.PERMITTEES MUST DRAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND REMOVE THE SEDIMENT WHEN THE DEPTHOF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME.8.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE THAT AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE SITE (OR AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITE INTHREE (3) CALENDAR DAYS) IS TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.B.9.PERMITTEES MAY ADJUST THE INSPECTION SCHEDULE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 11.2 AS FOLLOWS:a. INSPECTIONS OF AREAS WITH PERMANENT COVER CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH, EVEN IF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITYCONTINUES ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE; ORb.WHERE SITES HAVE PERMANENT COVER ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL AND NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING ANYWHEREON THE SITE, INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH AND, AFTER 12 MONTHS, MAY BE SUSPENDEDCOMPLETELY UNTIL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RESUMES. THE MPCA MAY REQUIRE INSPECTIONS TO RESUME IF CONDITIONSWARRANT; ORc.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS, INSPECTIONS MAY BESUSPENDED. INSPECTIONS MUST RESUME WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RUNOFF OCCURRING, OR UPON RESUMING CONSTRUCTION,WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. 10. PERMITTEES MUST RECORD ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BEING CONDUCTED ANDTHESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED WITH THE SWPPP. THESE RECORDS MUST INCLUDE:a.DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTIONS; ANDb.NAME OF PERSONS CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS; ANDc.ACCURATE FINDINGS OF INSPECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE NEEDED; ANDd.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN (INCLUDING DATES, TIMES, AND PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES); ANDe.DATE OF ALL RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL FOR EACH EVENT.PERMITTEES MUST OBTAIN RAINFALL AMOUNTS BY EITHER A PROPERLY MAINTAINED RAIN GAUGE INSTALLED ONSITE, AWEATHER STATION THAT IS WITHIN ONE (1) MILE OF YOUR LOCATION, OR A WEATHER REPORTING SYSTEM THAT PROVIDESSITE SPECIFIC RAINFALL DATA FROM RADAR SUMMARIES; ANDf.IF PERMITTEES OBSERVE A DISCHARGE DURING THE INSPECTION, THEY MUST RECORD AND SHOULD PHOTOGRAPH ANDDESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE DISCHARGE (I.E., COLOR, ODOR, SETTLED OR SUSPENDED SOLIDS, OIL SHEEN, AND OTHEROBVIOUS INDICATORS OF POLLUTANTS); ANDg.ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED AS REQUIRED INSECTION 6 WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (SECTION 12):1.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING ORTEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT A SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TOSTORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BE EXPOSED TO STORMWATER.2.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING ORTEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE, (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE, HYDRAULICFLUIDS, PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES, ADDITIVES, CURING COMPOUNDS, AND ACIDS)IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTEMATERIALS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7045 INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT AS APPLICABLE.4.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY STORE, COLLECT AND DISPOSE SOLID WASTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7035.5.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER. PERMITTEESMUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.6.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS, INCLUDING FUEL,FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADED INCLUDING THE USE OF DRIP PANS ORABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ARE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UPDISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS.PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLS IMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BY MINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UPMEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE.7.PERMITTEES MUST LIMIT VEHICLE EXTERIOR WASHING AND EQUIPMENT TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. PERMITTEES MUSTCONTAIN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA IN A SEDIMENT BASIN OR OTHER SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE CONTROLS AND MUSTDISPOSE WASTE FROM THE WASHING ACTIVITY PROPERLY. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORE SOAPS, DETERGENTS,OR SOLVENTS.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUTOPERATIONS (E.G., CONCRETE, STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTIONMATERIALS) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PERMITTEES MUST PREVENT LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUT WASTES FROMCONTACTING THE GROUND AND MUST DESIGN THE CONTAINMENT SO IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHOUTOPERATIONS OR AREAS. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA RULES.PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A SIGN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE WASHOUT FACILITY.PERMIT TERMINATION (SECTION 4 AND SECTION 13):1.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ALL TERMINATION CONDITIONS LISTED IN SECTION 13 ARE COMPLETE.2.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SELLING OR OTHERWISE LEGALLY TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRE SITE,INCLUDING PERMIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROADS (E.G., STREET SWEEPING) AND STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINAL CLEANOUT, OR TRANSFERRING PORTIONS OF A SITE TO ANOTHER PARTY. THE PERMITTEES' COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMITTERMINATES AT MIDNIGHT ON THE SUBMISSION DATE OF THE NOT.3.PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND MUST INSTALL PERMANENT COVER OVER ALL AREAS PRIOR TOSUBMITTING THE NOT. VEGETATIVE COVER MUST CONSIST OF A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATION WITH A DENSITY OF 70PERCENT OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. VEGETATION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF A SPECIFIC AREA DICTATESNO VEGETATION, SUCH AS IMPERVIOUS SURFACES OR THE BASE OF A SAND FILTER.4.PERMITTEES MUST CLEAN THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND MUSTENSURE THE SYSTEM MEETS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 15 THROUGH 19 AND IS OPERATING AS DESIGNED.5.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.6.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS PRIOR TOSUBMITTING THE NOT. PERMITTEES MAY LEAVE BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE ON-SITE IN PLACE.7.FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ONLY, PERMIT COVERAGE TERMINATES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IF THE STRUCTURES ARE FINISHEDAND TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION AND DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL IS COMPLETE, THE RESIDENCE SELLS TO THEHOMEOWNER, AND THE PERMITTEE DISTRIBUTES THE MPCA'S "HOMEOWNER FACT SHEET" TO THE HOMEOWNER.8.FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND (E.G., PIPELINES ACROSS CROPLAND), PERMITTEES MUST RETURN THEDISTURBED LAND TO ITS PRECONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL USE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.SEED NOTES:ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SALVAGE AND PRESERVE EXISTING TOPSOIL NECESSARY FOR FINAL STABILIZATION AND TOALSO MINIMIZE COMPACTION IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUMDEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATS COVER CROP)FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT A SEEDING RATE OF 100 LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEEDGERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90% COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS. Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT A: SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTPROJECT NAME: SWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUDPROJECT LOCATION (BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCCURS. INCLUDE ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE.)ADDRESS: NOBLE DRIVECITY OR TOWNSHIP: GOLDEN VALLEYSTATE: MNZIP CODE: 55422LATITUDE/LOGITUDE OF APPROXIMATE CENTROID OF PROJECT: 44.996162 N, -93.338415 EMETHOD OF LAT/LONG COLLECTION (CIRCLE ONE): GPS ONLINE TOOL USGS TOPOGRAPHICALL CITIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: GOLDEN VALLEYALL COUNTIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: HENNEPINALL TOWNSHIPS WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: NAPROJECT SIZE (NUMBER OF ACRES TO BE DISTURBED): 4.60PROJECT TYPE (CIRCLE ONE): RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL & RD CONSTRUCTION OTHER (DESCRIBE): XXXXXCUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE (TO THE NEAREST TENTH ACRE)EXISTING AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE : 0.00POST CONSTRUCTION AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 0.63TOTAL NEW AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 0.63RECEIVING WATERSWATER BODY IDNAME OF WATER BODY WATER BODY TYPE SPECIAL WATER? (Y/N) IMPARIED WATER (Y/N)27-0035-0107010206-538..SWEENEY LAKEBASSETT CREEK..LAKESTREAM..NN..YY..DATES OF CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION START DATE: 11/19ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 06/20GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT INFORMATIONDESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WHAT WILL BE BUILT, GENERAL TIMELINE, ETC): PROJECT IS SPLITTING THREE EXISTING PROPERTIES INTO FOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOME PROPERTIES. PLAT AND PUD OF THE FOUR NEWPROPERTIES AND THREE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WILL ALSO OCCUR.DESCRIBE SOIL TYPES FOUND AT THE PROJECT: SOILS ARE CLASSIFIED AS HSG D, NOT CONDUCIVE TO INFILTRATION.SITE LOCATION MAP - ATTACH MAPS (U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPS OR EQUIVALENT) SHOWING THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL RECEIVING WATERS, INCLUDINGWETLANDS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, STORMWATER PONDS, OR BASINS, ETC. THAT WILL RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT. USE ARROWS SHOWING THE DIRECTION OF FLOW AND DISTANCE TO THE WATER BODY.GENERAL SITE INFORMATION (III.A)1. DESCRIBE THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICIES (BMP'S). INCLUDE THE TIMING FOR INSTALLATION AND PROCEDURESUSED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY BMP'S AS NECESSARY. (III.A.4.A)THE PROJECT IS PROTECTED BY TWO (W) MAIN BMP'S, SILT FENCE AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES. THE SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE AND MONITORED AS NECESSARY. INLETPROTECTION DEVIDES WILL BE INSTALLED IN ALL CATCH BASINS ON THE SITE AND ANY OFF SITE THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THIS SITE. AS THE PROJECT PROGRESSES ADDITIONAL BMP'S SUCH AS EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET MAY BE UTILITZED.2. