Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-17-2024 Planning Commission Packet
Agenda Planning Commission Monday, June 17, 2024, 6:00 PM 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 /oronomn.gov 1.Call to Order 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Approval of Agenda 4.Approval of Minutes 4.1. Planning Commission Minutes of May 20, 2024 5.Public Hearings 5.1. #LA24-000018, Matt Jasper, 4745 North Shore Drive - CUP, Variances (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 5.2. #LA24-000026, Gregg Steinhafel, 2265 and 2285 North Shore Drive - Grading IUP (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 5.3. #LA24-000028, Steve White, 4375 Bayside Road, Preliminary Plat (Natalie Nye) 5.4. #LA24-000029, Robey Construction o/b/o Steve Streich, 1487 Shoreline Drive, Variance (Natalie Nye) 5.5. #LA24-000030, Aspect Design Build LLC., 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue N, + PIDs 29-118-23- 43-0013, 29-118-23-44-0004 & 29-118-23-44-0006 - Preliminary Plat (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 5.6. #LA24-000031, Peter Eskuche, 3120 North Shore Drive, Variance (Natalie Nye) 5.7. #LA24-000032, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, 3745 Shoreline Drive, Variances (Natalie Nye) 5.8. #LA24-000033, Brian & Sarah Muhlbauer, 1448 Baldur Park Road - Variances and CUP (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 6.Other Items 7.Adjournment Audience Members: Information regarding each of the agenda items is available on the city website under meetings and in the public packet located in the lobby near the entrance. Applicants will be asked to move to the lectern to answer questions after staff presents the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting. A quorum of the City Council may be in attendance of a Planning Commission meeting to hear comments made, though no action or deliberation of the Council will occur. Sign up for email notifications at https://www.oronomn.gov/ 1 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 4.1 Presenter: Laura Oakden, Community Development Director Section: Approval of Minutes Title: Planning Commission Minutes of May 20, 2024 1.Purpose: Approve the Planning Commission Minutes of May 20, 2024 2.Planning Commission Action Requested: Approve the Planning Commission Minutes of May 20, 2024 AGENDA ITEM Exhibits 05.20.2024 Planning Commission minutes.pdf 2 Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting Monday, May 20, 2024, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Page 1 of 3 Acting Chair Ressler called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL Orono Planning Commission members present: Acting Chair Jon Ressler, Commissioners Mark McCutcheon, Dennis Libby, Bob Erickson, Ted Schultze, and Scott Kirchner. Commissioners Chris Bollis and Gary Kraemer were absent. Staff present: Community Development Director Laura Oakden, City Planner Melanie Curtis, and City Planner Natalie Nye. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. NEW BUSINESS 3.1 Oath of Office – Bob Erickson, Dennis Libby and Jon Ressler Three current Planning Commission members were reappointed for another three-year term and took the Oath of Office. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Kirchner moved, Libby seconded, to approve the Agenda. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 5. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2024 McCutcheon moved, Erickson seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of April 15, 2024. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1. LA24-000017 COURTNEY PAULSON, 1090 WILDHURST TRAIL, AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK, SIDE YARD SETBACK AND HARDCOVER VARIANCES The Planning Commission is requested to review the Staff report, receive a presentation, and discuss and approve the requested variances. The Planning Commission discussed the item and had no additional questions for staff or the applicant, Courtney Paulson, 1090 Wildhurst Trail, who was present. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:05 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:05 p.m. Commissioners said they felt practical difficulty had been established and noted staff was in support of the application and that there was really no other logical place to add a deck. 3 Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting Monday, May 20, 2024, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Page 2 of 3 McCutcheon moved, Schultze seconded, to approve LA24-000017, 1090 Wildhurst Trail Variances as applied. VOTE: Ayes: 6, Nays 0. 6.2. LA24-000022 AMY YANIK, 1355 VINE PLACE, VARIANCE The Planning Commission is requested to review the Staff report, receive a presentation, and discuss and approve the requested variance. The Planning Commission discussed the item and had no additional questions for staff or the applicant, Amy Yanik, 1355 Vine Place who was present. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:11 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:11 p.m. Commissioners pointed out the new deck would be an in-kind replacement if it were not for making the new railing higher to meet building codes. McCutcheon moved, Libby seconded, to approve LA24-000022, 1355 Vine Place Variance as applied. VOTE: Ayes: 6, Nays 0. 6.3. LA24-000023 JOANNA HEINEN o/b/o KASEY LYNN JONES, 884 DAKOTA AVE., VARIANCES The Planning Commission is requested to review the Staff report, receive a presentation, and discuss and deny the requested variances. The Planning Commission discussed the item and asked questions of staff and Joanna Heinen on behalf of the applicant. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. Commissioners expressed support for the applicant’s goal of conserving the trees even though keeping the trees is not considered a practical difficulty, but suggested they have an expert assess the impact of the proposed new construction on the trees. They noted that the fact that the existing auxiliary structures would be removed would improve the situation and improve setbacks. They said it looked like there would be opportunities to relocate the building in places that could eliminate the need for a variance and still save the trees. For that reason, a practical difficulty has not been established since it is not a situation where it was demonstrated that nothing else can be done. Commissioners explained tabling the request would add another month to the process but a denial could go forward to the City Council with potential revisions. 4 Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting Monday, May 20, 2024, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Page 3 of 3 Schultze moved, Kirchner seconded, to deny LA24-000023, 884 Dakota Ave Variances as applied. VOTE: Ayes: 6, Nays 0. 6.4. LA24-000024 REVOLUTION DESIGN BUILD, o/b/o MARY AND DAVID O’KEEFE, 2980 GOLDEN ROD WAY, LOT AREA VARIANCE The Planning Commission is requested to review the Staff report, receive a presentation, and discuss and approve the requested variance. The Planning Commission discussed the item and asked questions of staff and the applicant, David and Mary O’Keefe, formerly of Minnetrista. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Commissioners said the plan is in character with the neighborhood and the applicant had no opportunity to buy additional land to meet the two-acres minimum due to right-of-way for Highway 12. Kirchner moved, Erickson seconded, to approve LA24-000024, 2980 Golden Rod Way, Variance, as applied. VOTE: Ayes: 6, Nays 0. 7. COUNCIL UPDATES Oakden reported the City Council reviewed the applications that had been before the Planning Commission the previous month and either approved them according to the recommendation of the Commission or worked with the applicants to make revisions in keeping with Planning Commission recommendations. 8. ADJOURNMENT Kirchner moved, Schultze seconded, to adjourn the Planning Commission Meeting at 6:44 p.m. to June 17, 2024. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ATTEST: _________________________________________ Christopher Bollis, Chair 5 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.1 Presenter: Melanie Curtis, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000018, Matt Jasper, 4745 North Shore Drive - CUP, Variances (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 1.Purpose: To review a conditional use permit and variances to construct new retaining walls, lake access stairs supported by walls, and a new ~15’ x 12’ lakeside shed less than 5 feet from the OHWL and within the average lakeshore setback, 75-foot structure setback from the OHWL, within the bluff and bluff impact zone, and hardcover within the 75-foot setback from the OHWL. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was submitted on March 20, 2024 and considered to be complete on June 10, 2024. Therefore the 60 day review timeline will expire on August 9, 2024. 3.Background: The applicant proposes to install a new stone lake access stair with retaining wall-supported landings, a new lakeside shed, and a retaining wall upslope from the new rip-rap on the eastern portion of the shoreline. The shed requires average lakeshore and 75-foot OHWL setback variances, and a hardcover variance within the 75-foot setback; the retaining walls require conditional use permit approval. The applicant has a permit from the MCWD for shoreline stabilization including rip-rap. 4.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the variances for the shed as proposed, denial of the set-in-grade stone staircase with walls in the bluff. Staff further recommends tabling the CUP application for new retaining walls to allow the applicant to provide the additional information requested to include updated engineering and a landscape plan. 5.Planning Commission Action Requested: The Planning Commission should consider the following options for a motion: 1. Deny the application as applied. The practical difficulty standards have not been met to support granting the variance request, The application is missing information in order to comply with the conditional use permit standards; or 2. (Recommended by Staff) Move to table the application and direct the applicant to provide the requested information for Planning Commission review on the July agenda; or 3. Offer a split recommendation, if the Commission is generally comfortable with the proposal, move to approve the CUP with conditions and direct the applicant to provide the requested information AND deny the variance request for new 165-square-foot shed so the CUP application can proceed to a City Council agenda for consideration. 4. Approve both the CUP and Variance request. Direct the applicant to provide the missing information for the CUP and provide a revised practical difficulty analysis that meets the criteria to support the variance request for the shed. AGENDA ITEM 6 Exhibits Exhibit A - LA24-000018 PC Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Narrative Pract Diff Exhibit D - Proposed Survey Exhibit E - Hagen Site Plan Exhibit F - Wall Cross Sections Exhibit G - Historical Surveys Exhibit H1 - Demoed Shed Photos Exhibit H2 - Demoed Shed Asbuilt Exhibit H3 - Proposed Shed Plans Exhibit H4 - Comparison Exhibit I - Vickery Slope Stability Exhibit J - Vickery Wall Design Exhibit K - MCWD Riprap Permit 24-056 Exhibit L - Erosion staging plan Exhibit M - Tree Photos Exhibit N - Aerial Photos Exhibit O - Hardcover Calcs Exhibit P - Code Sections Exhibit Q - List_Map 7 Date Application Received: 03/20/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 06/10/2024 60-Day Review Period Extension Expires: 08/09/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 17 June 2024 Subject: #LA24-000018, Matt Jasper, 4745 North Shore Drive Conditional Use Permit: retaining walls within the 75-foot setback/bluff Variances: Average Lakeshore Setback, 75-foot Lake Setback, Hardcover w/in 75-foot setback Public Hearing Background The applicant, Matt Jasper, is the new owner of the property. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District issued Permit 24-056 for shoreline stabilization including rip-rap (attached as Exhibit K). Additionally, Mr. Jasper proposes to install a new, stone lake access stair with retaining wall-supported landings, a new lakeside shed, and a retaining wall upslope from the new rip-rap on the eastern portion of the shoreline. The shed requires average lakeshore and 75-foot OHWL setback variances, and a hardcover variance within the 75-foot setback; the retaining walls require conditional use permit approval. The building pad area for the lake shed and the applicant’s measurements of the previously existing metal shed do not align with the city’s survey records, nor was there a permit for a shed with the noted dimensions in the property file. If the removed metal shed was placed on the lakeshore without permits, it would not be a legally nonconforming building with the rights and protections afforded to legal non-conformities. The applicant’s current shed design appears to be an attempt to recapture an illegal nonconforming building as there does not appear to be conclusive evidence to legitimize the metal shed. Therefore, the proposed shed should be viewed as a new improvement that is not supported by the City code or by staff. City Code Section 78-1281 allows a 20- square-foot lock box with a maximum height of 48 inches within the shore setback zone. According to the submitted survey, the proposed shed will be 2.88 feet from the OHWL; alternately, the Hagen wall site plan shows the shed proposed at 3.4 feet from the OHWL. The inconsistencies throughout the submitted information should be resolved before the application is reviewed by the City Council. In bluff and steep slope settings, the code allows stairways, lifts, and landings either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. The applicant should provide supporting evidence that the proposed stone staircase is preferential to the post stair system. Application Summary: The applicant requests a conditional use permit and variances to construct new retaining walls, lake access stairs supported by walls, and a new 14.5’x 11.3’ lakeside shed placed less than 5 feet from the OHWL within the average lakeshore setback, 75-foot lake setback, bluff area, and restricted hardcover area. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial of the variances for the shed as proposed, denial of the set-in-grade stone staircase with walls in the bluff, and staff further recommends tabling the application to allow the applicant to provide the additional information requested. 8 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 2 of 7 Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has provided a practical difficulty analysis identifying the stability of the bluff as a concern driving the need for the stair design and the retaining walls at the lakeshore. The applicant has not identified practical difficulties sufficient to support the placement of the new shed ±5 feet from the OHWL. Their supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties is included with Exhibit C; the applicant should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty, practical difficulties are not met to support the variances for the new lakeside shed. The applicant has not provided sufficient detail to confirm the replacement is in-kind and the Code provides for a lock box storage structure near the lake. Conditional Use Permit Analysis: The applicant has provided a wall plan (Exhibit E) and a cross-section drawing (Exhibit F) illustrating the placement of the new walls along the shoreline above the rip-rap. The applicant provided documentation about the slope stability from a professional engineer based on assumptions about the soil information provided by the applicant. The soil information should be verified. Further, the engineer should confirm that the proposed walls are necessary and the least impactful solution for the preservation of the slope, i.e. an analysis ruling out the feasibility of a less intensive improvement, vegetative solutions should also be provided. At one point the applicant indicated the slope would be seeded with the “low mow fescue mixture” pictured on the right. The applicant should confirm the vegetation/seeding plan for the slope. Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Tier Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 1 25,288 s.f. 6,322 s.f. (25 %) 3,291.8 s.f. (13%) 3,569 s.f. (14.1%) *The submitted hardcover calculations were edited by staff (Exhibit O). Applicable Regulations: Hardcover within 75-foot setback (Sections 78-1680) A new, 165-square-foot shed is proposed to be placed approximately 2-4 feet from the OHWL. To comply with the terms of his mortgage financing, the applicant stated that he removed a previously existing metal shed from the lakeshore. He did not apply for a demolition permit nor request a city inspection of the shed before its removal. Unfortunately, the city’s records reflect a pump house in this location with an approximate footprint of 28 square feet (see Exhibit G). The applicant provided photos of the shed included within the site photos (Exhibit M). 9 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 3 of 7 Average Lakeshore Setback and 75-foot OHWL Setback (Section 78-1279) The proposed shed is not an in-kind replacement and exceeds the parameters of a permitted lock box (max 20 square feet and 48 inches tall). The shed location is shown to be located between 2.8 and 3.4 feet from the OHWL and within the average lakeshore setback. Conditional Use Permit (Sections 78-1279 and 78-916 Section 78-1279(3)(c) states that a wall in the shore setback zone, within a defined bluff and bluff setback; and/or a replacement wall 4 feet in height or greater; and/or any new walls shall require a conditional use permit. New walls and replacement walls greater than 4 feet in height must meet the following conditions. The wall must be: 1. Designed to correct an established erosion problem; the applicant indicated that the new walls are necessary to provide stability at the base of the bluff just above the rip rap. They assert that the use of the wall will avoid the need to grade further inland to create stability. As noted by the City’s Engineer, the existing bluff is not well-vegetated. The applicant has not demonstrated that non-mechanical solutions such as deep-rooted plants and shrubs are not sufficient to provide the necessary stability. A landscape plan must be submitted to address the erosion within the bluff. This criterion has not been met; and 2. Suitable given the demonstrated need; A global stability analysis by Ronald W. Vickery, PE was provided, however, Mr. Vickery’s opinion was based on assumptions furnished by the applicant. The analysis notes a retaining wall would improve the stability of the bluff. This criterion has is met; and 3. Designed by a registered engineer or landscape architect, depending on the project scope; the applicant has not provided a revised retaining wall design from a registered engineer to match the submitted plans. This criterion has not been met; and 4. Designed to be the minimum size necessary to control the erosion problem. The engineer’s original analysis indicated that the applicant’s original plan was necessary to stabilize the bluff. The wall plan has been changed/lessened from the original proposal and the engineer’s analysis again states that the wall plan is necessary. The applicant should provide evidence that they have exhausted the less invasive stability solutions instead of new walls within the shore setback. In addition to the conditions listed in Section 78-1279, Section 78-916 provides a list of conditions supporting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) issuance. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a CUP as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. Based on the application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan; the protection and preservation of the natural lake shoreline is an identified priority of the Comprehensive Plan. Installation of new walls, particularly walls integrated into a continuation of the rip-rap without an opportunity for screening, should not be the first option for slope stability. The applicant should explore adding deep-rooted vegetation to add stability and lessen the visual impact resulting from walls. A landscape plan to create screening of the proposed walls and protect erosion from the bluff must be submitted. This criterion is not met. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; retaining walls within the lakeyard are permitted where they are deemed necessary to protect the integrity of the slope. The applicant stated the slope is failing. Further evidence should be provided showing that the installation of walls is the most effective and minimal necessary to achieve the desired stability. Additionally, updated engineering for the new proposed wall layout and a landscape plan must be submitted. This criterion is not met. 3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; the property meets this standard. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; the property meets this standard. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; the retaining wall project should not generate an excessive demand for public services at a public cost. 10 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 4 of 7 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; the installation of the stone staircase and stone retaining walls will change the existing character of the property. The stone staircase and wall construction, which is a continuation of the rip-rap, will not provide an opportunity for vegetative screening from the lake. This criterion is not met. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; the installation of stone retaining walls without vegetative screening, will change the character of the surrounding area. This criterion is not met. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; the proposed retaining walls will not be screened from view from the lake. The current natural appearance of the property, although unmaintained for years, will likely be altered by the proposed stone stair and retaining wall improvements. This criterion is not met. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; the lakeshore bluff improvements should not impact the neighboring property values or the enjoyment of the neighboring property owners. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; the applicant has not provided a landscape plan to provide adequate natural screening and buffering of the stone stairs and retaining wall improvements when viewed from the lake. This criterion is not met. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; the proposed walls should not create a nuisance situation. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; the property is situated on a severe curve along a busy County roadway. The amount of traffic, proximity, and location of the driveway, and the topography pose challenges for access and construction. According to their narrative, the applicant is proposing to deliver the materials to the site from North Shore Drive. The applicant should inform Hennepin County of the project scope and timeline and obtain necessary permits. 13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; the applicant has opted to install walls using boulder materials as a continuation of the rip-rap to be installed. They have not proposed landscaping to screen the walls to be compatible with the character of the improvements within the surrounding area. This criterion is not met. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; the lake yard improvements should not result in any lighting or glare being cast off the property toward the public street, the neighbors, or the lake; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. This is true of the project. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Variance Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do 11 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 5 of 7 not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The applicant requested variances to construct a shed within the 75’ lakeshore setback and bluff area. There is evidence, on old surveys, of a previous 28-square-foot pump house (now removed) in this general location. The applicant is requesting approval to build a 165-square-foot shed 2-4 feet from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. An accessory building in this location is not in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. The City Code permits a small water-oriented accessory structure for storage and a pump house near their dock. The plans submitted are unclear on the location and construction of the building. This criterion is not met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The request for an accessory structure with the proposed footprint size, the level of hardcover proposed, and proximity to the lake and bluff is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. This criterion is not met. 1. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The applicant’s request to permit the construction of a 165-square-foot shed and hardcover within the 75’ lakeshore setback and bluff is not reasonable. The city code permits a water-oriented structure for storage within the lakeshore. Construction of a building that would increase hardcover in a sensitive area is protected from improvements by official controls. This criterion is not met. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The bluff surrounding the lakeshore on the property was not created by the owners; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The requested variances will result in a building 2-4 feet from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. This request would result with the improvements being out of character with the neighborhood and impact the view from the lake. This criterion is not met. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 2. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 3. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 4. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a residential home is an allowed use in the LR-1B District. 5. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 6. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The bluff on the property surrounding the lakeshore are conditions that are consistent with the immediate neighborhood. This criterion is met. 7. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The location of the bluff in relation to the lakeshore applies to neighbor property owners. The construction of a shed and hardcover is not permitted throughout the City. This criterion is not met. 12 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 6 of 7 8. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Substantial property right is provided by the principal structure. The applicant is requested to improve their lake stair for access to the lake. The request for a 165-square-foot shed is not necessary for the preservation of the property and is out of convenience. This criterion is not met. 9. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variances is contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. This criterion is not met. 10. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The currently requested variances are not necessary to increase functionality of the home, and will merely serve as a convenience to the owners. This criterion is not met. The Commission may recommend or the Council may impose conditions in granting variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Grading Comments by City Engineer, Adam Edwards 1. It does not appear the proposed improvements will have any negative impact to the drainage of the area. 2. Prior to issuance of permits all improvements should be depicted on the same site plan. There are inconsistencies between the site plan provided by Acre Land Surveying and the Wall plan prepared by Hagen. As an example: the Acre Survey has a proposed elevation for the second stair landing from the top as 954’ but the Hagen plan has retaining walls that support a landing elevation of 956’. This is a 2-foot difference in elevation. 3. Prior to the issuance of permits the retaining wall engineering for the boulder walls should be updated. The layout in the engineering provided does not match the layout on the Hagen Landscaping plan. The building official will need to review these before permit issuance. 4. The photos provided indicate a slope pretty much devoid of vegetation. The applicant should consider adding some deep-rooted vegetation to help hold the soil in place. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested CUP? 3. Does the Commission find the variance request for a shed meets the practical difficulty standards? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Commission Consideration Options for Motion: 1. Deny the application as applied. The practical difficulty standards have not been met to support granting the variance request, The application is missing information in order to comply with the conditional use permit standards; or 2. Move to table the application and direct the applicant to provide the requested information for Planning Commission review on the July agenda; or 3. Offer a split recommendation, if the Commission is generally comfortable with the proposal, move to approve the CUP with conditions and direct the applicant to provide the requested information AND deny 13 FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 7 of 7 the variance request for new 165-square-foot shed so the CUP application can proceed to a City Council agenda for consideration. 4. Approve both the CUP and Variance request. Direct the applicant to provide the missing information for the CUP and provide a revised practical difficulty analysis that meets the criteria to support the variance request for the shed. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the variances for the shed as a new shed in the proposed location is contrary to the City’s ordinances and goals, and does not meet practical difficulty standards. Staff recommends the Planning Commission TABLE this item until the following are submitted for review to ensure the new proposed plan meets the newly created conditions for allowing retaining walls in the lakeyard (near the lake and within the proposed stone staircase). 1. Updated Engineering for the newly proposed retaining wall design 2. A landscape plan for the slope showing native and deep-rooted plantings. 3. Verification of the soil assumptions cited within the Vickery stability letter. 4. Documentation supporting the placed-in-grade stair over the post-style construction for slope stability and erosion control. 5. A statement from Mr. Vickery P.E. confirming that the currently proposed walls are the minimum solution necessary to stabilize the slope; and 6. Clarification of the site plan inconsistencies identified herein. 14 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:03/20/2024 Address:4745 North Shore DR Orono, MN 55364 Parcel Number:0711723320019 Land Use Number:LA24-000018 Application Submitted By:Property Owner Owner:Name: MATTHEW MICHAEL JASPER Address: Jasper Properties - Matthew Jasper Applicant:Name: Matthew Jasper Company: Jasper Properties Address: 1929 Fagerness Point Road Orono, MN 55391 matthew.jasper1@hotmail.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Stairs, retaining wall and grading within bluff and 75' setback. Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 15 4745 North Shore Drive Project Construction Plans Material List - 2-3’ Boulders (Approximately 105 Yards) - 12-18’ Rip Rap Boulders (Approximately 120 Yards) - Gravel (Approximately 15 Yards) - Dirt for Erosion Control Blanket (Approximately 15 Yards) - No Mow Grass Seed (Approximately 175 Linear feet, mixture in photos) - 4’ Wide Steps (Approximately 80) - Verdana Pavers for (4) 5.5X5.5 Landings (Approximately 121 Sqft) Project/Landscape Narrative The purpose for this project is for two primary concerns; safe, secure access to the lake and a plan to better mitigate the current erosion and bluff failure in the future. I have a vested interest in the longevity of this property as the homeowner and want to ensure I am exercising a proactive rather than reactive approach to take care of issues before they become worse. Stairway Due to the desire to not remove trees from this bluff I am requesting a stone stairway to the lake rather than an elevated decking stairway. Over time, trees have died and fallen on the existing stairway deeming a need for constant repair. A stone stairway engineered by a licensed engineer in accordance with natural contours will in fact help mitigate bluff failure in this area in the future. The material will be hauled in on the driveway, the boom truck will erect the stairs and set them down and placed in the area indicated for material storage. A small crane will be used to hoist the stairs and place them in position on the hillside. As discussed before and as depicted on Chris Hagens plan, Boulders will be placed to achieve the correct elevation to work with the natural contours and the stairs to ensure they are locked in and safe. Rip Rap Retaining Walls The boulder retaining walls by the rip rap are necessary to mitigate lateral pressure issues which are causing the bluff side to fail and continue sliding into 16 the lake. There is currently a drop off down to the water so the only option to do this correctly is to either construct a wall or cut away and remove fill to create a 3 to 1 slope. It would be much less impact to the land and surrounding areas to construct these walls rather than cut away material and change the contour of the land. Boat House In January I purchased this property with a VA Loan. With a VA Loan, they require zero money down but are very strict with minimum property requirement compliance. The VA told me I had to remove the stairs to the lake and the boat house due to the bad condition they were in, or I needed to have them rebuilt by closing which was not an option. I was able to obtain a “Minimum Property Requirement Waiver” for the stairs because it would have been more of a hazard to not have them at all. They were not willing to budge on the boat house due to a safety concern. I called the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and asked them if I tore down the boat house if I could rebuild it, they said that was fine but I had a limited timeframe to do so. I tore the boat house down and found out later that this decision was a function of the City of Orono, not the MCWD. Fortunately, there is still foundation there and a cutout in the hillside that shows the exact footprint of the boat house. Unfortunately, this does not match the 20~ish year- old survey. I do not have a desire to rebuild a boat house to the size that is on the old survey, so I am asking to rebuild like kind with the current foundation that is still present. If this is not allowed, I will have to build a retaining wall to hold back the earth, the previous boat house walls were achieving this function. I am humbly asking for your consideration in the approval of this project. I have shared my plans with the neighbors on both sides and they plan to share their positive opinions with the city staff when necessary. Practical Difficulty Criteria 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the ordinance. The general intent is to create a safe and secure access to the lake for all while ensuring careful measures have been taken in accordance with city guidelines. 17 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. We are only asking for a variance with the intent of correctly installing the rip rap with the least amount of impact to the surrounding land. 3. (a.) I am intending on going in front of the city council to provide and educate the staff on the proposal I am requesting. b. There are in fact circumstances for this request that were not created by me, I just purchased this property in January of 2024. The neglect this property has been subject to over the last 50 years has created a safety risk and a sliding hillside. c. Approval of this variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. In fact, the surrounding neighbors are grateful that I am attempting to rectify these issues. They were less than pleased at how this property has been previously maintained. Economic considerations are not the driver for the intent for me to propose these improvements, safety and bluff failure is. 4. There are no economic considerations as basis for this request. 5. Acknowledged but not applicable to my request. 6. Acknowledged 7. Acknowledged 8. The conditions requested do not apply or affect other land structures. In fact, the neighbors are grateful for what I am proposing. The immediate neighbor to my West told me I am giving him some hope and the immediate neighbors to my East are very grateful for the work I am proposing. 9. Very similar to the question above, the proposed changes will have no effect on surrounding land. 10. The granting of this application is critical for the preservation and enjoyment of this property and a substantial property right for me. 11. Granting this variance will in no way shape or form impair health, safety, or morals, it will address those concerns before they become issues. 12. The granting of this variance is not being proposed due to convenience and greed from my part. Again, it is being proposed for safety and mitigation of further bluff erosion. 18 This practical difficulty statement has proven to be practically difficult to answer, as they seem to be statements and suggestions rather than questions. I would be happy to address any further questions that have not already been covered above in front of the City Council in July. 19 20 21 1/8" = 1' Scale: 6/11/2024Date: 1Revision #:1 Chris Hagen Jasper Landscape Plan: Hagen Landscape Landscape Design by: 9 3 8 9 4 0 9 3 6 9 3 4 9 3 2 9 3 1 .5 1 0 0 y r 9 2 9 .4 O H W 9 5 0 9 6 0 9 7 0 Bow 931.5 tow 935 Bow 931.5 Bow 931.5 tow 933.5 tow 932.5 Rip rap Boulder wall Boulder wall Boulder wall Bow 940tow 944 tow 960.3 tow 956 Bow 952 Bow 956.3 stone steps / 5.5'x5.5' landings Jasper Residence boat house padLow Floor 934 turbidity blanket tow 947 Bow 944 22 No more than 5ft waterward of OHW100yr flood 931.5ohw 929.4lake bottom31No more than 5ft waterward of OHW100yr flood 931.5ohw 929.4lake bottom31No more than 5ft waterward of OHW100yr flood 931.5ohw 929.4lake bottom31No more than 5ft waterward of OHW100yr flood 931.5ohw 929.4lake bottom31existing bankmcwd approved rip rap1ft boulder wall2ft boulder wall3ft boulder wall100ft long wall ranging from 1ft-3ft height.100ftx2ft average height / 27 = 7.4yds disturbed soil23 LAKE n JEN CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR HERMAN CRAWFORD IN LOTS 1, 22 & 3, BLOCK 6, BEFGQUISTS & WICKLUND'S PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : That part of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 6, Bergquist & Wicklund` s Park, lying South of the Southerly right—of—way line of County Road No. 19. o : denotes iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, pump house, decks, driveway, and partial "hardcover" thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. REVISION 1 DATE DRAWN CHECKED 12-005 DESCRIPTION PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF VACATED LAKE STREET : That part of Lake Street as dedicated in the plat of "Bergquist Wicklund s Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies between the southwesterly extensions of the northwesterly line of Lot 3, and the southeasterly line of Lot 1, all in Block 6 of said plat. GRONBERG AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, & SITE PLANNERS 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 952-473-4141 r AUG 21 2012 CITY OF ORONO I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me, SCALE or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly 1 "-20' registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. DATE 1-6-12 Mark S. Gro JOB N0. ILicenseumber12755 12-00-5- 12-005 2-005 3573 24 J S 00, x 10 CO Q - y "• , Rom ON PLASTIC sGQP t Op 12 GRAVEL DRIVE get ) OJ w 1 4k,,, 0 rOND M-5) 979.5) PLAST C O OAAIcCK h OF 22-ZSLACK o1) e^ STOIESTEPP ' RIO b O BLACK3OOAKO 1 p` 979.4) ti SouthMy Right—of—Woy line of County Rood No. 19, occording to J/ NOT H/C County rnon rnentation 979.6) N.R. TIE [ 01 WOOD LANDW \ PUMP CY HOUSENK 9? 9A o 00, S91 OCi O-- 00 F 0 LF F o 00 F O JO ti LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES TY OF Onvn Y-, SITE PLAN GRADING PLAN That part of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 6, Bergquist & Wicklund' s Park, lying South APPROV€D- 'T(ON -6AMrjk of the Southerly right—of—way line of County Road No. 19.APPROVED WITH REVISIONS DESA R0VE B, o denotes iron marker By 41): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survev intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and garoge, and the location of all visibly W— 25 26 27 28 Survey: The certificate of survey shows the shed pad 2.88 feet from the OWHL of Lake Minnetonka. Hagen Landscape Plan: The landscape plan shows the shed pad 3.42 feet from the lake. 29 Project VEC 24-055 June 11, 2024 Mr. Matt Jasper 4745 North Shore Drive Orono, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Jasper: Re: Global Stability Analysis, 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN (Revised Letter) As you requested, Vickery Engineering & Consulting, LLC (VEC) has prepared the Boulder Retaining Wall Plans for the referenced project. The Boulder Wall Plans and Boulder Wall Calculations were submitted under separate cover. As part of the design process, a global stability analysis of the proposed slope was performed. Attached to this letter is the results of the global stability analysis. The analysis was performed using GSlope global stability software. The soil properties for the global stability analysis were assumed, based on information provided by you. As you can see from the attached global stability analysis, the results of the analysis indicate an overall global stability factor of safety of 1.378, which is in excess of the industry standard factor of safety of 1.3. Please note, without the retaining walls, this factor of safety would likely be less than 1.3. Therefore, the retaining walls are required to stabilize the slope. All walls proposed by Chris Hagen are designed and in accordance with this engineering analysis. Engineering services provided by VEC engineers for this project have been conducted with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of profession currently practicing in Minnesota under similar time restraints and conditions. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for using the services provided by VEC. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call Ron Vickery at 952-465-8272. I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Ronald W. Vickery, PE President/Principal Engineer Registration Number: 24065 April 15, 2024 Attachments: Global Stability Analysis 30 9309309409409509509609604/15/2024 8:12:06 AM F = 1.378Gamma CPhiPiezo Ru pcf psfdegSurf.Boulders 145 200 50 1 0Clayey Sand 120 100 30 1 0VEC 24-0554745 North Shore Drive, Orono, MNApril 15, 2024-50050100150F = 1.37831 DATA FILE NAME..... Job Number VEC 24-055 Title 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN Date April 15, 2024 Label A Label B Maximum Slice Width 1 Number of Soil Layers: (1 to 20) 2 Earthquake Acceleration: 0 No. of External Forces: (0 to 100) 0 Piezometric Surfaces: (0 to 9) 1 Unit weight of Water: 62.4 Reinforcement Layers: (0 to 100) 0 FoS against Pullout: 0 Material Unit Wt Cohesion Friction Piezo Ru Interaction Angle Surf. Coefficient 1 Boulders 145 200 50 1 0 .9 2 Clayey Sand 120 100 30 1 0 .7 Upper Surface of Material # 1 (Boulders) X-Coord Y-Coord -50 925 0 934 17 934 17.5 940 80 976 80.5 978 100 981 150 981 175 981 Upper Surface of Material # 2 (Clayey Sand) X-Coord Y-Coord -50 925 0 934 17 934 17.01 933 18 933 18.5 940.5 80 976 80.5 978 100 981 150 981 175 981 Piezometric Surface No. 1 X-Coord Y-Coord -50 929.5 0 929.5 150 929.5 175 929.5 There are no explicit external forces in the data set. 32 Reinforcement Horizontal Reinforcement Max Tension Layer Extents Layer per unit No. X1 <-------> X2 Elevation width Reinf. Soil X-Coord of Total Pore Force used Layer Mat'l Slip surface Vertical Pressure per unit No. No. Intersection Stress width 33 Center Radius Iter- No. of Factor MAlpha X-coord Y-coord ations Slices of Safety Warnings -5.90 996.60 68.30 5 42 1.9523 0 -2.60 996.60 67.17 5 42 1.8176 0 .70 996.60 66.18 5 41 1.6738 0 4.00 996.60 65.34 5 41 1.5675 0 7.30 996.60 64.67 4 41 1.4947 0 10.60 996.60 64.15 4 41 1.4500 0 13.90 996.60 63.80 4 41 1.4253 0 17.20 996.60 63.63 4 41 1.4193 0 20.50 996.60 63.62 4 42 1.4480 0 23.80 996.60 63.78 4 44 1.4672 0 27.10 996.60 64.11 4 45 1.5061 0 30.40 996.60 64.61 4 47 1.5610 0 33.70 996.60 65.28 5 48 1.6294 0 -5.90 999.80 71.29 5 43 1.8951 0 -2.60 999.80 70.21 5 43 1.7648 0 .70 999.80 69.26 5 42 1.6359 0 4.00 999.80 68.46 5 42 1.5417 0 7.30 999.80 67.82 4 42 1.4776 0 10.60 999.80 67.33 4 42 1.4386 0 13.90 999.80 66.99 4 42 1.4174 0 17.20 999.80 66.82 4 42 1.4122 0 20.50 999.80 66.82 4 44 1.4336 0 23.80 999.80 66.97 4 45 1.4581 0 27.10 999.80 67.29 4 46 1.5001 0 30.40 999.80 67.77 4 48 1.5563 0 33.70 999.80 68.40 5 49 1.6247 0 -5.90 1003.00 74.30 5 44 1.8430 0 -2.60 1003.00 73.26 5 44 1.7178 0 .70 1003.00 72.35 5 44 1.6025 0 4.00 1003.00 71.59 4 44 1.5188 0 7.30 1003.00 70.97 4 43 1.4623 0 10.60 1003.00 70.50 4 44 1.4280 0 13.90 1003.00 70.19 4 43 1.4100 0 17.20 1003.00 70.02 4 44 1.4017 0 20.50 1003.00 70.02 4 45 1.4249 0 23.80 1003.00 70.16 4 46 1.4536 0 27.10 1003.00 70.47 4 48 1.4980 0 30.40 1003.00 70.92 4 49 1.5551 0 33.70 1003.00 71.53 4 30 1.6227 0 -5.90 1006.20 77.32 5 46 1.7954 0 -2.60 1006.20 76.32 5 45 1.6761 0 .70 1006.20 75.45 5 45 1.5729 0 4.00 1006.20 74.72 4 45 1.4984 0 7.30 1006.20 74.13 4 45 1.4484 0 10.60 1006.20 73.68 4 46 1.4183 0 13.90 1006.20 73.38 4 46 1.4022 0 17.20 1006.20 73.22 4 45 1.3928 0 20.50 1006.20 73.22 4 47 1.4208 0 23.80 1006.20 73.36 4 48 1.4528 0 27.10 1006.20 73.65 4 49 1.4990 0 30.40 1006.20 74.08 4 30 1.5560 0 33.70 1006.20 74.66 4 30 1.6243 0 -5.90 1009.40 80.36 5 47 1.7518 0 -2.60 1009.40 79.39 5 46 1.6392 0 .70 1009.40 78.56 4 45 1.5465 0 4.00 1009.40 77.86 4 46 1.4801 0 7.30 1009.40 77.29 4 46 1.4358 0 10.60 1009.40 76.86 4 47 1.4093 0 13.90 1009.40 76.57 4 47 1.3906 0 17.20 1009.40 76.42 4 47 1.3885 0 20.50 1009.40 76.41 4 48 1.4203 0 23.80 1009.40 76.55 4 29 1.4547 0 27.10 1009.40 76.83 4 30 1.5020 0 30.40 1009.40 77.25 4 30 1.5599 0 33.70 1009.40 77.80 4 31 1.6292 0 -5.90 1012.60 83.40 5 48 1.7117 0 -2.60 1012.60 82.48 5 47 1.6063 0 .70 1012.60 81.68 4 47 1.5230 0 34 4.00 1012.60 81.00 4 48 1.4636 0 7.30 1012.60 80.46 4 47 1.4242 0 10.60 1012.60 80.04 4 49 1.3968 0 13.90 1012.60 79.76 4 48 1.3840 0 17.20 1012.60 79.62 4 48 1.3879 0 20.50 1012.60 79.61 4 49 1.4227 0 23.80 1012.60 79.74 4 30 1.4593 0 27.10 1012.60 80.01 4 31 1.5071 0 30.40 1012.60 80.41 4 31 1.5663 0 33.70 1012.60 80.95 4 32 1.6363 0 -5.90 1015.80 86.46 5 48 1.6748 0 -2.60 1015.80 85.57 5 48 1.5768 0 .70 1015.80 84.80 4 48 1.5019 0 4.00 1015.80 84.15 4 49 1.4487 0 7.30 1015.80 83.62 4 49 1.4124 0 10.60 1015.80 83.22 4 29 1.3861 0 13.90 1015.80 82.96 4 49 1.3815 0 17.20 1015.80 82.82 4 49 1.3902 0 20.50 1015.80 82.81 4 29 1.4269 0 23.80 1015.80 82.94 4 30 1.4652 0 27.10 1015.80 83.20 4 31 1.5143 0 30.40 1015.80 83.58 4 31 1.5746 0 33.70 1015.80 84.09 4 32 1.6449 0 -5.90 1019.00 89.53 5 28 1.6396 0 -2.60 1019.00 88.67 4 49 1.5502 0 .70 1019.00 87.93 4 49 1.4828 0 4.00 1019.00 87.30 4 49 1.4352 0 7.30 1019.00 86.79 4 29 1.3970 0 10.60 1019.00 86.41 4 29 1.3803 0 13.90 1019.00 86.15 4 30 1.3817 0 17.20 1019.00 86.02 4 29 1.3946 0 20.50 1019.00 86.01 4 30 1.4335 0 23.80 1019.00 86.13 4 31 1.4728 0 27.10 1019.00 86.38 4 32 1.5235 0 30.40 1019.00 86.75 4 32 1.5847 0 33.70 1019.00 87.25 4 33 1.6553 0 -5.90 1022.20 92.61 5 29 1.6077 0 -2.60 1022.20 91.78 4 29 1.5256 0 .70 1022.20 91.06 4 29 1.4650 0 4.00 1022.20 90.45 4 30 1.4176 0 7.30 1022.20 89.96 4 30 1.3879 0 10.60 1022.20 89.59 4 30 1.3784 0 13.90 1022.20 89.35 4 31 1.3848 0 17.20 1022.20 89.22 4 29 1.4007 0 20.50 1022.20 89.21 4 30 1.4411 0 23.80 1022.20 89.33 4 31 1.4820 0 27.10 1022.20 89.57 4 32 1.5340 0 30.40 1022.20 89.93 4 33 1.5958 0 33.70 1022.20 90.40 4 33 1.6667 0 -5.90 1025.40 95.70 5 29 1.5785 0 -2.60 1025.40 94.89 4 29 1.5041 0 .70 1025.40 94.19 4 30 1.4477 0 4.00 1025.40 93.61 4 30 1.4042 0 7.30 1025.40 93.14 4 30 1.3825 0 10.60 1025.40 92.78 4 30 1.3790 0 13.90 1025.40 92.54 4 31 1.3895 0 17.20 1025.40 92.42 4 30 1.4087 0 20.50 1025.40 92.41 4 31 1.4500 0 23.80 1025.40 92.52 4 32 1.4928 0 27.10 1025.40 92.75 4 33 1.5460 0 30.40 1025.40 93.10 4 34 1.6084 0 33.70 1025.40 93.56 4 34 1.6795 0 -5.90 1028.60 98.79 4 30 1.5522 0 -2.60 1028.60 98.01 4 31 1.4872 0 .70 1028.60 97.34 4 30 1.4285 0 4.00 1028.60 96.77 4 30 1.3951 0 7.30 1028.60 96.31 4 31 1.3809 0 10.60 1028.60 95.97 4 31 1.3823 0 13.90 1028.60 95.74 4 32 1.3961 0 17.20 1028.60 95.62 4 31 1.4175 0 20.50 1028.60 95.61 4 31 1.4603 0 23.80 1028.60 95.72 4 32 1.5046 0 27.10 1028.60 95.94 4 33 1.5587 0 30.40 1028.60 96.28 4 34 1.6216 0 33.70 1028.60 96.72 4 34 1.6928 0 35 -5.90 1031.80 101.89 4 31 1.5285 0 -2.60 1031.80 101.13 4 31 1.4621 0 .70 1031.80 100.48 4 31 1.4154 0 4.00 1031.80 99.93 4 31 1.3902 0 7.30 1031.80 99.49 4 31 1.3815 0 10.60 1031.80 99.16 4 31 1.3870 0 13.90 1031.80 98.93 4 32 1.4037 0 17.20 1031.80 98.82 4 31 1.4275 0 20.50 1031.80 98.81 4 32 1.4721 0 23.80 1031.80 98.92 4 34 1.5177 0 27.10 1031.80 99.13 4 34 1.5726 0 30.40 1031.80 99.46 4 34 1.6356 0 33.70 1031.80 99.89 4 34 1.7068 0 -5.90 1035.00 105.00 4 32 1.5046 0 -2.60 1035.00 104.26 4 32 1.4437 0 .70 1035.00 103.63 4 31 1.4063 0 4.00 1035.00 103.10 4 31 1.3880 0 7.30 1035.00 102.67 4 32 1.3846 0 10.60 1035.00 102.35 4 32 1.3936 0 13.90 1035.00 102.13 4 33 1.4124 0 17.20 1035.00 102.02 4 31 1.4385 0 20.50 1035.00 102.01 4 32 1.4846 0 23.80 1035.00 102.11 4 34 1.5313 0 27.10 1035.00 102.32 4 34 1.5870 0 30.40 1035.00 102.64 4 35 1.6506 0 33.70 1035.00 103.05 4 35 1.7217 0 Minimum Bishop Factor of Safety this run: 10.60 1022.20 89.59 4 30 1.3784 0 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Boulder Wall Calculations - 3-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 1 of 3 Design Parameters: Retained Soil Friction Angle,ϕsr 30degSoil Unit Weight,γs 125pcfCrest Slope,β 26.6deg Foundation Soil Friction Angle,ϕsf 30degSurcharge Load qs 0 lbf ft2 δ1 2 3 ϕsrδ1 20 degRock Unit Weight,γr 145pcf Exposed Height,He 2ftWall Embedment,Hb 1ftTotal Height,Hr He Hb Hr 3ft Top of Wall Width,Wt 1ftBase of Wall Width,Wba 2ft α 83degψ 90deg αψ 7 degυ tan ϕsf()υ 0.577 Stone reduction friction factor μb.8Leveling Pad depth:LPd 1ft Calculate Wall Weight: W1 .5 Wba Wt()Heγr1ftW1 145lbfW2 Wt Heγr1ftW2 290lbf W3 Hb Wbaγs1ftW3 250lbfWw W1 W2W3Ww 685lbf Active Earth Pressue Coefficient (Ka): Ka cos ϕsr ψ()()2 cos ψ()()2 cos δ1 ψ()()1 sin ϕsr δ1()( ) sin ϕsr β()()[] cos δ1 ψ()( ) cos ψβ()()[] 2 Ka 0.435 Total Horizontal Force: Horizontal Force From Soil,Fah .5 γsKaHrHrcos δ1 ψ()1ftFah 238.2 lbf Horizontal Force From Surcharge,Fs qs KaHr1ftFs 0 Total Horizontal Force,Fh Fah FsFh 238.2 lbf Frictional Resistance: Vertical Force From Soil,Fav .5 γsKaHrHrsin δ1 ψ()1ftFav 55lbf Fu υ Ww Fav()Fu 427.2 lbf Factor of Safety, Base Sliding: FOS Sliding,FOSs Fu FhFOSs 1.794 44 Boulder Wall Calculations - 3-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 2 of 3 Calculate Overturning Moment: Driving Moment,Mo 0.5 KaγsHrHrcos δ1 ψ()Hr 3 qs KaHrHr 2 Mo 238.2 lbf Calculate Resisting Moment: Resisting Moment is calculated by taking the sum of the weights times the moment arms for each section of wall above M1 W1 Wba Wt()2 3 1ftM1 96.667lbf M2 W2 Wba Wt()Wt 2 1ft()M2 435lbf M3 W2 Wba 2 1ftM3 290lbf Resisting Moment,Mr M1 M2M3Mr 821.7 lbf Factor of Safety, Overturning: FOS Overturning,FOSot Mr MoFOSot 3.45 Analyze Bearing Capacity Bearing capacity coefficients: Nq exp π tan ϕsf()()( ) tan 45 degϕsf 2 2 Nq 18.401 Nc Nq 1( ) cot ϕsf()Nc 30.14 Nγ 2Nq 1( ) tan ϕsf()Nγ 22.402 Eccentricity of Resultant Vertical Bearing Force (E):E Wba 2 Mr Mo() Ww 1ft E 0.148 ft 45 Boulder Wall Calculations - 3-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 3 of 3 Analyze Bearing Capacity (continued) Bf Wba LPdBf 3ftBf1 Bf 2 EBf1 2.704 ft Ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils (Qult): Qult 0.5 γsBf1NγγsHbNqQult 6085.716 psf Qa Ww Bf1 1ftQa 253.358 psfFOSbc Qult QaFOSbc 24.02 Summary of Results Total Height:Hr 3ftBase Sliding Factor of Safety:FOSs 1.794 Crest Slope:β 26.6 degOverturning Factor of Safety:FOSot 3.45 Surcharge:qs 0 lbf ft2Bearing Capacity Factor of Safety:FOSbc 24.02 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Ronald W. Vickery, PE Registration Number: 24065 April 15, 2024 46 Boulder Wall Calculations - 4-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 1 of 3 Design Parameters: Retained Soil Friction Angle,ϕsr 30degSoil Unit Weight,γs 125pcfCrest Slope,β 26.6deg Foundation Soil Friction Angle,ϕsf 30degSurcharge Load qs 0 lbf ft2 δ1 2 3 ϕsrδ1 20 degRock Unit Weight,γr 145pcf Exposed Height,He 3ftWall Embedment,Hb 1ftTotal Height,Hr He Hb Hr 4ft Top of Wall Width,Wt 1.5ftBase of Wall Width,Wba 2.5ft α 83degψ 90deg αψ 7 degυ tan ϕsf()υ 0.577 Stone reduction friction factor μb.8Leveling Pad depth:LPd 1ft Calculate Wall Weight: W1 .5 Wba Wt()Heγr1ftW1 217.5 lbfW2 Wt Heγr1ftW2 652.5 lbf W3 Hb Wbaγs1ftW3 312.5 lbfWw W1 W2W3Ww 1182.5lbf Active Earth Pressue Coefficient (Ka): Ka cos ϕsr ψ()()2 cos ψ()()2 cos δ1 ψ()()1 sin ϕsr δ1()( ) sin ϕsr β()()[] cos δ1 ψ()( ) cos ψβ()()[] 2 Ka 0.435 Total Horizontal Force: Horizontal Force From Soil,Fah .5 γsKaHrHrcos δ1 ψ()1ftFah 423.4 lbf Horizontal Force From Surcharge,Fs qs KaHr1ftFs 0 Total Horizontal Force,Fh Fah FsFh 423.4 lbf Frictional Resistance: Vertical Force From Soil,Fav .5 γsKaHrHrsin δ1 ψ()1ftFav 97.7lbf Fu υ Ww Fav()Fu 739.2 lbf Factor of Safety, Base Sliding: FOS Sliding,FOSs Fu FhFOSs 1.746 47 Boulder Wall Calculations - 4-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 2 of 3 Calculate Overturning Moment: Driving Moment,Mo 0.5 KaγsHrHrcos δ1 ψ()Hr 3 qs KaHrHr 2 Mo 564.5 lbf Calculate Resisting Moment: Resisting Moment is calculated by taking the sum of the weights times the moment arms for each section of wall above M1 W1 Wba Wt()2 3 1ftM1 145lbf M2 W2 Wba Wt()Wt 2 1ft()M2 1141.9lbf M3 W2 Wba 2 1ftM3 815.6 lbf Resisting Moment,Mr M1 M2M3Mr 2102.5lbf Factor of Safety, Overturning: FOS Overturning,FOSot Mr MoFOSot 3.724 Analyze Bearing Capacity Bearing capacity coefficients: Nq exp π tan ϕsf()()( ) tan 45 degϕsf 2 2 Nq 18.401 Nc Nq 1( ) cot ϕsf()Nc 30.14 Nγ 2Nq 1( ) tan ϕsf()Nγ 22.402 Eccentricity of Resultant Vertical Bearing Force (E):E Wba 2 Mr Mo() Ww 1ft E 0.051ft 48 Boulder Wall Calculations - 4-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 3 of 3 Analyze Bearing Capacity (continued) Bf Wba LPdBf 3.5ftBf1 Bf 2 EBf1 3.601 ft Ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils (Qult): Qult 0.5 γsBf1NγγsHbNqQult 7342.437 psf Qa Ww Bf1 1ftQa 328.359 psfFOSbc Qult QaFOSbc 22.361 Summary of Results Total Height:Hr 4ftBase Sliding Factor of Safety:FOSs 1.746 Crest Slope:β 26.6 degOverturning Factor of Safety:FOSot 3.724 Surcharge:qs 0 lbf ft2Bearing Capacity Factor of Safety:FOSbc 22.361 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Ronald W. Vickery, PE Registration Number: 24065 April 15, 2024 49 Boulder Wall Calculations - 8-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 1 of 3 Design Parameters: Retained Soil Friction Angle,ϕsr 30degSoil Unit Weight,γs 125pcfCrest Slope,β 26.6deg Foundation Soil Friction Angle,ϕsf 30degSurcharge Load qs 0 lbf ft2 δ1 2 3 ϕsrδ1 20 degRock Unit Weight,γr 145pcf Exposed Height,He 7ftWall Embedment,Hb 1ftTotal Height,Hr He Hb Hr 8ft Top of Wall Width,Wt 3ftBase of Wall Width,Wba 5ft α 83degψ 90deg αψ 7 degυ tan ϕsf()υ 0.577 Stone reduction friction factor μb.8Leveling Pad depth:LPd 1ft Calculate Wall Weight: W1 .5 Wba Wt()Heγr1ftW1 1015lbfW2 Wt Heγr1ftW2 3045lbf W3 Hb Wbaγs1ftW3 625lbfWw W1 W2W3Ww 4685lbf Active Earth Pressue Coefficient (Ka): Ka cos ϕsr ψ()()2 cos ψ()()2 cos δ1 ψ()()1 sin ϕsr δ1()( ) sin ϕsr β()()[] cos δ1 ψ()( ) cos ψβ()()[] 2 Ka 0.435 Total Horizontal Force: Horizontal Force From Soil,Fah .5 γsKaHrHrcos δ1 ψ()1ftFah 1693.5lbf Horizontal Force From Surcharge,Fs qs KaHr1ftFs 0 Total Horizontal Force,Fh Fah FsFh 1693.5lbf Frictional Resistance: Vertical Force From Soil,Fav .5 γsKaHrHrsin δ1 ψ()1ftFav 391lbf Fu υ Ww Fav()Fu 2930.6lbf Factor of Safety, Base Sliding: FOS Sliding,FOSs Fu FhFOSs 1.73 50 Boulder Wall Calculations - 8-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 2 of 3 Calculate Overturning Moment: Driving Moment,Mo 0.5 KaγsHrHrcos δ1 ψ()Hr 3 qs KaHrHr 2 Mo 4516.1lbf Calculate Resisting Moment: Resisting Moment is calculated by taking the sum of the weights times the moment arms for each section of wall above M1 W1 Wba Wt()2 3 1ftM1 1353.333lbf M2 W2 Wba Wt()Wt 2 1ft()M2 10657.5 lbf M3 W2 Wba 2 1ftM3 7612.5lbf Resisting Moment,Mr M1 M2M3Mr 19623.3 lbf Factor of Safety, Overturning: FOS Overturning,FOSot Mr MoFOSot 4.345 Analyze Bearing Capacity Bearing capacity coefficients: Nq exp π tan ϕsf()()( ) tan 45 degϕsf 2 2 Nq 18.401 Nc Nq 1( ) cot ϕsf()Nc 30.14 Nγ 2Nq 1( ) tan ϕsf()Nγ 22.402 Eccentricity of Resultant Vertical Bearing Force (E):E Wba 2 Mr Mo() Ww 1ft E 0.725ft 51 Boulder Wall Calculations - 8-Foot Total Wall Height, No Crest Slope Project VEC 24-055 - April 15, 2024 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, Minnesota Page 3 of 3 Analyze Bearing Capacity (continued) Bf Wba LPdBf 6ftBf1 Bf 2 EBf1 7.449 ft Ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils (Qult): Qult 0.5 γsBf1NγγsHbNqQult 12730.149 psf Qa Ww Bf1 1ftQa 628.928 psfFOSbc Qult QaFOSbc 20.241 Summary of Results Total Height:Hr 8ftBase Sliding Factor of Safety:FOSs 1.73 Crest Slope:β 26.6 degOverturning Factor of Safety:FOSot 4.345 Surcharge:qs 0 lbf ft2Bearing Capacity Factor of Safety:FOSbc 20.241 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Ronald W. Vickery, PE Registration Number: 24065 April 15, 2024 52 (Statement concerning fees for inspections, violations, etc... on following page) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D, and on the basis of statements and information contained in the permit application, correspondence, plans, maps, and all other supporting data submitted by the applicant, and made a part hereof by reference, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to the applicant named below for use and development of land in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Issued to: Matthew Jasper Permit No: 24-056 Location: 4745 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN Purpose: Shoreline Stabilization- 150’ Rip-Rap Repair and Sand Blanket Date of Issuance: 03/28/2024 Date of Expiration: 03/28/2025 By Order of the Board of Managers Maggie Menden Permitting Technician This permit is not transferable without District approval, and is valid to the date of expiration. No activity is authorized beyond the expiration date. If the permittee requires more time to complete the project, an application for renewal of the permit must be received by the District at least 30 days before expiration. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all District Rules and for the action of their representatives, contractors, and employees. Conditions: Project to be completed as described in plans submitted to the MCWD office on 03/27/2024 according to the provisions of this permit. All equipment intended for use at a project site must be free of prohibited invasive species and aquatic plants prior to being transported into or within the state and placed into state waters All equipment used in designated infested waters must be adequately decontaminated prior to being transported from the worksite Properly install and maintain all required erosion control measures until the disturbed areas are re-stabilized Notify MCWD in writing upon completing installation of perimeter and sedimentation controls When the site is re-stabilized and the MCWD staff has performed a final inspection, all perimeter control must be removed 53 Inspection/Analysis/Monitoring Fees A site inspection and monitoring by District staff will be performed where the activity involves: a commercial/industrial/multi-family residential development a single family residential development greater than 5 acres or of any size if within the Minnehaha Creek subwatershed any alteration of a floodplain or wetland dredging within the beds, banks or shores of any protected water or wetland a violation any project which in the judgment of the District staff should be inspected due to project location, scope, or construction techniques In these cases, the applicant shall pay to the District a fee equal to the actual costs of field inspection of the work, including investigation of the area affected by the work, analysis of the work, and any subsequent monitoring of the work, which in the case of a violation shall be at least $35. Standard Fee Schedule District Professional Staff: $70.07/hour District Administrative Staff: $50.74/hour Consulting Engineer/Technician: Contracted rate District Counsel: Contracted rate Permit Application Fee: $10.00 Wetland Buffer Signs: $2.85/sign Black and White Photocopy Costs: $0.25/page + actual staff time Color Photocopies: $1.00/page + actual staff time Electronic Records: cost of production 54 55 Existing Trees and Ground Cover - Page 1-taken by property owner56 Existing Trees and Ground Cover - Page 2 -taken by property owner57 58 59 60 61 62 Last Updated: January 2020 Note: This is an information sheet only, every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 8 of 9 City of Orono Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: Prepared by: Date: Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 1: EXISTING HARDCOVER In the following table identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to site plan or survey (must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75’ setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Survey Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24’ x 30’) (720 S.F.) A S.F. B S.F. C S.F. D S.F. E S.F. F S.F. G S.F. H S.F. I S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. (1) Total Existing Hardcover S.F. Excludable Hardcover (See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover S.F. (3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line (2) from line (1)]S.F. (4) Total Lot Area S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [ (3) ÷ (4) ] % (Proposed Hardcover next page) Garage 34.6' X 21.8' House (23' X 30') (17.2' X 33.8') Deck (15' X 10') (4' X 25') Cantilever 4' X 33.8' Driveway 34' X 18'Retaining wall not within 75'140' X 1' Stairway to Lake & Other (80' X 4') (10' X 4')Pump/Boat House 14.9' X 12.5' 754.28 1,271.36 250 135.2 612 140 360 186.25 Retaining wall not within 75'140' X 1'140 First 100 SF Pervious of Deck 100 240 3,718.09 3,478.09 25,288 13.753 4745 North Shore Drive Matt Jasper 6/11/2024 Air Conditioner 3' X 3'9 63 Last Updated: January 2020 Note: This is an information sheet only, every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 9 of 9 City of Orono Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: Prepared by: Date: Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to site plan or survey (must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75’ setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Survey Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24’ x 30’) (720 S.F.) A Garage S.F. B S.F. C Deck S.F. D S.F. E S.F. F S.F. G S.F. H S.F. I S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. (1) Total Proposed Hardcover S.F. Excludable Hardcover (See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line (2) from line (1)]S.F. (4) Total Lot Area S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [ (3) ÷ (4) ] % 34.6' X 21.8' Driveway House Retaining Wall Not Within 75' of Lake l 135.2 754.28 612 25,288 First 100 SF Pervious of Deck 4745 North Shore Drive Matt Jasper 6/11/2024 4' X 33.8' 34' X 18' Cantilever (15' X 10') (4' X 25') 250 (23' X 30') (17.2' X 33.8')1,271.36 3,954.09 14.687 3,714.09 240 140 100 Retaining Wall Not Within 75' of Lake Stairway to Lake & OtherPump/Boat House Air Conditioner (85' X 4') (10' X 4') Retaining Wall Within 75' of Lake near Rip Rap 90' X 1' 14.9' X 12.5' 3' X 3' 140' X 1'140 380 186.25 9 90 140' X 1' Retaining Wall Within 75' of Lake along stairway 55' X 1'55 64 Created: 2024-05-19 14:04:16 [EST] (Supp. No. 21, Update 2) Page 1 of 4 Sec. 78-1211. Definitions. Bluff means a topographic feature, such as a hill, cliff or embankment, having the following characteristics (An area with an average slope of less than 18 percent over a distance of 50 feet or more shall not be considered part of the bluff): (1) Part or all of the feature is located in a shoreland area; (2) The slope rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level of the water body; (3) The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25 feet or more above the ordinary high water level averages 30 percent or greater; and (4) The slope must drain toward the water body. Bluff impact zone means a bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff. Bluff, toe of the, means the lower point of the lowest 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. If the lowest such point is lakeward of the OHWL, the OHWL will be defined as the toe. Bluff, top of the, means that point on the cross section of a bluff below which the slope becomes more than 18 percent and above which the average slope for a distance of 50 feet or more is 18 percent or less. Steep slope means lands having average slopes of 12 percent or greater as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more, that are not bluffs. Water-oriented accessory structure or facility means a small, aboveground building or other improvement, except stairways, fences, docks and retaining walls, which, because of the relationship of its use to a surface water feature, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples of such structures and facilities include boathouses, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses, lock boxes, and detached decks. Sec. 78-1279. Placement of buildings and structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, buildings, structures, and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Buildings and structures shall be located as follows: (1) Building, structure, and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level: Public Water Classification Setbacks Building/Structure Sewage Treatment System Unsewered Sewered NE 150 150 150 RD 100 75 75 GD 75 75 75 Tributary 100 75 75 (2) Additional building and structure setbacks. The following additional setbacks apply, regardless of the classification of the water body: Setback from: Setback (in feet) Top of bluff 30 Unplatted cemetery 50 65 Created: 2024-05-19 14:04:16 [EST] (Supp. No. 21, Update 2) Page 2 of 4 Right-of-way line of federal, state or county highway and local public and private roads 30* * Except for accessory buildings on lakeshore lots as regulated in this chapter and except for buildings and structures subject to less restrictive side yard adjacent to street setbacks as regulated in the various zoning districts. (3) Bluff impact zones. Buildings, structures and accessory facilities, except stairways, landings and lock boxes, must not be placed within bluff impact zones. (4) Uses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. (5) Fences, docks, retaining walls. No fence shall be placed within the Shore Setback zone. Portions of dock located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a landing, subject to the regulations for landings per section 78-1282. Retaining walls within the Shore Setback zone may be permitted according to the following: a. A retaining wall may be constructed within the shore setback zone if it is an integral part of a permitted lake access stair and the retaining wall is designed to be the minimum size necessary. b. A replacement retaining wall, including a change in material, may be permitted within the shore setback zone when all of the following conditions are met: 1. The wall is under four feet in height, and in the same location, and 2. The existing wall shows signs of failure. c. A wall within a defined bluff and bluff setback; and/or a replacement wall four feet in height or greater; and/or any new walls shall require a conditional use permit. New walls and replacement walls greater than four feet in height must meet the following conditions. The wall must be: 1. Designed to correct an established erosion problem; and 2. Suitable given the demonstrated need; and 3. Designed by a registered engineer or landscape architect, depending on project scope; and 4. Designed to be the minimum size necessary to control the erosion problem. (6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the Ordinary High Water Line (OHWL) than the average distance from the shoreline of existing principal buildings on adjacent lots; This does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, and/or stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the principal buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way, the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the principal building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. b. In situations where the average lake shore setback line bisects the principal building located on either adjacent lot, the next most adjacent lake side point of the bisected principal building shall 66 Created: 2024-05-19 14:04:16 [EST] (Supp. No. 21, Update 2) Page 3 of 4 be used for determining the average lakeshore setback. If the line continues to bisect the principal building, the next most lakeside point is to be used until the setback line does not bisect the principal building on an adjacent lot. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(C)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004; Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 28, 6-10-2013; Ord. No. 157 3rd series, § 1, 8-10-2015; Ord. No. 222 3rd series, § 19, 12-10-2018; Ord. No. 234 3rd series, § 1, 10-14-2019; Ord. No. 243 3rd series, § 2, 4-13-2020; Ord. No. 284 3rd series, § 3, 11-13-2023) Sec. 78-1281. Water-oriented accessory structures. The only water-oriented accessory structures allowed to be located nearer the ordinary high water level than the normal structure setback as specified in this article shall be: (1) One lockbox no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height; (2) One flagpole setback from side lot lines a distance no less than the required principal structure side yard setback for the zoning district; and (3) One pumphouse no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(E)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 27, 6-10-2013) Sec. 78-1282. Driveways, stairways, lifts and landings. (a) A driveway no wider than eight feet is permitted in the shoreland or tributary setback zone if the property has no other frontage on or access to a public or private road. (b) Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts and landings shall be allowed in the Shore Setback zone and must meet the following design requirements: (1) Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width. (2) Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. (3) Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings. (4) Stairways, lifts and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. (5) Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, whenever practical. (6) Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allowed, provided that the dimensional and performance standards of subsections (1)—(5) of this section are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, chapter 1340. (7) A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways, lifts and landings regardless of whether such improvements are constructed above, at or below grade. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(F)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 59 3rd series, § 2, 5-11-2009; Ord. No. 243 3rd series, § 2, 4-13-2020) 67 Created: 2024-05-19 14:04:17 [EST] (Supp. No. 21, Update 2) Page 4 of 4 Sec. 78-1283. Steep slopes. Any applicant requesting a permit for construction of sewage treatment systems, roads, driveways, structures, grading, or other improvements on steep slopes shall provide adequate information to allow the city to evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development of visibility from public waters before such permit may be issued. Grading plans prepared for steep slopes shall be prepared by a professional engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. When necessary, conditions may be attached to issued permits to prevent erosion and preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles and other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(G)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 243 3rd series, § 2, 4-13-2020) Sec. 78-1285. Vegetation alterations. (a) No tree within 75 feet of the shoreline of public waters identified in section 78-1217, or within the bluff impact zone with a diameter of six inches or more (or 19 inches in circumference or greater) measured three feet above the ground may be removed without first obtaining a permit from the city staff. Live trees removed within 75 feet of the shoreline, shall be replaced based in the following manner: (1) Trees less than 36 inches in diameter 1 inch of replacement tree per inch of tree diameter removed. (2) Trees greater than 36 inches in diameter, ½ inch of replacement tree per diameter inch of tree removed. (3) Replacement trees shall be at least 1.5 inches in diameter, and of a type approved by the city. Removal of trees that are dead shall not require a permit, but such trees must be inspected by city staff prior to their removal. Dead, diseased, or trees deemed hazardous by a certified arborist and removed shall be replaced at a ratio of one tree per tree removed, regardless of size. The replacement tree shall be replanted at the same lake yard of the removed tree, approved by city administrator or designee. The city may solicit the review of the tree by an independent arborist, at the property owner's expense. Replacement trees shall be at least 1.5 inches in diameter, and of a type approved by the city. (b) Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline of public waters identified in section 78-1217, on steep slopes or within the bluff impact zone within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than six inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trimming of trees of any size is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of permitted stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted lockboxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(I)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series, § 7, 7-11-1994; Ord. No. 178 3rd series, § 14, 10-10-2016; Ord. No. 243 3rd series, § 2, 4-13-2020; Ord. No. 274 3rd series, § 1, 6-13-2022) 68 36 12-117-24 41 0001 JOSEPH GARRITANO JILL TOKARCZYK 4801 MINNEAPOLIS AVE MOUND MN 55364 36 12-117-24 41 0013 STEPHEN J KAMINSKI KAY G KAMINSKI 4821 MINNEAPOLIS AVE MINNETRISTA MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0027 DWIGHT A AFFELDT PATRICIA E AFFELDT 4765 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0035 NICHOLAS SCHMITT 4740 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0036 STEVEN F & JOAN VALEK 4720 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0037 STEVEN F & JOAN VALEK 4720 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0003 TERRY CHRISTIANSON 4641 TONKA VIEW LANE MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0004 ALLEN BREDESON 4735 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0009 VIKTORYIA BANCHUK 6627 TESSMAN LN BROOKLYN PARK MN 55445 38 07-117-23 32 0010 RYAN P TURNER 4745 TONKAVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0011 JAMES & MARTHA HARTFIEL 4749 TONKAVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0012 S A SCHAUER & F E KOUBSKY 4751 TONKAVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0013 CORY GERBER JANICE GERBER 4753 TONKAVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0014 L GREENHAGEN & V GREENHAGEN 4739 TONKAVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0019 MATTHEW MICHAEL JASPER 4745 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0020 THOMAS J CORNELISSEN KAREN PRESTON 4753 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0021 NAM PHAM THU PHAN 8812 138TH ST W SAVAGE MN 55378 38 07-117-23 32 0022 BEN A WASSCHER TRUST KATRINA WASSCHER TRUST 4775 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0023 CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 07-117-23 32 0025 ERICH K BLAUFUSS ELIZABETH BLAUFUSS 4625 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0026 JAMES R & DAWN ABRAHAMSON 4629 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0050 SUSAN J KRAFT 4680 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0053 GEORGE THOMAS AHERN CANDACE F AHERN 1345 REST POINT LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0054 GEORGE T AHERN CANDACE F AHERN 1345 REST POINT LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0056 KELLI GILLSPIE-COEN STEVEN C COEN 4685 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0057 KIM G & HONI L MARONDE 4755 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0058 ANDREW H & TRACY K RASCHER 4705 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0059 MOLLY G PORTER CAMERON J PORTER 4695 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0064 JOSEPH SPLETTSTOESER BRITTANY RADANT 4655 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0065 DAVID DARROW JENNIFER ZICK 4685 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 69 38 07-117-23 32 0066 BRADLEY K ARENDS TEMPEST A ARENDS 4725 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0067 JUSTIN B HOUSTON ALLISON J HOUSTON 4731 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 70 He nn epin Co u n ty L oc ate & N o tify Map 474 5 N o rth Shor e Dr 0 100 20050 Feet Da te : 3/2 7/20 24 Buffer Size:500Map Co mm e nts : Th is d ata (i) is furn ish ed 'AS IS' with no represen ta tion as tocompleteness or accuracy; (ii) is fu rn ish ed with n o warra nty of anykind; an d (iii) is n ot suitable for le ga l, eng ineerin g or surve yingpurposes. Hennepin County shall not b e liab le for a ny da ma ge , in ju ryor loss resu lting from this dat a. Fo r mo re inf ormation , co nta ct Hen ne pin Co un ty GI S Off ice300 6th S tree t So uth , Minn ea polis, MN 5 5487 / gis.in fo@h en ne pin.us 71 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.2 Presenter: Melanie Curtis, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000026, Gregg Steinhafel, 2265 and 2285 North Shore Drive - Grading IUP (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 1.Purpose: The purpose of this request is to consider an Interim Use Permit to conduct grading activities over three properties in excess of 500 cubic yards in the Shoreland Overlay District. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was submitted on March 24, 2024 and considered to be complete on May 20, 2024. The 60-day review period will expire on July 10, 2024. 3.Background: The applicant requests an Interim Use Permit in order to utilize approximately 2,900 cubic yards dredging spoil materials on the properties to create 4-foot-tall berms on their properties along North Shore Drive. The remaining material will be spread thinly in the adjacent areas. 4.Staff Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends approval of the IUP conditioned upon compliance with the permitting requirements from all applicable jurisdictions. 5.Planning Commission Action Requested: Planning Commission should consider a motion to approve the IUP as applied. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - PC Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Project Narrative Exhibit D - Proposed Plan_Survey Exhibit E - Revised Dock Dredging Plan Exhibit F - Engineer Comments Exhibit G - LMCD Minutes Exhibit H - Haul Route Exhibit I - Neighbor List & Plat Map 72 Date Application Received: 04/24/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/20/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/19/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 17 June 2024 Subject: #LA24-000026, Gregg Steinhafel, 2265 and 2285 North Shore Drive, Interim Use Permit – Material Import/Grading Public Hearing Background The applicant is currently seeking approval from the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) to conduct dredging within the perimeter wetland and bed of the southeast bay (referred to herein as “Grandpa’s Bay”) within Lake Minnetonka. The goal of the proposed dredging project is to create/improve a navigable channel to access their dock area. The applicant plans to dewater the approximately 2,900 cubic yards of spoils off-site. The dewatered spoils materials will be returned to the site and used to create 4-foot-tall berms on the northern portion of the properties along North Shore Drive. The remaining material will be spread thinly in the adjacent areas (reference Exhibit D). The applicant requests an Interim Use Permit to utilize the spoils material on the properties abutting North Shore Drive (2265 and 2285 North Shore Drive). Note, the approximate 11-acre (each) properties at 2165 North Shore Drive and 2385 North Shore Drive, also owned by the applicant, are not involved in the project. Applicable Regulations: Interim Use Permit (Section 78-1726) An Interim Use Permit (IUP) is required when substantial land alterations are proposed that are not associated with a construction permit. For lots greater than 5 acres in area, a project that disturbs over 20,000 square feet of area, results in more than 5,000 cubic yards of imported/exported material, and/or includes stockpiling of material for more than 180 days requires an IUP. The dredging project will produce approximately 2,900 cubic yards of material to be utilized on the combined 46-acre site. The wetland areas and existing driveways will not be impacted. Interim Use Permit Analysis Staff finds the proposed project purpose and scope are reasonable. The City Engineer has reviewed the project and provided comments (Exhibit F). The project will be reviewed again at the time of the administrative grading permit. According to Code Section 78-1726, an interim use permit may be granted if the city council determines that the use will comply with the following: 1) The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district; Grading activities are permitted within the LR-1A Zoning District. This criterion is met. 2) The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site; The grading activities will not impact future site development. This criterion is met. Application Summary: The applicant requests an Interim Use Permit to import approximately 2,900 cubic yards of dredging spoils to the site to create berms on the north portion of the properties. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. 73 FILE # LA24-000026 17 June 2024 Page 2 of 3 3) The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis; The plan will be reviewed by our City Engineer and the applicant will be required to follow City requirements. The project will obtain all necessary permits with outside agencies including MCWD, LMCD, and NPDES permitting. This criterion is met. 4) The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, or other uses on the property where the use will be located; The applicant shall ensure the project scope remains within the property lines, the haul route is monitored (and cleaned as often as necessary), and that any adverse impacts are mitigated. This criterion is met. 5) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; The project will not impose additional costs on the public. This criterion is met. 6) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; The applicant has provided a project timeline which will commence in the Fall of 2024 and will be finalized mid- summer 2025. This criterion is met. 7) And the applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior or better conditions. The conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between the property owner and the city, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Deeds. Approval of the Interim Use Permit will be done through a resolution that is recorded with the County. All requirements and conditions will be listed as part of the resolution. This criterion is met. Additional Applicable Regulations (Section 78-916) 1) Consistent with the community management plan; The proposed activity on the residential properties is consistent with the community management plan. Grade alterations are reasonable. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; This criterion is met. 3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; This criterion is met. The applicant will be obtaining all necessary permits. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This criterion is not applicable. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This criterion is met. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; There is no change of use contemplated. This criterion is met. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The project will not result in a change in character. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; This criterion is not applicable. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The proposed land alterations will be contained to the site and will meet all requirements by the City of Orono and other outside agencies. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The applicant is encouraged to work with any potentially impacted neighboring properties with concerns about screening or buffering. No screening or buffer requirements are required by the City. This criterion is met. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; The proposed project will be contained to the 74 FILE # LA24-000026 17 June 2024 Page 3 of 3 site and is not permitted to encroach on neighboring properties. A haul route has been reviewed and approved by the City for the imported dredging materials. This criterion is met. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; The dredging spoils will be transported by lake to the dewatering site and will be transported back to the site over an approved haul route. This should allow construction traffic to be less of an impact. This criterion is met. 13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The project will obtain all necessary permits from outside agencies such as MCWD, LMCD, and DNR as well as an NPDES permit. This criterion is met. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; This criterion is met; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. This criterion is met. The Commission may recommend or the Council may impose conditions in granting an IUP. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the IUP. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the IUP and subsequent grading permit, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 2. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested grading activity? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval conditioned upon compliance with the permitting requirements from all applicable jurisdictions. 75 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:04/24/2024 Address:2265 North Shore Drive Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number:1011723330005 Land Use Number:LA24-000026 Application Submitted By:Agent on behalf of property owner Owner:Name: GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL Address: 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 Applicant:Name: Mark Gronberg Company: Gronberg &Associates, Inc Address: 445 North Willow Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 markg@gronbergassoc.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Mark Gronberg markg@gronbergassoc.com Associated Contact: Gregg & Denise Steinhafel gregg.wm.steinhafel@gmail.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Construct a 4 foot high berm of dredging soils disposal of 2830 CY of material Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 76 77 78 79 80 From:Adam Edwards To:Melanie Curtis Subject:RE: LA24-000026 / 2265 NSD / Updated Spoils Survey Date:Monday, June 3, 2024 2:00:37 PM No issues from me From: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Sent: Monday, June 3, 2024 1:45 PM To: Adam Edwards <aedwards@oronomn.gov> Subject: LA24-000026 / 2265 NSD / Updated Spoils Survey Adam The property owner has provided an updated survey showing an expanded project area – they’ve also corrected the berm in the driveway area. They would like to leave the option open to spread the spoils “thinly” over the land in addition to or instead of the berms. See attached. Do you see any issues with this change? Comments? Melanie Curtis Direct: 952.249.4627mcurtis@oronomn.gov From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments: Adam Edwards Melanie Curtis RE: Engineering Review Requested for LA24-000026 / 2265, 2285, & 2385 North Shore Drive Friday, May 31, 2024 1:31:07 PM image002.png Melanie, I have reviewed the grading plan, haul route and Project Description provided and offer the following comments: 1. The grading plan depict the western most berm cutting off a driveway. If this driveway is not longer to be in use, it should be restored/ vegetated particularly the area north of the berm and into the county right of way. 2. A copy of the report on the dredged material samples should be included in the permit application. 3. The haul route provided is acceptable. Adam Adam T. Edwards, P.E. City Administrator / City Engineer 2750 Kelley Parkway | Orono, MN 55356 (952) 249-4600 aedwards@oronomn,gov http://www.ci.orono.mn.us 81 From: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:57 PM To: Adam Edwards <aedwards@oronomn.gov> Subject: Engineering Review Requested for LA24-000026 / 2265, 2285, & 2385 North Shore Drive Adam We received an application for an IUP to create a berm along North Shore Drive using dredging materials from “Grandpa’s Bay” abutting the site at 2265, 2285, & 2385 North Shore Drive. The dredging spoils will be dewatered off-site by barge and then returned to the property over land. The application is planned for a public hearing at the June 17th Planning Commission meeting. Please review the necessary information and provide a memo with your comments by or before Monday, June 10th. Comment memos will be included in the public packet. Consultant time on this review should be billed to the application number LA24-000026. Please see the attached files: 1.Project Description 2.Dredging & Dock Plan (plan labeled “42324 revised Dock Dredging MCWD….”) 3.LMCD approval minutes 4.Haul Route 5.Berm Grading Plan Thank you, Melanie Melanie Curtis, Planner 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Website: www.oronomn.gov Email: mcurtis@oronomn.gov Direct 952.249.4627 Planning & Zoning Department 952.249.4620 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 38 09-117-23 41 0007 CHARLES J SCHOEN 2430 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 41 0008 CHARLES J SCHOEN 2430 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 41 0009 CHARLES & BIRGITTA SCHOEN 2430 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 44 0003 DOROTHY C & MORRIS G LEVY JR 2425 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 44 0008 NS CARDINAL PROPERTIES LLC 2455 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 44 0009 HOVDE PRESTIEGE WORLDWIDE LL 2885 WOOD DUCK TRAIL ORONO MN 55356 38 09-117-23 44 0010 HOVDE PRESTIGE WORLDWIDE LLC 2885 WOOD DUCK TRAIL ORONO MN 55356 38 09-117-23 44 0011 NS CARDINAL PROPERTIES LLC 2455 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 44 0012 CAMBROOK PROPERTIES LLC P O BOX 1 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 11 0002 HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY 701 4TH AVE S SUITE 700 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55415 38 10-117-23 23 0004 WILLIAM BALL III/ERICA BALL 1300 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0002 KEITH R ERICKSON 2040 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0003 LYLE G GODFREY NORMA J GODFREY 2060 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0004 JDAE LLC 2501 WAYZATA BLVD MINNEAPOLIS MN 55405 38 10-117-23 31 0005 ROBERT C LARSON 1390 RAILROAD AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0006 STEFAN GARCON PEGGY GARCON 1380 RAILROAD AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0007 STEVEN R TWELVES SALLY A TWELVES 1360 RAILROAD AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0048 CRAIG B SARNER 1375 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0049 CRAIG S BLEEKER/AMY B BUTLER 1380 ARBOR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0050 PHILIP F KALEY 1395 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0051 COLIN L KELLER VANESSA A KELLER 1335 ARBOR STREET WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0052 ROBERT F CRAIG SAMANTHA F CRAIG 1355 ARBOR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0053 JEFFREY ZITZLOFF BRENDA ZITZLOFF 1380 BRIAR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0054 DAVID ALAN SUTHERLAND 1365 ARBOR ST PO BOX 161 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0055 MATHEW JEREMY ANGULO MACKENZIE ANN ANGULO 1385 ARBOR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0056 JONATHAN M PARSONS MOLLIE PARSONS 2140 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0057 WILLIAM IAN ANDERSON ETAL 1335 BRIAR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0058 AARON H PRINTUP 2195 PROSPECT AVE P O BOX 104 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0098 MSSP ORONO LLC ATTN RAJIV GARG 855 VILLAGE CENTER DR #382 ST PAUL MN 55127 38 10-117-23 31 0101 CITY OF ORONO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 89 38 10-117-23 32 0008 JOHN M BRYANT 1345 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0009 DAVID ANTHONY BURNS 1380 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0010 ADRIAN SMITH 4301 BRUNELLO PL SUMMERFIELD NC27358 38 10-117-23 32 0016 HEIDI J & STEPHEN E CLEAR JR 1360 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0017 WILLIAM BALL III/ERICA BALL 1300 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0018 WILLIAM BALL III/ERICA BALL 1300 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0019 MINNETONKA CTR FOR THE ARTS 2240 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 33 0001 GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 33 0005 GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 33 0006 GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0003 THOMAS J OTTESON 1449 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0004 GREGG W STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DRIVE ORONO MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0005 THOMAS & MARTHA MCCUNE 787 TRAMORE LA NAPLES FL 34108 38 10-117-23 34 0006 SUSAN M KERBER & JOHN C HOLM 1485 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0007 TWILA B GERMANSON DONALD M GERMANSON 1161 WAYZATA BLVD E #228 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0008 ROBERT SNYDER 1513 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0009 KLOVER HOLDINGS LLC 1525 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0014 BERTA KVAMME 2050 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0015 THOMAS H ALT SR DONNA DELANEY ALT 2054 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0016 BERTA KVAMME 2050 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0017 JULIE WIENS & ROBERT WIENS 1425 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 15-117-23 21 0002 MICHAEL D MAULE PATRICIA SILVA 2056 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 15-117-23 21 0013 HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY 701 4TH AVE S SUITE 700 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55415 38 15-117-23 22 0001 GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 90 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 2285, 2265, 2385 North Shore 0 410 820205 Feet Date: 5/30/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 91 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.3 Presenter: Natalie Nye, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000028, Steve White, 4375 Bayside Road, Preliminary Plat (Natalie Nye) 1.Purpose: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for the creation of a new lot. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was received on May 21, 2024 and deemed complete on June 4, 2024. The 120- Day timeline for review expires on October 2, 2024 3.Background: The applicant is the owner of two properties, 4375 Bayside Road and 4246 Bayside Road. 4375 Bayside Road is currently improved with a single-family home, whereas 4246 Bayside Road is vacant. 4375 Bayside Road is 34.14 acres and is bisected by Bayside Road. This property also has several zoning districts with the northern portion RR-1A and the southern portion split between RR-1B and LR-1A. The applicant is requesting a preliminary plat to create three buildable lots from the two current lots. The proposal is to split 4375 Bayside Road at the roadway and adjust the shared property line with 4246 Bayside Road to the east. The three lots will be conforming to the existing zoning districts standards. There are no immediate plans to construct on the newly created parcels. 4.Public Comment: No public comments have been received. 5.Staff Recommendation: Staff is supportive of the preliminary plat application where two existing lots become three lots. 6.Planning Commission Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subdivision application. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Preliminary Plat Exhibit D - Conservation Design Analysis Exhibit E - Wetland Delineation Exhibit F - Mailing List & Map 92 Date Application Received: 5/21/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/4/2024 120-Day Review Period Expires: 10/2/2024 To: Chris Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards City Administrator From: Natalie Nye, City Planner Date: June 17, 2024 Subject: #LA24-000028, Steve White, 4375 Bayside Road, Preliminary Plat - Public Hearing Background The applicant is the owner of two properties, 4375 Bayside Road and 4246 Bayside Road. 4375 Bayside Road is currently improved with a single-family home, whereas 4246 Bayside Road is vacant. 4375 Bayside Road is 34.14 acres and is bisected by Bayside Road. This property also has several zoning districts with the northern portion RR-1A and the southern portion split between RR-1B and LR-1A. The applicant is requesting a preliminary plat to create three buildable lots from the two current lots. The proposal is to split 4375 Bayside Road at the roadway and adjust the shared property line with 4246 Bayside Road to the east. The three lots will be conforming to the existing zoning districts standards. There are no immediate plans to construct on the newly created parcels. The proposal also includes an outlot containing a wetland. LOT ANALYSIS Section 78- 395/420 – RR-1A/RR-1B - Lot Area/ Width: Proposed Address Propose Legal Zoning District Required Area Proposed Area Required Width Width at the OHWL Width at the 75’ lake setback Width at front yard building setback 4375 Bayside Rd- Existing Home Lot 1, Block 2 RR-1B 2.0 acres 21.6 acres 200’ ±375’ ±370’ n/a 4375 Bayside Rd– New Lot Lot 1, Block 1 RR-1A 5.0 acres 15.0 acres 300’ n/a n/a ±885’ 4246 Bayside Rd Lot 2, Block 1 RR-1A 5.0 acres 14.5 acres 300’ n/a n/a ±650’ Section 78-1403- Structural Building Coverage: The three proposed lots will meet the minimum size requirement for the zoning district. A 20% structural coverage will be required for each of the three lots. Lot 1, Block 2 (4375 Bayside Road) Application Summary: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide two properties into 3 building lots in the Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. 93 FILE #LA24-000028 June 17, 2024 Page 2 of 3 is currently improved with a single-family home and accessory building and meets the structural coverage requirement at under 1% currently. While there are building footprints proposed for the vacant lots, the buildings will need to adhere to all required zoning limitations and setbacks. Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: The lot of the south side of Bayside Road is within Tier 1 of the Stormwater Overlay District with a 25% maximum hardcover limit. This lot is currently improved with a single-family home and accessory building, but is well below the limit of 25%. The newly created lots to the north of Bayside Road are not within the Stormwater Overlay District and is therefore exempt from hardcover limitations. Analysis Conformity with 2040 Orono Community Management Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the properties for Rural Residential and Rural Preserve. The lot currently addressed 4375 Bayside Road is guided for Rural Residential at 1 unit per 2 acres. The proposal would create an additional lot for the 34.14-acre site. This would be calculated at .06 units per acre, well below the density guide from the comprehensive plan. 4246 Bayside Road is guided for Rural Preserve at 1 unit per 5 acres. The proposed change in acreage with a lot line realignment would create a single lot consisting of 14.5 acres. This change is also consistent with the comprehensive plan. Conformity with Zoning District Standards. The properties to the north of Bayside Road are currently zoned RR-1A One Family Rural Residential (5.0 acre). Lot 1, Block 2, which is south of Bayside Road, has a split zoning between RR-1B and LR-1A. All three of the newly created parcels are conforming to their zoning districts as it relates to size and width. The existing structures of Lot 1, Block 2 meet current setback requirements and any new buildings constructed on any lot will need to meet the required zoning district’s standards as no variances have been requested. The properties are outside of the MUSA and are will be served by private sewer and private well. Relationship to Surrounding Development. The proposed lots are consistent in character with the neighboring lots. Bayside Road is a County road. The surrounding area is unique in that there are a variety of lot sizes from 1 acre in size to over 25 acres. Conservation Design: The requirements of this conservation design ordinance are meant to preserve and enhance this ecological/aesthetic character are the area. This is often triggered for properties over 5 acres in size or with increased density. The proposed project does trigger the requirements for a conservation design, which have been included in the packet as Exhibit D. Staff finds that the assessment is appropriate. There are several wetlands throughout the properties. A delineation report has been conducted and included in Exhibit E. Utilities: The properties are not served by City water or sewer. The proposed lots will be served by private well and septic. Preliminary septic locations have been shown on the preliminary plat. served by City sewer and private water supply wells. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District: The MCWD provided comment that the creation of an additional lot does not trigger their permitting. Erosion control permits will be required for the construction of new homes on the currently vacant parcels Hennepin County: Hennepin County has provided preliminary comments below: 1. We request 45’ half right of way, or 90’ full. Easements could be accommodated (ie 10’) if needed. 94 FILE #LA24-000028 June 17, 2024 Page 3 of 3 2. The applicant should be aware that future access on County Road 84 will be a little tricky. We’d typically consider 1/8 mile spacing for low density on this type of roadway. We’d further typically prefer to align and consolidate access where feasible. That said, the curves of this roadway and existing sight distance need to be taken into account. When future plans are pursued, we’ll need to work together to determine the best locations for access. Is there any consideration for the private road Cristofori Cir become public? It would make sense for lot 1, block 1 to share access there. Drainage and Utility Easements: The City requires standard perimeter drainage and utility easements around all property boundaries in the Plat and drainage easements over the wetland areas. The easements as shown on the proposed plat drawing must be revised to meet the City standards. Driveway Easement: An access plan has not been shown for the parcels to the north of Bayside Road. Should a shared driveway be proposed, a driveway easement and maintenance agreement would be required. Parks Parks: The Parks, Open Space and Trail Plan chapter of the Orono Comprehensive Plan does not specify the need for a neighborhood park at this location. As there is no defined need for park land at this location, it would appear that dedication of actual land for park purposes is not required. Absent the need for park land dedication, a Park Dedication Fee in lieu of land would be appropriate per City Ordinance. Park Dedication: The proposed application is anticipated to pay a park dedication fee in lieu of providing land for the newly created lot. The fee is determined by fair market value of the land being subdivided. The assessor will be consulted to determine the market value of the land for establishing the amount of the fee. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the subdivision. 95 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/21/2024 Address:4375 Bayside RD Orono, MN 55359 Parcel Number:0611723120009 Land Use Number:LA24-000028 Application Submitted By:Property Owner Owner:Name: STEVEN C WHITE Address: STEVEN C WHITE Applicant:Name: steve White Company: Address: 4375 bayside rd Maple Plain, MN 55359 stevewhite.sve@gmail.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Mark Gronberg markg@gronbergassoc.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: Subdividing 4375 Bayside Rd. into two lots, one on the South side of Bayside Rd., and one on the North side of Bayside Rd.. Also re-aligning the lot line between the new lot on the north side of Bayside and my adjacent lot at 4246 Bayside Rd. Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 6/13/24, 12:36 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14416415&WorkOrder_ID=884…1/196 PC Exhibit C97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 38 06-117-23 11 0003 STEVEN C WHITE 4375 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 12 0001 CHRIS MAJOR LYDIA MAJOR 4360 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 12 0004 JEFFREY R & LYNETTE C MAYHEW 45 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 12 0005 WILLIAM F & EVELYN KNAPP 85 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 12 0006 CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 06-117-23 12 0009 STEVEN C WHITE PATRICIA L H WHITE 4375 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 13 0003 PATRICIA L WHITE 4375 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 13 0004 TODD G SYLVESTER LISA M SYLVESTER 4245 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 13 0005 ANDREW MICHAEL KNUTSON NATALIE MARIE KNUTSON 4355 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 14 0008 MICHAEL HOAG JULIE CALDWELL 4185 BAYSIDE ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 14 0024 M NICHOLAS BURKE 4105 BAYSIDE RD ORONO MN 55359 38 06-117-23 14 0026 M NICHOLAS BURKE 4105 BAYSIDE RD ORONO MN 55359 38 06-117-23 21 0002 GEORGETTE GABRIEL JABBOUR 23500 SMITHTOWN ROAD SHOREWOOD MN 55331 38 06-117-23 21 0006 ROBERT W CARLSON 4465 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 21 0007 CHELSEA J WICKESBERG GRANT T WICKESBERG 4461 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 21 0008 GABRIEL JABBOUR 23500 SMITHTOWN ROAD SHOREWOOD MN 55331-1726 38 06-117-23 24 0001 BRADLEY PASS 2536 18TH AVE S MPLS MN 55404 38 06-117-23 24 0008 CASEY J BURNS STEPHANIE M BURNS 370 NORTH ARM LA MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 24 0012 BRIAN J & EMILY L HEDEEN 360 NORTH ARM LA MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 24 0013 JAMES R NEILSON 340 NORTH ARM LA MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 24 0014 MELISSA M DEMEUSE MICHAEL A DEMEUSE 350 NORTH ARM LA MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 31 0003 RENE STERNAU 440 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 31 0004 THOMAS J & SUSAN J WANNER 460 N ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 31 0005 TIMOTHY PELLIZZER BRENDA JOHNSON 520 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 31 0006 CONNIE K PIEPHO 540 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 42 0006 VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS C/O THOMAS MAZER 560 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 42 0007 VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS C/O THOMAS MAZER 560 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 31-118-23 34 0012 JOEL BRIAN HARMER KRISTIE ANNE HARMER 4440 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 43 0009 CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 31-118-23 43 0012 JEFFREY R & LYNETTE C MAYHEW 45 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 168 38 31-118-23 43 0013 WILLIAM F & EVELYN KNAPP 85 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 43 0015 WILLIAM F & EVELYN KNAPP 85 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 43 0016 CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 31-118-23 43 0017 WILLIAM F & EVELYN KNAPP 85 CRISTOFORI CIR MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 44 0004 ANDREW HANSEN & ALEX HANSEN 50 CRISTOFORI CIR ORONO MN 55359 169 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 4375 Bayside 0 410 820205 Feet Date: 5/30/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 170 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.4 Presenter: Natalie Nye, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000029, Robey Construction o/b/o Steve Streich, 1487 Shoreline Drive, Variance (Natalie Nye) 1.Purpose: The applicant is requesting a variance from the 75-foot lake setback for an entryway modification. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was received on May 21, 2024 and deemed complete on May 23, 2024. The 60- Day timeline for review expires on July 22, 2024 3.Background: The applicant is proposing to modify the roofline of the entryway of an existing home within the 75-foot lake setback. The home is nonconforming with a majority of the home within the 75-foot lake setback. The modification to the roofline on the entryway does not expand the footprint or increase hardcover. 4.Public Comment: No public comment has been received. 5.Staff Recommendation: Staff is supportive of the variance from the 75-foot lake setback for the entryway modification. 6.Planning Commission Action Requested: Motion to recommend approval of the 75-foot lake setback variance as applied. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Practical Difficulties Form Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plans Exhibit F - Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G - Mailing List & Map 171 Date Application Received: 05/21/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/23/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/22/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Natalie Nye, Planner Date: June 17, 2024 Subject: #LA24-000029, Robey Construction o/b/o Steve Streich, 1487 Shoreline Dr, Variances - Public Hearing Background The applicant is proposing to modify the roofline of the entryway of an existing home within the 75- foot lake setback. The home is nonconforming with a majority of the home within the 75-foot lake setback. The modification to the roofline on the entryway does not expand the footprint or increase hardcover. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has identified the existing non-compliant setback of the home, the existing nonfunctional interior layout, and problematic roof drainage as practical difficulties supporting the requested variances. The applicant has provided supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit C. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty, Staff finds that the proximity of the home to the lake prevents any structural or massing modification. The proposed changes appear to be minor and do not increase hardcover. The existing home’s location and existing conditions of the site are practical difficulties. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-305 & 78-1279 – Setbacks: LR-1A Required Existing Proposed Rear / Street 50’ 100’ Existing Home No Change North Side 30’ ±7’ Existing Home No Change South Side 30’ ±28’ Existing Home No Change Lakeshore 75’ 24’ Existing Home No Change Average Lakeshore The existing home is approximately 55’ lakeward of the diagonal average lakeshore setback line. The entryway modification is not within the average lakeshore setback – no change Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance from the 75-foot lake setback for a remodel of an existing home. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. 172 FILE #LA24-000029 June 17, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Section 78-305 – Lot Area/Width: LR-1A Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acres) 200’ Actual 32,927 s.f. (0.75 acre) 130’@ 75’ / 130’ @ OHWL Section 78-1403 – Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 32,927 s.f. (0.75 acre) Allowed: 6,585 s.f. (20%) Existing: 4,170 s.f. (12.6%) Proposed: 4,170 s.f. (12.6%) – no change Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Tier Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 1 32,927 s.f. 8,231 s.f. (25 %) 8,664 s.f. (26.3%) 8,664 s.f. (26.3%) – no change Applicable Regulations: 75-foot Lake Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) The majority of the home is within the 75-foot lake setback. The proposed entryway modification to the roofline is within the 75-food lake setback. The modification increases the vertical massing of the building within the setback. Any modification to the massing of the nonconforming building requires a variance. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed variance is in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The property includes difficulties in the location of the existing home and existing site conditions. The 173 FILE #LA24-000029 June 17, 2024 Page 3 of 4 requested changes are minimal and do not expand the footprint or increase hardcover. This criterion has been met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance to allow a remodel of an existing, nonconforming home without increasing hardcover is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit a minor entryway modification within the 75-foot setback appears to be reasonable considering the location of the existing home. This criterion is met. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The location of the existing home prevents changes or expansions of the home consistent with the neighborhood. The proposed overall hardcover level is not changing. The circumstances are unique to the property; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance requested to permit the modification to the home’s entryway and roofline are not visible from the lake and do not expand the footprint or increase hardcover. The proposal will not alter the character of the neighborhood. This criterion is met. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as improvements to a single-family home are allowed within in the LR-1A District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The existing home’s proximity to the lakeshore and the existing conditions of the site are unique to the site. This criterion is met. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The unique condition of the nonconforming home and site does not apply to other properties in the area. This criterion is met. 174 FILE #LA24-000029 June 17, 2024 Page 4 of 4 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting the variance is necessary for the preservation of the property rights of the owners. This criterion is met. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variance in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. This criterion is met. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The requested variance is necessary to address the poor roof drainage and open up the interior layout. The request is minor and does not expand the footprint nor increase the hardcover. This criterion is met. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments Supportive comments from the adjacent property owners have been received and are attached as Exhibit H. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of requested variance for the entryway modification at 1487 Shoreline Drive. 175 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/21/2024 Address:1487 Shoreline DR Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number:1111723230010 Land Use Number:LA24-000029 Application Submitted By:Agent on behalf of property owner Owner:Name: MARTY L SANDERS Address: - STEVE STREICH Applicant:Name: Bill Robey Company: Robey Contruction Address: 3806 Westin Ave Woodbury, MN 55125 bill@robeyconstruction.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Modified front entryway Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 6/3/24, 12:11 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14417134&WorkOrder_ID=884…1/1176 PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA24-000029 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: Although the proposed front elevation change is not in compliance to the setback requirements, it is only due to the fact that the house was built with approximately 70% of the footprint inside the 75’ setback. The entryway change DOES NOT protrude closer to the shoreline that the existing house does. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: The plight of the landowner is due to the fact that the house was permitted to be located with-in the 75’ setback. If the original structure was built outside of the setback no variance would be necessary. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The small addition will blend seamlessly with the existing home and is an improvement in aesthetics to the general public and adjacent neighbors 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: The requested variance is not due to economic reasons. The new homeowners seek to improve the front elevation of the home as part of a total renovation of the main level of the home. This improvement requires a small addition that does not encroach beyond the current encroachment into the setback. The variance is only necessary due to the original home’s construction by previous owners inside the 75’ setback. 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: n/a 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: The requested variance is expanding a single family dwelling which is in compliance with this Chapter for property in this zone. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: n/a 6/3/24, 12:12 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14417134&WorkOrder_ID=884…1/2177 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: The new homeowner purchased this property with the intention of updating the aging property. The new homeowner was not made aware that there was a 75’ setback that the home encroached. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: We are not aware of other homes in the district that are in violation of the setback, however the appearance of the home with the proposed small addition will blend seamlessly into the adjacent properties with an improved curbside appearance. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: This entryway change is consistent with the overall remodel underway improving the curb appeal and improved covered entryway area. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: The proposed variance will not impair any health, safety, comfort, morals, or any other respect to be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: This entryway change is consistent with the overall remodel underway improving the curb appeal and improved covered entryway area. 6/3/24, 12:12 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14417134&WorkOrder_ID=884…2/2178 c Pioneer Engineering 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 Ph. : (651) 681-1914 www.pioneereng.comFax: (651) 681-9488 Project # :124001 Folder #:8915 Drawn by:NJK CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS Certificate of Survey for: ROBEY CONSTRUCTION LLC 3806 Westin Ave, Woodbury, MN 55125 Phone: (612) 834-8403 PC Exhibit D179 4 3.0 3 3.0 2 3.0 14 12 x36905E3L A C E E ;, S T. % E A 0 T2 S 8 3 3 2 5 T N E : % E A 0 NE: :,N'2: ,N *A%LE A%29E 8CA 144 S 5.2. 1'-" x 3'- /" 2x 5A)TE5S 9LTC. CL*. 5E3LACE E;,ST,N* ENT5< :A< AN' 522) :/ NE: 2N T23 2) E;,ST. )28N'AT,2N 9E5,)< 9'-0" 9E5,)< '-6" 9E5,)< 1'-9"'-6" 1'-9" NE: ENT5< '225 1'-0"2 2.0 1 2.0 14 SKRUHOLQH 'ULYH :D\]DWD 0N 3913ODQV SUHSDUHG E\ :DGH S.Streich, Steve & CariFront Entry RemodelSCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" SCALE: N.T.S. 180 1 3.0 4 3.0 14 12 14 12 3 3.0 2 3.0 14 SKRUHOLQH 'ULYH :D\]DWD 01 3 13ODQV SUHSDUHG E\ :DGH S.Streich, Steve & CariFront Entry RemodelSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" 181 1487 Shoreline Drive, Wayzata, MN 55391Plans prepared by Wade S.Streich, Steve & CariFront Entry RemodelS&$/( 1 1 1 S&$/( 1 1 1 S&$/( 1 1 1 S&$/( 1 1 1 182 PC Exhibit F183 38 11-117-23 21 0001 RLA FAMILY L P 3205 CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0002 ELLEN A SCHMITT 1475 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0008 JANET C KRIER RICHARD C KRIER 1491 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0009 RAYMOND K NEWKIRK TRUSTEE NYLENE J NEWKIRK TRUSTEE 1489 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0010 CAROLYN A STREICH 9156 E ANDORA HILLS DR SCOTTSDALE AZ 85262 38 11-117-23 23 0011 JOSHUA DAVID JASBERG SUZANNE GEIER JASBERG 1485 GREEN TREES RD ORONO MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0012 JAMES T & JUDITH L BRASS 1495 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0014 1520 GREEN TREES LLC 701 CARLSON PARKWAY STE 1010 MINNETONKA MN 55305 38 11-117-23 23 0015 JENNIFER & SCOTT STEVENSON 1510 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0016 CHRISTOPHER G WILLSON 1480 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0017 CHRISTOPHER G WILLSON 1480 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 23 0018 GREEN TREES HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O JACK O YOST 4972 COMSTOCK LN N PLYMOUTH MN 55446 38 11-117-23 32 0010 ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY 1265 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 32 0018 ANDERSON REV TRUST 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 11-117-23 32 0021 JOHN NOBLE 1697 LENOX DR WACONIA MN 55387 184 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 1487 Shoreline 0 200 400100 Feet Date: 5/21/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 185 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.5 Presenter: Melanie Curtis, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000030, Aspect Design Build LLC., 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue N, + PIDs 29-118-23-43-0013, 29-118-23-44-0004 & 29-118-23-44-0006 - Preliminary Plat (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 1.Purpose: The purpose for the application is to review a new 6-lot subdivision in the RR-1B, 2-acre rural district. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: This application was submitted on May 22, 2024, and considered to be complete on May 30th. The 120-day preliminary plat review period will end on September 27, 2024. 3.Background: Please refer to the Preliminary Plat review memo attached as Exhibit A. This application involves five individual tax parcels, 2 containing existing homes, and contemplates preliminary plat approval to create six, 2+ acre buildable lots and a private road. applicant requests preliminary plat approval to create a 6-lot plat in the RR-1B district. The following is proposed: 1. Lot 1: 2.5 total acres; 2.3 dry, buildable acres. 2. Lot 2: 3.2 total acres; 3.26 dry, buildable acres. 3. Lot 3: A lakeshore lot with 2.75 total acres; 2.1 dry, buildable acres. 4. Lot 4: A lakeshore lot with 4.45 total acres; 2.02 dry, buildable acres. 5. Lot 5: 2.0 total acres; there is a small wetland shared with Lot 6.* 6. Lot 6: 2.0 total acres; there is a very, small wetland shared with Lot 5.* All of the roads will be served by a new private road with a cul-de-sac extending south from Hennepin County Road 6 (CSAH 6). All lots will be served by private wells and septic systems. 4.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval for the proposed 6-lot subdivision with the following conditions before consideration by the City Council: 1. MCWD approval of the wetland delineation and stormwater plans 2. Updated Septic Design 3. Updated Landscaping and tree plan 5.Planning Commission Action Requested: The Planning Commission should review all of the issues identified within the report and provide direction to the Developer. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - Preliminary Plat Memo 186 Exhibit B - App Narrative Map Exhibit C - Prelim Plat Exhibit D - Master Grading Plan -Storm Exhibit E - Aerial Photos Exhibit F - Road Plan Exhibit G - Soil Borings Exhibit H - Septic Design Exhibit I - Utility & Septic Exhibit J - Septic Review Comments Exhibit K - Landscape Plan Exhibit L - Tree Preservation Plan Exhibit M - Wetland Delinleation Exhibit N - Agency Comments Exhibit O - Prelim HOA Declaration Exhibit P - CDMP Exhibit Q - Hydrology & Soils Exhibit R - Map & List 187 Date Application Received: 05/22/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/30/2024 120-Day Review Period Expires: 09/27/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 17 June 2024 Subject: #LA24-000030, Aspect Design Build LLC (Developer), 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue N, including PIDs 29-118-23-43-0013, 29-118-23-44-0004 & 29-118-23-44-0006 Subdivision: Preliminary Plat Public Hearing PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW Conformity with 2020 – 2040 Orono Community Management Plan The 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the properties for Rural Residential which allows 1 unit per 2 acres. The site is 17.25 acres in area ending at the OHWL of Lake Classen. The plat includes an outlot for a new road and a portion of land to be added to the neighboring property to the east. The proposal would create six buildable lots. This would be calculated at 0.34 units per acre, well below the density guide from the comprehensive plan of 0.5 units per acre. Conformity with Zoning District Standards The properties are currently zoned RR-1B One Family Rural Residential (5.0 acre). All of the newly created parcels conform to the current RR-1B zoning district as it relates to size and width. The existing structures will be removed (except the outbuilding on Lot 2 which will remain). New buildings constructed must meet the required zoning district standards as no variances have been requested. The properties are outside of the MUSA and will be served by private septic systems. Relationship to Surrounding Development The proposed 6-lot single-family development with 2-plus acre lot sizes is relatively isolated and is bookended by two 3 to 4+ acre residential properties on the east and the west. The 20+ acre Susan B. Lurton Off-Leash Dog Park (City of Orono) abuts the property on the south and Baker Park (Three Rivers Park District) is across CSAH 6 to the north. The development will be consistent with its residential neighbors. Application Summary: This application involves five individual tax parcels, 2 containing existing homes, and contemplates preliminary plat approval to create six, 2+ acre buildable lots and a private road. applicant requests preliminary plat approval to create a 6-lot plat in the RR-1B district. The following is proposed: 1. Lot 1: 2.5 total acres; 2.3 dry, buildable acres. 2. Lot 2: 3.2 total acres; 3.26 dry, buildable acres. 3. Lot 3: A lakeshore lot with 2.75 total acres; 2.1 dry, buildable acres. 4. Lot 4: A lakeshore lot with 4.45 total acres; 2.02 dry, buildable acres. 5. Lot 5: 2.0 total acres; there is a small wetland shared with Lot 6.* 6. Lot 6: 2.0 total acres; there is a very, small wetland shared with Lot 5.* All of the roads will be served by a new, private road with a cul-de-sac extending south from Hennepin County Road 6 (CSAH 6). All lots will be served by private wells and septic systems. *The wetland square footage is not called out for Lots 5 and 6. The dry buildable acreage should be confirmed. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission should review all of the issues identified within the report and provide direction to the Developer. 2.0 acre FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 2 of 5 General Site Characteristics The site to be platted as “Honey Hill on Lake Classen” currently contains two developed residential homes with outbuildings, open meadow or pasture areas, wetlands, and some wooded areas along the south portions of the property. The property also abuts Lake Classen which is classified by the DNR as a Natural Environment Lake and requires a 150-foot structure and building setback from the OHWL. A wetland delineation has been completed and the wetlands have been depicted on the preliminary plat drawing with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District- required buffers (“MCWD”). The City has received a copy of the delineation; the MCWD currently has the delineation under review. Road Layout and Standards A 50-foot wide outlot containing a 24-foot wide paved, private road ending in a cul-de-sac is proposed to serve the development. The road extends for 650 feet accessing south of CSAH 6. A split entrance is proposed to create a landscaping island for the development identification sign, 55 feet from the paved county road. The paved width has been increased to 30 feet in this area, and a 6’ x 48’ pavement opening is provided to accommodate the sign and any landscaping. Rural Oasis + Conservation Design + Wetlands The Developer’s engineer, Anderson Engineering prepared a Conservation Design Master Plan (CDMP) for the development following the Conservation Design requirements outlined within Chapter 78, Article XII (beginning with Section. 78-1631). The Honey Hill CDMP reviewed the development against the City’s Rural Oasis Study, and provided an overview of the property relating to Drainage, Land Use, Natural Resources Inventory, Public Waters Inventory, and Wetlands. The property is directly adjacent to CSAH 6, a corridor identified in Orono’s Rural Oasis Study (R.O.S) The Study identifies the corridor along CSAH 6 from Brown Road to Highway 12, as an Open Enclosure Corridor. The R.O.S defines Open Enclosure Corridors as having “Long views beyond the right of way, and no real sense of corridor enclosure.” Positive views of the natural landscape extending from Open Enclosure Corridors are tied to the rural feel of the area. The CDMP determined that novel “non-rural” land uses such as new residential or industrial structures, can threaten the rural character of the open corridors identified in the study. The study identified potential solutions to these threats through ecological and conservation design measures such as berming, landscaping, and planting techniques that preserve the rural character of the area. According to the CDMP report, the plan for the site includes integrating the existing natural environment in a way that will minimize negative impacts on the current rural character as described in the Rural Oasis Study. Landscaping and planting along the northern boundary of the property will be utilized to preserve the positive and natural viewsheds identified along CSAH 6. The development will not impact the natural viewshed of Lake Classen, regardless of travel direction (east or west) along CSAH 6. The Honey Hill CDMP concluded that the project would not have a significant impact on these resources, nor would it negatively impact the rural character of the City of Orono. This CDMP determination was made considering the following factors: 1. The inventoried natural resources and ecologic communities primarily occur on the periphery of the site 2. Site development plans are focused on areas of the site that have already been impacted by human development, thus the risk of impacting the remaining resources and ecological communities is minimized. 3. The site development plans maintain the rural character of the City of Orono through the necessary site design plans, as described in the Rural Oasis Study. 4. The site development plans follow the City of Orono’s Shoreland Overlay District building setback standards and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District wetland buffer standards. FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 3 of 5 Lot Layout + Lot Standards – RR-1B, Rural Residential The RR-1B district has a minimum lot area requirement of 2.0 dry, contiguous acres and 200 feet in width. For non- lakeshore lots, the width is measured at the 50-foot front building setback along the roadway. For lakeshore lots, the minimum 200-foot width must be met when measured in a straight line between the points at which the side lot lines intersect the 974.5’ OHWL contour for Lake Classen, and at the required 150-foot structure setback from the OHWL, measured in a straight line between the points of intersection of the side lot lines with the 150-foot structure setback line. Lot 1: Proposed Lot 1 will have 2.5 total acres; 2.3 acres is upland. This lot will have almost 400 feet of frontage on the new private road and ±320 feet of frontage on Cty Rd 6. There are two wetland areas on the property. An approximately 1.0 acre building envelope is proposed. A stormwater basin is proposed on the east side of the larger wetland on the property with a culvert maintaining the existing connection to the wetland straddling Lots 5 and 6. A building pad is proposed to be created for a home with a first-floor elevation of 994’, in addition to a potential building pad for an ADU (984’). A second driveway access for the ADU is proposed. Lot 2: Lot 2 is shown with 3.2 total acres; and 3.26 dry, buildable acres. The property has a total width of 235 feet on the road; 94 feet are cul-de-sac. 268 feet of the continued front property line abuts Lot 3. The eastern property line continues for 268 feet south of the cul-de-sac. The existing accessory building is proposed to remain on the property. This lot shares a wetland with Lot 1 and has a small wetland shared with Lurton Park on the south. This lot will have approximately 1.7 acres of building envelope; a building pad for a home with a 1002’ first-floor elevation is shown to be graded by the developer. A stormwater basin is shown on the northwest corner of the property near the wetland. Lot 3: Lot 3 is a proposed lakeshore lot with 2.75 total acres; and 2.1 dry, buildable acres. There is an approximate 1.0 acre building envelope. The connection to the cul-de-sac is over a 40-foot-wide driveway corridor. Lot 3 contains a large, wetland shared with Lot 4 which separates the majority of the lot from the lake. The width of the lot is 240 feet measured at the OHWL and 230 feet measured diagonally at the 150-foot setback. The developer is proposing a building pad for a home with a first-floor elevation of 1000’; a small stormwater basin to the west of the 75-foot wetland buffer (from the large wetland) is also proposed. Lot 4: A lakeshore lot with 4.45 total acres; 2.02 dry, buildable acres. This lot has 313 feet in width measured at the OHWL, and 318 feet at the 150-foot setback. This lot has a total of 174 feet of frontage on the development road, partially on the cul-de-sac. As with Lot 3, this lot contains a large, wetland that separates the majority of the lot from the lake. Lot 4 contains the larger portion of this wetland. A building pad is proposed for a first-floor elevation of 1002’. A common drainage swale is proposed on the shared boundary with Lot 3. Lot 5: Lot 5 is 300+ feet wide on the road, and has 2.0 total acres; no wetlands. A building pad with a first-floor elevation of 997’ is shown in addition to a potential building pad for an ADU (986.7’). A second driveway access for the ADU is shown. Lot 6: Lot 6 has a nearly 1.0-acre building envelope, 258 feet along the new private road, and 296 feet on Sixth Avenue. The rear of the lot abuts the driveway to the neighboring property to the east at 3405 Sixth Avenue North. The developer’s plan reflects the creation of Outlot B, which is the eastern 20 feet of the existing outlot containing the driveway to 3405 Sixth Avenue N. Outlot B is not included in the area for Lot 6 which has 2.0 total acres. A building pad for a home with a first-floor elevation of 997’ is shown to be created. FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 4 of 5 Landscaping + Tree Preservation A landscape plan has been provided. City Code Section 82-225(b) stipulates deciduous trees (“boulevard trees”) are to be planted within five feet of the right-of-way of the roads within and abutting the subdivision. One tree shall be planted for every 40 feet of frontage along each road. The proposed landscape plan reflects 31 deciduous trees (including golden weeping willow, honey locust, spring snow crab, and Swedish columnar aspen), and four Eastern white pine in addition to various grasses, perennials, and shrubs – both evergreen and deciduous. The landscape plan is attached as Exhibit K. There are approximately 1,920 linear feet of road frontage requiring 48 trees. According to the schedule, 13 more trees should be provided to conform. The Developer is proposing to create tree preservation areas (Exhibit L). Tree preservation is proposed at the entrance corners and along the first 15-20 feet of the CSAH 6 frontage of Lots 1 and 6, and on the first 10 to 18 feet of the private property abutting the private road on Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6. A 35-foot by 155-foot tree preservation area is proposed on the east side of Lot 5 to protect trees planted by the owners of 3405 Sixth Avenue North by an informal agreement with the previous property owners. The tree preservation language is included in the Developer’s draft HOA Declaration (Exhibit O). Stormwater Drainage Trunk Fee + Stormwater Drainage Improvements Stormwater facilities will be required. The Developer has completed a stormwater and grading plan which is currently under review by the City Engineer and the MCWD. Their plan reflects grading and stormwater basins to address stormwater resulting from the new hardcover of the development. The plan has not been finalized but it is not likely that amendments to the plan will require adjustments to the proposed property boundaries or orientations. The final, approved stormwater and grading plan will be required as part of the final plat application submittals. Park/Trail Easement + Park Fees or Dedication The Parks, Open Space, and Trail Plan chapter of the Orono Comprehensive Plan does not specify the need for a neighborhood park at this location. Three River’s Baker Park is a regional park located to the north of the property. The City of Orono has Lurton Dog Park to the south abutting the proposed development. As there is no defined need for park land at this location, it would appear that the dedication of actual land for park purposes is not required. Absent the need for park land dedication, a Park Dedication Fee instead of land would be appropriate according to the City Ordinance. Park Dedication: The proposed application is anticipated to pay a park dedication fee in lieu of providing land for the newly created lots. The Park Dedication Fee is determined by the fair market value of the land being subdivided. The Hennepin County Assessor will be consulted to determine the market value of the land to establish the amount of the fee. Issues for Discussion 1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the Developer’s findings in the Conservation Design Master Plan? If not, what is lacking? 2. Does the Commission find the proposed plan preserves the existing rural “Open Enclosure” character along the CSAH 6 corridor? 3. The City’s landscaping requirements call for 13 additional boulevard trees. The Commission should ask for addition testimony from the application regarding the tree and landscaping plan. Are existing trees to remain accounted for in the plan? Does the Developer’s plan provide the desired natural aesthetic? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval for the proposed 6-lot subdivision with the following conditions before consideration by the City Council: FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 5 of 5 1. MCWD approval of the wetland delineation and stormwater plans 2. Updated Septic Design 3. Updated Landscaping and tree plan Date Application Received: 05/22/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/30/2024 120-Day Review Period Expires: 09/27/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 17 June 2024 Subject: #LA24-000030, Aspect Design Build LLC (Developer), 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue N, including PIDs 29-118-23-43-0013, 29-118-23-44-0004 & 29-118-23-44-0006 Subdivision: Preliminary Plat Public Hearing PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW Conformity with 2020 – 2040 Orono Community Management Plan The 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the properties for Rural Residential which allows 1 unit per 2 acres. The site is 17.25 acres in area ending at the OHWL of Lake Classen. The plat includes an outlot for a new road and a portion of land to be added to the neighboring property to the east. The proposal would create six buildable lots. This would be calculated at 0.34 units per acre, well below the density guide from the comprehensive plan of 0.5 units per acre. Conformity with Zoning District Standards The properties are currently zoned RR-1B One Family Rural Residential (5.0 acre). All of the newly created parcels conform to the current RR-1B zoning district as it relates to size and width. The existing structures will be removed (except the outbuilding on Lot 2 which will remain). New buildings constructed must meet the required zoning district standards as no variances have been requested. The properties are outside of the MUSA and will be served by private septic systems. Relationship to Surrounding Development The proposed 6-lot single-family development with 2-plus acre lot sizes is relatively isolated and is bookended by two 3 to 4+ acre residential properties on the east and the west. The 20+ acre Susan B. Lurton Off-Leash Dog Park (City of Orono) abuts the property on the south and Baker Park (Three Rivers Park District) is across CSAH 6 to the north. The development will be consistent with its residential neighbors. Application Summary: This application involves five individual tax parcels, 2 containing existing homes, and contemplates preliminary plat approval to create six, 2+ acre buildable lots and a private road. applicant requests preliminary plat approval to create a 6-lot plat in the RR-1B district. The following is proposed: 1. Lot 1: 2.5 total acres; 2.3 dry, buildable acres. 2. Lot 2: 3.2 total acres; 3.26 dry, buildable acres. 3. Lot 3: A lakeshore lot with 2.75 total acres; 2.1 dry, buildable acres. 4. Lot 4: A lakeshore lot with 4.45 total acres; 2.02 dry, buildable acres. 5. Lot 5: 2.0 total acres; there is a small wetland shared with Lot 6.* 6. Lot 6: 2.0 total acres; there is a very, small wetland shared with Lot 5.* All of the roads will be served by a new, private road with a cul-de-sac extending south from Hennepin County Road 6 (CSAH 6). All lots will be served by private wells and septic systems. *The wetland square footage is not called out for Lots 5 and 6. The dry buildable acreage should be confirmed. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission should review all of the issues identified within the report and provide direction to the Developer. 188 FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 2 of 5 General Site Characteristics The site to be platted as “Honey Hill on Lake Classen” currently contains two developed residential homes with outbuildings, open meadow or pasture areas, wetlands, and some wooded areas along the south portions of the property. The property also abuts Lake Classen which is classified by the DNR as a Natural Environment Lake and requires a 150-foot structure and building setback from the OHWL. A wetland delineation has been completed and the wetlands have been depicted on the preliminary plat drawing with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District- required buffers (“MCWD”). The City has received a copy of the delineation; the MCWD currently has the delineation under review. Road Layout and Standards A 50-foot wide outlot containing a 24-foot wide paved, private road ending in a cul-de-sac is proposed to serve the development. The road extends for 650 feet accessing south of CSAH 6. A split entrance is proposed to create a landscaping island for the development identification sign, 55 feet from the paved county road. The paved width has been increased to 30 feet in this area, and a 6’ x 48’ pavement opening is provided to accommodate the sign and any landscaping. Rural Oasis + Conservation Design + Wetlands The Developer’s engineer, Anderson Engineering prepared a Conservation Design Master Plan (CDMP) for the development following the Conservation Design requirements outlined within Chapter 78, Article XII (beginning with Section. 78-1631). The Honey Hill CDMP reviewed the development against the City’s Rural Oasis Study, and provided an overview of the property relating to Drainage, Land Use, Natural Resources Inventory, Public Waters Inventory, and Wetlands. The property is directly adjacent to CSAH 6, a corridor identified in Orono’s Rural Oasis Study (R.O.S) The Study identifies the corridor along CSAH 6 from Brown Road to Highway 12, as an Open Enclosure Corridor. The R.O.S defines Open Enclosure Corridors as having “Long views beyond the right of way, and no real sense of corridor enclosure.” Positive views of the natural landscape extending from Open Enclosure Corridors are tied to the rural feel of the area. The CDMP determined that novel “non-rural” land uses such as new residential or industrial structures, can threaten the rural character of the open corridors identified in the study. The study identified potential solutions to these threats through ecological and conservation design measures such as berming, landscaping, and planting techniques that preserve the rural character of the area. According to the CDMP report, the plan for the site includes integrating the existing natural environment in a way that will minimize negative impacts on the current rural character as described in the Rural Oasis Study. Landscaping and planting along the northern boundary of the property will be utilized to preserve the positive and natural viewsheds identified along CSAH 6. The development will not impact the natural viewshed of Lake Classen, regardless of travel direction (east or west) along CSAH 6. The Honey Hill CDMP concluded that the project would not have a significant impact on these resources, nor would it negatively impact the rural character of the City of Orono. This CDMP determination was made considering the following factors: 1. The inventoried natural resources and ecologic communities primarily occur on the periphery of the site 2. Site development plans are focused on areas of the site that have already been impacted by human development, thus the risk of impacting the remaining resources and ecological communities is minimized. 3. The site development plans maintain the rural character of the City of Orono through the necessary site design plans, as described in the Rural Oasis Study. 4. The site development plans follow the City of Orono’s Shoreland Overlay District building setback standards and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District wetland buffer standards. 189 FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 3 of 5 Lot Layout + Lot Standards – RR-1B, Rural Residential The RR-1B district has a minimum lot area requirement of 2.0 dry, contiguous acres and 200 feet in width. For non- lakeshore lots, the width is measured at the 50-foot front building setback along the roadway. For lakeshore lots, the minimum 200-foot width must be met when measured in a straight line between the points at which the side lot lines intersect the 974.5’ OHWL contour for Lake Classen, and at the required 150-foot structure setback from the OHWL, measured in a straight line between the points of intersection of the side lot lines with the 150-foot structure setback line. Lot 1: Proposed Lot 1 will have 2.5 total acres; 2.3 acres is upland. This lot will have almost 400 feet of frontage on the new private road and ±320 feet of frontage on Cty Rd 6. There are two wetland areas on the property. An approximately 1.0 acre building envelope is proposed. A stormwater basin is proposed on the east side of the larger wetland on the property with a culvert maintaining the existing connection to the wetland straddling Lots 5 and 6. A building pad is proposed to be created for a home with a first-floor elevation of 994’, in addition to a potential building pad for an ADU (984’). A second driveway access for the ADU is proposed. Lot 2: Lot 2 is shown with 3.2 total acres; and 3.26 dry, buildable acres. The property has a total width of 235 feet on the road; 94 feet are cul-de-sac. 268 feet of the continued front property line abuts Lot 3. The eastern property line continues for 268 feet south of the cul-de-sac. The existing accessory building is proposed to remain on the property. This lot shares a wetland with Lot 1 and has a small wetland shared with Lurton Park on the south. This lot will have approximately 1.7 acres of building envelope; a building pad for a home with a 1002’ first-floor elevation is shown to be graded by the developer. A stormwater basin is shown on the northwest corner of the property near the wetland. Lot 3: Lot 3 is a proposed lakeshore lot with 2.75 total acres; and 2.1 dry, buildable acres. There is an approximate 1.0 acre building envelope. The connection to the cul-de-sac is over a 40-foot-wide driveway corridor. Lot 3 contains a large, wetland shared with Lot 4 which separates the majority of the lot from the lake. The width of the lot is 240 feet measured at the OHWL and 230 feet measured diagonally at the 150-foot setback. The developer is proposing a building pad for a home with a first-floor elevation of 1000’; a small stormwater basin to the west of the 75-foot wetland buffer (from the large wetland) is also proposed. Lot 4: A lakeshore lot with 4.45 total acres; 2.02 dry, buildable acres. This lot has 313 feet in width measured at the OHWL, and 318 feet at the 150-foot setback. This lot has a total of 174 feet of frontage on the development road, partially on the cul-de-sac. As with Lot 3, this lot contains a large, wetland that separates the majority of the lot from the lake. Lot 4 contains the larger portion of this wetland. A building pad is proposed for a first-floor elevation of 1002’. A common drainage swale is proposed on the shared boundary with Lot 3. Lot 5: Lot 5 is 300+ feet wide on the road, and has 2.0 total acres; no wetlands. A building pad with a first-floor elevation of 997’ is shown in addition to a potential building pad for an ADU (986.7’). A second driveway access for the ADU is shown. Lot 6: Lot 6 has a nearly 1.0-acre building envelope, 258 feet along the new private road, and 296 feet on Sixth Avenue. The rear of the lot abuts the driveway to the neighboring property to the east at 3405 Sixth Avenue North. The developer’s plan reflects the creation of Outlot B, which is the eastern 20 feet of the existing outlot containing the driveway to 3405 Sixth Avenue N. Outlot B is not included in the area for Lot 6 which has 2.0 total acres. A building pad for a home with a first-floor elevation of 997’ is shown to be created. 190 FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 4 of 5 Landscaping + Tree Preservation A landscape plan has been provided. City Code Section 82-225(b) stipulates deciduous trees (“boulevard trees”) are to be planted within five feet of the right-of-way of the roads within and abutting the subdivision. One tree shall be planted for every 40 feet of frontage along each road. The proposed landscape plan reflects 31 deciduous trees (including golden weeping willow, honey locust, spring snow crab, and Swedish columnar aspen), and four Eastern white pine in addition to various grasses, perennials, and shrubs – both evergreen and deciduous. The landscape plan is attached as Exhibit K. There are approximately 1,920 linear feet of road frontage requiring 48 trees. According to the schedule, 13 more trees should be provided to conform. The Developer is proposing to create tree preservation areas (Exhibit L). Tree preservation is proposed at the entrance corners and along the first 15-20 feet of the CSAH 6 frontage of Lots 1 and 6, and on the first 10 to 18 feet of the private property abutting the private road on Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6. A 35-foot by 155-foot tree preservation area is proposed on the east side of Lot 5 to protect trees planted by the owners of 3405 Sixth Avenue North by an informal agreement with the previous property owners. The tree preservation language is included in the Developer’s draft HOA Declaration (Exhibit O). Stormwater Drainage Trunk Fee + Stormwater Drainage Improvements Stormwater facilities will be required. The Developer has completed a stormwater and grading plan which is currently under review by the City Engineer and the MCWD. Their plan reflects grading and stormwater basins to address stormwater resulting from the new hardcover of the development. The plan has not been finalized but it is not likely that amendments to the plan will require adjustments to the proposed property boundaries or orientations. The final, approved stormwater and grading plan will be required as part of the final plat application submittals. Park/Trail Easement + Park Fees or Dedication The Parks, Open Space, and Trail Plan chapter of the Orono Comprehensive Plan does not specify the need for a neighborhood park at this location. Three River’s Baker Park is a regional park located to the north of the property. The City of Orono has Lurton Dog Park to the south abutting the proposed development. As there is no defined need for park land at this location, it would appear that the dedication of actual land for park purposes is not required. Absent the need for park land dedication, a Park Dedication Fee instead of land would be appropriate according to the City Ordinance. Park Dedication: The proposed application is anticipated to pay a park dedication fee in lieu of providing land for the newly created lots. The Park Dedication Fee is determined by the fair market value of the land being subdivided. The Hennepin County Assessor will be consulted to determine the market value of the land to establish the amount of the fee. Issues for Discussion 1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the Developer’s findings in the Conservation Design Master Plan? If not, what is lacking? 2. Does the Commission find the proposed plan preserves the existing rural “Open Enclosure” character along the CSAH 6 corridor? 3. The City’s landscaping requirements call for 13 additional boulevard trees. The Commission should ask for addition testimony from the application regarding the tree and landscaping plan. Are existing trees to remain accounted for in the plan? Does the Developer’s plan provide the desired natural aesthetic? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval for the proposed 6-lot subdivision with the following conditions before consideration by the City Council: 191 FILE #LA24-000030 17 June 2024 Page 5 of 5 1. MCWD approval of the wetland delineation and stormwater plans 2. Updated Septic Design 3. Updated Landscaping and tree plan 192 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/22/2024 Address:3465 6th AVE North Orono, MN 55356 Parcel Number:2911823430011 Land Use Number:LA24-000030 Application Submitted By:Agent on behalf of property owner Owner:Name: Under contract: Aspect Design Build LLC Address: 422 Second St Excelsior, MN 55331 Applicant:Name: Shaun Winkler Company: Aspect Design Build LLC Address: 422 Second St Excelsior, MN 55331 shaun@aspectdesignbuild.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Tom Preissing tom@aspectdesignbuild.com Associated Contact: Tom Bloom tom@advsur.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Subdivision of PIDs 2911823430011, 2911823430013, 291182344004, 291182344006, 291182343002 into a 6 lot subdivision. Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 193 422 Second Street Excelsior, MN 55331 612-300-0025 Project Narrative Summary –Aspect Design Build is excited to submit a Preliminary Plat for review on this beautiful, 17+ acre site with both varied elevation and vegetation. It features long views of beautiful Lake Classen to the east and a striking mix of rolling topography coupled with a variety of trees. Around the time of WWI, while owned by the Butterfield family, the land was home to a large bee business and at one point in time was the largest producer of honey in the state. The Butterfield’s called their business Honey Hill. With that heritage in mind, the intent of Honey Hill on Classen is to keep the existing rural, rugged character full of diverse trees and vegetation intact while enhancing the land by creating six unique lots from the existing land. We also intend to bring in pollinator friendly flora along the private drive, in order to provide a haven for the struggling honeybee population with the hope of adding honeybee colonies in the future. Details - -The site consists of two existing property addresses, 3515 and 3465 Sixth Ave N located in the RR-1B zoning district. -The proposed Preliminary Plat includes a total of six lots ranging from 2-4.5 acres for new single-family homes with two homesites having frontage on the “natural” classified Lake Classen. Each lot will be served by a private well and septic system. All proposed lots conform to the minimum design standards of the RR-1B zoning code. -We are proposing to pave (asphalt) and expand over existing shared dirt driveway with a cul-de-sac bulb at the end and naming the road Honey Hill Lane. -New electric, gas, and cable/internet utilities will be brought in underground along the proposed new road. -Honey Hill will be controlled by an HOA consisting of the six homesite owners. The covenants are intended to not only keep, but enhance the inherent natural character of the land. To that end, outside of the outlot for Honey Hill Lane, there are landscape areas along both the proposed private road and County Road 6, specified on the tree mitigation and landscape plan which will be maintained by the HOA. The Conservation Design Report will call out additional details relating to buckthorn and nuisance tree removal. - In conjunction with input from the neighbors to the east (at 3405 Sixth Ave N), there will be a tree preservation area on the northeast portion of proposed lot 5. -All current structures on both sites would be razed, apart from the existing red barn on 3515. 194 422 Second Street Excelsior, MN 55331 612-300-0025 Honey Hill on Lake Classen Map 195 Pa r c e l 1 Parcel 2 6th Avenue (Henn. Co. Highway No. 6)Lake C l a s s e n Lo t 4 Lo t 5 8 7 , 1 9 1 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 0 A c r e s ) Lo t 6 8 7 , 2 8 1 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 0 A c r e s ) Lo t 3 Lot 1109,059 S q . F t . ( 2 . 5 0 A c r e s ) Lot 2143,663 Sq. Ft. (3.30 Acres)Dry 100, 2 5 5 S q . F t . ( 2 . 3 0 A c r e s ) 120 , 197 S q . F t . (2 .75 A c r e s t o O HW L i n e)Dr y 9 1 ,637 Sq . F t . (2 . 10 A c r e s) 1 9 3 , 5 8 5 S q . F t . ( 4 . 4 5 A c r e s t o O H W L i n e ) D r y 8 8 , 1 9 7 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 2 A c r e s )ON LAKE CLASSENDry 142,147 Sq. Ft. (3.26 Acr e s )PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY HILL Outlot A # 42379LICENSE NO.Thomas M. BloomDATE:DATE DRAFTED:CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET TITLESHEET NUMBERSHEET 1 OF 4S1PRELIMINARYPLATMAY 21, 2024MAY, 2024Phone (952) 474-7964Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE240226 TBMAY 21, 2024DRAWING NUMBERDATE SURVEYED:120600SHEET SIZE22 X 34SCALE - 1" = 60'LEGENDASPECTDESIGNBUILD3465 & 35156TH AVENUENORTHORONO, MN18202 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 401Deephaven, Minnesota 55391LEGAL DESCRIPTION:Parcel 1:Lot 2, Block 1, and Outlot C, Craddock Ledstrom Estates, Hennepin County, Minnesota;AndThat part of the West Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying South of the South line ofLot 3, Block 1, Craddock Ledstrorn Estates, East of the West line of said Lot 3, Block 1, CraddockLedstrom Estates, extended Southerly, and West of the East line of said Lot 3, Block 1, CraddockLedstrom Estates, extended Southerly, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Abstract PropertyAndParcel 2:Lot 3, Block 1;That part of Outlot A, embraced within the plat of Rocky Knoll, Craddock Ledstrom Estates,Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens property.ANDThe West 20 rods of that part of the West 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 29, Township 118North, Range 23, West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described asfollows: Commencing at a point 29 rods East of center of said Section 29, Township 118, Range 23;thence at right angles South 160 rods to Section line; thence at right angles East 40 rods; thence atright angles North 160 rods to East and West line through center of said section; thence at rightangles West 40 rods to point of beginning lying Southerly of the center line of County Road,EXCEPT, Parcels 98A and Parcel 99 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of WayPlat Numbered 27-162.SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS:1.Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. Thescope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter.Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, ifnecessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements, thatyou wish to be included on the survey have been shown.2.Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey.3.Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of theproperty.4.Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topography ofthe site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations forconstruction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on thissurvey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey whendetermining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning construction.STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS:"●" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted.EXISTING INFORMATION:Owner and subdivider:Aspect Design Build422 2nd Street, Excelsior, MN 55331Area of existing property excluding Knoll Drive and up to the OHW line:751,587 Sq. Ft.17.25 AcresAddress:3515 & 3465 6th Avenue NorthOrono, MNPROPOSED INFORMATION:Hardcover designations:Lots 1, 2 5, and 6, are Tier 3, and Lots 3 and 4 are Tier 1.Lot areas of proposed lots:Lot 1- 112,724 Sq. Ft. (2.59 Acres)Lot 1 Dry - 104,478 Sq. Ft. (2.40 Acres)Lot 2 - 132,048 Sq. Ft. (3.03 Acres)Lot 3 - 124,371 Sq. Ft. (2.86 Acres to OHW line)Lot 3 Dry - 87,425 Sq. Ft. (2.00 Acres)Lot 4 - 193,925 Sq. Ft. (4.45 Acres to OHW line)Lot 4 Dry - 87,105 Sq. Ft. (2.00 Acres)Lot 5 - 87,191 Sq. Ft. (2.00 Acres)Lot 6 - 87,281 Sq. Ft. (2.00 Acres)196 984 982980 980 978 976 974988992 990 994 996 998 998996994992 99 8 99 6 9 9 4 992 990 988 9 8 6 9 8 4 9 8 2 9809969949 9 2 1000 998 996 994 99 2 992990994990 988 988 986 9849789 8 0 9 8 2 9 9 2 990988 98 6988986 984986988 9 8 2 9809 8 2 980 25.00 25.00 25.009 9 0 986 74.07 75.00 71.00 72.89 25.00 PLOTTED:COMM. NO. DRAWING NO. ----XXXXX MASTER GRADING PLAN 1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e n u e N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1 | a e -m n .c o m P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C DRAWING TITLE CHECKED BY:DRAWN:DESIGNED: XXXXXXXXX DATE REVISION LOG DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONSNO.DATE HONEY HILL ON LAKE CLASSEN 3465-3515 6TH AVE N. ORONO, MN 55356 ASPECT DESIGN BUILD PROJECT PHASE STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA LOT 4 FFE: 1002' GFE: 1000' B: 992' LOT 5 FFE: 997' GFE: 995' B: 987' LOT 6 GFE: 994' FFE: 997' B: 987' WETLAND BUFFER N 0 60'120' WETLAND DELINEATION LOT 3 FFE: 1000' GFE: 998' B: 990' LOT 2 FFE: 1002' GFE: 1000' B: 992' LOT 1 FFE: 994' GFE: 992' B: 984' ADU SLAB: 984' ADU SLAB: 986.7' EX. BLDG TO REMAIN WETLAND 1 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 4-1 WETLAND 3 BASIN 2 BASIN 3 BASIN 4 987 990 PROPOSED MINOR CONT. PROPOSED MAJOR CONT. BASIN 1 BASIN 1 - 100YR HWL: 981.72, EOF: 981.20 BASIN 2 - 100YR HWL: 981.94, EOF: 981.50 BASIN 3 - 100YR HWL: 981.99, EOF: 981.50 BASIN 4 - 100YR HWL: 983.94, EOF: 984.70 EXHIBIT C 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 May 17, 2024 HGTS Project Number: 24-0323 Mr. Tom Preissing Aspect Design Build 422 2nd Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Residential Development, 3456 6th Avenue N, Orono, Minnesota Dear Mr. Preissing: We have completed the geotechnical exploration report for the proposed residential development in Orono. A brief summary of our results and recommendations is presented below. Specific details regarding our procedures, results and recommendations follow in the attached geotechnical exploration report. Three soil borings were completed for this project that encountered topsoil or aggregate base at the surface that was underlain by sandy lean clay glacial till that extended to the termination depths of the borings. Groundwater was not encountered in the soil borings while drilling and sampling or after removing the augers from the boreholes. The vegetation, topsoil are not suitable for roadway or utility support and will need to be removed and replaced, as needed, with suitable compacted engineered fill. It is our opinion that the underlying native glacial till soils are generally suitable for roadway and utility however portions of the clayey soils had a soft consistency and some corrections to remove the soft clays could be required. Thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Paul Gionfriddo at 612-729-2959. Sincerely, Haugo GeoTechnical Services Paul Gionfriddo, P.E. Senior Engineer 204 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT PROJECT: Proposed Residential Development 3456 6th Avenue N Orono, Minnesota PREPARED FOR: Aspect Design Build 422 2nd Street Excelsior, MN 55331 PREPARED BY: Haugo GeoTechnical Services 2825 Cedar Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55407 Haugo GeoTechnical Services Project: 24-0323 May 17, 2024 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Paul Gionfriddo, P.E. Senior Engineer License Number: 23093 205 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Project Description 1 1.2 Purpose 1 1.3 Site Description 1 1.4 Scope of Services 1 1.5 Documents Provided 2 1.6 Locations and Elevations 2 2.0 FIELD PROCEDURES 2 3.0 RESULTS 3 3.1 Soil Conditions 3 3.2 Groundwater 3 3.3 Laboratory Testing 3 3.4 OSHA Soil Classification 4 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 4.1 Proposed Construction 4 4.2 Discussion 5 4.3 Roadways & Utilities 6 4.4 Pavements 7 4.5 Materials 8 4.6 Stormwater Ponds/Infiltration Basins 8 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 9 5.1 Excavation 9 5.2 Observations 9 5.3 Backfill and Fills 9 5.4 Testing 9 5.5 Winter Construction 9 6.0 PROCEDURES 10 6.1 Soil Classification 10 6.2 Groundwater Observations 10 7.0 GENERAL 10 7.1 Subsurface Variations 10 7.2 Review of Design 10 7.3 Groundwater Fluctuations 11 7.4 Use of Report 11 7.5 Level of Care 11 APPENDIX Boring Location Sketch, Figure 1 Soil Boring Logs, SB-1 thru SB-3 Descriptive Terminology 206 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description Aspect Design Build (Aspect) is preparing for construction of a residential development in Orono, Minnesota and retained Haugo GeoTechnical Services (HGTS) to perform a geotechnical exploration to evaluate the suitability of site soil conditions to support the proposed development. Three soil borings were requested. Two (2) boring were requested within a gravel drive that will be upgraded to a paved street and one boring requested for use in designing a stormwater management area. 1.2 Purpose The purpose of this geotechnical exploration was to characterize subsurface soil and groundwater conditions and provide recommendations for pavement design and construction and to provide estimated soil infiltration rates for stormwater management system design. 1.3 Site Description The project site is located 3465 and 3515 6th Avenue N in Orono. Combined the 2 parcels total about 13.8 acres. At the time of this exploration the 2 lots contained multiple single-family homes, a pole barn and some smaller sheds. The lots contained open spaces, wetlands and wooded areas. Access to the homes was via a gravel driveway (vacated Rocky Knoll Drive). The site topography across the lots varied and ranged from about 978 to 1000 feet above mean sea level (msl). The ground surface elevations at the soil boring locations ranged from about 983 to 997 feet msl. 1.4 Scope of Services Our services were performed in accordance with the Haugo GeoTechnical Services proposal 24-0073 dated January 30, 2024. Our scope of services was performed under the terms of our General Conditions and limited to the following tasks: Completing 3 standard penetration test soil borings each extending to nominal depths of 10 feet. Sealing the borings in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health requirements. Obtaining GPS coordinates and ground surface elevations at the soil boring locations. Visually/manually classifying samples recovered from the soil borings. Performing laboratory moisture content and P-200 content tests on selected samples. Preparing soil boring logs describing the materials encountered and the results of groundwater level measurements. Preparing an engineering report describing soil and groundwater conditions and providing recommendations for pavement design and construction and providing estimated soil infiltration rates for stormwater management system design. 207 2 1.5 Documents Provided We were provided a plan sheet that was titled “Proposed Soil Boring Locations” that was prepared by Advance Surveying & Engineering Co. The plan sheet was not dated. The plan sheet generally consisted of a property survey or preliminary plat that was edited to show the proposed boring locations. Based on the plan sheet it appears the properties will be redeveloped to include 6 residential lots. Other than the documents described above, specific architectural, structural or civil plans were not available at the time of this geotechnical evaluation. 1.6 Locations and Elevations The soil borings were selected by Aspect Design Build and were staked in the field by HGTS. The approximate locations of the soil borings are shown on Figure 1, “Soil Boring Location Sketch,” in the Appendix. The sketch was prepared by HGTS using an aerial image from Google Earth as a base. HGTS obtained the GPS coordinates and ground surface elevations at the soil boring locations using GPS technology based on the US State Plane Coordinate System. GPS coordinates and ground surface elevations are shown on Figure 1 in the Appendix. 2.0 FIELD PROCEDURES The 3 standard penetration test borings were advanced on May 10th, 2024 by HGTS with a rotary drilling rig, using continuous flight augers to advance the boreholes. Representative samples were obtained from the borings, using the split-barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM Specification D-1586. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a 2-inch O.D. split-barrel spoon is driven into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of an 18-inch penetration is recorded as the standard penetration resistance value, or "N" value. The results of the standard penetration tests are indicated on the boring logs. The samples were sealed in containers and provided to HGTS for testing and soil classification. A field log of each boring was prepared by HGTS. The logs contain visual classifications of the soil materials encountered during drilling, as well as the driller's interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples and water observation notes. The final boring logs included with this report represents an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on visual/manual method observation of the samples. The soil boring logs, general terminology for soil description and identification, and classification of soils for engineering purposes are also included in the appendix. The soil boring log identify and describe the materials encountered, the relative density or consistency based on the Standard Penetration resistance (N-value, “blows per foot”) and groundwater observations. 208 3 The strata changes were inferred from the changes in the samples and auger cuttings. The depths shown as changes between strata are only approximate. The changes are likely transitions, variations can occur beyond the location of the boring. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Soil Conditions Soil borings SB-1 and SB-3 were completed within or near the gravel driveway. Soil boring SB-1 encountered about 5 inches of aggregate that appeared to be a crushed limestone product. The surficial soils at boring SB-3 consisted of silty sand and gravel that was dark brown to black in coloration and did not appear to be an aggregate base material. The material may have initially been placed as aggregate base but may degraded over time, possibly to traffic and/or freeze-thaw cycles. For these reasons the surficial soils at SB-3 were identified as Possible Aggregate Base. Soil boring SB-2 was completed within the proposed stormwater management area and encountered about 2 feet of sandy lean clay topsoil that was black in color and judged to be slightly organic to organic. Below the topsoil, aggregate base or Possible Aggregate Base, the soil borings encountered native sandy lean clay glacial till that extended to the termination depths of the borings. The glacial till soils were mostly brown in color. N-Values within the sandy lean clay glacial till ranged from 5 to 13 bpf with most of the values ranging from about 7 to 10 bpf. These values indicate the clayey glacial till had a rather soft to stiff consistency but were mostly medium to rather stiff. 3.2 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in the soil boring while drilling and sampling or after removing the augers from the boreholes. Groundwater appears to be below the depths explored by our borings. Water levels were measured on the dates as noted on the boring logs and the period of water level observations was relatively short. Given the cohesive nature of the soils encountered, it is possible that insufficient time was available for groundwater to seep into the borings and rise to its hydrostatic level. Seasonal and annual fluctuations in the groundwater levels should be expected. Groundwater monitoring wells or piezometers in conjunction with deeper soil boring(s) would be required to more accurately determine water levels. 3.3 Laboratory Testing Laboratory moisture content and percent passing the #200 sieve (P-200) tests were performed on selected samples recovered from the soil borings. Moisture contents within the clayey subgrade soils ranged from about 20 to 26 ½ percent. These values indicate that the soils were likely above their assumed optimum moisture content based on the standard Proctor test. 209 4 The P-200 content is a measure of the silt and clay sized particle of a sample. The P-200 contents within the aggregate base or Possible Aggregate Base ranged from about 4 ½ to 26 ½ percent. New MN/DOT Class 5 aggregate base has a P-200 content ranging from 3 to 10 percent. The P-200 content of the Possible Aggregate base at boring SB-3 was significantly greater than MN/DOT requirements and therefore does not meet MNDOT requirements. The aggregate base at SB-1 had a P-200 content within the range for MN/DOT aggregate base. Laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1 and are also shown on the boring logs adjacent to the sample tested. Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Tests Boring Number Sample Number Depth (feet) Moisture Content (%) * P-200 Content (%) * SB-1 AU-1 Aggregate Base 16 4 ½ SB-1 SS-2 2 ½ 26 ½ - SB-2 SS-8 5 22 ½ 56 ½ SB-3 AU-11 Aggregate Base 19 ½ 26 ½ SB-3 SS-13 5 20 - *Moisture content and P-200 contents were rounded to the nearest ½ percent. 3.4 OSHA Soil Classification Below the topsoil or aggregate base, the soils encountered in the borings consisted of sandy lean clay meeting the ASTM Classification of CL. These soils will generally be Type B soils under Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines. An OSHA-approved qualified person should review the soil classification in the field. Excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. The project specifications should reference these OSHA requirements. 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Proposed Construction We understand the project will include reconstructing the existing gravel driveway as a bituminous paved roadway and will also include constructing a stormwater management pond. We assume that new underground utilities could also be installed as part of roadway construction. We were not provided any information regarding roadway grades and for the purposes of this evaluation we do not anticipate any significant changes in the roadway alignment or roadway grades however we assume the driveway will be widened to meet city standards. Permanent grade changes, if any, are anticipated to be less than 3 feet. Underground utilities, if any are anticipated to bear at depths ranging from about 5 to 10 feet below the ground surface. 210 5 Changes in the nature, design or location of all or parts of this project may occur. If so, we should be informed as additional analysis and revised recommendations may be necessary. 4.2 Discussion Aggregate Base/Possible Aggregate Base Soil borings SB-1 and SB-3 were completed within or near the gravel driveway. Soil boring SB-1 encountered about 5 inches of aggregate that appeared to be a crushed limestone product. The aggregate base at SB-1 had a P-200 content within the range for MN/DOT aggregate base which suggest that the material might be suitable for reuse as Class 5 Aggregate base. If the material will be salvaged and reused additional samples should be collected and analyzed to confirm that the material meets the full gradation requirements for MN/DOT Class 5 aggregate base. The Possible Aggregate base at boring SB-3 had a P-200 content of about 26 ½ percent which was significantly greater than MN/DOT requirements. The aggregate base at boring SB-3 will likely not be suitable for reuse as MN/DOT Class 5 aggregate base. Subgrade Soils New watermain, storm sewer and sanitary sewer utilities could be installed as part of this project. We anticipate that new utilities will bear at depths ranging from about 5 to 10 feet below the ground surface. At these depths, we anticipate that the pipes will bear on medium to stiff native glacial till soils or compacted engineered fill which in our opinion are suitable for pipe support. The clayey glacial till soil in our opinion are suitable for pavement support. However, these soils are moderately to highly frost susceptible and can heave if they become saturated and heave. To reduce the effects of frost heave you may wish to consider using a 12 to 18-inch- thick drained sand sub-base below the aggregate base course. Portion of the clayey soil had a rather soft consistency and because of that some soft soils could be encountered during utility installation and/or during proof-rolling of the roadway subgrade. Soft soils, if any, will need to be removed and replaced with suitable compacted engineered fill or excavated, dried and recompacted. Soils that cannot be dried and recompacted may need to be replaced with suitable materials. Laboratory Moisture Contents Laboratory moisture content of the clayey soils ranged from about 20 to 26 ½ percent indicating that the soils were likely above their assumed optimum soil moisture content. Clayey soils that will be reused as fill or backfill will likely need to moisture conditioned (dried) to meet the recommend compaction levels. Summer months are typically more favorable for drying wet clays. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in the soil boring while drilling and sampling or after removing the augers from the boreholes. We do not anticipate that groundwater will be encountered during construction and do not anticipate that dewatering will be required. 211 6 4.3 Roadways & Utilities Excavations The existing gravel surfacing (aggregate base), especially at boring SB-3, has likely been compromised over time and will likely not be reusable as “new” aggregate base and should not be relied upon or substituted for “new” aggregate base. We therefore recommend that the existing gravel surfacing be moved to accommodate the new gravel section. As noted above the aggregate base at SB-1 might be suitable for reuse but should be tested to confirm that it meets MN/DOT requirements. Where the roadway is widened, we recommend that all vegetation and topsoil and any other soft or otherwise unsuitable materials, be removed from below the roadway and oversize areas. Table 2 summarizes the anticipated excavation depths at the boring locations. Since the borings were spaced fairly far apart excavation depths could vary and could be deeper. Table 2. Anticipated Soil Excavation Depths Boring Number Estimated Surface Elevation (feet) Anticipated Excavation Depths (feet)* Anticipated Excavation Elevation (feet)* Anticipated Groundwater Elevation (feet)* SB-1 985.9 ½ 985 ½ NE SB-2 982.8 2 (Pond) 981 (Cut to grade) NE SB-3 997.0 2 995 NE * = Excavation depths and elevation were rounded to the nearest ½ foot. Oversizing In areas where the excavations extend below the proposed pavement or utility elevations, the excavation requires oversizing. We recommend the perimeter of the excavation be extended a foot outside the proposed footprint for every foot below finish grade (1H:1V oversizing). The purpose of the oversizing is to provide lateral support of the pavement or utility. Selecting Replacement Backfill Additional fill will likely be required for embankment construction and to replace any topsoil or any soft or otherwise unsuitable materials. Where the excavations bottoms are wet or submerged, if any, we recommend initially backfilling to a height no less than 2 feet above the excavation bottom or water surface with imported coarse sand having less than 50 percent of its particles by weight passing the #40 sieve and less than 5 percent of its particles passing a #200 sieve, such as MN/DOT 3149.2B2. Alternately “clear rock” (coarse filter aggregate) can be used in wet excavations. Fill and backfill above the water table can consist of any debris free, non-organic mineral soil. Topsoil, organic soils or soils that are black in color are not suitable for use or reuse as structural fill or backfill. Backfilling & Compaction We assume that new pavements will be constructed over the top of the utility trench(s) and that soil excavated for pipe installation will be placed back in the excavations, to the greatest extent possible. It is our opinion that the on-site soil encountered in the borings is generally suitable for re-use as fill and backfill provided it is free of topsoil, organic soils or other unsuitable materials. We do not recommend re-using topsoil, buried 212 7 topsoil, organic soils or any soils that are black in color for pipe support or for fill or backfill below roadways. Laboratory moisture content of the clayey soils indicated that the soils were likely above their assumed optimum soil moisture content. Clayey soils that will be reused as fill or backfill will likely need to moisture conditioned (dried) to meet the recommend compaction levels. Summer months are typically more favorable for drying wet clays. We recommend bedding material be thoroughly compacted around the pipes. We recommend that engineered fill placed to establish pavement grades be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698), the exception being within 3 feet of the proposed pavement subgrade, where 100 percent of standard Proctor density is required. In landscaped areas, if any, we recommend a minimum compaction of 90 percent. Granular fill classified as SP or SP-SM, if used, should be placed within 65 percent to 105 percent of its optimum moisture content as determined by the standard Proctor. Other fill soils should be placed within 3 percentage points above and 1 percentage point below its optimum moisture content as determined by the standard Proctor. All fill should be placed in thin lifts and be compacted with a large self-propelled vibratory compactor operating in vibratory mode. Fill and backfill placed on slopes must be “benched” into the underlying suitable soil to reduce the potential for slip planes to develop between the fill and underlying soil. Likewise, any fill placed for embankment construction should be “benched” into the existing roadway embankment. We recommend “benching” or excavating into the slope at 5 feet vertical intervals to key the fill into the slope. We recommend each bench be a minimum of 10 feet wide. Prior to placing/replacing the aggregate base (Class 5) we recommend compacting and/or proof-rolling the subgrade soil to provide a more uniform surface and to identify soft, weak, loose or unstable areas that may require additional subcuts or corrections. Backfill, if needed, to attain pavement subgrade elevation can consist of any mineral soil provided it is free of organic material or other deleterious materials. 4.4 Pavements General The City of Orono may have standard plates that dictate pavement design. If so , we recommend that the pavements be designed and constructed in accordance with the city standard plates. The following paragraphs provide general pavement recommendations in the absence of city standard plates. Traffic & Street Section Based on the plan provide, the new street will provide access to about 6 single family residences. We assume the street will be used mostly by automobiles and light truck but will also include some heaver single-unit trucks such as garbage trucks, school busses, and delivery vans. Based on the assumed traffic types and traffic volumes we estimate that the pavements will be subjected to Equivalent Single Axle Loads (SEAL’s) significantly less than 50,000 over a 20-year design life. This value has not account for any future growth. 213 8 R-Value The underlying subgrade soils were composed of sandy lean clay corresponding to the ASTM classification of CL. Soils meeting the ASTM Classification CL typically have R- Values ranging from 6 to 18. It is our opinion that an R-value of 10 can be used for pavement design. Pavement Section Based on an estimated R-value of 10 and a maximum of 50,000 ESAL’s we recommend pavement section consisting of a minimum of 3 ½ inches of bituminous (2 inches of wear course and 2 inches of base course) underlain by a minimum of 9 inches of aggregate base. 4.5 Materials We recommend aggregate base meeting MN/DOT Specification 3138 for Class 5 aggregate base. We recommend the aggregate base be compacted to 100 percent of its maximum standard Proctor dry density or to meet MN/DOT Dynamic Cone Penetration testing specifications. We recommend that the bituminous wear and base courses meet the requirements of MN/DOT Specification 2360. We suggest using mix type SPNWB330C for the Non-Wear course(s) and mix type SPWEB340C for the Wear course. We recommend the bituminous pavements be compacted to at least 93% of the maximum theoretical density for mix type SPNWB330C and 92% of the maximum theoretical density for mix type SPWEB340C. The improvements will include concrete curb and gutter repair. We recommend specifying concrete that has a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,500 psi. We recommend specifying 5 to 8 percent entrained air for exposed concrete to provide resistance to freeze- thaw deterioration. We recommend slump, air content and compressive strength tests of Portland cement concrete. 4.6 Stormwater Ponds/Infiltration Basins The project will include constructing a storm water pond/infiltration basin on the project site. We were not provided any information regarding site grades and or pond bottom elevations. Soil borings SB-2 was completed within or near the proposed pond locations and encountered sandy lean clay meeting the ASTM classification CL. It is our opinion that the infiltration rate(s) presented in Table 2, which were obtained from “Minnesota Storm Water Manual”, can be used for stormwater pond design. Table 2. Infiltration Rates In-situ soils Soil Description Hydrologic Soil Group Design Infiltration Rate (in/hr.) CL Sandy Lean Clay D 0.06 It should be noted that soil infiltration rates can vary due to; soil moisture content, soil compaction, the placement or introduction of fine-grained soils, topsoil or biofiltration media and changes or variations in local groundwater levels. These variations may result in additional construction costs and it is suggested that a contingency be provided for this purpose. 214 9 Field tests (double ring infiltrometer) can be performed within the proposed infiltration basin area to verify infiltration rates of the in-situ soils. We would be pleased to provide these services if required or requested. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Excavation Below the topsoil or aggregate base, the soils encountered in the borings consisted of sandy lean clay meeting the ASTM Classification of CL. These soils will generally be Type B soils under Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines. An OSHA-approved qualified person should review the soil classification in the field. Excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. The project specifications should reference these OSHA requirements. Temporary excavations in Type B soils should be constructed at a minimum of 1 foot horizontal to every 1 foot vertical within excavations. Slopes constructed in this manner may still exhibit surface sloughing. If site constraints do not allow the construction of slopes with these dimensions, then temporary shoring may be required. 5.2 Observations A geotechnical engineer or a qualified engineering technician should observe the excavation subgrade to evaluate if the subgrade soils are similar to those encountered in the borings and adequate to support the proposed construction. 5.3 Backfill and Fills We recommend moisture conditioning all soils that will be used as fill or backfill in accordance with Section 4.3 above. We recommend that fill and backfill be placed in lifts not exceeding 4 to 12 inches, depending on the size of the compactor and materials used. 5.4 Testing We recommend density tests of backfill and fills placed for roadway and/or house foundations. Samples of the proposed materials should be submitted to our laboratory prior to placement for evaluation of their suitability and to determine their optimum moisture content and maximum dry density (Standard Proctor). 5.5 Winter Construction If site grading and construction is anticipated to proceed during cold weather, all snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading and placement of fill. No fill should be placed on frozen soil and no frozen soil should be used as fill or backfill. 215 10 Concrete delivered to the site should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM and/or ACI. Concrete should not be placed on frozen soil. Concrete should be protected from freezing until the necessary strength is obtained. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below the footings. 6.0 PROCEDURES 6.1 Soil Classification The drill crew chief visually and manually classified the soils encountered in the borings in general accordance with ASTM D 2488, “Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- Manual Procedure).” Soil terminology notes are included in the Appendix. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review of the field classification by a soils engineer. Samples will be retained for a period of 30 days. 6.2 Groundwater Observations Immediately after taking the final samples in the bottom of the boring, the hole was checked for the presence of groundwater. Immediately after removing the augers from the borehole the hole was once again checked and the depth to water and cave-in depths were noted. 7.0 GENERAL 7.1 Subsurface Variations The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from a limited number of soil borings. Variations can occur away from the boring, the nature of which may not become apparent until additional exploration work is completed, or construction is conducted. A reevaluation of the recommendations in this report should be made after performing on-site observations during construction to note the characteristics of any variations. The variations may result in additional foundation costs and it is suggested that a contingency be provided for this purpose. It is recommended that we be retained to perform the observation and testing program during construction to evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs, specifications and construction methods. This will allow correlation of the soil conditions encountered during construction to the soil borings and will provide continuity of professional responsibility. 7.2 Review of Design This report is based on the design of the proposed structures as related to us for preparation of this report. It is recommended that we be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the design and specifications. With the review, we will evaluate whether any changes have affected the validity of the recommendations and whether our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. 216 11 7.3 Groundwater Fluctuations We made water level measurements in the borings at the times and under the conditions stated on the boring log. The data was interpreted in the text of this report. The period of observation was relatively short and fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, spring thaw, drainage, and other seasonal and annual factors not evident at the time the observations were made. Design drawings and specifications and construction planning should recognize the possibility of fluctuations. 7.4 Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of Aspect Design Build and their design team to use to design the proposed structures and prepare construction documents. In the absence of our written approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. The data, analysis and recommendations may not be appropriate for other structures or purposes. We recommend that parties contemplating other structures or purposes contact us. 7.5 Level of Care Haugo GeoTechnical Services has used the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised under similar circumstance by members of the profession currently practicing in this locality. No warranty expressed or implied is made. 217 APPENDIX 218 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search, appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. Haugo GeoTechnical Services, LLC 2825 Cedar Avenue S. Minneapolis, MN 55407 Figure #: 1 Drawn By: AH Date: 24-0323 Scale: None Project #: 24-0323 Soil Boring Location Sketch Orono, MN GPS Boring Locations Boring Number Elevation (US Feet) Northing Coordinate Easting Coordinate SB-1 985.9 1055774.76597753 2725118.47028398 SB-2 982.8 1055585.49769749 2725207.89880062 SB-3 997.0 1055288.19530476 2725135.87045045 Referencing US State Plane Coordinate System Legend Approximate Soil Boring Location SB-2 SB-3 SB-1 219 Approximately 5 Inches of Aggregate Base P-200= 4.5% (CL) Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, brown, moist to wet, rather soft to stiff (Glacial Till) Bottom of borehole at 11.0 feet. AU 1 SS 2 SS 3 SS 4 SS 5 2-2-3 (5) 3-4-6 (10) 3-5-7 (12) 3-6-7 (13) 16 26.5 NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 985.9 ft LOGGED BY NC/MS DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger/Split Spoon DRILLING CONTRACTOR HGTS- 45 GROUND WATER LEVELS: CHECKED BY PG DATE STARTED 5/10/24 COMPLETED 5/10/24 AT TIME OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AT END OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AFTER DRILLING --- Not Encountered HOLE SIZE 3 1/4 inches DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPENUMBERRECOVERY %(RQD)BLOWCOUNTS(N VALUE) SPT N VALUE 20 40 60 80 Moisture Content(%) FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 PL LLMC PAGE 1 OF 1 BORING NUMBER SB-1 CLIENT Aspect Design Build PROJECT NUMBER 24-0323 PROJECT NAME Orono Residential Development PROJECT LOCATION Orono, MN GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 5/16/24 16:23 - C:\USERS\ALICE HAUGO\HGTS DROPBOX\LAB HAUGO\HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES\GINT PROJECT BACKUP\PROJECTS\24-0323 BORING LOG DRAFT.GPJHaugo GeoTechnical Services 2825 Cedar Ave South Minneapolis, MN, 55407 Telephone: 612-729-2959 Fax: 763-445-2238 220 Sandy Lean Clay, black, slightly organic to organic, wet (Topsoil) (CL) Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, brown, wet, rather soft to rather stiff (Glacial Till) P-200= 56.5% (CL) Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, grey, wet, medium (Glacial Till) Bottom of borehole at 11.0 feet. AU 6 SS 7 SS 8 SS 9 SS 10 2-2-3 (5) 2-4-4 (8) 3-5-5 (10) 2-3-5 (8) 22.5 NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 982.8 ft LOGGED BY NC/MS DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger/Split Spoon DRILLING CONTRACTOR HGTS- 45 GROUND WATER LEVELS: CHECKED BY PG DATE STARTED 5/10/24 COMPLETED 5/10/24 AT TIME OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AT END OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AFTER DRILLING --- Not Encountered HOLE SIZE 3 1/4 inches DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPENUMBERRECOVERY %(RQD)BLOWCOUNTS(N VALUE) SPT N VALUE 20 40 60 80 Moisture Content(%) FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 PL LLMC PAGE 1 OF 1 BORING NUMBER SB-2 CLIENT Aspect Design Build PROJECT NUMBER 24-0323 PROJECT NAME Orono Residential Development PROJECT LOCATION Orono, MN GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 5/16/24 16:23 - C:\USERS\ALICE HAUGO\HGTS DROPBOX\LAB HAUGO\HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES\GINT PROJECT BACKUP\PROJECTS\24-0323 BORING LOG DRAFT.GPJHaugo GeoTechnical Services 2825 Cedar Ave South Minneapolis, MN, 55407 Telephone: 612-729-2959 Fax: 763-445-2238 221 Clayey Sand, with Gravel, dark brown to black (Possible Aggregate Base) P-200= 26.5% (CL) Sandy Lean Clay, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium to rather stiff (Glacial Till) Bottom of borehole at 11.0 feet. AU 11 SS 12 SS 13 SS 14 SS 15 2-2-4 (6) 4-3-4 (7) 3-4-5 (9) 11-4-6 (10) 19.5 20 NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 996.9 ft LOGGED BY NC/MS DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger/Split Spoon DRILLING CONTRACTOR HGTS- 45 GROUND WATER LEVELS: CHECKED BY PG DATE STARTED 5/10/24 COMPLETED 5/10/24 AT TIME OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AT END OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered AFTER DRILLING --- Not Encountered HOLE SIZE 3 1/4 inches DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPENUMBERRECOVERY %(RQD)BLOWCOUNTS(N VALUE) SPT N VALUE 20 40 60 80 Moisture Content(%) FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 PL LLMC PAGE 1 OF 1 BORING NUMBER SB-3 CLIENT Aspect Design Build PROJECT NUMBER 24-0323 PROJECT NAME Orono Residential Development PROJECT LOCATION Orono, MN GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 5/16/24 16:23 - C:\USERS\ALICE HAUGO\HGTS DROPBOX\LAB HAUGO\HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES\GINT PROJECT BACKUP\PROJECTS\24-0323 BORING LOG DRAFT.GPJHaugo GeoTechnical Services 2825 Cedar Ave South Minneapolis, MN, 55407 Telephone: 612-729-2959 Fax: 763-445-2238 222 223 24910 Territorial Road, Rogers, Minnesota 55374 • 763-428-4489 info@endeseptic.com • www.endeseptic.com ______________________________________________________________________________ Septic Site Identification 3515 and 3465 Sixth Ave N Orono, MN 55356 PID# 2911823430002 and 2911823430011 Prepared For: Aspect Design Build Prepared By: Ende Septic Service 24910 Territorial Road Rogers, MN 55374 May 16th, 2024 224 24910 Territorial Road, Rogers, Minnesota 55374 • 763-428-4489 info@endeseptic.com • www.endeseptic.com ______________________________________________________________________________ Address: 3465 and 3515 Sixth Ave N Orono, MN 55356 Introduction: On behalf of Aspect Design Build, Tristan Ende from Ende Septic Service conducted a site and soil assessment to help determine suitable area for subsurface sewage treatment system for multiple individual SSTS locations for a 6-lot subdivision based on the criteria set forth in MN chapter 7080 and City of Orono in Hennepin County ordinances. The subject property is in the Southern Quadrant of 6th Ave N and Northeast Quadrant of Wayzata Blvd NW. The properties are existing acreage sites with existing homes that are scheduled to be torn down, a new road installed and 6 lots created for new homes. Ende Septic Service conducted soil observations in the Months of October 2023-May of 2024. Further desktop resources were reviewed to help further characterize the site and identify potential factors for a SSTS. Reviewed materials included United States Department of Agriculture soil surveys, wetland delineation maps, Hennepin County natural resource maps and historical satellite imagery. Per state and local rules, a site for a new facility or home must be a Type 1 septic site. Which means the site must have 12 inches of suitable soil not subject to compaction, disturbance, or prolonged seasonal high groundwater. Ende’s site visit concentrated on sites thought to be of optimal location after reviewal of proposed building locations, road locations and storm water locations. 225 Findings: 24 bucket auger observations were observed. See attached soil logs for Lot 1-Lot 6. All borings were taken within the 7.2 and 6.58 -acre site. All 24 soil borings were found to have 12 inches of usable, non-compacted soils and were not subject to a seasonally high groundwater. The observed borings consisted of 6-14 inches of black loamy soils and clay loams soils from 6-24 inches. Seasonally saturated soils were observed at 12-16 inches. Thus, each boring showed suitability for type 1 septic system. Additional Site Assessments: Surveyed lot lines provided by Advance Surveying and Engineering Septic Sizing for Individual SSTS Locations: During the time of soil observations 2 locations were identified per site. On lots 1-6 one site will be used as a primary septic site and the other site used as the alternate septic site. Each site is approximately 30’x63’ in size. These proposed rockbed locations will allow for a home to be built with 5- bedrooms or less. If a larger bedroom home is proposed on the lot more soil work must be done by the hired septic designer. Overview Ende Septic Service has concluded that the septic fields located are type 1, native, natural, non-disturbed, non-compacted, approvable septic areas that can be used during the building of a home. These sites when protected, designed, and installed correctly will provide adequate soil separation and be suitable locations for septic systems. The septic areas must be fenced off prior to building. The site is currently covered in mowable grass, woods and prairie grass. All borings were done with the knowledge of proposed lot lines provided by surveyor. Tristan Ende SSTS inspector, Intermediate Designer, Installer, Mainainer LIC#C9206 226 Hennepin County Property Map Date: 5/16/2024 Comments:PARCEL ID: 2911823430011 OWNER NAME: Gail A Ledstrom Living Trust PARCEL ADDRESS: 3465 Sixth Ave N,Orono MN 55356 PARCEL AREA: 6.58 acres, 286,502 sq ft A-T-B: Both SALE PRICE: SALE DATE: SALE CODE: ASSESSED 2023, PAYABLE 2024 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,064,600 TAX TOTAL: $11,205.04 ASSESSED 2024, PAYABLE 2025 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $976,800 This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is not suitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2024 1:2,400 227 Hennepin County Property Map Date: 5/16/2024 Comments:PARCEL ID: 2911823430002 OWNER NAME: D Milianta & D E Peterson PARCEL ADDRESS: 3515 Sixth Ave N,Orono MN 55356 PARCEL AREA: 7.2 acres, 313,459 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: $375,000 SALE DATE: 08/2012 SALE CODE: Warranty Deed ASSESSED 2023, PAYABLE 2024 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,016,300 TAX TOTAL: $10,652.44 ASSESSED 2024, PAYABLE 2025 PROPERTY TYPE: Residential HOMESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALUE: $928,000 This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is not suitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2024 1:2,400 228 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-9 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 9-12 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-18 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 05/16/224 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Lot 1 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 229 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 1 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-7 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 7-12 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-17 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 1 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-8 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 8-13 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 13-19 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature redox color consistence Friable Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service = Soil Separation Report Boring Pit Boring Pit 230 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 1-Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-10 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 10-12 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-18 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # redox color consistence Friable Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Boring Pit Boring Pit 231 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-14 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 14-16 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Lot 2 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 05/16/224 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 232 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 2 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-15 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 15-20 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 2 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-13 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 13-17 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature = Soil Separation Report Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8,10YR6/2 Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 233 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 2-Soil Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-14 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 14-20 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky Loose Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 234 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-11 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 11-13 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 13-16 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Lot 3 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable Friable Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 05/16/224 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 235 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 3 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-13 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 13-20 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 3 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-14 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 14-18 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature = Soil Separation Report Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8,10YR6/2 Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 236 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 3-Soil Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 14" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-10 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 10-14 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 14-20 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Loose Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 237 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-13 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 13-19 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Lot 4 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 05/16/224 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 238 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 4 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-9 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 9-13 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 13-19 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 4 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-13 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 13-21 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature = Soil Separation Report Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 239 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 4-Soil Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-12 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 12-17 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 240 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-11 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 11-12 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-19 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Lot 5 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable Friable Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 05/16/224 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 241 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 5 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-10 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 10-12 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-18 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 5 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 13" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-8 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 8-13 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 13-19 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature = Soil Separation Report Ende Septic Service 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 242 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 5-Soil Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-9 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 9-12 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky 12-17 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 243 Property Owner / project:Date Property Address / PID: Soil Survey Information Parent matl's: landscape position: soil survey map units:L36A slope ?downhill Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-14 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 14-18 clay loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive Comments: loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid Lot 6 Boring #1- Primary Site redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable Soil Observation Log Owner Information Aspect Design Build 5/16/2024 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N % direction- Till Outwash Lacustrine Alluvium Organic Bedrock Summit Shoulder Side slope Toe slope Boring Pit refer to attached soil survey 244 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 6 Boring #2-Primary Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-13 loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 13-18 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 Single grain <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 6 Boring #3- Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-12 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Weak Blocky 12-17 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # LUG soil verify Signature +LUG media elev/depth Signature = Soil Separation Report Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable 5YR5/8 Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 245 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Lot 6-Soil Boring #4-Alternate Site Elevation Depth to SHWT 12" Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape 0-12.5 Loam <35 10YR3/2 Moderate Blocky 12.5-18 Clay Loam <35 10YR4/6 Moderate Blocky <35 <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive 3465 6th Ave N and 3515 6th Ave N Soil Log #5 Elevation Depth to SHWT Depth (in)Texture fragment % matrix color grade shape <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive <35 35 - 50 >50 loose weak moderate strong single grain granular blocky prismatic platy massive I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's. L2654 Designer Signature Company License # loose friable firm rigid Ende Septic Service loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence loose friable firm rigid 5YR5/8 Friable loose friable firm rigid redox color consistence Friable Boring Pit Boring Pit 246 Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 1 of 449809004981400498190049824004982900498340049839004980900498140049819004982400498290049834004983900449600450100450600451100451600452100452600453100453600454100 449600 450100 450600 451100 451600 452100 452600 453100 453600 454100 45° 0' 29'' N 93° 38' 31'' W45° 0' 29'' N93° 34' 45'' W44° 58' 45'' N 93° 38' 31'' W44° 58' 45'' N 93° 34' 45'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84 0 1000 2000 4000 6000 Feet 0 300 600 1200 1800 Meters Map Scale: 1:22,600 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. 