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A TABLE WITH THE ANTICIPATED QUANITITIES FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT FOR ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (III.A.4.B) SEE PAGE SW1.33. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A SITE MAP THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING FEATURES (III.A.3.B-F):EXIST AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMRWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS.LOCATIONS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND SOIL TYPES.·EXISTING AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS.·LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTRUBED.·LOCATION OF AREAS OF PHASED CONSTRUCTION.·ALL SURFACE WATERS AND EXISTING WETLANDS WITHIN ONE MILE FROM THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE SITE (IDENTIFIABLE ON MAPS SUCH AS USGS 7.5 MINUTEQUADRANGLE MAPS OR EQUIVALENT. WHERE SURFACE WATERS RECEIVING RUNOFF ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL NOT FIT ON THE PLAN SHEET, THEY MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH AN ARROW,INDICATING BOTH DIRECTION AND DISTANCE TO THE SURFACE WATER.·METHODS TO BE USED FOR FINAL STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREA4. WERE STORMWATER MITIGATION MEASURES REQUIRED AS THE RESULT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, OR OTHER REQUIRED LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW THESE MEASURES WERE ADDRESSED IN THE SWPPP. (III.A.6)N/A5. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED IN A KARST AREA SUCH THAT ADDITIONAL MEASURES WOULD BE NECESSARY OT PROJECT DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN MINN. R. CHAPTERS 7050 AND 7060? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO BE USED. (III.A.7)N/A6. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A CALCEREOUS FEN LISTED IN MINN. R. 7050.0180, SUBP. 6 B? YES OR NOIF YES, A LETTER OF APPROVAL FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO APPLICATION FOR THIS PERMIT. (PART I B.6 AND PART III.A.8)7. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A WATER THAT IS LISTED AS IMPARED FOR THE FOLLOWING POLLUTANT(S) OR STRESSOR(S): PHOSPHORUS, TURBIDITY, DISSOLVED OXYGEN OR BIOTIC IMPAIRMENT? USE THE SPECIAL ANDIMPAIRED WATERS SEARCH TOOL AT: WWW.PCA.STATE.MN.US/WATER/STORMWATER/STORMWATER-C.HTMLN/AIF NO, SKIP TO TRAININGDOES THE IMPAIRED WATER HAVE AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS (TMDL) WITH AN APPROVED WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY? NOIF YES:A. LIST THE RECEIVING WATER, THE AREAS OF THE SITE DISCHARGING TO IT, AND THE POLLUTANT(S) IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.B. LIST THE BMP'S AND ANY OTHER SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RELATED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.IF THE SITE HAS A DISCHARGE POINT WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE IMPAIRED WATER AND THE WATER FLOWS TO THE IMPAIRED WATER BUT NO SPECIFIC BMPS FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL, THE ADDITIONALBMPS IN APPENDIX A (C.1, C.2, C.3 & (C.4-TROUT STREAM)) MUST BE ADDED TO THE SWPPP AND IMPLEMENTED. (III.A.7). THE ADDITIONAL BMPS ONLY APPLY TO THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT THAT DRAIN TO ONE OF THEIDENTIFIED DISCHARGE POINTS.N/A8. IDENTIFY ADJACENT PUBLIC WATERS WHERE THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) HAS DECLARED “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS” DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMEFRAMESN/ASELECTION OF A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (III.D.)1. WILL THE PROJECT CREATE A NEW CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO ONE ACRE? YES OR NOIF YES, A WATER QUALITY VOLUME OF ONE INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE CUMULATIVE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE (SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT) THROUGH INFILTRATION UNLESS PROHIBITED DUETO ONE OF THE REASONS IN PART III.D.1.J. IF INFILTRATION IS PROHIBITED IDENTIFY OTHER METHOD OF OTHER VOLUME REDUCTION (E.G., FILTRATION SYSTEM, WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN, REGIONAL PONDING OR EQUIVALENTMETHOD2. DESCRIBE WHICH METHOD WILL BE USED TO TREAT RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE PROJECT (III.D):·WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN·INFILTRATION/FILTRATION·REGIONAL PONDS·COMBINATION OF PRACTICESINCLUDE ALL CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN INFORMATION FOR THE METHOD SELECTED. SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH METHOD.INFILTRATION / FILTRATION / REGIONAL PONDINGCALCULATIONS ARE WITHIN THE SITE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT AND PART OF THIS SWPPP AS ATTACHMENT D.3. IF IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO MEET THE TREATMENT REQUIREMENT FOR THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME, DESCRIBE WHY. THIS CAN INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAYPRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT, SUCH AS GRASSES SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS, WILL BE IMPLEMENTEDTO TREAT RUNOFF PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. (III.C)IT IS FEASIBLE TO MEET REQUIREMENT FOR WATER QUALITY VOLUME.4. FOR PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE TO TROUT STREAMS, INCLUDING TRIBUTARIES TO TROUT STREAMS, IDENTIFY METHOD OF INCORPORATING TEMPERATURE CONTROLS INTO THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEM.N/AEROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES (IV.B)DESCRIBE THE TYPES OF TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION BMP'S EXPECTED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCITON:1. DESCRIBE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE EROSION. DELINEATE AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED (E.G., WITH FLAGS,STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) BEFORE WORK BEGINS.SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT ATHE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE.2. DESCRIBE METHODS OF TEMPORARILY STABILIZING SOILS AND SOIL STOCKPILES (E.G., MULCHES, HYDRAULIC TACKIFIERS, EROSION BLANKETS, ETC.):TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION WILL BE SEED AND MULCH AND EROSION BLANKETS WHERE REQUIRED, WITH PERMANENT COVER BEING EITHER SOD OR LANDSCAPE FEATURES.3. DESCRIBE METHODS OF DISSIPATING VELOCITY ALONG STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND AT CHANNEL OUTLETS (E.G., CHECK DAMS, SEDIMENT TRAPS, RIP RAP, ETC.):SOD WILL BE UTILIZED ALONG CHANNELS AND RIP RAP AT CHANNEL.4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STABILIZATION OF DITCH AND SWALE WETTED PERIMETERS (NOTE THAT MULCH, HYDRAULIC SOIL TACKIFIERS, HYDROMULCHES, ETC. ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE SOIL STABILIZATION METHODSFOR ANY PART OF A DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE)FINAL STABILIZATION OF SWALES WILL BE SOD5. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS (E.G., RIP RAP, SPLASH PADS, GABIONS, ETC.)RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT PIPE OUTLETS6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO PROMOTE INFILTRATION AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL ON THE SITE PRIOR TO OFFSITE DISCHARGE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE (E.G., DIRECT STORMWATER FLOW TO VEGETATED AREAS):DISCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA AND INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE UTILIZED7. FOR DRAINAGE OR DIVERSION DITCHES, DESCRIBE PRACTICES TO STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET OF THE PROPERTY EDGE OR POINT OF DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATER. THE LAST 200LINEAL FEET MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO SURFACE WATERS AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED FOR ALL DISCHARGES TOSPECIAL, IMPAIRED OR “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS”. ALL OTHER REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER,PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.N/A, NO DITCHES ON SITE8. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION (E.G., CONSTRUCTION PHASING, MINIMIZING SOIL DISTURBANCE, VEGETATIVE BUFFERS, HORIZONTALSLOPE GRADING, SLOPE DRAINING/TERRACING, ETC.):OTHER EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO; MINIMIZING SITE EXPOSURE WHEN POSSIBLE.9. IF APPLICABLE, INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN APPENDIX A PART C.3 REGARDING MAINTAINING A 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE OR INSTALLING REDUNDANT BMPS FOR PORTIONS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO SPECIALWATERS).N/A10. IF APPLICABLE, DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE TO PROTECT PLANNED INFILTRATION AREASMINIMIZE SITE EXPOSURE IN AREAS ADJACENT TO INFILTRATION AREAS.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICIES (IV.C)DESCRIBE THE METHODS OF SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS1. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL:SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE SITE2. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SOIL STOCKPILES:SEED AND MULCH AS WELL AS EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS WILL BE UTILIZED AS NECESSARY3. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION:SEE INLET PROTECTION DETAILS4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO MINIMIZE VEHICLE TRACKING AT CONSTRUCTION EXITS AND STREET SWEEPING ACTIVITIES:THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.5. DESCRIBE METHODS, IF APPLICABLE, ADDITIONAL SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G., DIVERSION BERMS) TO BE INSTALLED TO KEEP RUNOFF AWAY FROM PLANNED INFILTRATION AREAS WHEN EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FINALSTABILIZATION OF THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA:SILT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING TO PROTECT INFILTRATION AREAS.6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND PRESERVE TOP SOIL (UNLESS INFEASIBLE) AT THIS SITE:LIGHT TRACKED EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED, TOPSOIL WILL BE STRIPPED AND STOCKPILED7. DESCRIBE PLANS TO PRESERVE A 50-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT'S SOIL DISTURBANCE AND A SURFACE WATER OR PLANS FOR REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE:DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG WETLAND. PROJECT WILL NOT DISTURB WITHIN 200 FEET OF WETLAND.8. DESCRIBE PLANS FOR USE OF SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS (E.G., POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, ETC.) SEE PART IV.C.10 OF THE PERMIT:N/A9. IS THE PROJECT REQUIRED TO INSTALL A TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN DUE TO 10 OR MORE ACRES DRAINING TO A COMMON LOCATION OR 5 ACRES OR MORE IF THE SITE IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPAIRED WATER?NOIF YES, DESCRIBE (OR ATTACH PLANS ) SHOWING HOW THE BASIN WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.C OF THE PERMIT.N/ADEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (IV.D)1. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE MEASURES TO BE USED TO TREAT/DISPOSE OF TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER AND METHOD TO PREVENT EROSION OR SCOUR OF DISCHARGE POINTS (SEE PART IV. D OF THE PERMIT):N/A 2. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE USE OF FILTERS FOR BACKWASH WATER? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW FILTER BACKWASH WATER WILL BE MANAGED ON THE SITE OR PROPERLY DISPOSED (SEE PART III.D.3. OF THE PERMIT):N/AADDITIONAL BMP'S FOR SPECIAL WATERS AND DISCHARGES TO WETLANDS (APPENDIX A, PARTS C AND D)1. SPECIAL WATERS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE TO SPECIAL WATERS? NO2. IF PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAY PRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, THEN OTHER TREATMENT SUCH ASGRASSED SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED.N/A3. DESCRIBE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS FOR EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH A CONTINUOUS POSITIVE SLOPE TO A SPECIAL WATERS, AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS FOR AREAS THAT DRAIN FIVE OR MORE ACRESDISTURBED AT ONE TIME.N/A4. DESCRIBE THE UNDISTURBED BUFFER ZONE TO BE USED (NOT LESS THAN 100 LINEAR FEET FROM THE SPECIAL WATER).N/A5. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL ENSURE THAT THE PRE AND POST PROJECT RUNOFF RATE AND VOLUME FROM THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION EVENTS REMAINS THESAME.N/A6. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL MINIMIZE ANY INCREASE IN THE TEMPERATURE OF TROUT STREAM RECEIVING WATERS RESULTING IN THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATIONEVENTS.N/A7. WETLANDS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE STORMWATER WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO A WETLAND (E.G., CONVERSION OF A NATURAL WETLAND TO A STORMWATER POND)? YES OR NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE WETLAND MITIGATION SEQUENCE THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART D OF APPENDIX A.N/AINSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (IV.E)DESCRIBE PROCEDURES TO ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE:·ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND·WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND WITHIN (7) DAYS AFTER THATINSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION,AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S AND INFILTRATION AREAS.INSPECTOR WILL FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND FILL OUT "ATTACHMENT B - CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST"1. Describe practices for storage of building products with a potential to leach pollutants to minimize exposure to stormwater:ALL BUILDING PRODUCTS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE EXPOSURE2. Describe practices for storage of pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers, treatment chemical, and landscape materials:ALL LANDSCAPE TREATMENT CHEMICALS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZED EXPOSURE3. Describe practices for storage and disposal of hazardous materials or toxic waste (e.g., oil, fuel, hydraulic fluids, paint solvents, petroleum-based products, wood preservative, additives, curing compounds, and acids) according to Minn. R. ch. 7045, includingrestricted access and secondary containment:ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS.4. Describe collection, storage and disposal of solid waste in compliance with Minn. R. ch. 7035:ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND SOLID WASTER WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS5. Describe management of portable toilets to prevent tipping and disposal of sanitary wastes in accordance with Minn. R. ch. 7040:SANITARY AND SEPTIC SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED TO WORKERS WITH PORTABLE FACILITIES MAINTAINED AS NEEDED BY THE PROVIDER.6. Describe spill prevention and response for fueling and equipment or vehicle maintenance:EMPLOYEES WILL BE TRAINED IN TECHNIQUES DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE SPILLS. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS.7. Describe containment and disposal of vehicle and equipment wash water and prohibiting engine degreasing on the site:ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE WASHED OFF SITE8. Describe storage and disposal of concrete and other washout wastes so that wastes do not contact the ground:ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR OFF SITE.FINAL STABILIZATION (IV.G)1. DESCRIBE METHOD OF FINAL STABILIZATION (PERMANENT COVER) OF ALL DISTURBED AREAS:FINAL STABILIZATION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH PAVEMENT, SOD AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS.2. DESCRIBE PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING FINAL STABILIZATION AND TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE (SEE PART IV.G.1-5):UPON STABILIZATION DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE CONTRCTOR AND OWNER SHALL MUTUALLY TRANSFER THE NPDES PERMIT TO THE NEXT OWNER WITH DOCUMENTS DESCRIBING THE NATURE OF TERMINATION PROCEDURE.DOCUMENTATION OF INFEASIBILITY: (IF APPLICABLE)SOILS INFORMATIONSEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR SOIL TYPES. Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cSWEENEY LAKE SHORES PUD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 312 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOHN GABBERT PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.09/27/19P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:1928011/8/19RESUBMITTAL..........9/27/19PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:WB, KWMP..............201811/8/2019 12:44 PMREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.5SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT B: SWPPP INSPECTION FORMATTACHMENT C: MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMNOTE: THIS INSPECTION REPORT DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL ASPECTS OF THE NATIONAL APOLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS) CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT ISSUED ON AUGUST 1,2013. THE COMPLETION OF THIS CHECKLIST DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE; IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE(S) TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.FACILITY INFORMATIONSITE NAME: FACILITY ADDRESS: PERMIT NUMBER:CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:INSPECTION INFORMATIONINSPECTOR NAME: _______________________ PHONE NUMBER: _________________________DATE (MM/DD/YYYY): _____________________TIME: ____________ AM / PMIS THE INSPECTOR CERTIFIED IN SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL AND IS IT DOCUMENTED IN THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)?IS THIS INSPECTION ROUTINE OR IN RESPONSE TO A STORM EVENT:RAINFALL AMOUNT (IF APPLICABLE): ____________IS THE SITE WITHIN ONE AERIAL MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPARED WATER?IF YES, FOLLOW APPENDIX A AND OTHER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTSNOTE: IF N/A IS SELECTED AT ANY TIME, SPECIFY WHY IN THE COMMENT AREA FOR THAT SECTION.EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.B)1.SOIL STABILIZATION WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR 14 DAYS? (7 DAYS WHERE APPLICABLE)2.HAS THE NEED TO DISTURB STEEP SLOPES BEEN MINIMIZED?3.ALL DITCHES STABILIZED 200; BACK FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE WITHIN 24 HOURS? (NOT MULCH)4.ARE THERE BMP'S FOR ONSITE STOCKPILES?5.ARE APPROPRIATE BMP'S INSTALLED PROTECTING INLETS/OUTLETS?6.DO PIPE OUTLETS HAVE ENERGY DISSIPATION?COMMENTS:SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.C)1.PERIMETER CONTROL INSTALLED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS?2.PERIMETER CONTROL TRENCHED IN WHERE APPROPRIATE?3.50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER MAINTAINED AROUND ALL SURFACE WATERS?3.1.IF NO, HAVE REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS BEEN INSTALLED?4.INLET PROTECTION ON ALL CATCH BASINS AND CULVERT INLETS?5.VEHICLE TRACKING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AT ALL SITE EXITS?6.ALL TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITHIN 24 HOURS?7.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS STAKED AND MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?8.ARE ALL INFILTRATION AREAS PROTECTED WITH A PRETREATMENT DEVICE?9.DO ALL STOCKPILES HAVE PERIMETER CONTROLS?COMMENTS:MAINTENANCE-EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (PART IV.E.)1.ARE ALL PREVIOUSLY STABILIZED AREAS MAINTAINING 90% GROUND COVER?2.ANY DITCH EROSION OBSERVED?3.PERIMETER CONTROL--HAS SEDIMENT REACHED ONE HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE?4.ARE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MAINTAINED AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY?COMMENTS:OTHER1.ARE ALL MATERIALS THAT CAN LEACH POLLUTANTS UNDER COVER?2.HAS ACCESS BEEN RESTRICTED TO ONSITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS?3.DOES ON-SITE FUELING ONLY OCCUR IN A CONTAINED AREA?4.ARE ALL SOLID WASTES BEING PROPERLY DISPOSED OF?5.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA COMPLETELY CONTAINED?6.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA MARKED WITH SIGN?COMMENTS:7.WERE ANY DISCHARGES SEEN DURING THIS INSPECTION, SEDIMENT, WATER, OR OTHERWISE?7.1.IF YES, STATE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL POINTS OF DISCHARGE. PHOTOGRAPH THE DISCHARGE AND DESCRIBE THE DISCHARGE (COLOR, ODOR, FOAM, OIL SHEEN, ETC). HOW WILL IT BE REMOVED? HOW DID THE DISCHARGEHAPPEN? HOW MUCH WAS DISCHARGED? HOW WILL IT BE STOPPED, AND HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO STOP? IS THE DISCHARGE GOING INTO AN ADJACENT SITE? WAS THE DISCHARGE A SEDIMENT DELTA? IF YES, WILL THE DELTA BERECOVERED WITHIN 7 DAYS?8.WILL A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BE UTILIZED IN THIS PROJECT AS REQUIRED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.D OF THE PERMIT? DESCRIBE:9.IS ANY DEWATERING OCCURRING ON SITE?9.1.IF YES, WHERE? WHAT BMP IS BEING USED? HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING DEWATERED? IS THE WATER CLEAR? WHERE IS THE WATER BEING DISCHARGED TO?10.IS A COPY OF THE SWPPP LOCATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE?11.HAS THE SWPPP BEEN FOLLOWED AND IMPLEMENTED ON SITE?12.IS A SEDIMENTATION BASIN REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?12.1.IF YES, ARE THEY MAINTAINED AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?13.IS THE TOPSOIL ON THIS PROJECT BEING PRESERVED?13.1.IF YES, EXPLAIN HOW THE TOP SOIL IS BEING PRESERVED. IF NO, EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS INFEASIBLE.14.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?14.1.DO ALL INFILTRATION AREAS HAVE PRETREATMENT DEVICES?15.DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTED DURING THE INSPECTION, REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, AND RECOMMENDED DATE OF COMPLETION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:16.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP:17.POTENTIAL AREAS OF FUTURE CONCERN:18.ADDITIONAL COMMENTSDISCLOSURES:·AFTER DISCOVERY, THE PERMIT REQUIRES MANY OF THE DEFICIENCIES THAT MAY BE FOUND IN THIS CHECKLIST BE CORRECTED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME. SEE PERMIT FOR MORE DETAILS.·THIS INSPECTION CHECKLIST IS AN OPTION FOR SMALL CONSTRUCTION SITES. LARGE CONSTRUCTION SITES AND LINEAR PROJECTS REQUIRE MORE EXTENSIVE/MORE LOCATION SPECIFIC INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS.·THE PERMITTEE(S) IS/ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMP'S AS WELL AS EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S UNTILANOTHER PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT ACCORDING TO PART II.B.5., OR THE PROJECT HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION AND A NOTICE OF TERMINATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.Y N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AATTACHMENT C - ABOVE-GROUNDFACILITY MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE1.ALL STORMWATER RETENTION, DETENTION AND TREATMENT BASINS MUST BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR TO DETERMINE THAT BASINRETENTION AND TREATMENT CHARACTERISTICS ARE ADEQUATE. A STORAGE TREATMENT BASIN WILL BE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE IF SEDIMENTHAS DECREASED THE WET STORAGE VOLUME BY 50 PERCENT OR DRY STORAGE VOLUME BY 25 PERCENT OF ITS ORIGINAL DESIGN VOLUME.BASED ON THIS INSPECTION, IF A STORMWATER BASIN REQUIRES SEDIMENT CLEANOUT, THE BASIN WILL BE RESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL DESIGNCONTOURS AND VEGETATED STATE WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE INSPECTION DATE.2.ALL OUTLET STRUCTURES, CULVERTS, OUTFALL STRUCTURES AND OTHER STORMWATER FACILITIES FOR WHICH MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTSARE NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED HEREIN MUST BE INSPECTED IN THE SPRING, SUMMER AND FALL OF EACH YEAR. WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THEINSPECTION DATE, ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS MUST BE REMOVED SUCH THAT EACH STORMWATER FACILITY OPERATES ASDESIGNED AND PERMITTED. CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BE KEPT CLEAR OF LITTER AND VEGETATIVE DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES ANDOVERFLOW SPILLWAYS KEPT CLEAR, INLET AREAS KEPT CLEAN, AND UNDESIRABLE VEGETATION REMOVED. EROSION IMPAIRING THE FUNCTIONOR INTEGRITY OF THE FACILITIES, IF ANY, WILL BE CORRECTED, AND ANY STRUCTURAL DAMAGE IMPAIRING OR THREATENING TO IMPAIR THEFUNCTION OF THE FACILITIES MUST BE REPAIRED.3.VOLUME CONTROL FACILITIES AND CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED EVERY THREE MONTHS DURING THE OPERATIONALPERIOD (BETWEEN SPRING SNOWMELT AND FIRST SUBSTANTIAL SNOWFALL) AND MONITORED AFTER RAINFALL EVENTS OF 1 INCH OR MORE TOENSURE THAT THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS CLEAR OF LITTER AND DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES AND OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS ARE CLEAR, INLETAREAS ARE CLEAN, UNDESIRABLE VEGETATION IS REMOVED AND THERE IS NO EROSION IMPAIRING OR THREATENING TO IMPAIR THE FUNCTIONOF A FACILITY. IF SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED IN A INFILTRATION FEATURE, WITHIN 30 DAYS OF INSPECTION DEPOSITED SEDIMENTS MUST BEREMOVED, THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS MUST BE RESTORED, AND ANY SURFACE DISTURBANCE MUST BE STABILIZED.INSPECTION MUST ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT TRAPS AND FOREBAYS ARE TRAPPING SEDIMENT AND THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THESTORAGE VOLUME REMAINS, THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS STABLE (I.E., NO EROSION IS OBSERVED), AND INLETS ANDOUTLET/OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS ARE IN GOOD CONDITIONS WITH NO EROSION. MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUES USED MUST PROTECT THEINFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE PRACTICE BY LIMITING SOIL COMPACTION TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE (E.G., BY USING LOW-IMPACTEARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT). 1 Date: October 22, 2019 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: 5410 Wayzata Boulevard Webb Golden Valley, LLC, Property Owner Introduction Webb Golden Valley, LLC, owner of the property at 5410 Wayzata Blvd (the Good Day Café and Metropolitan Ballroom), is seeking Site Plan approval from the Planning Commission in order to redesign parking areas. Background The property at 5410 Wayzata Boulevard is approximately 4.5 acres in size and is split by a public alley that provides access from Turners Crossroad to the west to the Global Pointe Senior Living and Talo Apartment developments to the east. The south portion of the property contains one building that houses both the Good Day Café and the Metropolitan Ballroom, as well offices for D’Amico Catering, while the portion of the property to the north of the alley consists only of parking. With the conversion of Highway 12 to Interstate 394, parking availability at this location was reduced. In addition, the alley was widened from 18 to 28 feet. Prior to the construction to the east, overflow parking was able to utilize the vacant parcels. With the recent development, parking options have been limited. The property owner now proposes to improve both portions of the lot in order to create more efficient layouts and increase the number of parking stalls from 354 to 395. Based on the uses in the building, the minimum amount of parking required is 366 spaces: Use Size Requirement Parking Needed Ballroom 750 seats 1 space per 3.5 seats 215 Class III Restaurant 6,000 sq. ft. floor area 1,000 sq. ft. bar area 1 space per 60 sq. ft. of floor area plus 1 space per 25 sq. ft. of bar area 100 + 40 = 140 2 Office 2,750 sq. ft. 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area 11 Total 366 In October, the owner received a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals to reduce the width of the drive aisles in the north parking lot by two feet each in order to achieve a more efficient parking layout and maximize the number of parking stalls. City Code Requirement City Code Section 113-32 requires the Planning Commission to review site plans for proposed construction within the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District. Site plans are reviewed with reference to (a) conformance to the applicable standards of the City Code and other City requirements and (b) where applicable, consistency with the development standards and objectives established for the I- 394 Mixed Use Zoning District. The regulations recognize the unique character of land and development throughout the City and the need for flexibility in site plan review, allowing the Planning Commission discretion in reviewing site plans. The applicant’s proposal to improve the parking lot requires additional examination of Section 113- 151: Off-Street Parking and Loading. Staff Analysis I-394 Mixed Use Development Standards: Parking Screening: Parking areas must be screened from public streets with a landscaped frontage strip. This frontage strip may consist of either a masonry wall, berm or hedge, or combination that forms a screen between 3.5 and 4 feet in height with 50% opacity. The north parking area is partially screened from the public right-of-way with a row of mature trees. Due to the unusual configuration of parcels along the entrance to the south parking lot, there is very little area in which to install landscaping. In addition to two existing trees, the applicant is proposing to add a third tree at the entrance to the southernmost driveway. Existing planting beds surround the base of the trees. Staff is comfortable with the proposed level of screening. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements: Curbing: Parking lots containing more than six spaces shall be delineated by a curb and gutter. While the majority of the parking lot perimeter has curb and gutter, there is none installed to the east of the main parking area, adjacent to the new Global Pointe senior building. Curb and gutter must be installed here; staff encourages the applicant to work with the adjacent property owner to design an effective and, if possible, landscaped edge. Traffic Islands: Traffic island shall be provided based on the circulation system, number of spaces, frequency of use (turnover rate), and other relevant factors. The plans for the main parking area include a portion of the lot that is striped no-parking but does not include a raised traffic island. Staff would like to better understand why the island has been omitted and if one could be installed 3 to better define and break up the lot area. It would be helpful to have a diagram of anticipated truck movements in the lot to verify if this traffic island could be installed. Internal Landscaping: Parking lots design for more than 40 off-street parking spaces shall have at least four percent of the interior of the parking lot landscaped with vegetation including shade trees. Each landscape break shall occur approximately every 24 spaces. Staff requests calculations to demonstrate the proposed amount of landscaped area within the parking lot meets the four percent standard. Staff recommends an additional five landscaped breaks be added to the long east-west rows of parking to better conform to the City’s standards. Snow Storage or Removal: Off-street parking plans shall include provisions for snow storage and/or removal. A plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval. Provisions for Pedestrian Access: Provisions for pedestrian circulation to and from, and in some cases through, parking lots shall be required as determined appropriate by the City. The long interrupted curb to the north of the alley creates a barrier to pedestrian movement from the north parking lot to the businesses to the south. Staff recommends adding one to two access points to provide better pedestrian circulation. Accessible Parking: Accessible parking spaces shall be provided pursuant to the Minnesota Accessibility Code. The Building Official has noted minor changes to the location of accessible spaces for the Good Day Café. Bicycle Parking: Bicycle racks shall be provided in a location accessible to employees and to the public at the rate of five percent of parking required for vehicles. Facilities to accommodate 19 bicycles must be provided on site. Additional Information The proposed site plan shows seven parking spaces and a landscaped island located within the City’s right-of-way (alley). Without obtaining a Right-of-Way Management Permit for a Permanent Right- of-Way Obstruction, these spaces and island must be removed. Staff is requesting calculations on the amount of pervious/impervious surfaces on the site, both existing and proposed, in order to evaluate the level of conformance with the standards of the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District. Opportunities to increase the amount of pervious surfaces exist in both the southwest and southeast corners of the main parking lot. The Fire Department has indicated that physical vehicle impact protection will be required to be installed on the north side of the fire hydrant located along the alley in order to prevent damage to the hydrant, in accordance with Section 507.5.6 and 312 of the Minnesota State Fire Code. Following Site Plan Review, the applicant will need to obtain Stormwater, Right-of-Way, and Utility permits before beginning work. The issuance of these permits provides a safeguard to ensure the items above have been addressed. 4 Recommendation Staff is seeking Planning Commission support for the above recommendations addressing a variety of development standards and other City requirements covered by Site Plan Review. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Plans received November 4, 2019 (11 pages) SUBJECT PROPERTY t REIGSTID Professional Engineers GOOD DAY CAFE Parking Lot Improvements 5410 Wayzata Boulevard - Golden Valley, MN 55416 Project Location: (not to scale) Project Team: Parking Consultant: Reigstad Engineers, Inc. 192 West 9th Street St. Paul, MN 55102 Project Site: Contact: Jim Collins 5410 Wayzata Blvd Phone: 612.770.1471 Email: jcollins@reigstad.com Civil Engineer: Hakanson Anderson - - _ — - t 3601 Thurston Avenue Anoka, MN 55303 Contact: Adam Thiele, P.E. Phone: 763.852.0489 Site Photo: (not to scale) Email: AdamT@HAA-inc.com Landscape Architect: Calyx Design Group 475 Cleveland Avenue North, Suite 307 St. Paul, MN 55104 Contact: Ben Hartberg, RLA / ASLA / LEED AP Phone: 651.788.9018 Email: ben@calyxdesigngroup.com Architect: Contact: Phone: Email: Framework Architects, P.A. 7914 Stafford Trail Savage, MN 55378 Douglas Feickert 612.220.3435 dfelckert@frameworkarch.com Owner: Webb Golden Valley, LLC 5410 Wayzata Boulevard Golden Valley, MN Contact: David Webb Phone: 612.310.3140 Email: dwebb@webbgv.com Sheet Index: Sheet No. Sheet Title T100 Cover Sheet, Team Directory, Sheet Index --- Site Survey (1 of 2) - NORTH --- Site Survey (2 of 2) SOUTH C101 Exisitng Conditions & Removals Plan C102 Civil Site Plan C103 Grading and Drainage Plan C104 Site Details 1-1.0 Tree Preservation and Removal Plan 1-1.1 Landscape Plan 1-1.2 Landscape Details A-1 Dumpster Enclosure Plan & Details St. —1; MN :92 woi 91 N 91. n. 65292.1 23 69.. 651.292E0i5 Ms n I226.e69.an 3681— 229 — 0 (n +- (D 0) � N NLO Ln O OZ U L-- => Q a E D p J > O C 0) O O U n Issue Date: 11y1l�41/.7�(PTi®19 Project No: x Drawn By. Design: xxxxxs Issue / Revisions No. Date Description Description Cover Sheet Sheet Number T100 CIRCLE DOWN ,p 660 FOOT AR)r PUBLIC M071T-0E-WAY) °,'-CS21033 T -_ r8&'-('v "- 1-. _- l526'4T39"E•- - SP_ 1 RING AF ON PROPERTY 4LRA4R -- J^ r I - PROPERTY OWNER: 394 ASSOCIATES LLP • T O PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5150 WAYZATA BOULEVARD N PARCEL 1 ONE STORY BRICK BUILDING _ PARCEL NUMBER: 30-029-24-23-0065 NO. 5411 CIRCLE DOWN Q I GREEN I BULGING FOOTPRINT = 1A687 50. FT.Own \ k oQ Al ti \I aRw'-;ter.. -=:-SOUTH J - N8B_41_171Y- 509.94 -------------_ Ilrr,,v���� 0- j'� yr � IRLW PIPE lot > N PART OF THE S. W. 714 OF THE N. W, 114 iz wo Q, 2 _ �Op m : PARCEL 2 (PAR 2) j O � Q I all �! C7 W.53'06 75"Wi II 25.7T­�--- �- T - - - - T r3�".tea- M1Lj . \ N-iovE err ALlcr `t EXCEP77ON 6 112-aryl ALLEY -� oxw gs "r- - �e e 8 39 b5 E i 2 r rt uN£ Pf $'N0. 706 LEGEND: LIGHT Tl UTILITY POLE - GUY WIRE © COMMUNICATION BOX W RIDER OPTIC SIGN W GAS METER b GAS VALVE - SIGN BOLLARD } p HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE S HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGN 1151 PARKING COUNT - LIMITED ACCESS -_-_-_- CHAIN LINK FENCE SANITARY SEWER ss STORM SEWER BITUMINOUS SURFACE FIELD BOOK I PAGE FIELDWORK 2710 59 CHIEF: CT DRAWN BY: NCP DRAWING NAME: 37512.dwq CHECKED JOB NO. 37512 BY: FILE NO. 1889 ER ® SANITARY MANHOLE ® STORM MANHOLE MOR® CATCH BASIN Oo DRAIN (INLET) ® WATER MANHOLE 0 GATE VALVE HYDRANT 19-r POST INDICATOR VALVE (0 AIR CONDITIONER M ELECTRIC BOX 9 HANOHOLE WATERM A N E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC Rw OVERHEAD WIRE -a UNDERGROUND GAS CONCRETE SURFACE REVISIONS SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 r IN 0 3i3 60 90 SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT a SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED WITH LICENSE NUMBER 47475 err• SET PK NAIL ALTA/NSPS SURVEY FOR: LAND TITLE SURVEY WEBB GOLDEN VALLEY, LLC sr GIENWO� � s 3 4` CIRCLE 00� INTERSTATE', HIGXWAY NO, 394 ) 1 , VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE PROPERTY ADDRESS: ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR: WEBB GOLDEN VALLEY, LLC LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Per the Commitment for Title Insurance Supplemental No. 1 doted July 30. 2C1'. prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, Commitment No. 663600 Parcel 1 Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Block 2, 'Spring Green So::th', according to the recorded plot thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land tt is evidenced by Certificate of Tine No, 1080096. Parcel 2 Par 1: Tract C, F, H. I. J and K, Registered Land San" No. 106. Hennepin County, Minnesota Par 2: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northh gnat Quarter of Section 30. 7 nship 29. Range 24. Hennepin County, rs C Mfnnesoto lying East of the Eas[ One of Tumorossrand. South of the South line of Lots 1, 2. 3 and 4. Block 2, Spring Green South, West of the West line of Lot 19. Block 2, said addition and North of the North line of the alley separating Spring Green South from Registered Land Survwy No, 106, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Excepthat port taken by the Slate of Mnrusoto for highway purposes as Parcel No. 75 In Final Certificate filed July 23, as 1999 Comment No. 3184798 ere canveyed to City of Golden Valley by Deed Document 5371175. Being Registered land as M evidenced by Certificate of Title Na, 1363413 NOTES: 1. The Orientation of this bearing system is based on the Hennepin County coordinate grid (NAD 93-2011 Ady). 2. The told ore. of the prvpaly de..rbed hereon 1. 266.022 square feet Or 6.12768 acres and is divided as follows; Parcel 1 = 65.810 Square feet or 1.51079 acres Parcel 2 = 201.112 square feet or 4.61689 acres and is divided as (allows; Par 1 = 130.152 square fat a 798787 surds Par 2 = 70.960 square feel a 1.62202 acres 3. The legal description and easement information used in the preparation of this survey is based an the Commitment for 7Ue Insurance prepared by Old Reaubfc Naterea Title Waseence Company, Commitment No. 63600 Supplemental No. 1 dated July 30, 2017. 4. Existing ulllltles, services and underground structures shown hereon were located either phystcally, from existing records trade vailable 72 7 by resMenl test:n 9y err by lattl'nna provided by Gopher Slate One Call, per Tickek No's. /72772674 & 172772675 However, lading excev I- the exact location of underground features cannot be accurately, c omplately and rNndy depicted. Where otldRlanal err mare deluged information Is required, the client is advised that ex ovation may be necess.ry: Omer utI ties end serM may be present and veNOcatien and location of all utilities and seMces should be obtained from the owner of the respcMive utgitiea prior to any design, planning or excavalltn. 5. No zonng report err letter was received tom the Insurer purment to Optional Table A Item 6(o) & G(b) of Table A, as .at forth in the 2016 Mfninum Standard Detail Requirements far ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survsys.t 6. The property described herein On within Flood Zone K (Areas determined to be outside the 0,2% annual chance foodadr) per Federal Insurance Rate Map Ne, 27053C 0351 F. dated November 4, 2016. T. As of the date of this survey the Property described harem contains a total of 403 parking spaces of which 392 are standard spaces. and 11 are handicapped sparse, B. As of the dote of this survey (hare', no observable evidence of c.,art earth moving work, building construction or building additions on the property described hereon. 9. As of the date of this survey and a d'ng to the City of Gulden Valley Engineering Department there are no ompleled or proposed changes in street right- (-say lines. As of the data of this survey there is no observable evidence of recent street or ddewolk constmetian err Opens, that affect the property described hereon. SURVEY ITEMS PER SCHEDULE B: Per the Commitment for Title Insurancepr Oared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, Canmltment Na, 63600 Supplemental No. 1 doted July 30, 2017. ITEM 06: Utility easement(,) over part of the subject properly as shown an the recorded plat of Spring Green South. (Parcds 1 and 2). Saitl eaxmants affect the surveyed Prapaty pod are depicted hereon. ITEM 07: Slortn s w cas moil(,) over part of the subject property as evidenced by Document NO(s). T1529656. (Parcels.( trod 2). Said easement effects the surveyed property and is dap clef hereon. REM 0& Terms and condition. of storm soda quality treatment facility maintenance agreement by and between the City of Golden Valley and Carlson Brown investments LLC, ea ted August 26. 2002. fited September 6, 2002 os Document No. T3598106. (Parch 1). Said terms and ccrdltlons affect the surveyed property. No plottable item, to depict. ITEM 09: Water I'll and hydrant easement(s) cue, port of the subject property as evidenced by Document No(.). 2323974. (Parcel 2). Sad easement affects the surveyed properly antl Is depicted hereon (See Sheet 2), ITEM 10: Restricted actt,s to trunk high*ny as e=.ad by Final CerUlfttte fP.d July 23. 1999 oa Document N. Ia. 3184798. (Parcel 2). Said restricted altos, affect, the surveyed property and is depicted hereon (See Sheet 2). ITEM 11: Retaining all eo ent(s) ova Dart of the subject property as evidenced by Document No(,). 3184798. (Parcel 2). Said easement effects the surveyed property and is depicted hereon (See Sheet 2). CERTIFICATION: To'Webb Golden Valley, LLC a Minnesotomited liliability aampany, American Heritage National Bank, and Old Republic National Tite Irsuronce Company. Miis to certify that this p a plot and the survey an which it is based w made in accordance with the 2016 nima mum Standard Detail Requirements fa ALTA/NSPS Lard Title Surveys. jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items I, 2, 3, 4, 60). 7(.), 7(b)(1), e, B. 13. 16. and 17 of Table A thereof- The field work was completed on October 12, 2017. Data of Plot or Map: November 7, 2017 Eric R�oeaer- MInn to U-se 1 47476 5411 CIRCLE DOWN & 5410 WAYZATA BLVD GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55416 1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 5541: PHONE: (612) 466-3300 FAX: (612) 466-3383 Egan, Field & Nowak, Inc. WWW,EFNSURVEY.COM I a n d Is u TV e v o r s e COPYRIGHT® 2017 By EGAN. FIELD & NOWAK. INC. n, a 1 F 7 9 2710 {N53'06 Z5"WI 25.7r i7 T -- --� ALLEY n 1avE TRACT B \Su j 9 t SEE SHEET 1 OF 2 _ ��205 EXCEPTION N. UVE 5 Nd TO6 pc ,• T 7�,,'TRACT ONE STORY BRICK BUILDINGNO. 5410 WA YZA TA BL VD. BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 26.795 5Q. FT.TRACT F 2 O �D . � q P 0 ° o O an o � Q 6p TRACT H N &a ly �, .i ,Idj p� PARCEL 2 (PAR 1) 39' ,.W 736.$s1_ 0 L TRACT 0 LEGEND: )(- LIGHT l0 UTILITY POLE - GUY WIRE © COMMUNICATION BOX ro FIBER OPTIC SIGN GAS METER 41 GAS VALVE - SIGN BOLLARD } Ci HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE "S HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGN I I51 PARKING COUNT LIMITED ACCESS -e-n-o- CHAIN LINK FENCE - SANITARY SEWER -5s STORM SEWER BITUMINOUS SURFACE FIELDWORK CHIEF: 37512.dW4 CHI JOB NO. 37512 By. FILE NO. 1889 FR TRACT E 0 ---------'--------- ------- - ----- - ACT ul 'N88 39 "0.5 "W 435 491 - - '� r/z-1WfH 'I neav PfPe EXCEPTION -- -- S. LINE OF TRACT TRACT C L TRACT L INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 394 (pAMABLE MOTH PUBLIC RIGHT-QF-WAY) © SANITARY MANHOLE I@ STORM MANHOLE ®ORO CATCH BASIN Oo DRAIN (INLET) ® WATER MANHOLE 0 GATE VALVE HYDRANT 64 POST INDICATOR VALVE R AIR CONDITIONER M ELECTRIC BOX H HANOHOLE w WATERMAIN -E UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC w OVERHEAD WIRE c UNDERGROUND GAS CONCRETE SURFACE REVISIONS 0 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET • FOUND IRON MONUMENT SET IRON MONUMENT MARKED WITH LICENSE NUMBER 47476 -10 SET PK NAIL SURVEY FOR: ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY WEBB GOLDEN VALLEY, LLC sr �tT,yvE . IRCLE DOM II�y SITE VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE PROPERTY ADDRESS: ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR: WEBB GOLDEN VALLEY, LLC LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Per the Commitment for Title Insurance prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, Commitment No. 63600 dated July 30. Supplemental No. 1 d2017. Parcel 1 Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Block 2. 'Spring Green Soulh", acceding to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County. Minnesota. Being Registered land as Is evldenttd by Certificate of Title No. 1050096. Parcel 2 Par 1; Tract C. F. H. I, J and K. Registered Lord Survey No, 106. Hennepin County, Minnesota Par 2: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 30. Township 29, Range 24, Hennepin Canty. Minn esato lying East of the East line of Turners Crasarood, South of the South line of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2, Spring Green South, West of Me West he of Lot 19. Block 2, sold addition old North of the North line of the alley separating Spring Grean South from Registered Land Survey No. 106. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Except that part taken by the State of Minn"' to for highway purposes as Parcel No. 76 Final Certificate fled July 23, 1999 as Document No. 3184798 as conveyed to City of Golden Valley by Deed Document 5371175. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1363413 NOTES: 1. The orientation of this bearing system is basetl on the Hennepin County coordinate grid (NAD 83-2011 Adj). 2. The total area of the property desc bed hereon is 266.935 square feet a 5.12798 acres and is divided as follows; Parcel I = 65,810 square feet a 1.51079 acrea. Parcel 2- 201.112 square feet or 4.61689 acres and is divided os follows; Par 1 - 130.152 square feet or 2.98787 Par 2 = 70.960 square feel or 1.62902 acres. 3. The legal description and easement information used in the preparation of this surwy is based a, the Commitment for Title Insurance prepared by Did Republic Notional Title Insurance Company, Commitment No. 63600 Supplemental No. 1 dated July 30. 2017. 4. Exfsting utilities, services and underground structures shown hereon were located either physically, from edsting records made awlame to us,b re aident . I'cm n e b lo cations ocahona roeded b Gopher Y� Y p Y P State One Coll, per Ticket No's. completely & 17277y de However, lacking additional or the exact location of underground .thes cannot be accurately, omplelely and reliably depicted. Where atldilional a mare detailed information is i qu-vetl, the client Is ad,ised that awllon may be necessary. Other utilities and service may be present and wrifcation and Io cI of all utilities and services should be obtained from the owners of the respective utlities prior to any design, planning or excawtion. S. No zoning report ar letter was receiwd from the insurer pursuant to Optional Table A Item 6(a) & 6(b) of Table A. as ,at forth in the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surwys.t S. The property described hereon Iles wfthln Flood Zone X (Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance 6oadplatn) per Federal Insurance Rate Map No. 27053C 0351 F. dated November 4, 2016 7. As of the date of this survey the properly described hereon contains a total of 403 parking spaces of which J92 are standerd spaces. and 11 are handicapped spaces. 8. As of the date of this survey there is no observable evdance of current earth moving work, building construction e building additions on the property described hereon. 9. As of the date of this survey and acceding to the City of Golden Valley Engineering Department there arecclap, no evidenceed or of recan�astre cha�gsidewelk rconstmctlon w r Ilnes thaA.t affect of the the of this ae Giese there obserwble epaire property SURVEY ITEMS PER SCHEDULE B: Per the Commitment for Title Insurance prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, Commitment No. 63600 Supplemental Na 1 dated July 30. 2017. ITEM 06: Utility easement(s) over part of the subject property as shown on the recorded plat of Spring Green South. (Parcels 1 and 2). Said easements affect the surveyed property and are depicted hereon (See Sheet 1). ITEM 07: Storm sew e s enl(s) a err part of the subject properly as evidenced by Document No(s). T1529656. (Parcels I ono 2). Said easement affects the surveyed property and is depicted hereon (sea Sheet 1). ITEM 08: Terms and conditions of storm water quality treatment facility maintenance agreement by and between the City of Golden Valley and Carlson Brown Inwstmonts LLC, dated August 26, 2002, feed September 6, 2002 as Document No. T3598106. (Parcel 1). Sold terms and conditions affect the surveyed property. No plottoble Items to depict. ITEM 09: Water line and hydrant aasement(s) over part of the subject property as evidenced by Document No(a), 2323974. (Parcel 2). Said easement affects the surveyed property and is depicted hereon. ITEM 10: Restricted access to trunk highway as eviden<ed by Ran Certificate fled July 23. 1909 as Document No. 10. 3184798. (Parcel 2). Said restricted attess affects the surveyed property and Is depleted hereon. ITEM 11: Retaining wall ea ent(s) aver port of the subject properly as evidenced by Document No(,). 3184798. (Parcel 2), Said s easement affects the surveyed property and is depicted hereon. 5411 CIRCLE DOWN & 5410 WAYZATA BLVD. GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55416 1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 1� 0 007N Minneapolis, Minnesota 5541 PHONE: (612) 466-3300 FAX: (612) 466-3383 Egan, Field & Nowak, Inca WWW.EFNSURVEY.COM 6PYRIGG♦HT0 2017 By EGAN. FIELD & NOWAK, INC. I a n d s u r v e y o r s s I n c e 1 8 7 2 ----- — — — I FREHAB CATCHBASIN STRUCTURE 1� — — — — - — --__� — — — — — — — — — — — — — — LEGEND —�' REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT REMOVE CONC. CURB FULL DEPTH SAWCUT GENERAL NOTES: 1. FULL DEPTH SAWCUT TERMINATION OF ALL REMOVALS, INCLUDING CURB, TO ENSURE CLEAN JOINT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. 2. COMPLETELY REMOVE CURB AND/OR PAVEMENT FROM REMOVAL AREAS. IF AGGREGATE BASE MATERIAL IS CONTAMINATED WITH UNDERLYING SOILS, REMOVE AND REPLACE PER APPROPRIATE DETAIL. 3. ALL REMOVED MATERIALS BECOME PROPERTY OF CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROMPTLY REMOVE DEBRIS FROM PROJECT AREA AND DISPOSE OF OFFSITE ACCORDING TO APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. REFERENCE NOTES: 01 SALVAGE FRAME AND GRATE FROM STRUCTURE. REMOVE ADJUSTING RINGS. GROUT AND REPAIR STRUCTURE AS NECESSARY TO ELIMINATE INFILTRATION OF BASF AND SUBGRADE MATERIALS. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT AS NECESSARY FOR REPAIRS. SAWCUT EDGE OF BIT, REMOVAL. I. I -7 IT - 1 ° �.� !J ---�77—J IL16OLF SAWCUT BIT. PAVEMENT 1355 SF REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT ' I r r- 1 ` I I 1 t 1 .1 1 1 4 ' 1 1 1 � _ 1 1 REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB I y. PRO ECT EXISTING CONC._&LX-�-QJIiEMAIN REMOVE 162LF CONC. CURB I L r-"1 I, 373LF SAWCUT BIT. PAVEMENT I 8,792 SF REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT 130LF SAWCUT BIT. PAVEMENT - 846 SF REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT l 11 I �I _ III X. 1 i 91LF REMOVE CONC. CURB 211LF SAWCUT BIT. PAVEMENT 1,930 SF REMOVE BIT. PAVEMENT 11 'r•a� I 1: REIGSTLD Professional Engineers °x - strerl /zoo Ph. 651-2.1123 — 551.292.6a15 aultp— Ns 14— areoeote Roaa Ph. 228.666.0771 F6s. 228.868.0772 Civil Engineers and La1� Surveyors 3601 Thurston Ava. Anoka. Minnesota 55 763—a27-5860 PAX -4V-0520 I hare.. certify Ih plan, spac1--ion, o preparetl by m tler my direct supervl6lan a I a a 6uly Licensed Praie Engineer under thl laws of of Minnesota. If 1317 ADAM M. P.E. LIC. NO. U) a Q0 Q Liz N Q U 0z Q� SET 0 > 0 CD N� 0 Issue Date: 11/04/2019 Project No: 4429.01 Drawn By AMT Design: AMT Issue / Revisions No. Date Description 1 11/1/19 CITY SUBMITTAL Description EXISTING CONDITIONS 8c REMOVALS PLAN Sheet Number c101 m=. --------- — — = — - - 6HW�1.5... ---------------------- �axb--- REHAB CATCHBASIN STRUCTURLBC----------------- Air- im t-: ------------------ VA \9' 10 2 4' 25.2' f4) NORTH AND EAST FOUNDATION SHALL — BE EXPOSED �6-12" FOR GRADE 6 I 1 2 ILI - A tra - TRASH ENCLOSURE \\ 1 (SEE ARCH) m- 1 f 9 1 ' 1 1 1 111 , I 'll garden 1 y $ 1U + in r 24 R=12' -'1 + R=3' / 4" CONC. WALK —�' B612 CONC. CURB & GUTTER encl. LEGEND NEW BIT. PAVEMENT NEW CONC. CURB FULL DEPTH SAWCUT � lea GENERAL NOTES: 1. NEW CURB SHALL BE 6612 CONC. CURB & GUTTER. 2. NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SHALL MATCH EXISTING 41 ADJACENT PAVEMENT. EDGES OF EXISTING PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT AND MILLED PER 24' DETAIL 3/C104. 3. TIPOUT CURB WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN PER DETAIL f I 4/C104. TIPOUT CURB INTENDED FOR ALL AREAS 41 WHERE PAVEMENT SLOPES AWAY FROM CURB. REFERENCE NOTES: I 1Q REPAIR STRUCTURE AND RE —GROUT OUTLET PIPE. INSTALL FRAME AND CASTING WITH NEW CONCRETE R++=3JJ R=6' f401� 10� I ADJUSTING RINGS, REPLACE BIT. PAVEMENT. 18.5' I� I I 7 II 24.5' —I A. I I I I 4" CONC. WALK I R=3' I I 22 22 R=2' -R=12' 27' I I 26 71 1 x 211 o I 20 40 SCALE IN F REIGSTID Professional Engineers $1. —1. NN 192 Wert — 4ree1 I— PF. 661.292.1123 11. 661.292.9011 ..'Wn. Ms lose aleoeme e°Pd PF. 226.66e.0771 Fax. 226.e66.0])2 ......19.ma.P� r ? Qem my direct a duly eer Enginu der of Minnesalo. 3131] uc. No. Issue Date: 11/04/2019 Project No: 4429.01 Drawn By. AMT Design: AMT Issue / Revisions No. Date Description 1 11/1/19 CITY SUBMITTAL Description CIVIL SITE PLAN Sheet Number c102 - ------ - - - - - �w r---------- w.,w �w ��_ r, _-----------1--------------- �- ' - LEGEND esfi - EXISTING CONTOUR l 11 _ _ _ �• I I _ 873.64 �. PROPOSED ELEV 47 (GUTTER OR PAVEMENT) R�876.56 s / DRAINAGE ARROW 877 30 - 0 ,f 1 - TIPOUT CURB 874.30 / 41 / R_87 41 77.90 8878.40 \\ ` 1� 878.80 \ ` \ 873.90 \ •'� / 10 I \ 874.45 \ +++j+ \ �S• 1Dj 87 .60 \11 10 77.. a is: 0 40 87 ,90 873: 5- _ -� 87�,BQ 878.60 -• 876.15 875.10 - \ 874.40 TW=877.95 BW=877.30 r TW=877.35-- I 4 . 875.35 \ . 6 - I -BW 87 y 874 0 \trash encl. x 877.20 \ o I I � I II EXISTING BUILDING =` 7 0: i FFE=88p.00 7 I 1 1 / 7 v', 1� garden 1 I � i --a7$ r _ - -- 87e.55 879.00 _ - �' i.OTCH \9\ \ \ \ It •. \ \ MATCH - �� • _ _ J - - �- \ _ 6 I I 87 .40 _ - - _ -- 876.50 22 22 87 40 87 .00 ' - 879.20 -J 878.45 -1 `--1 876.45� 875.80 - '� 875.45 877.95 J 876.60 - I � LLL._L_ � + 43 L 20 40 SCALE IN if. REIGSTID Professional Engineers u. P9ul. MN 192 Weet 9th Sheet ll 0 Ph 651 .292.1123 Fe.e. 11.292.e013 aVIIDDn. MS 143ee c-.- Ii- Ph. 229.968-1 Foe. 2 8N,0772 ......y,ma.ewn 12-91 Civil Engineers A-. , q� s9rr.yor, . 55V9rr.yor,3601 Thurston Ava., 76 -427-5860 Anoka, % -�427-0520 �erebyo t-dl e1 pDrea mymreDlir1317DC. N0. Cn O d- Ln N LO > U O z Q a E o CD O __j O 01 C: � O C O a Issue Date: 11/04/2C19 Project No: 4429.01 Drawn By. AMT Design: AMT Issue / Revisions No. Date Description 1 11/1/19 CITY SUBMITTAL Description GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN Sheet Number C103 TOOLED JOINT ® 5'-0" OC MAX UNLESS NOTED� OTHERWISE 3/4 3/8" +. CONCRETE : GRANULAR BASE COMPACTED SUBGRADE EXPANSION JOINT - 30' OC MAXIMUM OR AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. ALSO, WHERE WALK ABUTS ANY FIXED OBJECT. EG WALLS, CURBS, MANHOLES, ETC. 1 CONCRETE JOINT DETAIL ,C104 NO SCALE VARIES d I 4" CONCRETE a WALK 4" CLASS V AGGREGATE BASE 2 1CONCRETE SIDEWALK C10! NO SCALE 1.51, MILL & WEAR NEW PAVEMENT COURSE OVERLAY (MATCH EXISTING SECTION) (2- WIDE) CLASS V 1�1' AGGREGATE BASE 3 BITUMINOUS PATCH REPAIR SECTION C104 NO SCALE 1/2" R.-+f6"i�- 3 V'„ R -� INTAKE PER FII� I 2 1 INTAKE T 1 /2" R. : j ". 3" R SPILLOUT FT Iy ,° '•3/4�' PER T SPILLOUT NOTE: ALL PARKING LOT TO HAVE 8612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DRAINAGE ARROWS INDICATE � � SPILLOUT AND INTAKE CONFIGURATION 4 1 113612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER IC10 7" CONCRETE PAVEMENT I� 6" CLASS V AGGREGATE BASE I- APPROVED SUBGRADE (.---)CONCRETE PAVEMENT 104 NO SCALE REIGSTID Professional Engineers 51. Paul, uv 1g2 Wert g 8 Skert 12. Ph. 6612g2A1 Foe 5 2.2.8015 (port. US 1I38B Creodate Road Ph. V86650nl .. 22B.B6BA772 ......gmpa. l Civil ERgln ..d Lard Surveyara 3601 Thurston Ave., �S Anoka, Minnesota 55��[[1t3. 763-627-5860 FA%[YJ]E'�427-0520 v W 1•dar my direct I am a duly Engin.er under of IANn... ta. P.E. UC. NO. (n + Q0 Q) r� Q) a) Ln L l > U O Z Q 0 >, � QJ O J O Q) O I Issue Date: 11/04/2019 Project No: 4429.01 Drown By. AMT Design: AMT Issue / Revisions No. Dote Description 1 11/1/19 CITY SUBMITTAL Description DETAILS Sheet Number C104 Z II 1 I I 1 i EX LAWN i u \ 7 AREA v`- TO ROVE '�—E-ASANG L�a7ANTRACTOR / ENSTING DEAD TREE EASTIVIS TREES TO BE LIMBED UP, SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES Q` TREE TO REMAf V TYR *H444' EX LArvrv-nnu� tit - � ---------- � EX LAWN AREA •lcs I . PROPERTY LINE - jf —EX LAWN AREA 7„ I , EXISTING LANDSCAPE : TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN, TYR EX OUTDOOR PATIO SPACE ' TO REMAIN . .1 EX. LAWN EX LAWN AREA 1 '�� �LL� it --- _ -EK LAWN AREA LEGEND: � I 1 1 EXISTING SHADE TREES TO REMAIN EXISTING SHADE TREES TO BE REMOVED 0' 15' 37 60' %%mmii! W TREE PRESERVATION & REMOVALS PLAN: SCALE: 1"=3D'-o• NORTH 00SL TREE TO BE REMOVED, TYP. y c I o z c --- l o n0 z Tree Preservation Notes: Existing boundary, location, topographic, and utility information shown on this plan is from a field survey provided by Egan, Feld & Nowak, Inc. • Do not begin tree clearing work unfil tree protection measures are in place and to the permit approval of the City of Wayzata Forestry Department has been granted. • Critical Roct Zone: Install Ngh density polyethylene safety fence, 4 R high, international orange, at the Drip Line or at the Critical Root Zone whichever is greater, of trees to be preserved per detail 1, prior to commencement of earthwork activity. Feld -staking of the fence locadon(s) subject to City of Golden Valley approval. • Where sat fence and proposed tree protection fence overlap, place the tree protection fence on the outside of the silt fence, double -staked at the break-point • The contractor shall prune the canopy of existing trees to remain where the canopy is in jeopardy of damage due to the new improvements shown. It is recommended that the contractor hire a certified arborist to perform the pruning. Any branches broken during construction shall be immediately trimmed and wounds painted to prevent further damage. • Perform work in accordance with the laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and orders of public authority having jurisdiction. Secure and pay for permits, governmental fees and licenses necessary for the proper execution of the demolition work • Provide protective coverings and enclosures as necessary to prevent damage to existing work that is to remain. Existing work to remain may include items such as trees, shrubs, lawns, sidewalks, drives, curbs, utilities, buildings and/or other structures on or adjacent to the demolition site. Provide temporary fences and barricades as required for the safe and proper execution of the work and the protection of persons and property. • Remove debris, waste, and rubbish promptly from the site. On -site burial of debris is not permitted. Bum no debris on the site. Salvage material not otherwise indicated to be reused shall become the Contractor's property and is to be removed promptly from the site and disposed ofin strict accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and/or statutes. • Buildings, features, surfaces, and other descriptive references shown on this drawing are for Informational purposes only. Feld verify all information relevant to the project prior to proceeding with the work Msil the site and detemline all site conditions and hazards. • This plan is a glide as to the anticipated amount of disturbance expected due to proposed improvements. The contractor is expected to lake all necessary precautions to ensure trees noted to remain are not damaged during construction. Do not store materiel or drive within the drip fine of existing trees to remain. Be aware of overhead branches for clearance of material and equipment • This plan is not a guarantee that existing trees will survive during/post construction, but rather a guide to help assure their protection and greatest chances of survived at the surface level. Further protection measures outside this scope could involve ecologists, foresters and arborists. • Notify the Owner's Representative and Engineer when tree protection fencing is taken dawn to perform work in conjunction with the new improvements noted in this plan set The contrectoris responsible for re -erecting the tree protection fence immediately after the work is complete, when ever possible • Trees shown as existing to remain (be preserved) that are damaged / killed as a result of construction activities are subject to replacement per the CLty Tree Replacement penalty. Replacement trees are to be paid for at no additional expense to the Owner. TREE INVENTORY LOG: In SIZE SPECIES 16_ 4 I s 1 1T Lacrut Y 2 I6" INcrrvafNehlle N 3 1T Dnden N 4 Ir -Norway NI;0e N 5 15" N—sV Map/¢ N 6 I,- Narw Nage N /8" Ash y 13 R.sh y IO-Gabapple N 11• :Autumn Et— _ N 11 26- tNotwa NSae r 12 1V Nenxar Mwe M 13 30' Blackflills Spruce N 1 30' Sladc Hills Spruce N 'S 3D- Blade Hills Spruce N 1 IS" Nonvav P.trple N 17 20 .StackOk Spn:re 1 3d Black Hilts Svrute N 19 6 &adt Hills Sprute N Zi 20' Smtd1 Pin N 21 IN Srotch Pine N 22 2P Heckber, N 23 20' _Blab Hi1kS ice N 24 2A Ponders. Pine N 25 20' BIa4H1116Spr°ce N - 13' Ash N 27 E4- Norwa6ro e N 29 ZO Scoldh Pine N W Norway Maple N 31 32 20' 27' &lick Hill, Spruce Hadbem; N N 33 19" Hackbs N 34 15' Black Hills Spree N 35 17 Ash N 36 11' Ash N 37 16r Ash N 38 16- Ash N 39 15' !Ach N 40 16` Ash N #OF E%I S DNG TREES: 40 #TREES TO BE REMOVED 2 #TREES AS CREOm 3p REIGSTID Professional Engineers S„ P N9 N 192 q th Street 0211e Ph. 6512921123 o„6512928015 Pnmzn, Ns 1•066 c a.ah• see 2a.e6a.a171 ox 22S.SSS.S172 CA IYX DESIGN GROUP Landscape Architecture I Planning 475 Qev9end Avenue N I Suite 307 St Pad, MN 55104 eptiow 651.7689018 hn temae elyxdeagngraupmm cn aJ � Ln Ln > 0z Q� _E 0 0 J 0 0 2_ Issue Date: 11/04/2019 Project No: Drawn By: MF Design: MF / BH Issue / Revisions No. Dote Description D-crlptlthn TREE PRESERVATION + REMOVALS PLAN Sheet Number L1.0 YADTHS MAY VARY 36'IMt11 SEE PLANS FACE OF WALL OR BACK OF CURB L MULCH PER NOTES J I �1AF PROFESSIONAL BLACK STEELI • WITH STAKES EVERY 19• jMN} RYI OR EQUAL HNSHED GRADE OZ NEEDLE -PUNCH FILTER FABRIC. TURN -UP AT EDGES, OVERLAP SEAMS 4'. _=1' i-----•� - FITCH FREE DRAINING NATIVE SOLSUBGRADETO DRAIN AWAY FROM BNLNNG WALLS a CURBS ENSURE PLANT BEDS PASS INFILTRATION TEST AS DESCRIBED NOTES SEE OVAL GRACING RAN FOR CROSS SLOPE DRECAON IN NOTE l21L PLANT BED W DTH VARIES, SEE PLAN SUBMIT ROCK, EDGER, AND FABRIC SAMPLES FOR APPROVAL PLANT BED ROCK MULCH DETAIL L1.1• rvoT ro scxa _ PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN: PERFNNALIPLUGPLANr MULCHPERNOTES EDGE carvunm vAR6s • sEB IxwN N2 11-0D6FR ROaT30-AINIMIND PVRr MAiERALS P4NaN'GSOLPERSPEO11G1lON3 COMMCTORPRePAREaSUaG- 2..TYP. PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL L1.1.' NOT TO SCALE SCALE: 1"=30'.0' NORTH BUILDING ENTRY c WOOD MULCH REIGSTID Professional Engineers I� IL W ,92 1 BM 1t 1 12Gp EX SIDEWALK =. es;,2a Fp.. 6.1.2-8011 PI Il , MS 16]6e areoppte RoaO Pl.- 220.968.0771 Fp.. 229.a69.0772 PROPOSED SInEINALK' PERi�IEABLE*V.ERS ....... H r I I 7 6 16 IIII PROPOSI'D PARKING LOT RAISED EARTHEN } MOUND, Z MAX HEIGHT -1 LANDSCAPE ENLARGEMENT PLANT SCHEDULE OVERSTORYTREE CODE BOTANICALNAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER DTY As A.-x/reemari 'Senrle' Blenna pen Maple 2Y Cal. B&B 8 -a.-. tiacamhosinemis'Skycde'TM Skyline Thornless Honey Locust 25'CA B&B 2 Tlia emeriCana'Sentry' Sentry rden 23 CA. .- 5 SHRUBS CODE BOTANICAL NAME COMMONNAME SIZE CONTAINER OTY ODI C'ierx>ialoricera Dwad Bush HoneysucWB 3 gaL Pot 29 OHe Hydrangea arborescens'Annabele' Annabele Hydrangea 5get Pot 17 ® le Ilex ver5alala'AXerjow' Afleryow Winterberry 3get Pat 8 W Ilex verlalata'Im Dandy' Jim Dandy Wimerberry 3 gel Pot 1 O8m3 Spimea x bumalda'Gddmound' Gold Mound Sprea 3gd. Pot 12 ANNUALSIPERENNALS CODE BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER CITY OEp Ectinacea purpurm Purple Canelower 1gal. Pat 16 OHo Hemeroceis x - Stela de Oro' Stela de Oro Daylly Iget Pat 75 Hp Heuchers nicrantha'Palace Purple' Palace Purple Card Bela 1gal. Pat 26 K Hosta x'June June Host. 1gd. Pat B ONw Nepeta x taasseril'Wdkers Law' Walkers Law Catnip 1gal. Pat 7 0 Rg2 Rudbeclia hlgida'Gddstrum' Black Eyed Susan 1 gel pot 12 GRASSES CODE BOTANICAL NAME COMMONNAME SIZE CONTAINER CITY Ck Calamagrosis x acullora'Kad FDerster' Feather Read Grass igl. Pot 221 Mp2 Macanthus dnends'Purpurescans' Rama Grass Igal. Pot B LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL EXISTING SHADE TREES: 40 EXISTING SHADE TREES TO REMAIN: 38 NEW TREES TO BE PLANTED: 13 TOTAL TREES POST CONSTRUCTION: 53 4� + _ pnPrxT6gsPAaxcassrAlEa alFLw: 0Fx EExcwn,taysnu_Fa1Fmr.rexnaofs rno�Es sEmnpTIF xwnagrwr sv616M 3FnEFFPFO AIAnG BAan�0EER5PFOReATexs - �'i' -�-•' `I'�� .if ice' �' � I • .�:� � �� ...�'� ' MN. KCOP:I':G TO RPNgNGpEraLSFOgI6alAl-p RANIrrcLanaanswrnrxE ExcE"govagEdcEo (2TYP. SHRUB PLANTING - SECTION C A LIY X DESIGN GROUP Landscape Architecture I Ranring 475 Oev9and Avenue N. I Sdte 307 SL Pad, MN 01N tdephow 651.7889018 Intemet caw Apdedgngreupmm (n J Q0 LO _O Ln > U Oz Q '_ — -0 O O O J O _Y ^^C) ((O^ CL V e Data: 11/04/2019 Project No: Drawn By. ME Design: ME / OH Issue / Revisions No. Date Description Deaeriptron PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet Number L1 Landscape Notes: 1. Tree saucer mulch to be four inches (4") depth natural single -shred hardwood mulch for trees outside of a plant bed. Install per tree planting detail. 2. Refer to civil plan sheets for grading, drainage, site dimensions, survey, tree removal, proposed utilities & erosion control. 3. All plant material shall comply with the latest edition of the American Standard for Nursery Stock, American Association of Nurserymen. Unless noted othervfse, deciduous shrubs shall have at least 5 canes at the specified shrub height. Plant material shall be delivered as specified. 4. Plan takes precedence over plant schedule if discrepancies in quantities exist 5. All proposed plants shall be located and staked as shown. 6. Adjustment in location of proposed plant material may be needed in field. Should an adjustment be required, the client will provide field approval. Significant changes may require city review and approval. 7. The project landscape contractor shall be held responsible for watering and property handling all plant materials brought on the site both before and after installation" Schedule plant deliveries to coincide with expected installation time within 36 hours. 8. All plant materials shall be fertilized upon installation as specified" 9. The landscape contractor shall provide the owner with a watering schedule appropriate to the project site conditions and to plant material growth requirements. 10" If the landscape contractor is concerned or perceives any deficiencies in the plant selections, soil conditions, drainage or any other site condition that might negatively affect plant establishment, survival or guarantee, they must bring these deficiencies to the attention of the landscape architect & client prior to bid submission. 11" Contractor shall establish to his/ her satisfaction that soil and compaction conditions are adequate to allow for proper drainage at and around the building site. 12" Contractor is responsible for ongoing maintenance of all newly installed material until time of owner acceptance. Any acts of vandalism or damage which may occur prior to owner acceptance shall be the responsibility of the contractor. Contractor shall provide the owner with a maintenance program including, but not limited to, pruning, fertilization and disease/pest control. 13" The contractor shall guarantee newly planted material through TWO calendar years from the dale of written owner acceptance. Plants that exhibit more than 10% die -back damage shall be replaced at no additional cost to the owner. The contractor shall also provide adequate tree wrap and deer/rodent protection measures for the plantings during the warranty period. 14. This layout plan constitutes our understanding of the landscape requirements listed in the ordnance. Changes and modifications maybe requested by the city based on applicant information, public input, council decisions, etc. 15" The landscape contractor shall be responsible for obtaining any permits and coordinating inspections as required throughout the work process. 16. Plant size & species substitutions must be approved in writing prior to acceptance in the field. 17. Replacement and repairs requested by the Owner during the warranty period must be made within 14 business days of the request 18. Landscape Contractor is responsible for coordination with the General Contractor, to protect the new improvements on and off -site during landscape work activities. Report any damage to the General Contractor immediately. 19. Irrigation: the landscape contractor is required to provide temporary irrigation for newly installed plants and turf. Provide a layout & connection plan showing routing of temporary pipe, emitters, sleeving, water source connection, & electronic timer. Remove temporary irrigation after plant and turf establishment 20" All sod areas shall be prepared prior to planting with a harley power box rake or equal to provide a firm planting bed free of stones, sticks, Construction debris, etc. Any alternate seed mixtures, rates, & application method noted shall be submitted to the landscape architect for approval. 21. The Landscape Contractor shall furnish samples of all landscape materials for approval prior to installation. 22. The Landscape Contractor shall dear and grub underbrush from within the work limits to remove dead branches, leaves, trash, weeds and foreign materials. Remove trees where noted on the civil plan, including the stump to 30" below grade. 23" The landscape contractor shall contact 811 no less than 48 hours before digging for field utility locations. 24. The landscape contractor shall be responsible for the removal of erosion control measures once vegetation has been established to the satisfaction of the municipal staff" This includes silt curtain fencing and sediment logs placed in the landscape. 25. The landscape contractor shall be responsible for visiting the site to become familiar with the conditions prior to bidding and installation. Coordinate with the general contractors on matters such as fine grading, landscaped area conditions, staging areas, irrigation connection to building, eta 26. All plant beds shall receive 4" depth locally available 1" die. limestone rock mulch, over weed mat Submit mulch sample for Owner approval" Bryan Rock or Equal. Install rock mulch 1" below back of curbs or walks to prevent spill -over. Do not mound rock mulch. Coordinate finished grade condition with earthwork subcontractor. 27. All edger shall be professional grade''" thick black steel edger, Ryerson or Equal. Anchor every 18" on -center (minimum). Submit sample for Owner approval. 28. Topsoil Requirements: All graded areas of the site that are designated on the plan set for turf sod shall have no less than 6" of imported top soil, areas designated for shrubs, trees, and perennials shall have no less than 12' of imported top soil, meeting WiDOT Classifications for planting soil for trees, shrubs, and turf. Slope away from building. 29. Landscape contractor must prove the open sub -grade of all planting areas after their excavation is capable of infiltrating a minimum requirement of 1/44nch of water per hour prior to installation of plant materials, topsoil, irrigation, weed mat, and mulch. Planting areas not capable of meeting this requirement shall have 4" diameter 48" depth holes augured every 36" on -center and filled with WTDOT Free -Draining Coarse Filter Aggregate. Re -test sub -grade percolation for compliance to infiltration minimum requirement. 30. Landscape contractor to provide nursery pull list (gill of lading) including plant species and sizes shipped to the site. Additionally, the landscape contractor shall provide nursery stock traceability, proving none of the materials provided contain or are genetic strains of the neonicobnoid family including acetamipdd, clothianidin, imidadoprid, nitenpyram, nithiazine, thiadoprid and thiamethoxam. 31. Landscape contractor is to hire a licensed arborist to limb up existing trees on site as needed LANDSCAPE NOTES, DETAILS AND SCHEDULES: REIGSAD Professional Engineers EL P-MN 1 WBlh 1h1 a M2a0 Ph. 111-11,1121 Pp." 111,111,101, Gunport, M NOTE Ph. 228.868.0771 Fevl229.e68.0772 1IRR TO CONRWISE NO MULREOOED MLVRwnETxE'REEArpurvsto_ •" HARDWOOD MULCH UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE NOMULCH TO BEIN CONTACTw ER TRUNK raivcaOssovmuMs5,c00ouxo" PLACE ROOT Brll150 THAT BASPLRs, ANDNNxEx Oa DFAo surclE.sFLAREISI" ABOVESURROUNDING INnRW TWGS AWLATBIMLB ca NaWR.RTU+cYETxE THE CONTACTOR IS RESFONAPLE FORPOSITION THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTY APP.mvx DF TPER ODD CA LYX w c WRA"'REEIMUNXBBV�WYtETH AY)ROOT SAUL TO SIT ON MOUNDED SUBGRADE, REMOVE BURLAP Wmt mE HUH EIDE OFTE TREEIN THEFROM TOP 113 OF ROOT BAL1 NeBTHATTEBTEMRENEVERFr RE DESIGN GROUP MULCH-4•DEEP•SEE SPEC 3RETri[rmUMl7nAV11. Landscape Architecture I Planning PUWTING SCIL• SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES. UBe1t 5Hn1 BE RF Ep Da"TODVERTET/iOpOFTNEROm DA:Lwm50L RmTauy HUsn TO 6vuLCx Rncsa DAi nrf WMl 475 Cleveland Avenue It l Bute 307 OR Iff.BA MREFERREDI SL Pau, MN 55104 SOD DRAnxG mLs y.UCEq BE.He.BE or Bdaphonc 651.78fl9018 3 " •-.-. -1' _ i L inLawt wwvtadyABedgngreupmm lraorBM - ;ll :USGRADE ctt-u MUICH DDxDRgc MACH. -I - NNM'JMRIPFAINFE u1ER STANa TOMAHAWK TREE STABILIZER STAKEE THEW w'AFEOFREEmRUTERAH -1 I I _ f AEMOY£NLTYIN-ROPEAHOWREAxa BLeLM MNMUM (2)PER TREE PDmnc'jl RMn6 ENPPF➢v1�A1YLREB0.4GT AA0UM TxE m7oisuL. ORAN SYSTEMISNECESSARY EE FOR HEAVY CLAY ROILS Nan'F0ADetnsasaF Fanatic wlAss _ EAxarINFwR RxsavD FQaDDrmMNlnr. f.,(- 4'OIAMETER AUGERED HOLE sj IL E.'i(-lxoM.o)FFA MNDEPTH FILLED WTaeUcar EDORTuED SaL DIAMETERDRANROMCMER E��WH TR10NTERL i '�'•�" W/6-RLTER FABRC PPEaA1RE00THMHroT9,MLa0Fa NpTgIFL FOOL +, CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING -SECTION 4 DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING - SECTION L1.2 NOTTOSCAUR Q� In Q) Ln '.YEW eTUMNWEPAVBAEM" mil TS O It FIAT ccNTANM[lsmxr;RETE gIAO ' SEEEOF�6gLW1tiBAO:ItEVr PAVEMEN[ V PAVER RESTMMSYSTEM MORE PAYERS WRIAT-sE lIONTO 'PAAE aV OR EQUAL SUBMT Lw]sGWEPACHTECTFORAPRTOVAL USE ` SAMPLEFORAPPROVAL SECURE - SOLO ERCQIRSNGATEDGRRNANIFAOTURED /l NTH METAL SRKES PER MNFR5 GUOEUNES BY BORDERT PRaNaCTS.ING (SEE PLAN FOR 11 E> .F IROW SQI RCO.REE C) T FCENCRETE PAVERS �, EUGE,00 UQ1R PA-WGBEETBPAONG 0 /I1 T SAND LEVEUNG BASE A,it li 1, 7/f./ INSNILA-ELENOOF-NRKEMHOT'Ie•TRAP 4 �i�•Vr _,E ROOKCHPE AHD TRAP-SANDELEND T O BEP75ENJONTBOFAWA4Rct V IMMEDATELYAFIERNSTALAnUN O J --WM1'CRETE GIPB PE90ETALtht2 �I pDa • O - `TL /`�-ADucBn-uxoswEAREA•BEEE-111 -��\/�/ roEFr..ffDDxc IAYER,IreTwvRocrccHPR I - P OEQTH RASE I ETR, IR'IPIPROCKgIPR Ir GERHSJ-E LAYER 3MM' WASHED, t1 OI _ FREE-0RANYG GEOTOBIIEFABRCBERYEEN AGGREGATEMSE PER DETML I 1 _ - EasED E-Eso5L6GpIfIE C.ETESEN O ]/ ANGMAR ROCK BASEIN•FILL IWTERPL� B��-�ll��-- 4TED0ESAN00VE&SEA EcM 1Tnn �J RMInNG PREA0.5 NOTEOON PLW 1-ICI f �.- -� CONTRACTOR PREPAREDBIIEGPADE 7'-1 -If -•PRDor-Rou Rtw HEITIDRTKwacRADE Ta sr1. -AoRDENSTvr TSOF- -10 REGION V=W NQl1PE PACIER COPotl:OT56Po1S TO 2 PAVER EDGE RESTRAINT DETAIL NOTE sRE MAKLFA;,-ulaLs REEaMLErwAnaxB 1_12 noT To scnLE roRInSTULA�an=oaomTaxwwFoxwnon _s PERMEABLE PAVER WITH 24" FREE DRAINING ROCK BASE ISSOe note 11/04/2019 L`"2� NOT Ta SCOLE Project No: Drawn By- MF Design: MF / BH NEW SOD BLADE - - THATCH LAYERS TO HAVE NEW THATCH LAYER MATCHNG ELEVATION Issue / Revisions ERSTING SOD BLADE No. Date Description ENSTING THATCH LAYER �J„+S� J,J J,J �,L;1I111I1I11 '' "", I I I I I • CONCRETE SIDEWALK OR CURB - - SOL FIT={11=���=���=��1-��� • THATCH LAYERS TO MATCH SOIL • NO THATCH ABOVE ADJACENT GRADE 'SUB -CUT AND RNAL GRADE BY SODINSTALLER UNEVEN SOD WLL BE REJECTED AND SUBCUTFORNEWSOD RETAINAGE OR BOND MONIES USED TO CORRECT OtgQipifOn 3 SECTION - NEW TURF SOD AGAINST EXISTING LANDSCAPE Li.2 NOTTO E DETAILS Sheet Number L1.2 1x6 NOMINAL WOOD SLATS, TYP„ WITH 1/2 INCH CAP BETWEEN BOARDS, TYP. 2X6 NOMINAL WOOD TRIM AT CORNERS AND PANEL JOINTS BETWEEN HORIZONTAL SIDING r - TDaRos e -s GATES: GALVANIZED STEEL TUBE FRAME, BRACING AND SUB -FRAMING -CLAD WITH 1X6 NOMINAL WOOD, TO MATCH TYP. SIDING MATERIAL 4 A -I ----- --,f EXISTING WOOD POWER 6'-V V-2" POLE, SEE SITE DRAWING F-- o I ! ► _ i I CONCRETE FILLED B' DIAMETER �I, STEEL PIPE BOWRD -EXTEND ' PIPE MIN. 48' BELOW GRADE 10 CONCRETE FILLED B' DAM j STEEL PIPE BOLLARD - E kV PIPE MIN. 48` BELOW GR/ 2 A -I I Trash Enclosure -Plan A -I SCALE: 1/e = 1'-T 10'-0" • -ter CONCRETE FILLED 8' DIAMETER STEEL PIPE BOLLARD -.EXTEND PIPE MIN. 46 BELOW GRADE IIII I I I I I I I -'IT BOLLARDS IN2 DIAMETER CD CRE Er III IIII IIII IIII BASE, TV. I I I Lu_J Lu_J LLJJ LuJ LuJ — 2 Trash Enclosure - SOUTH (Front) Elevation SCALE: Ile = 1r-o' PREFINISHED METAL 1X6 NOMINAL WOOD SLATS, TYP., WITH NOMINAL WOOD TRIM AT COPING, TYP., OVER 1/2 INCH CAP BETWEEN BOARDS, TYP. CORNERS AND PANEL JOINTS BETWEEN CANTED WOOD BLOCKING /-2X6 HORIZONTAL SIDING BOARDS L — — 4 Trash Enclosure - NORTH (Rear) Elevation SCALE! Ile = v-Dr PREFINISHED METAL COPING, TYP.. OVER CANTED WOOD BLOCKING IX6 NOMINAL WOOD SLATS, TYP., WITH 1/2 INCH GAP BETWEEN BOARDS, TYP. - 2X6 NOMINAL WOOD TRIM r AT CORNERS AND PANEL JOINTS BETWEEN HORIZONTAL SIDING BOARDS i nT�Tf) OrP A T) 51. Paul. NN 1U Weat — sheet IF— Ph. 651.2-112] Fax. s11391.e015 t, 9 e 22 Ma 5S 16] cre e Ph. 2]0.00.01>1 roa. . 68 07)2 wWw�e�gata6rom frame u architects 3 1 s:P.Ho1c t.a' -1,12.22 9435 Ln Q > U 07, Q� c3 E A � — N p J O 0) C: Q) O Issue Date: 11/04/2019 Project No: z Drawn By: Design: 1111xx Trash Enclosure - EAST Elevation Issue / Revismas SCALE: Ile = 1'-O' No. Date Description 7X6 NOMINAL WOOD SLATS, TYP., WITH _ / /2 INCH GAP BETWEEN BOARDS, TYP, 1 ° J 2%6 NOMINAL TRIM A7 CORNERS AND PANEL I JOINTS BETWEEN HORIZ. SIDING / BOARDS e 6 Trash Enclosure - WEST Elevation I: SCALE: Ile = I'-T Description Dumpster Enclosure Plan & Details Sheet Number A-1