247 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:12,000. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 29, 2023—Sep 13, 2023 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 2 of 4 248 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI L9A Minnetonka silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 20.1 0.9% L16A Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 257.7 11.2% L21A Canisteo clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 2.9 0.1% L22C2 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 164.4 7.1% L22D2 Lester loam, 10 to 16 percent slopes, moderately eroded 60.9 2.6% L22E Lester loam, 10 to 22 percent slopes 16.5 0.7% L22F Lester loam, morainic, 25 to 35 percent slopes 2.8 0.1% L23A Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 106.0 4.6% L24A Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 55.8 2.4% L25A Le Sueur loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 211.1 9.2% L26B Shorewood silty clay loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes 13.1 0.6% L35A Lerdal loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 37.7 1.6% L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes 131.5 5.7% L37B Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 164.9 7.2% L40B Angus-Kilkenny complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes 107.0 4.7% L41C2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 162.8 7.1% L41D2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 10 to 16 percent slopes, moderately eroded 93.9 4.1% L41E Lester-Kilkenny complex, 16 to 22 percent slopes 13.0 0.6% L41F Lester-Kilkenny complex, 22 to 40 percent slopes 4.2 0.2% L45A Dundas-Cordova complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes 10.9 0.5% Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 3 of 4 249 Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI L49A Klossner soils, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes 107.5 4.7% L50A Muskego and Houghton soils, 0 to 1 percent slopes 169.5 7.4% L64A Tadkee-Tadkee, depressional, complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes 9.6 0.4% L132A Hamel-Glencoe complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes 260.3 11.3% U2A Udorthents, wet substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 7.6 0.3% U6B Urban land-Udorthents (cut and fill land) complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes 30.7 1.3% W Water 77.8 3.4% Totals for Area of Interest 2,300.4 100.0% Soil Map—Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 4 of 4 250 Hennepin County, Minnesota L36A—Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tsjx Elevation: 690 to 1,840 feet Mean annual precipitation: 24 to 37 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 140 to 180 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained Map Unit Composition Hamel, overwash, and similar soils:50 percent Hamel and similar soils:43 percent Minor components:7 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hamel, Overwash Setting Landform:Ground moraines Landform position (three-dimensional):Dip Down-slope shape:Concave, linear Across-slope shape:Linear, concave Parent material:Colluvium over till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 12 inches: loam A - 12 to 26 inches: loam Btg - 26 to 48 inches: clay loam Cg - 48 to 79 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Map Unit Description: Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 1 of 3 251 Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: F103XY029MN - Footslope/Drainageway Forests Forage suitability group: Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Other vegetative classification: Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Hamel Setting Landform:Ground moraines Landform position (three-dimensional):Dip Down-slope shape:Concave, linear Across-slope shape:Linear, concave Parent material:Colluvium over till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: loam A - 10 to 24 inches: loam Btg - 24 to 46 inches: clay loam Cg - 46 to 79 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 0 to 8 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: F103XY030MN - Wet Footslope/Drainageway Forests Forage suitability group: Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Other vegetative classification: Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Terril Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Dip Map Unit Description: Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 2 of 3 252 Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R103XY011MN - Footslope/Drainageway Prairies Other vegetative classification:Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Hydric soil rating: No Glencoe Percent of map unit:2 percent Landform:Depressions Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave Ecological site:R103XY015MN - Depressional Marsh Other vegetative classification:Ponded If Not Drained (G103XS013MN) Hydric soil rating: Yes Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 Map Unit Description: Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes---Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 3 of 3 253 Hennepin County, Minnesota L22C2—Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2ttc4 Elevation: 690 to 1,840 feet Mean annual precipitation: 24 to 37 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 140 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Lester, moderately eroded, and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Lester, Moderately Eroded Setting Landform:Ground moraines, hillslopes Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, rise Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Linear, convex Parent material:Fine-loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: loam Bt - 6 to 38 inches: clay loam C - 38 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope:6 to 10 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 47 to 63 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Map Unit Description: Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded---Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 1 of 2 254 Ecological site: R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Storden, moderately eroded Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional):Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Rise Down-slope shape:Convex, linear Across-slope shape:Linear, convex Ecological site:R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Other vegetative classification:Sloping Upland, Calcareous (G103XS010MN) Hydric soil rating: No Le sueur Percent of map unit:3 percent Landform:Hillslopes, ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, talf Down-slope shape:Convex, linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R103XY020MN - Loamy Upland Savannas Other vegetative classification:Sloping Upland, Acid (G103XS006MN) Hydric soil rating: No Hamel Percent of map unit:2 percent Landform:Ground moraines Landform position (three-dimensional):Dip Down-slope shape:Concave, linear Across-slope shape:Linear, concave Ecological site:F103XY030MN - Wet Footslope/Drainageway Forests Other vegetative classification:Level Swale, Neutral (G103XS001MN) Hydric soil rating: Yes Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 Map Unit Description: Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded---Hennepin County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/16/2024 Page 2 of 2 255 Pa r c e l 1 Parcel 2 6th Avenue (Henn. Co. Highway No. 6)Lake C l a s s e n Lo t 4 Lo t 5 8 7 , 1 9 1 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 0 A c r e s ) Lo t 6 8 7 , 2 8 1 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 0 A c r e s ) Lo t 3 Lot 1109,059 S q . F t . ( 2 . 5 0 A c r e s ) Lot 2143,663 Sq. Ft. (3.30 Acres)Dry 100 , 2 5 5 S q . F t . ( 2 . 3 0 A c r e s ) 120 , 197 S q . F t . (2 .75 A c r e s t o O HW L i n e)Dr y 9 1 ,637 Sq . F t . (2 . 10 A c r e s) 1 9 3 , 5 8 5 S q . F t . ( 4 . 4 5 A c r e s t o O H W L i n e ) D r y 8 8 , 1 9 7 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 2 A c r e s )ON LAKE CLASSENUTILITY PLANDry 142,147 Sq. Ft. (3.26 Acr e s )PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY HILL Outlot A # 42379LICENSE NO.Thomas M. BloomDATE:DATE DRAFTED:CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET TITLESHEET NUMBERSHEET 3 OF 4S3UTILITY PLANMAY 21, 2024MAY, 2024Phone (952) 474-7964Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE240226 TBMAY 21, 2024DRAWING NUMBERDATE SURVEYED:120600SHEET SIZE22 X 34SCALE - 1" = 60'ASPECTDESIGNBUILD3465 & 35156TH AVENUENORTHORONO, MN18202 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 401Deephaven, Minnesota 55391256 From:Nicole Post To:Melanie Curtis Subject:RE: Septic Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Date:Monday, June 10, 2024 8:45:55 AM Attachments:Septic Review for LA24.docx The properties at 3465 and 3515 6th Ave N are existing acreage sites scheduled to have the existing homes torn down. The developer is subdividing the two existing lots into six that will support new homes. Ende Septic Service conducted a site and soil evaluation to determine suitable subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) areas for this 6-lot subdivision. Ende Septic conducted soil observations from October 2023 – May 2024. Christopher Uebe of Midwest Sewer Services, the contracted Septic Inspector for the City of Orono, verified the soil observations for lots 2, 4, 5, and 6. Results found: Lots 1, 2, 5, and 6 show suitability as proposed for a Type I SSTS with primary and secondary areas 30’ x 63’ in size. When protected, designed, and installed correctly, these SSTS areas will provide adequate soil separation and be suitable locations for SSTS for 5-bedroom or less homes. Lots 3 and 4 propose the primary and alternate areas in the proposed drainage easement. The designer must relocate the primary and alternate areas on lots 3 and 4. With the relocation and possible re-design of the SSTS, lots 3 and 4 will also support a Type I system for five bedrooms or less." Nicole Post City of Orono Building Official 952-249-4625 npost@oronomn.gov From: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:29 PM To: Nicole Post <npost@oronomn.gov> Subject: Septic Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Nicole, We received an application for a 6-lot subdivision of the properties at 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue North (+ 3 associated PIDs). The application is planned for a public hearing at the June 17th Planning Commission meeting. 257 CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESS SHEET TITLE SHEET NUMBER SHEET 4 OF 4 S4 LANDSCAPE PLAN Phone (952) 474-7964 Web: www.advsur.com Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE 240226 TB DRAWING NUMBER 120600 SHEET SIZE 22 X 34 SCALE - 1" = 60' ASPECT DESIGN BUILD 3465 & 3515 6TH AVENUE NORTH ORONO, MN 18202 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 401 Deephaven, Minnesota 55391 258 Pa r c e l 1 Parcel 2 6th Avenue (Henn. Co. Highway No. 6)Lake C l a s s e n Lo t 4 Lo t 5 8 7 , 1 9 1 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 0 A c r e s ) Lo t 6 Lo t 3 Lot 1109,059 S q . F t . ( 2 . 5 0 A c r e s ) Lot 2143,663 Sq. Ft. (3.30 Acres)Dry 100 , 2 5 5 S q . F t . ( 2 . 3 0 A c r e s ) 120 , 197 S q . F t . (2 .75 A c r e s t o O HW L i n e)Dr y 9 1 ,637 Sq . F t . (2 . 10 A c r e s) 1 9 3 , 5 8 5 S q . F t . ( 4 . 4 5 A c r e s t o O H W L i n e ) D r y 8 8 , 1 9 7 S q . F t . ( 2 . 0 2 A c r e s )ON LAKE CLASSENTREE PRESERVATION PLANDry 142,147 Sq. Ft. (3.26 Acr e s )PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY HILL Outlot A # 42379LICENSE NO.Thomas M. BloomDATE:DATE DRAFTED:CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET TITLESHEET NUMBERSHEET 2 OF 4S2TREEPRESERVATIONPLANMAY 21, 2024MAY, 2024Phone (952) 474-7964Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE240226 TBMAY 21, 2024DRAWING NUMBERDATE SURVEYED:120600SHEET SIZE22 X 34SCALE - 1" = 60'LEGENDASPECTDESIGNBUILD3465 & 35156TH AVENUENORTHORONO, MN18202 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 401Deephaven, Minnesota 55391SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS:1.Showing existing tree locations per a filesupplied to us from TREEBIZ. All existing treeinformation as shown is from TREEBIZ. Notrees were field located by us and the tree tablewas supplied to us from our client.259 13605 1st Avenue North #100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com WETLAND INVESTIGATION ASPECT DESIGN BUILD SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES REVISED MAY 24th , 2024 3465 & 3515 SIXTH AVE N ORONO, MINNESOTA MAY 1, 2024 AE JOB NO. 17981 260 TABLE OF CONTENTS WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTACT INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 3 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 4 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................... 4 RESOURCE REVIEW .......................................................................................................................................... 5 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 15 APPENDICES Appendix A FIGURE Appendix B ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD DATASHEETS Appendix C ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION RECORD Appendix D MINNESOTA ROUTINE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (MnRAM) Appendix E CREDENTIALS 261 CONTACT INFORMATION WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 2 CONTACT INFORMATION PREPARED FOR: Aspect Design Build Tom Preissing 422 2nd St, Excelsior, MN 55331 612-300-0025 tom@aspectdesignbuild.com PREPARED BY: Robert Bergstrom Environmental Scientist Dylan Kruzel Environmental Scientist Certified MN Wetland Delineator #1406 Ben Hodapp Environmental Services Manager Certified MN Wetland Delineator #1016 bhodapp@ae-mn.com Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100 Plymouth, MN 55441 Phone: (763) 412-4000 Fax: (763) 412-4090 262 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC was retained to provide professional wetland services using the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1; January 1987) and all supplemental guidance documents to identify areas meeting wetland criteria at Hennepin County parcels 2911823430002, 2911823430011, 2911823440004, and 2911823440006 near 3465 and 3515 Sixth Avenue North located in Orono, Minnesota. This project area is in Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23 West. Delineated aquatic resources or, portions thereof, were identified and delineated within the project area and summarized in Table 1 and depicted in Appendix A, Figure 5. This document is a revision of the report submitted on May 2nd, 2024, revised May 24th, 2024. All revisions are shown in red font. On May 22nd, 2024, the TEP review determined the Type 1 portion of Wetland 1 was better characterized as an ephemeral tributary. An additional Wetland, Wetland 5, was added. This Wetland is listed below and shown in Appendix A, Figure 5. Appendix B, data sheets 5A and 5B, document data collected along a transect of this Wetland boundary. The western boundary of Wetland 4 was moved downslope eastward towards Lake Classen. Additional sample points transecting this adjusted Wetland boundary were taken. Appendix B, data sheets 4E and 4F, document the data collected at this transect. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources representative made an onsite determination that the 974.5 contour line marking the OHWL of Lake Classen did not accurately reflect the purpose or intent of the Public Waters Work program. The adjusted OWHL as interpreted by the MnDNR representative is shown in Appendix A, Figure 5. Table 1. Summary of delineated aquatic resources, corresponding sizes, and wetland type classifications. RESOURCE RESOURCE TYPE APPROXIMATE SIZE1 RESOURCE TYPE CLASSIFICATION MnRAM Classification CIRCULAR 39 COWARDIN EGGERS & REED 1 Wetland 0.18 Ac Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh Manage 2 2 Wetland 0.17 Ac Type 2 PEM1B Fresh Wet Meadow Manage 2 3 Wetland 0.01 Ac Type 1 PFO1A Floodplain Forest Manage 2 4 Wetland 1.67 Ac Type 2/3/5 PUBHx/EM1C/B Fresh Wet Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh Preserve 5 Wetland 0.01 Type 2 PEM1B Fresh Wet Meadow Manage 2 A Ephemeral Tributary 196 L.F. Type 90 R6SB Channel N/A Lake Classen Lake 0.04 Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh N/A 1 Approximate size within the project area expressed in acres (ac), square feet (SF), or tributary linear feet (LF). Areas less than 0.01 acre are presented in square feet. 263 BACKGROUND & METHODOLOGY WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 4 BACKGROUND As requested by Aspect Design Build, Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC completed a wetland investigation Hennepin County parcels 2911823430002, 2911823430011, 2911823440004, and 2911823440006 near 3465 and 3515 Sixth Avenue North located in Orono, Minnesota (Appendix A, Figure 1). This project area is in Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23 West. The wetland delineation was completed in accordance with the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the published regional supplement to the Army Corps Wetland Delineation Manual, Midwest Regional Supplement. The purpose of this study was to identify areas meeting the technical criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins, and classify the wetland habitats in the project area. Fieldwork for this site investigation was completed by Dylan Kruzel and Robert Bergstrom on April 18, 2024. The weather was partly sunny and 49 degrees Fahrenheit. METHODOLOGY U.S. Geologic Service 7.5” Topographic Quadrangle maps, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Public Water Inventory (PWI) maps, U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey, and available aerial photographs were consulted to initially locate potential wetland habitats. Routine On-site Determination Method was used during this investigation. In this method, the following procedures were used: 1. The vegetative community was sampled in all present strata to determine whether it met hydrophytic vegetation criteria based on the indicators identified in the Midwest Regional Supplement. 2. Soil pits were dug using a Dutch auger to depths of twenty-four to forty-two inches. The soil profile was noted in addition to any hydric soil characteristics. 3. Signs of wetland hydrology were noted and compared to field criteria such as depth to shallow water table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil pits. Data from sample points were recorded on Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Wetland Determination Data Forms (Appendix B). At least one sample point transect crosses the delineated wetland edge. This transect consists of an upland sample point and a wetland sample point. Other sample points may be in areas which have one or more other wetland criteria present; where questionable conditions exist; or to verify the absence of wetland criteria. Photographs of each resource are included in the resource review summary pages. Sample points were marked in the field with orange flags. The identified aquatic resource was marked with sequentially numbered pink flags. All sample points and the delineated aquatic resource extent were located using a Trimble Geo XH sub-meter GPS unit. MN ROUTINE ASSESSMENT METHOD Delineated resources were evaluated using Board of Soil and Water Resource’s Minnesota Routine Assessment Method version 3.2 (MnRAM). Information from desktop and field assessment was evaluated in the system and a management classification ranging from exceptional quality to low quality is output as Preserve, Manage 1, Manage 2, and Manage 3. Resulting classifications are typically utilized in development planning. 264 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 5 RESOURCE REVIEW The below described data was reviewed as part of the aquatic resource field delineation. A summary of each resource contained within the project area follows. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY The National Wetlands Inventory identifies one PEM1C, PEM1A, and PABH in the project area (Appendix A, Figure 2). USDA – NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SOIL SURVEY Soil survey data for Hennepin County was obtained and reviewed prior to the delineation. Table 2 provides a list of the mapped soils in the project area. Figure 3 in Appendix A depicts USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service mapped soils within the project categorized by total percentage of hydric components. Hydric ratings descriptions were assigned using Section 3.5.1 of the Guidance for Submittal of Delineation Reports to the St. Paul District Army Corps of Engineers and Wetland Conservation Act Local Governmental Units in Minnesota, Version 2.0. Hydric soil rating descriptions include: • All hydric – All components listed for a given map unit are rated as being hydric. • Predominantly Hydric – More than 66% to less than 100% of components are hydric. • Partially Hydric – More than 33% to less than 67% of components are hydric. • Predominantly Non-Hydric – More than 0% and less than 34% of components are hydric. • Not Hydric – All components are rated as not hydric. • Unknown Hydric – At least one component is not rated so a definitive rating for the map unit cannot be made. Table 2. Summary of mapped soil units in the project area. MAP UNIT SYMBOL MAP UNIT NAME HYDRIC STATUS PERCENT COVER DRAINAGE CLASSIFICATION L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes 45% 23.37% Somewhat poorly drained L16A Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 100% 14.98% Very poorly drained L37B Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 5% 5.80% Well drained L22C2 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 2% 0.01% Well drained L22C2 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 2% 35.87% Well drained L37B Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 5% 19.51% Well drained L24A Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 100% 0.45% Very poorly drained Hydric soils are defined in the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United State s: Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, version 8.2, 2018; The 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual; and The Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0). 265 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 6 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Public Water Inventory for Hennepin County identifies one public water, Lake Classen (PWI ID #27016200) in the project extent (Appendix A, Figure 4). 30-DAY ROLLING PRECIPITATION DATA A review of the 30-day rolling precipitation data collected from the University of Minnesota/ State of Minnesota Climatology Office Working Group (Appendix C) indicates that precipitation totals for the weeks prior to the site visit were above the range of average in the general project area. The overall hydrologic conditions were suitable, however, for completing an accurate wetland determination and boundary delineation. 266 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 7 RESOURCE 1 FIELD DELINEATED 4/18/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 Viewing East | Moderate transition to Wetland Wetland RESOURCE TYPE 0.18 Acre TOTAL AREA WITHIN ECB Shallow Marsh EGGERS & REED Type 3 CIRCULAR 39 PEM1C COWARDIN Manage 2 MnRAM2 DOMINANT HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION Acer negundo Rhamnus cathartica Typha x glauca Phalaris arundinacea Boxelder European buckthorn Hybrid cattail Reed canary grass HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Black Histic 2cm Muck Depleted Below Dark Surface Depleted Matrix A3 A10 A11 F3 WETLAND HYDROLOGY DETERMINATION Surface Water High Water Table Saturation Water-stained Leaves Drainage Patterns Geomorphic Position FAC-Neutral Test A1 A2 A3 B9 B10 D2 D5 DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Partially Hydric - Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, 45% (L36A) NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY PEM1C PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY No DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION The resource consists of a wetland community receiving hydrology via overland flow from the gradual downslope topography of the surrounding landscape. There is a culvert outside the wetland upslope to the east that discharges hydrology. Overall, the resource was delineated based on a lack of wetland hydrology forming a gradual boundary in most areas. Upland vegetation communities are generally dominated by boxelder, European buckthorn and Kentucky blue grass (Poa pratensis). ATYPICAL/PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS Analysis of antecedent precipitation revealed that the area was well above average at the time of the field investigation, surface hydrology was observed in several areas. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW NWI inventoried areas were found to be generally correct but did not identify the ditched Type 1 portion. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 1A Up Point(s): 1B 2 Appendix E contains MnRAM output 267 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 8 RESOURCE 2 FIELD DELINEATED 4/18/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 Viewing Southwest | Gradual to moderate transition to wetland Wetland RESOURCE TYPE 0.16 Acre TOTAL AREA WITHIN ECB Fresh Wet Meadow EGGERS & REED Type 2 CIRCULAR 39 PEM1B COWARDIN Manage 2 MnRAM2 DOMINANT HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION Acer negundo Phalaris arundinacea Poa pratensis Box Elder Reed canary grass Kentucky blue grass HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Thick Dark Surface Loamy Mucky Mineral Redox Dark Surface A12 F1 F6 WETLAND HYDROLOGY DETERMINATION High Water Table Saturation Geomorphic Position FAC-Neutral Test A2 A3 D2 D5 DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Partially Hydric - Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, 45% (L36A) NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY PEM1A PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY No DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION The resource consists of a single wetland community type receiving hydrology via overland flow from the gradual downslope topography of the surrounding landscape and the adjacent wetland complex continuing beyond the ECB to the west. Additionally, the resource receives hydrology from the ditched portion of wetland 1 during high water events; however, it was not connected. Overall, the resource was delineated based on a lack of hydric soil forming a gradual to moderate transition boundary in most areas. Upland vegetation communities are generally dominated by boxelder, European buckthorn, reed canary grass and smooth brome (Bromus inermis). ATYPICAL/PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS Analysis of antecedent precipitation revealed that the area was well above average at the time of the field investigation, surface hydrology was observed in several areas. Although water table and saturation were present in upland sample point 2B, primary indicators were not checked as it was above average precipitation and adjacent to a ditch where hydrology overtopped. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW NWI inventoried areas were found to be generally correct; however, it was found to be a Type 2. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 2A Up Point(s): 2B 2 Appendix E contains MnRAM output 268 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 9 RESOURCE 3 FIELD DELINEATED 4/18/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 Viewing Southwest | Gradual transition to Floodplain Forest Wetland RESOURCE TYPE 0.01 Acre TOTAL AREA WITHIN ECB Floodplain Forest EGGERS & REED Type 1 CIRCULAR 39 PFO1A COWARDIN Manage 2 MnRAM2 DOMINANT HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION Acer negundo Rhamnus cathartica Poa pratensis Box Elder European buckthorn Kentucky blue grass HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Redox Dark Surface F6 WETLAND HYDROLOGY DETERMINATION High Water Table Saturation Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface Geomorphic Position A2 A3 B8 D2 DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Predominately Non- Hydric - Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded, 2% (L22C2) NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY None PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY None DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION The resource consists of a single wetland community type receiving hydrology via overland flow from the gradual downslope topography of the surrounding landscape and the adjacent wetland complex continuing beyond the ECB to the west. Overall, the resource was delineated based on a lack of wetland hydrology and hydric soil forming a gradual transition boundary in most areas. Upland vegetation communities are generally dominated by boxelder, European buckthorn and Kentucky blue grass. ATYPICAL/PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS Analysis of antecedent precipitation revealed that the area was well above average at the time of the field investigation, surface hydrology was observed in several areas. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW NWI did not inventory this area. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 3A Up Point(s): 3B 2 Appendix E contains MnRAM output 269 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 10 RESOURCE 4 FIELD DELINEATED 4/18/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 Viewing Northeast | Gradual transition to a Fresh Wet Meadow/Shallow Marsh Wetland RESOURCE TYPE 0.71 Acre TOTAL AREA WITHIN ECB Fresh Wet Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh EGGERS & REED Type 2/3/5 CIRCULAR 39 PUBHx/EM1C/B COWARDIN Preserve MnRAM2 DOMINANT HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION Acer negundo Salix nigra Phalaris arundinacea Box Elder Black Willow Reed canary grass HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Thick Dark Surface Loamy Mucky Mineral Redox Dark Surface A12 F1 F6 WETLAND HYDROLOGY DETERMINATION High Water Table Saturation Geomorphic Position FAC-Neutral Test A2 A3 D2 D5 DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Hydric - Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes, 100% (L16A) NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY PEM1C, PABH PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY No – Adjacent is Lake Classen (27016200) with a 974.5’ Ordinary High Water (OHW) DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION The resource consists of multiple wetland community types receiving hydrology via overland flow from the moderate to abrupt downslope topography of the surrounding landscape and Lake Classen through the lateral exchange of hydrology. Additional wetland and upland points were taken to confirm the continuing boundary of the resource to the northeast. Overall, the resource was delineated based on a lack of wetland hydrology and hydrophytic vegetation at upland sample points 4B and 4D forming a gradual to moderate transition boundary in most areas. Upland vegetation communities are generally dominated by black willow, boxelder, Kentucky blue grass, smooth brome, Canada goldenrod (Solidago altissima) and ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea). ATYPICAL/PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS Analysis of antecedent precipitation revealed that the area was well above average at the time of the field investigation, surface hydrology was observed in several areas. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW NWI inventoried areas were found to be generally correct; however, additional wetland was found in hydric soil units. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 4A, 4C Up Point(s): 4B, 4D 2 Appendix E contains MnRAM output 270 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 11 RESOURCE 4 ADDITIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATION PHOTOS Viewing Northeast | Edge of Reed canary transition Viewing South | Transition from wetland to Lake Classen OHW 271 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 12 RESOURCE 5 FIELD DELINEATED 5/22/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 Wetland RESOURCE TYPE 0.01Acre TOTAL AREA WITHIN ECB Fresh Wet Meadow EGGERS & REED Type 2 CIRCULAR 39 PEM1B COWARDIN Manage 2 MnRAM2 DOMINANT HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Redox Dark Surface F6 WETLAND HYDROLOGY DETERMINATION High Water Table Saturation A2 A3 DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Hydric - Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY N/A PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY No – Adjacent is Lake Classen (27016200) DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION TEP review determined subject area met wetland criteria based on the dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and present wetland hydrology. ATYPICAL/PROBLEMATIC CONDITIONS Analysis of antecedent precipitation revealed that the area was well above average at the time of the field investigation, surface hydrology was observed in several areas. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW NWI inventoried areas were found to be generally correct; however, additional wetland was found in hydric soil units. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 5A Up Point(s): 5B 2 Appendix E contains MnRAM output 272 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 13 LAKE CLASSEN (27016200) FIELD DELINEATED 4/18/2024 Viewing Southeast | Type 3, Shallow Marsh to Type 5, Open Water transition to Lake Classen FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 RESOURCE TYPE Lake AREA WITHIN ECB 1.01-Acre EGGERS & REED Shallow Marsh/Open Water CIRCULAR 39 Type 3/5 COWARDIN PABH/EM1C DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Hydric - Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes, 100% (L16A) NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY PEM1C, PABH, and L2UBH (adjacent but outside project area) PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY Yes – Lake Classen (27016200) with a 974.5’ Ordinary High Water DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION The OHW of Lake Classen intersects in and out of the ECB along the east side of the project area. Hydrology is generally received via overland flow from the surrounding landscape and is associated with wetland 4, bordering the OHWL. Wetland sample points 4A and 4C confirms the presence of adjacent wetland. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW Reviewed desktop resources are consistent with field validation. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): 4A, 4C Up Point(s): N/A 273 RESOURCE REVIEW WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 14 RESOURCE A FIELD DELINEATED 5/22/2024 FIELD INVESTIGATION CONCLUSION1 RESOURCE TYPE Tributary AREA WITHIN ECB 196 L.F./ 588 S.F. EGGERS & REED Channel CIRCULAR 39 Type 90 COWARDIN R6SB DESKTOP REVIEW HYDRIC RATING - SOIL UNIT(S) Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, 33-65% Hydirc NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY N/A PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY N/A DISCUSSION RATIONALE FOR DETERMINATION TEP review determined the area did not meet criteria as a wetland and thus characterized the area as an ephemeral tributary. CONSISTENCY WITH DESKTOP REVIEW Reviewed desktop resources are consistent with field validation. 1 Appendix B contains wetland determination data forms supporting this investigated resource: Wet Point(s): N/A Up Point(s): N/A 274 CONCLUSION WETLAND INVESTIGATION SIXTH AVENUE PROPERTIES ORONO, MN May 24, 2024 P a g e 15 CONCLUSION A total of five wetlands, one ephemeral tributary, and one lake were identified and delineated within the project area and in accordance with the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Project area aquatic resources may be regulated by several agencies at the local, state, and/or federal level. Activities which may potentially impact wetlands should be discussed in advance with the appropriate regulating agency regarding potential permit requirements. The Local Government Unit (LGU) responsible for implementing the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act at this project location is Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The MCWD and the City of Orono may require vegetated buffers around all regulated wetland areas. Wetland buffers must meet the standards specified by the MCWD and the city for any project that is regulated under the Wetland Conservation Act. This wetland investigation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and all applicable subsequent guidance for an on-site determination. The results reflect the conditions present at the time of the delineation. I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or wrote the report for this wetland determination. May 24, 2024 Robert Bergstrom Environmental Scientist Date I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or wrote the report for this wetland determination. May 24, 2024 Dylan Kruzel Environmental Scientist Certified MN Wetland Delineator #1406 Date I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or reviewed work completed by above staff. May 24, 2024 Benjamin J. Hodapp Environmental Services Manager MN Certified Wetland Delineator #1016 Date 275 Appendix A FIGURES 276 ^_ Legend ^_Project Location SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 1 Project Location I1 inch = 3,0 00 feet03,000 6,0001,500 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 Proje ct L oca tion 277 PABHP U B F x PUBH PEM1CPEM1A P E M 1 C PEM1CPEM1C PEM1APEM1A PEM1A PEM1APEM1APEM1CL2UBHLegend Project Extent County Parcels National Wetland Inventory SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 2 National Wetland Inventory I1 inch = 300 feet0300 600150 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 278 L50A L132A L132A L36A L36A L36A L36A L36A L36A L16A L37B L37B L22C2 L22C2 L22C2 L37B L37B W L40B L22E L40B L22D2 L22D2 L24A L24A L24A L25A Legend Project Extent County ParcelsHydric Rating by Map Unit 0% Hydric Components 1-32% Hydric Components 33-65% Hydric Components 66-99% Hydric Components 100% Hydric Components SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 3 Hennepin Co. Soil Survey I1 inch = 300 feet0300 600150 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 279 27091601 27091602 27091800 27052100 27051900 Katrina Lake27015400 27051300 27051300 27083900 27084100 27052000 27052000 27084200 27110100 Lake Classen27016200 Lake Classen27016200 Thies Lake27015600 27091700 27052200 27084300 27040800 P a in te r C r e e k (M -0 5 6 -0 1 2 ) Legend Project Extent County Parcels MN DNR Inventoried Public Watercourse MN DNR Inventoried Public Waterbasin SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 4 MnDNR Public Water Inventory I1 inch = 2,0 00 feet02,000 4,0001,000 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 280 Type 3 Type 5 Type 3 Type 2Type 3B Type 3 EF Wetland 5 Type 2 PEM1B Fresh Wet Meadow 0.01 Ac. A B Ephe meral Trib utary A Type 90 R6SB Channel 0.00 Ac. (58 8 S.F. /196 L.F.) Lake Classen27016200 Wetland 1 Type 3 PEM 1C Shallow Marsh 0.18 Ac. Wetland 2 Type 2 PEM 1B Fresh Wet Meadow 0.17 Ac. Wetland 3 Type 1 PFO1A Floodplain Forest 0.01 Ac. Wetland 4-1 Type 2/3/5 PABH/EM1C/Bx Fresh Wet Meadow/ Shallow Marsh/Open Water 1.67 Ac. Wetland 4-2 Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh 0.01 Ac. Lake Classen Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh 0.04 Ac. C D B A A B A AB Legend Project Extent County Parcels Oridnary High Water Line Wetland Field Delineated April 18th, 2024 TEP Rev. May 22nd, 2024 Ephemeral Tributary Sample Point Culvert SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 5 Delineation I1 inch = 250 feet0250 500125 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 5.23.2024 281 Appendix B ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD DATASHEETS 282 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:1A Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):0 Lat:44.99505725 Long:-93.61232289 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L36A NWI classification:PEM1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Wetland is a Type 1/3. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:5 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 15 x 1 =15 FACW species 45 x 2 =90 FAC species 60 x 3 =180 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:120 (A)285 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.38 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 15 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 20 Yes FAC 2.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 15 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 35 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 45 Yes FACW 2.Typha angustifolia / Narrow leaf cattail, Narrow-leaved cattail 15 Yes OBL 3.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 10 No FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 70 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0283 SOIL Sampling Point:1A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/1 95 7.5YR 3/4 5 C M Muck PRC 8-24 10YR 4/2 95 7.5YR 3/4 5 C M Clay DRC ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) X Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) X 2 cm Muck (A10)X Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) X Surface Water (A1)X Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)X Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):1 Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0284 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:1B Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99506016 Long:-93.61237213 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L36A NWI classification:None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Wetland criteria is absent. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 5 x 1 =5 FACW species 0 x 2 =0 FAC species 145 x 3 =435 FACU species 15 x 4 =60 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:165 (A)500 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.03 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 40 Yes FAC 2.Salix nigra / Black willow 5 No OBL 3. 4. 5. 45 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 20 Yes FAC 2.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 10 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 70 Yes FAC 2.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion10 No FACU 3.Hydrophyllum virginianum / Shawnee-salad 5 No FAC 4.Bromus inermis / Smooth brome, Smooth brome, Hungarian brome5 No FACU 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 90 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0285 SOIL Sampling Point:1B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 2/1 100 C M Loam 6-18 10YR 2/1 98 7.5YR 3/4 2 C M Clay Loam PRC 18-30 10YR 4/1 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M Clay PRC ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):16 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0286 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:2A Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope(%):0 Lat:44.99474854 Long:-93.61295908 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L36A NWI classification:PEM1A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Wetland is a Type 2. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 80 x 2 =160 FAC species 25 x 3 =75 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:105 (A)235 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.24 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 5 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 80 Yes FACW 2.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 20 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0287 SOIL Sampling Point:2A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/1 100 Muck Lm Clay 4-18 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M Loam 18-30 10YR 4/1 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M Sndy Clay Lm ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):1 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0288 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:2B Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99475483 Long:-93.6130415 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L36A NWI classification:None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Wetland criteria is absent. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:5 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:83.3 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 30 x 2 =60 FAC species 80 x 3 =240 FACU species 50 x 4 =200 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:160 (A)500 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.13 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 15 Yes FAC 2.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 15 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 15 Yes FAC 2.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 15 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Bromus inermis / Smooth brome, Smooth brome, Hungarian brome40 Yes FACU 2.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 30 Yes FACW 3.Alliaria petiolata / Garlic-mustard 15 No FAC 4.Hydrophyllum virginianum / Shawnee-salad 5 No FAC 5.Solidago altissima / Canada goldenrod 5 No FACU 6.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion5 No FACU 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0289 SOIL Sampling Point:2B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-30 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 30-40 10YR 3/1 100 Clay Loam ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):5 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Adjacent to drainage way with flashy hydrology. Above average precip and sloped landscape. US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0290 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:3A Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope(%):0 Lat:44.99338339 Long:-93.61261203 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L22C2 NWI classification:None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Wetland is a Type 1. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 0 x 2 =0 FAC species 130 x 3 =390 FACU species 10 x 4 =40 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:140 (A)430 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.07 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 50 Yes FAC 2.Populus deltoides / Eastern cottonwood 10 No FAC 3. 4. 5. 60 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 20 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 40 Yes FAC 2.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion10 No FACU 3.Alliaria petiolata / Garlic-mustard 10 No FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0291 SOIL Sampling Point:3A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-3 10YR 2/1 100 Loam 3-24 10YR 3/2 80 10YR 3/6 10 C M Loam 10YR 2/1 10 Loam Intermixed profile ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):4 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0292 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:3B Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99330201 Long:-93.61259126 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L22C2 NWI classification:None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Wetland criteria is absent. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:75.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 0 x 2 =0 FAC species 40 x 3 =120 FACU species 10 x 4 =40 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:50 (A)160 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 10 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 10 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Rhamnus cathartica / European buckthorn 5 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 25 Yes FAC 2.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion5 No FACU 3.Solidago altissima / Canada goldenrod 5 No FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion Yes FACU 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0293 SOIL Sampling Point:3B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/2 100 Clay Loam 4-24 10YR 4/4 60 10YR 2/2 40 Clay Loam Intermixed ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):18 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0294 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4A Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope(%):0 Lat:44.99341684 Long:-93.60998332 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L16A NWI classification:PEM1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Wetland is a Type 2/3. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 10 x 1 =10 FACW species 100 x 2 =200 FAC species 10 x 3 =30 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:120 (A)240 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Salix nigra / Black willow 10 Yes OBL 2.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 10 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 100 Yes FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0295 SOIL Sampling Point:4A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/1 95 7.5YR 4/4 5 C M Muck Lm Clay PRC 4-14 10YR 2/1 95 7.5YR 4/4 5 C M Clay Loam PRC 14-30 10YR 5/1 95 7.5YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam PRC ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):3 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0296 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4B Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99339123 Long:-93.61000062 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L16A NWI classification:PEM1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Wetland criteria is absent. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 10 x 1 =10 FACW species 10 x 2 =20 FAC species 30 x 3 =90 FACU species 55 x 4 =220 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:105 (A)340 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.24 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1.Salix nigra / Black willow 10 Yes OBL 2. 3. 4. 5. 10 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 30 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Solidago altissima / Canada goldenrod 35 Yes FACU 2.Glechoma hederacea / Ground ivy 15 Yes FACU 3.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 10 No FACW 4.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion5 No FACU 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 65 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0297 SOIL Sampling Point:4B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-5 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 5-12 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M Clay 12-24 10YR 2/1 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Clay Loam ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):20 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0298 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4C Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):0 Lat:44.99388361 Long:-93.60954377 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L16A NWI classification:PEM1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Wetland is a Type 2/3. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 95 x 2 =190 FAC species 5 x 3 =15 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:100 (A)205 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.05 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 95 Yes FACW 2.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 5 No FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0299 SOIL Sampling Point:4C Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-2 10YR 2/2 100 Muck Lm Clay 2-5 10YR 5/1 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M Clay Loam 5-24 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/4 2 M Clay ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):6 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0300 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:04/18/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4D Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99373226 Long:-93.60958244 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:L37B NWI classification:None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Wetland criteria is absent. Antecedent precipitation is above average for time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 0 x 2 =0 FAC species 65 x 3 =195 FACU species 35 x 4 =140 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:100 (A)335 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =3.35 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹ 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 65 Yes FAC 2.Bromus inermis / Smooth brome, Smooth brome, Hungarian brome20 Yes FACU 3.Solidago altissima / Canada goldenrod 10 No FACU 4.Achillea millefolium / Yarrow 5 No FACU 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0301 SOIL Sampling Point:4D Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 2/1 100 Loam 6-15 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 3/4 5 C M Loam 15-24 10YR 4/2 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M Loam ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):14 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0302 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:05/22/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4E Investigator(s):Dylan Kruzel Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope(%):0 Lat:-93.61008697553105 Long:44.99377105424962 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes NWI classification:L2UBH Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Antecedent precipitation was above the normal range for this time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 100 x 2 =200 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:100 (A)200 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 100 Yes FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0303 SOIL Sampling Point:4E Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 7-15 10YR 6/3 60 Clay Loam 7-15 10YR 5/1 40 Clay Loam ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)X Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)X Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: Best professional judgement for hydric soil determination. Soils show evidence of disturbances, including placement of lacustrine dredge material HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):10 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0304 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:05/22/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:4F Investigator(s):Ben Hodapp & Robert Bergstrom Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:44.99403069 Long:-93.61790528 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: Antecedent Precipitation is above normal for this time of year. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 70 x 2 =140 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 FACU species 20 x 4 =80 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:90 (A)220 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.44 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 70 Yes FACW 2.Cirsium arvense / Canada thistle 15 No FACU 3.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion5 No FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 90 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0305 SOIL Sampling Point:4F Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 7-24 10YR 6/3 40 Clay Loam Mixed matrix past 7 inches 7-24 10YR 5/1 60 Clay Loam Mixed matrix past 7 inches ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)X Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0306 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:05/22/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:5A Investigator(s):Ben Hodapp & Robert Bergstrom Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope(%):0 Lat:93.61790527986385 Long:44.99403068519668 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes X No Remarks: Antecedent precipitation is above the range of normal for this time of year in this area. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 75 x 2 =150 FAC species 10 x 3 =30 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:85 (A)180 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.12 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 75 Yes FACW 2.Acer negundo / Boxelder, Box elder 10 No FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 85 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0307 SOIL Sampling Point:5A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 7-22 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam redox inclusions begin at 7 inches ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)X Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) X Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) X Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):1 Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0308 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region Project/Site:3465 & 3525 Sixth Ave N City/County:Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date:05/22/2024 Applicant/Owner:Tom Preissing/Aspect Design Build State:Minnesota Sampling Point:5B Investigator(s):Ben Hodapp & Robert Bergstrom Section, Township, Range:S29 T118N R23W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc):Moraines Local relief (concave, convex, none):none Slope(%):2 Lat:-93.62762903060856 Long:45.04484816669896 Datum:WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name:Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes X No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Yes No X Remarks: VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50.0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 =0 FACW species 30 x 2 =60 FAC species 10 x 3 =30 FACU species 27 x 4 =108 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 Column Totals:67 (A)198 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =2.96 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index ≤3.0¹X 4 - Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain ) ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:30-ft )% Cover Species?Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15-ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:5-ft ) 1.Phalaris arundinacea / Reed canary grass 30 Yes FACW 2.Solidago altissima / Canada goldenrod 20 Yes FACU 3.Poa pratensis / Kentucky blue grass 10 No FAC 4.Taraxacum officinale / Red seeded dandelion, Common dandelion5 No FACU 5.Cirsium arvense / Canada thistle 2 No FACU 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 67 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30-ft ) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0309 SOIL Sampling Point:5B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-17 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 17-30 10YR 5/2 100 Clay Loam ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Histosol (A1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2)Sandy Redox (S5)Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 cm Muck (A10)Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):18 Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2.0310 Appendix C ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION RECORD 311 Appendix C, Figure 1. Graph of recent precipitation in comparison with the normal range of precipitation in the general site location. Daily precipitation data is plotted independently and as a 30-day rolling total up to the date of the site visit. The normal range is plotted from precipitation data recorded from 1981 to 2010. The normal range is represented in this graph with two lines, the 30th percentile and the 70th percentile of the period-of-record data distribution. Source: http://climate.umn.edu/ 01234561/19/20241/22/20241/25/20241/28/20241/31/20242/3/20242/6/20242/9/20242/12/20242/15/20242/18/20242/21/20242/24/20242/27/20243/1/20243/4/20243/7/20243/10/20243/13/20243/16/20243/19/20243/22/20243/25/20243/28/20243/31/20244/3/20244/6/20244/9/20244/12/20244/15/20244/18/20244/21/20244/24/20244/27/20244/30/2024PRECIPITATION (INCHES)DATEAntecedent PrecipitationDaily PrecipitationSite VisitsNormal Monthly Range 30-Day Rolling Total S29 T118N R23W Hennepin County, MN4/18/2024312 Appendix C, Figure 2. Minnesota State Climatology Office map depicting total precipitation for the week of the site visit. Source: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/weekmap/maps-produced-april-16-2024.html 313 Appendix D MINNESOTA ROUTINE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (MnRAM)314 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1Date 4/19/2024Special Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)- ____-____-____-____#1Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland)Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -1A------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) M0.5 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -13B------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) L0.1 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) -0 0 0 0Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others)Cowardin TypesPhoto ID0.5 Medium 0 - 0 - 0 -0.30 Low - - - - - -0.20 Low 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 -#4 Listed, rare, special plant species? n Y N Y N Y N Y N#5Rare community or habitat?nY NY NY NY N#6 Pre-European-settlement conditions? n Y N Y N Y N Y N53A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B#2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Plant Community #11A, 13B25%75%4Acer negundoAverage vegetative diversity/integrity:Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity:Plant Community #2Plant Community #3Plant Community #4*Highest rated community veg. div./integ:Cover Class Class Range1 0 - 3%2 3 - 10%3 10 - 25%4 25 - 50%5 50 - 75%6 75 - 100%Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B]*If there are more than four plant community types, use the next column over to enter the rest and do not rely on the automatic average calculations.Wetland 1__________________Wetland name / ID___________________Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID__________________WETLAND1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity4/30/2024315 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071A B C D E F G H I J K L M N PMnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2Question Description RatingHighest-rated:1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.200.5TOTAL VEG Rating0.2 L4Listed, rare, special plant species?nnext5Rare community or habitat?n next6Pre-European-settlement conditions?nnext7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A8 Water depth (inches)Water depth (% inundation)9Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)10Existing wetland size 0.1811SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site)12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention C 0.113 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime B 0.514Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft) B 0.5 0.515Soil condition (wetland) B0.516 Vegetation (% cover)50%M 0.517 Emerg. veg. flood resistanceN/A018 Sediment deliveryA119Upland soils (based on soil group)B0.520 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detentionB0.5 0.521Subwatershed wetland densityB0.522 Channels/sheet flowA123 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)25MWQ0.5L0.124 Adjacent Area Management: % Full25%0.25 20.625adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured75%0.375adjacent area mgmt: % Bare0%025Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 20%0.2 20.6adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 80%0.4adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 0%026 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle50%0.5 20.75adjacent area slope: % Moderate50%0.25adjacent area slope: % Steep0%027Downstream sensitivity/WQ protectionA128 Nutrient loadingB0.529Shoreline wetland? NN30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )Enter a percentage31 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)Enter a percentage32 Emergent vegetation erosion resistance Enter valid choice33 Shoreline erosion potentialEnter valid choice34 Bank protection/upslope veg. Enter valid choice35Rare WildlifeNN36Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local communityNN37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)6M 0.538 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)1L 0.1039 Wetland detritusN/AN/A40Wetland interspersion on landscape B 0.50.541 Wildlife barriers B 0.542 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod A 143 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence A 144 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat C 0.145 Wildlife species (list)46 Fish habitat quality C 0.147 Fish species (list)48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N49 Wetland visibility C 0.150 Proximity to population Y 151Public ownership C 0.152 Public access C 0.153 Human influence on wetland B 0.554 Human influence on viewshed B 0.555 Spatial buffer B 0.556 Recreational activity potential C 0.157 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact N/A N/ADigital worksheet, section II Digital worksheet, section IUser entryWETLAND1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 1 4/30/2024316 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls72737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141A B C D E F G H I J K L M N P58 GW - Wetland soilsR R or D 0.159 GW - Subwatershed land useD R or D 160 GW - Wetland size and soil groupR R or D 0.161 GW - Wetland hydroperiod D R or D 162 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration D R or D 163 GW - Surrounding upland topographic reliefDR or D164Restoration potential w/o flooding Y or N 4.265Landowners affected by restoration E a b cEnter valid choice66AExisting wetland size (acres) [from #10]0.18 __ acres66BTotal wetland restoration size (acres) __ acres 0.166C(Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A] -0.18 __ acres ####67Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potential)0 __ feet 0.1 value: ####68Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice69 Hydrologic alteration typeOutlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling70Potential wetland type (Circ. 39) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 871Wetland sensitivity to stormwater E a b c72Additional stormwater treatment needsa b cFunction Name Formula shown to the right.Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.20 LHydrology - Characteristic 0.50 MedFlood Attenuation 0.47 MedWater Quality--Downstream 0.57 MedWater Quality--Wetland 0.50 MedShoreline Protection N/A N/ACharacteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure0.380.38 MedMaintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat0.470.47 MedMaintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.30LowAesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural0.360.36 MedCommercial use N/A N/A0Special Features listing: - ____Groundwater Interaction dischargeGroundwater Functional Indexno special indicatorsRestoration Potential (draft formula) #VALUE! #####Stormwater Sensitivity (not active)Final RatingRating CategoryFunctional Rating SummariesRaw scoreAdditional questions% effectively drained:WETLAND1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 2 4/30/2024317 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1Date 4/19/2024Special Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)- ____-____-____-____#1Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland)Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -15B------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) L0.1 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) - ------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) L0.1 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) -0 0 0 0Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others)Cowardin TypesPhoto ID0.1 Low 0 - 0 - 0 -0.10 Low - - - - - -0.10 Low 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 -#4 Listed, rare, special plant species? n Y N Y N Y N Y N#5Rare community or habitat?nY NY NY NY N#6 Pre-European-settlement conditions? n Y N Y N Y N Y N3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B#2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Plant Community #115B100%Reed canary/ 6 Average vegetative diversity/integrity:Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity:Plant Community #2Plant Community #3Plant Community #4*Highest rated community veg. div./integ:Cover Class Class Range1 0 - 3%2 3 - 10%3 10 - 25%4 25 - 50%5 50 - 75%6 75 - 100%Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B]*If there are more than four plant community types, use the next column over to enter the rest and do not rely on the automatic average calculations.Wetland 2__________________Wetland name / ID___________________Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID__________________WETLAND2_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity4/30/2024318 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071A B C D E F G H I J K L MMnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2Question Description Rating1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.10TOTAL VEG Rating0.1 L4Listed, rare, special plant species?nnext5Rare community or habitat?n next6Pre-European-settlement conditions?nnext7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A8 Water depth (inches)Water depth (% inundation)9Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)10Existing wetland size 0.1711SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site)12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention A 113 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime A 114Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft) C 0.1 115Soil condition (wetland) B0.516 Vegetation (% cover)10%L 0.117 Emerg. veg. flood resistanceN/A018 Sediment deliveryA119Upland soils (based on soil group)B0.520 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detentionB0.5 0.521Subwatershed wetland densityB0.522 Channels/sheet flowA123 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)10LWQ0.1L0.124 Adjacent Area Management: % Full20%0.2 30.56adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured70%0.35adjacent area mgmt: % Bare10%0.0125Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 20%0.2 20.6adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 80%0.4adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 0%026 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle40%0.4 20.7adjacent area slope: % Moderate60%0.3adjacent area slope: % Steep0%027Downstream sensitivity/WQ protectionA128 Nutrient loadingB0.529Shoreline wetland? NN30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )Enter a percentage31 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)Enter a percentage32 Emergent vegetation erosion resistance Enter valid choice33 Shoreline erosion potentialEnter valid choice34 Bank protection/upslope veg. Enter valid choice35Rare WildlifeNN36Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local communityNN37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)8L 0.138 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)1L 0.1039 Wetland detritusB0.540Wetland interspersion on landscape B 0.50.541 Wildlife barriers B 0.542 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod I 043 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence A 144 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat N/A 045 Wildlife species (list)46 Fish habitat quality N/A N/A47 Fish species (list)48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N49 Wetland visibility C 0.150 Proximity to population Y 151Public ownership C 0.152 Public access C 0.153 Human influence on wetland B 0.554 Human influence on viewshed C 0.155 Spatial buffer B 0.556 Recreational activity potential C 0.157 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact N/A N/ADigital worksheet, section II Digital worksheet, section IUser entryWETLAND2_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 1 4/30/2024319 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls72737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141A B C D E F G H I J K L M58 GW - Wetland soilsR R or D 0.159 GW - Subwatershed land useD R or D 160 GW - Wetland size and soil groupR R or D 0.161 GW - Wetland hydroperiod D R or D 162 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration D R or D 163 GW - Surrounding upland topographic reliefDR or D164Restoration potential w/o flooding Y or N 4.265Landowners affected by restoration E a b cEnter valid choice66AExisting wetland size (acres) [from #10]0.17 __ acres66BTotal wetland restoration size (acres) __ acres 0.166C(Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A] -0.17 __ acres ####67Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potential)0 __ feet 0.1 value: ####68Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice69 Hydrologic alteration typeOutlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling70Potential wetland type (Circ. 39) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 871Wetland sensitivity to stormwater E a b c72Additional stormwater treatment needsa b cFunction Name Formula shown to the right.Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.10 LHydrology - Characteristic 0.53 MedFlood Attenuation 0.67 HighWater Quality--Downstream 0.59 MedWater Quality--Wetland 0.39 MedShoreline Protection N/A N/ACharacteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure0.380.38 MedMaintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat#######N/A N/AMaintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.00N/AAesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural0.310.31 LowCommercial use N/A N/A0Special Features listing: - ____Groundwater Interaction dischargeGroundwater Functional Indexno special indicatorsRestoration Potential (draft formula) #VALUE! #####Stormwater Sensitivity (not active)Final RatingRating CategoryFunctional Rating SummariesRaw scoreAdditional questions% effectively drained:WETLAND2_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 2 4/30/2024320 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1DateSpecial Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)- ____-____-____-____#1Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland)Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -1A------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassBoxelder/4Community Quality (E, H, M, L) L0.1 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) -0 0 0 0Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others)Cowardin TypesPhoto ID0.1 Low 0 - 0 - 0 -0.10 Low - - - - - -0.10 Low 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 -#4 Listed, rare, special plant species? n Y N Y N Y N Y N#5Rare community or habitat?nY NY NY NY N#6 Pre-European-settlement conditions? n Y N Y N Y N Y N3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B#2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Plant Community #1Eastern Cottonwood/31A100%European buckthorn/3Average vegetative diversity/integrity:Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity:Plant Community #2Plant Community #3Plant Community #4*Highest rated community veg. div./integ:Cover Class Class Range1 0 - 3%2 3 - 10%3 10 - 25%4 25 - 50%5 50 - 75%6 75 - 100%Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B]*If there are more than four plant community types, use the next column over to enter the rest and do not rely on the automatic average calculations.Wetland name / ID_____________3_____Wetland name / ID___________________Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID__________________WETLANDS3_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity5/1/2024321 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071A B C D E F G H I J K L MMnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2Question Description Rating1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.10TOTAL VEG Rating0.1 L4Listed, rare, special plant species?nnext5Rare community or habitat?n next6Pre-European-settlement conditions?nnext7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A8 Water depth (inches)Water depth (% inundation)9Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)10Existing wetland size 0.0111SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site)12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention N/A N/A13 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime A 114Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft) B 0.5 0.515Soil condition (wetland) B0.516 Vegetation (% cover)50%M 0.517 Emerg. veg. flood resistanceN/A018 Sediment deliveryA119Upland soils (based on soil group)B0.520 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detentionC0.1 121Subwatershed wetland densityB0.522 Channels/sheet flowA123 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)25MWQ0.5L0.124 Adjacent Area Management: % Full50%0.5 20.75adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured50%0.25adjacent area mgmt: % Bare0%025Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 10%0.1 20.55adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 90%0.45adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 0%026 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle60%0.6 30.76adjacent area slope: % Moderate30%0.15adjacent area slope: % Steep10%0.0127Downstream sensitivity/WQ protectionA128 Nutrient loadingA129Shoreline wetland? N/AEnter Y or N30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )Enter a percentage31 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)Enter a percentage32 Emergent vegetation erosion resistance Enter valid choice33 Shoreline erosion potentialEnter valid choice34 Bank protection/upslope veg. Enter valid choice35Rare WildlifeNN36Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local communityNN37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)N/AN/A N/A38 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)N/AN/A N/A039 Wetland detritusA140Wetland interspersion on landscape A 1141 Wildlife barriers B 0.542 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod I 043 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence A 144 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat N/A 045 Wildlife species (list)46 Fish habitat quality N/A N/A47 Fish species (list)48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N49 Wetland visibility C 0.150 Proximity to population Y 151Public ownership B 0.552 Public access B 0.553 Human influence on wetland B 0.554 Human influence on viewshed B 0.555 Spatial buffer C 0.156 Recreational activity potential C 0.157 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact N/A N/ADigital worksheet, section II Digital worksheet, section IUser entryWETLANDS_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 1 5/1/2024322 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls72737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141A B C D E F G H I J K L M58 GW - Wetland soilsR R or D 0.159 GW - Subwatershed land useD R or D 160 GW - Wetland size and soil groupD R or D 161 GW - Wetland hydroperiod R R or D 0.162 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration D R or D 163 GW - Surrounding upland topographic reliefDR or D164Restoration potential w/o flooding Y or N 4.265Landowners affected by restoration E a b cEnter valid choice66AExisting wetland size (acres) [from #10]0.01 __ acres66BTotal wetland restoration size (acres) __ acres 0.166C(Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A] -0.01 __ acres ####67Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potential)0 __ feet 0.1 value: ####68Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice69 Hydrologic alteration typeOutlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling70Potential wetland type (Circ. 39) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 871Wetland sensitivity to stormwater E a b c72Additional stormwater treatment needsa b cFunction Name Formula shown to the right.Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.10 LHydrology - Characteristic 0.75 HighFlood Attenuation 0.51 MedWater Quality--Downstream 0.59 MedWater Quality--Wetland 0.62 MedShoreline Protection N/A N/ACharacteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure0.650.65 MedMaintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat#######N/A N/AMaintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.00N/AAesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural0.410.41 MedCommercial use N/A N/A0Special Features listing: - ____Groundwater Interaction dischargeGroundwater Functional Indexno special indicatorsRestoration Potential (draft formula) #VALUE! #####Stormwater Sensitivity (not active)Additional questions% effectively drained:Final RatingRating CategoryFunctional Rating SummariesRaw scoreWETLANDS_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 2 5/1/2024323 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1DateSpecial Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)- ____-____-____-____#1Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland)Community Type (wet meadow, marsh)15B, Fresh(wet) Meadow------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) M0.5 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -Shallow Marsh ------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) M0.5 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) -0 0 0 0Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others)Cowardin TypesPhoto ID0.5 Medium 0 - 0 - 0 -0.50 Medium - - - - - -0.50 Medium 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 -#4 Listed, rare, special plant species? n Y N Y N Y N Y N#5Rare community or habitat?nY NY NY NY N#6 Pre-European-settlement conditions? n Y N Y N Y N Y NAverage vegetative diversity/integrity:Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity:Plant Community #2Plant Community #3Plant Community #4*Highest rated community veg. div./integ:15B, 13B30%70%Reed Canary Grass/ 63A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B#2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Plant Community #1Reed Canary Grass/ 4Hybrid cattail/ 4Cover Class Class Range1 0 - 3%2 3 - 10%3 10 - 25%4 25 - 50%5 50 - 75%6 75 - 100%Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B]*If there are more than four plant community types, use the next column over to enter the rest and do not rely on the automatic average calculations.Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID___________________Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID__________________WETLANDS4_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity5/1/2024324 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061626364656667686970A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2Question Description RatingHighest-rated:1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.500.5TOTAL VEG Rating0.5 Medium4Listed, rare, special plant species?nnext5Rare community or habitat?n next6Pre-European-settlement conditions?nnext7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A8 Water depth (inches)Water depth (% inundation)9Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)10Existing wetland size 1.5911SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site)12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention N/A N/A13 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime A 114Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft) B 0.5 0.515Soil condition (wetland) A116 Vegetation (% cover)80%H 117 Emerg. veg. flood resistanceN/A018 Sediment deliveryA119Upland soils (based on soil group)B0.520 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detentionC0.1 121Subwatershed wetland densityC0.122 Channels/sheet flowA123 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)50MWQ0.5M0.524 Adjacent Area Management: % Full60%0.6 30.76adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured30%0.15adjacent area mgmt: % Bare10%0.0125Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 0%0 10.5adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 100%0.5adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 0%026 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle50%0.5 30.71adjacent area slope: % Moderate40%0.2adjacent area slope: % Steep10%0.0127Downstream sensitivity/WQ protectionA128 Nutrient loadingB0.529Shoreline wetland? YY30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )90% 131 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)30 0.532 Emergent vegetation erosion resistanceA133 Shoreline erosion potentialB0.50.534 Bank protection/upslope veg.C0.135Rare WildlifeNN36Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local communityNN37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)4M 0.538 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)2M 0.5039 Wetland detritusA140Wetland interspersion on landscape A 1141 Wildlife barriers B 0.542 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod A 143 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence B 0.544 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat B 0.545 Wildlife species (list)46 Fish habitat quality A 147 Fish species (list)48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N49 Wetland visibility B 0.550 Proximity to population Y 151Public ownership B 0.552 Public access B 0.553 Human influence on wetland B 0.554 Human influence on viewshed B 0.555 Spatial buffer A 156 Recreational activity potential B 0.557 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact N/A N/ADigital worksheet, section II Digital worksheet, section IUser entryWETLANDS4_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 1 5/1/2024325 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls7172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141A B C D E F G H I J K L M N58 GW - Wetland soilsR R or D 0.159 GW - Subwatershed land useD R or D 160 GW - Wetland size and soil groupD R or D 161 GW - Wetland hydroperiod R R or D 0.162 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration R R or D 0.163 GW - Surrounding upland topographic reliefDR or D164Restoration potential w/o flooding Y or N 3.365Landowners affected by restoration E a b cEnter valid choice66AExisting wetland size (acres) [from #10]1.59 __ acres66BTotal wetland restoration size (acres) __ acres 0.166C(Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A] -1.59 __ acres ####67Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potential)0 __ feet 0.1 value: ####68Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice69 Hydrologic alteration typeOutlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling70Potential wetland type (Circ. 39) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 871Wetland sensitivity to stormwater E a b c72Additional stormwater treatment needsa b cFunction Name Formula shown to the right.Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.50 MedHydrology - Characteristic 0.88 HighFlood Attenuation 0.57 MedWater Quality--Downstream 0.63 MedWater Quality--Wetland 0.67 HighShoreline Protection 0.62 MedCharacteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure0.710.71 HighMaintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat0.810.81 HighMaintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.29LowAesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural0.630.63 MedCommercial use N/A N/A0Special Features listing: - ____Groundwater Interactionindeterminate GW sourceGroundwater Functional Indexno special indicatorsRestoration Potential (draft formula) #VALUE! #####Stormwater Sensitivity (not active)Additional questions% effectively drained:Final RatingRating CategoryFunctional Rating SummariesRaw scoreWETLANDS4_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (1).xls 2 5/1/2024326 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1DateSpecial Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)- ____-____-____-____#1Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland)Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) -15B------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) L0.1 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 0Community Type (wet meadow, marsh) --------Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover ClassCommunity Quality (E, H, M, L) -0 0 0 0Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others)Cowardin TypesPhoto ID0.1 Low 0 - 0 - 0 -0.10 Low - - - - - -0.10 Low 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 -#4 Listed, rare, special plant species? n Y N Y N Y N Y N#5Rare community or habitat?nY NY NY NY N#6 Pre-European-settlement conditions? n Y N Y N Y N Y NAverage vegetative diversity/integrity:Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity:Plant Community #2Plant Community #3Plant Community #4*Highest rated community veg. div./integ:3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B100%Reed canary/ herb3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B#2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ ~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Plant Community #1Cover Class Class Range1 0 - 3%2 3 - 10%3 10 - 25%4 25 - 50%5 50 - 75%6 75 - 100%Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B]*If there are more than four plant community types, use the next column over to enter the rest and do not rely on the automatic average calculations.Wetland name / ID_________5_________Wetland name / ID___________________Wetland name / ID__________________Wetland name / ID__________________WETLAND5_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (2).xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity5/23/2024327 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061626364656667686970A B C D E F G H I J K L M N PMnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2Question Description RatingHighest-rated:1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.100.1TOTAL VEG Rating0.1 L4Listed, rare, special plant species?n next5Rare community or habitat?n next6Pre-European-settlement conditions?n next7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A8 Water depth (inches)Water depth (% inundation)9Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)10Existing wetland size 0.0111SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site)12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention C 0.113 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime C 0.114Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft)B0.5 0.515Soil condition (wetland) B0.516 Vegetation (% cover)5%L 0.117 Emerg. veg. flood resistanceN/A018 Sediment deliveryA119Upland soils (based on soil group)B0.520 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detentionC0.1 121Subwatershed wetland densityC0.122 Channels/sheet flowA123 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)25MWQ0.5L0.124 Adjacent Area Management: % Full25%0.25 30.525adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured50%0.25adjacent area mgmt: % Bare25%0.02525Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 20%0.2 30.52adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 60%0.3adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 20%0.0226 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle75%0.75 20.875adjacent area slope: % Moderate25%0.125adjacent area slope: % Steep0%027Downstream sensitivity/WQ protectionA128 Nutrient loadingB0.529Shoreline wetland? NN30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )Enter a percentage31 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)Enter a percentage32 Emergent vegetation erosion resistance Enter valid choice33 Shoreline erosion potentialEnter valid choice34 Bank protection/upslope veg. Enter valid choice35Rare WildlifeNN36Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local communityNN37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)N/AN/A N/A38 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)N/AN/A N/A039 Wetland detritusB0.540Wetland interspersion on landscape B 0.50.541 Wildlife barriers B 0.542 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod I 043 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence A 144 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat N/A 045 Wildlife species (list)46 Fish habitat quality N/A N/A47 Fish species (list)48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N49 Wetland visibility C 0.150 Proximity to population N 0.151Public ownership C 0.152 Public access C 0.153 Human influence on wetland B 0.554 Human influence on viewshed B 0.555 Spatial buffer C 0.156 Recreational activity potential C 0.157 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact N/A N/ADigital worksheet, section II Digital worksheet, section IUser entryThis comes in from Side 1 automatically using the weighted average. To use the highest rated veg. Community rating, please manually overwrite that value (shown to the right) into the field at E5.Enter data starting here. Yellow boxes are used in calculations.Scroll down to answer more questions and see formula calculationsWETLAND5_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (2).xls 1 5/24/2024328 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 9091 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 58 GW - Wetland soils R R or D 0.1 59 GW - Subwatershed land use D R or D 1 60 GW - Wetland size and soil group R R or D 0.1 61 GW - Wetland hydroperiod R R or D 0.1 62 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration D R or D 1 63 GW - Surrounding upland topographic relief D R or D 1 64 Restoration potential w/o flooding Y or N 3.3 65 Landowners affected by restoration E a b c Enter valid choice 66A Existing wetland size (acres) [from #10]0 __ acres 66B Total wetland restoration size (acres) __ acres 0.1 66C (Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A] 0 __ acres #### 67 Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potential)0 __ feet 0.1 value: #### 68 Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice 69 Hydrologic alteration type Outlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling 70 Potential wetland type (Circ. 39) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 71 Wetland sensitivity to stormwater E a b c 72 Additional stormwater treatment needs a b c Function Name Formula shown to the right. Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.10 L Hydrology - Characteristic 0.53 Med Flood Attenuation 0.36 Med Water Quality--Downstream 0.48 Med Water Quality--Wetland 0.55 Med Shoreline Protection N/A N/A Characteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure 0.40 0.40 Med Maintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat ######N/A N/A Maintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.00 N/A Aesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural 0.20 0.20 Low Commercial use N/A N/A 0 Special Features listing: - ____ Groundwater Interaction indeterminate GW source Groundwater Functional Index no special indicators Restoration Potential (draft formula) #VALUE! ##### Stormwater Sensitivity (not active)Additional questions% effectively drained:Final RatingRating CategoryFunctional Rating SummariesRaw scoreWETLAND5_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version (2).xls 3 5/23/2024 329 Appendix E CREDENTIALS 330 Benjamin Hodapp, PWS Environmental Specialist 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com CERTIFICATIONS Professional Wetland Scientist #1832 MN Certified Wetland Delineator #1016 EDUCATION MS Water Resources Management University of Wisconsin-Madison BS Biology; Ecology Minnesota State University- Mankato SPECIALIZED TRAINING Wetland Delineation & Management Training Richard Chinn Environmental Training, Inc. Wetland Plant Identification Biotic Consultants Inc. Plant Identification for Wetland Delineation University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Watershed Academy Web Certificate United States Environmental Protection Agency PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Society of Wetland Scientists MN Wetland Professionals Association (WPA) MN WPA President 2010 Wisconsin Wetlands Association Association of State Wetland Managers Minnesota Native Plant Society Ecological Society of America TOTAL EXPERIENCE 19 years YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM 2004 to Present PUBLICATIONS & PRESENTATIONS The Future of Rowan Creek Watershed: Connecting Land Use and Management with Water Quality. 2003. Water Resources Management Workshop 2002, Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison. The Tumultuous World of Drainage Districts: An Analysis of Existing Management Arrangements, with Recommendations. Working Paper Series 2002-1. Water Resources Institutions and Policies, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin, Madison. South Shore Lake Bemidji Remediation & Restoration, Society of American Military Engineers meeting June 22, 2016, St Paul, MN. SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE Benjamin Hodapp, an Environmental Specialist and Senior Project Manager, brings a broad background of knowledge and experience in the environmental field to the Anderson Engineering team. Benjamin has a unique combination of multi-disciplinary academic training and work experience at various levels of federal, state and local government and private consulting. Benjamin’s project experience includes natural resource inventory and assessment; wetland delineation, mitigation design and monitoring; regulatory permitting; agency and stakeholder coordination; environmental impact assessment, environmental document preparation and public outreach. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Southwest Light Rail Transit- Metropolitan Council – Minneap olis, MN: Project manager for wetland delineation and permitting efforts in support of multi-disciplinary consultant team for preparation of Final Environmental Impact Statement for proposed 16 mile light rail alignment. Project tasks included completion of wetland delineations, preparation of all federal, state and local wetland permits and wetland mitigation plans, quality assurance and quality control of all deliverable products. Harriet Island to South St. Paul Regional Trail – City of St Paul, City of South St. Paul and Dakota County – St Paul, MN: Project manager for wetland delineation, mapping and assessment efforts in support of multi-disciplinary consultant team responsible for preliminary engineering and final design. Project tasks included project management oversight and coordination, supervising field staff in completion of both off-site and on-site wetland determinations, boundary delineations, GPS mapping and functional assessments. Oversaw preparation of and responsible for quality assurance and quality control of all deliverable products. Crosstown Blvd. Pedestrian Trail – City of Andover – Ando ver, MN: Project Manager for wetland delineation associated with proposed City trail improvements. Services included a wetland delineation, GPS mapping and functional assessment document findings and coordination and approval of findings with federal, state and local regulatory agencies. Bennett Family Park Improvements – Minnetonka, MN: Project Manager for wetland delineation associated with proposed baseball complex improvements. Services included a wetland delineation, GPS mapping and functional assessment document findings and coordination and approval of findings with federal, state and local regulatory agencies. Section 401/404 Wetland Permitting – Fort McCoy Commemo rative Park Expansion – Fort McCoy, WI: Provided project management services for Section 401/404 permitting associated with proposed wetland impacts resulting from the Commemorative Park Expansion Project at the Fort McCoy U.S. Army installation. Project tasks included project management, developing a wetland mitigation strategy in compliance with Section 401/404 and state wetland permitting requirements and oversight and quality control in preparing Section 401/404 permit application. 331 Dylan J. Kruzel Environmental Scientist 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com EDUCATION Bachelor of Science: Wildlife Biology Minor: Wetlands Ecology and Biology Bemidji State University – Bemidji SPECIALIZED TRAINING Certified Minnesota Wetland Professional #1406 S-130 Basic Wildland Firefighter S-190 Introduction to Fire Behavior L-180 Human Factors in the Wildland Fire Service Certified Open Water Diver OSHA 10 Hour Training PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS MN Wetland Professionals Association The Wildlife Society TOTAL EXPERIENCE 3.5 years YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM 2020 to present SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE Dylan Kruzel, an Environmental Scientist, brings a broad background of knowledge and experience in the environmental field to the Anderson Engineering team. Prior to his employment with Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC, Dylan worked for the Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) of Becker County as a Conservation Technician. He conducted field evaluations for conservation plans, monitored conservation easements, and provided available natural resource program information to landowners with conservation concerns. He has also assisted in the design and installation of various native habitat, shoreline restoration, rain garden, and storm water mitigation projects. The skills that Dylan has developed through his educational background and experience make him proficient in assessing and addressing a range of ecological indications and environmental issues. Dylan’s project and educational experience includes conservation management practices, habitat management evaluations, ecosystem restoration, species identification, regulatory permitting, environmental document preparation and compliance oversight, wetland delineation and classifications, wetland mitigation, and project coordination. Dylan has experience with Collector for ArcGIS, Wildnote, Geographic Information Systems, Global Positioning Systems, and Realtime Landscape Architect. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Wetland Delineation/Reporting – Various Locations: Services included wetland delineation and reporting in support of linear construction projects and real-estate transactions for federal, state, and local agencies, as well as private companies. Project tasks included completion of wetland field delineations following the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and Regional Supplement: Midwest Region, and Northcentral and Northeast Region, GPS mapping, and preparation of reports to document findings and assess wetland impacts. Permitting Specialist – MN: Services include preparation of permit applications in accordance with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act to support the planning, design, and mitigation for residential, commercial, and state land development projects. NEPA Documentation – MN: Services include preparation of Categorical Exclusion Determination documents in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Transportation Highway Project Development Process and the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) NEPA Interim Guidance for Projects. Tasks include evaluation, coordination, and responding to assist project managers in environmental documentation for Minnesota highways and VA health care facilities. Project Book – US Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) – Dallas VA Medical Center, TX: Project Coordinator to guide a multidisciplinary team in development of a project book for expansion of and upgrades to the Dallas VA Medical Center. The project consists of organizing and collection of pre-design information that will serve as the foundation of all future design work by defining project requirements and refining cost elements. Efforts involve close coordi nation with members of the design team. Land Alterations and Field Monitoring – Becker County SWCD – MN: Services include performing the following general activities in compliance with federal, state, and local regulations: assisting in site evaluations and installing for various cost share projects like conservation easements, management practices, and shoreland alterations. 332 Robert Bergstrom Environmental Scientist 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management Minor in Water Sciences University of Minnesota Twin Cities CERTIFICATIONS OSHA 30-hour-1910 First Aid/CPR/AED Certified Minnesota Boater Safety Certification SPECIALIZED TRAININGS Construction Installer- UMN Erosion and Stormwater Management Program PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS MN Wetland Professionals Association (WPA) Trout Unlimited (TU) TOTAL EXPERIENCE 0 years YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM 2024 to present SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE Robert is an Environmental Scientist who brings a variety of knowledge and experience to the Anderson Engineering team. Prior to his employment with Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC, Robert worked for the Minnesota Pollution Control agency, in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Unit. At the MPCA, Robert was involved in a variety of water quality monitoring programs. Programs such as Intensive Watershed Management, Sulfate-Wild Rice, Mercury/Heavy Metals, and more, focused on the collection of field data and the sampling of physical and biological indicators of water quality. Along with state programs, Robert conducted sampling and data collection for the federal National Lake Assessment. Sampling of physical indicators of water quality included general chemistry, nutrients, heavy metals, E. coli, VOC’s and more. Biological sampling included zoo and phytoplankton tows, chlorophyll-a, benthic macroinvertebrates and more. Robert’s wide range of experience in natural resource monitoring and sampling programs across Minnesota has provided him with unique experience and knowledge of the complex interactions between hydrology, ecology and pedology. Prior to working with the MPCA, Robert interned with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in the State Climatology Office. At the state Climatology office, Robert’s primary responsibilities were data entry and data management of the states combined climatological monitoring networks. This work involved doing QA/QC checks on large volumes of data that will be used in a wide range of decision-making situations by both government officials and private individuals. Robert’s professional and educational experiences combine to create a dynamic ensemble of natural resource management and monitoring. With an educational background heavily focused on hydrology and soils, Robert can analyze and quantify and the interactions of natural systems and can report the potential impacts across the landscape. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Governing Bylaws- Minnesota Stormwater Research Council- Dr. Joseph Magner chose Robert to lead the project of creating the 1st edition of the Governing Bylaws of the Minnesota Stormwater Research council. Through research and a literature review, Robert was the primary contributing author to the bylaws, which were accepted by vote of the council in September 2023. Rain Garden Stratified Random Sampling- City of St. Louis Park- Senior capstone project working in a group in conjunction with the City of St. Louis Park. Created a rain garden functionality scoring system. Trained others in the use of the system and field data collection. Primary data analyst for the project. Using a system of Stratified Random Sampling, interpolated results for the entire population of rain gardens by determining the statistically valid range of site samples needed. 333 H:\ORNO\_Surface Water Management\MS4 Administration\MCM-5\2_Site Plan Reviews\Honey Hill\Honey Hill_PrePlatReview_2024-06-06.docx June 6, 2024 City of Orono Attn: Adam Edwards 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 RE: Preliminary Plat Application Honey Hill Engineering Review #1 Dear Adam: As requested, I have completed an engineering review of the documents submitted for the above referenced project. Following are my comments for your consideration: 1. Proposed improvements will require the installation of stormwater runoff management practices to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and NPDES requirements for runoff treatment. The following should be considered regarding stormwater management: a. Per MCWD requirements, the proposed stormwater runoff management system must provide rate control and volume control for the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces. b. Per NPDES requirements, the water quality volume must be treated, calculated as 1” times the sum of the new and fully reconstructed impervious surfaces. If infiltration is prohibited as outlined by NPDES requirements, a wet sedimentation basin or filtration basin may be utilized. c. A complete Stormwater Management Plan for the site meeting MCWD and NPDES requirements should be provided for review. d. Per City requirements to track TMDLs and reduce loads to meet required Waste Load Allocations, the calculations for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TP) loading should be provided. e. Facilities necessary for the ultimate development (street construction, sewer, basins, etc.) should be installed and the site mass-graded at the same time as street construction to ensure all drainage ways, watersheds, and runoff management systems are constructed per the approved Stormwater Management Plan and are sized adequately for proposed improvements. 2. Final Plans should include the following: a. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan b. Street Construction Plan c. Landscape and Restoration Plan d. SWPPP meeting NPDES requirements e. City Standard Details 3. The applicant will be required to obtain the following permits and provide a copy of any approvals required prior to Final Plat approval: 334 Preliminary Plat Application Honey Hill Page 2 H:\ORNO\_Surface Water Management\MS4 Administration\MCM-5\2_Site Plan Reviews\Honey Hill\Honey Hill_PrePlatReview_2024-06-06.docx a. Hennepin County Access Permit b. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) c. NPDES General Construction Permit 4. The private street should be operated and maintained per the City’s standard agreement. 5. The required cul-de-sac radius is 40 ft for pavement and 50 ft for ROW. The proposed cul-de- sac indicates a radius 40 ft, and 50 ft for the ROW. 6. The applicant will be required to submit a Maintenance Agreement for all stormwater management structures and facilities. The agreement must define maintenance responsibilities following completion of project, specify types and frequencies of inspection and maintenance activities, designate who will conduct inspection and maintenance activities, and outline reporting requirements. The Agreement should be recorded with the County per the City’s approval process. 7. Drainage and Utility Easements should be provided as follows: a. Over all stormwater management facilities used to meet regulatory requirements, including access routes. b. Over all wetlands, creeks, and buffers. c. All swales, structures, and piping providing drainage for multiple properties. d. 5’ along all side lot lines, unless adjacent to Development boundary. e. 10’ along all front lot lines, rear lot lines, and adjacent to Development boundary. 8. Additional comments may be forthcoming once a complete Stormwater Management Plan is provided. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me to discuss. Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Robert E. Bean, Jr., P.E. Water Resources Engineer 335 This message may be from an external email source. Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center. From:Saunders-Pearce, Wes (DNR) To:Melanie Curtis; "permitting@minnehahacreek.org"; "transportation.plats@hennepin.us" Cc:Natalie Nye; Laura Oakden; kmoran@minnehahacreek.org Subject:RE: Plat Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Date:Monday, June 10, 2024 11:01:35 AM Attachments:image002.png Melanie, I have no comments on this application. Wes Saunders-Pearce, CFM North Metro Area Hydrologist | Ecological and Water Resources Anoka & Hennepin Counties Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road Saint Paul, MN 55106 Phone: 651-259-5822 From: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:29 PM To: 'permitting@minnehahacreek.org' <permitting@minnehahacreek.org>; Saunders-Pearce, Wes (DNR) <Wes.Saunders-Pearce@state.mn.us>; 'transportation.plats@hennepin.us' <transportation.plats@hennepin.us> Cc: Natalie Nye <nnye@oronomn.gov>; Laura Oakden <loakden@oronomn.gov>; kmoran@minnehahacreek.org Subject: Plat Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Hello, We received an application for a 6-lot subdivision of the properties at 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue North (+ 3 associated PIDs). The application is planned for a public hearing for Preliminary Plat Review at the June 17th Planning Commission meeting (tentatively slated for preliminary plat review by the City Council on July 8th). The project is located in Orono’s RR-1B, Rural Residential zoning district which requires a minimum of 2.0 acres and 200-feet of frontage. The project is located within the Shoreland Overlay and Stormwater Quality Overlay Districts, it abuts Lake Classen and contains several wetlands. 336 From:Ashley Morello To:Melanie Curtis Cc:Natalie Nye; Laura Oakden; kmoran@minnehahacreek.org; Saunders-Pearce, Wes (DNR); "permitting@minnehahacreek.org"; Transportation.Plats Subject:RE: [External] RE: Plat Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Date:Tuesday, June 11, 2024 2:45:56 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png Melanie, Appreciate you sharing this for county review. County staff support the two access points as shown. Please have the applicant confirm that the driveway apron will be paved to prevent gravel on the county road. County staff appreciates the proposal to clean up the right-of-way on the west side of the site. Be advised that this segment of 6th Ave is programmed for a chip seal in 2025. Be advised that the existing drainage patterns can’t be altered unless approved byHennepin County. Watershed District approval and drainage calculations are required if the work alters existing drainage patterns. Post-construction flow rates entering Hennepin County’s drainage system, overland or through pipes, shall not exceed pre-construction rates for the two, 10 and 100-year events. Will need the stormwater management report or other documentation when that is completed to ensure the above is met. Not our purview, but it may be some added value for the home owners to considerinternal connections to the dog park. Since this is a preliminary plat, county staff will provide a formal comment letter for your records.It takes a couple of weeks, so I hope the informal comments will suffice in the interim. The formalletter will be helpful for when the applicant submits the plat with the county surveyor group toconfirm that county staff has reviewed. Ashley Morello she/her Transportation Planning Office: 612-596-0359ashley.morello@hennepin.us | hennepin.us From: Saunders-Pearce, Wes (DNR) <Wes.Saunders-Pearce@state.mn.us> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 11:01 AM To: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov>; 'permitting@minnehahacreek.org' <permitting@minnehahacreek.org>; Transportation.Plats <Transportation.Plats@hennepin.us> 337 This message may be from an external email source. Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center. CAUTION: This email was sent from outside of Hennepin County. Unless you recognize the sender and know the content, do not click links or open attachments. Cc: Natalie Nye <nnye@oronomn.gov>; loakden <loakden@OronoMn.gov>; kmoran@minnehahacreek.org Subject: [External] RE: Plat Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Melanie, I have no comments on this application. Wes Saunders-Pearce, CFM North Metro Area Hydrologist | Ecological and Water Resources Anoka & Hennepin Counties Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road Saint Paul, MN 55106 Phone: 651-259-5822 From: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:29 PM To: 'permitting@minnehahacreek.org' <permitting@minnehahacreek.org>; Saunders-Pearce, Wes (DNR) <Wes.Saunders-Pearce@state.mn.us>; 'transportation.plats@hennepin.us' <transportation.plats@hennepin.us> Cc: Natalie Nye <nnye@oronomn.gov>; Laura Oakden <loakden@oronomn.gov>; kmoran@minnehahacreek.org Subject: Plat Review Requested for LA24-000030, Plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen / 3465 & 3515 6th Ave N Hello, We received an application for a 6-lot subdivision of the properties at 3465 & 3515 6th Avenue North (+ 3 associated PIDs). The application is planned for a public hearing for Preliminary Plat Review at the June 17th Planning Commission meeting (tentatively slated for preliminary plat review by the City Council on July 8th). The project is located in Orono’s RR-1B, Rural Residential zoning district which requires a minimum of 2.0 338 #10634702v3 _____________________________________________________________________ [Above space reserved for recording information] DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS FOR HONEY HILL ON LAKE CLASSEN THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS (this “Declaration”) is made in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, on this ____ day of _______________, 2024, by Aspect Design Build L.L.C., a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Declarant”). WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto, and WHEREAS, Declarant desires to establish on the Property (as defined below) a plan for a permanent residential community, commonly known as Honey Hill on Lake Classen (“Honey Hill”), to be owned, occupied and operated for the use, health, safety and welfare of its resident Owners and Occupants, and for the purpose of preserving the value, the structural quality, and the original architectural and aesthetic character of the Property, and WHEREAS, Honey Hill is not subject to the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act (“MCIOA”), Chapter 515B of the Minnesota Statutes. Honey Hill is exempt from MCIOA pursuant to Minn. Stat. §515B.1-102(e)(2), because the Homesites consist solely of separate parcels of real estate designed or utilized for detached single family dwellings, and the Association has no obligation to maintain any building containing a dwelling or any agricultural building, and the Declarant has not elected to subject the Property to MCIOA, and references to MCIOA herein or any reliance on terms or provisions defined or specified in MCIOA are for convenience only. THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that this Declaration shall constitute covenants to run with the Property described herein, and that the Property shall be owned, used, occupied and conveyed subject to the covenants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens set forth herein, which are for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of and shall run with the Property, and shall be binding upon all persons owning or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property, and their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. SECTION 1 339 #10634702v3 2 DEFINITIONS The following words when used in the Governing Documents shall have the following meanings (unless the context indicates otherwise): 1.1 “Articles of Incorporation” shall mean and refer to the Articles of Incorporation for Honey Hill Homeowners Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation under Chapter 317A of the laws of the State of Minnesota, and filed with the Minnesota Secretary of State, and which govern the operation of the Association, defined below. 1.2 “Assessment” shall mean and refer to any assessment for Common Expenses, determined by the Board, and levied by the Association, pursuant to the Governing Documents. 1.3 “Association” shall mean Honey Hill Homeowners Association, a nonprofit corporation which has been created pursuant to Chapter 317A of the laws of the State of Minnesota. 1.4 “Board” shall mean the Board of Directors of the Association as provided for in the By- Laws. 1.5 “By-Laws” shall mean the By-Laws governing the operation of the Association, as amended from time to time. 1.6 “City” shall mean the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation. 1.7 “Common Areas” shall mean all parts of the Property except the Homesites, owned by the Association for the common benefit of the Owners and Occupants. The Common Areas include, without limitation, all easements benefitting the Association, and all improvements and fixtures located thereon, including, without limitation, the Shared Roadway together with all landscaping, planters, trees and structures, and the entrance monument and related landscaping located at the entrance to Honey Hill within Outlot A of the Plat; all proceeds paid or payable to the Association as a result of any damage to or condemnation of the Common Areas and all personal property the Association owns. 1.8 “Common Expense” shall mean and include all expenditures made or liabilities incurred by or on behalf of the Association and incident to its operation, including without limitation allocations to reserves and those items specifically identified as Common Expenses in this Declaration or the By-Laws. 1.9 “Declarant Control Period” shall mean the period commencing upon the filing of this Declaration and continuing until the earlier of: (i) the date Declarant no longer owns any Homesite; or (ii) the date Declarant voluntarily turns over control of the Association to the Owners. 1.10 “Dwelling” shall mean a building or part thereof consisting of one or more floors, designed and intended for occupancy as a single family residence, and located within the boundaries of a Homesite. The Dwelling includes any garage attached thereto or otherwise within the boundaries of the Homesite in which the Dwelling is located. 340 #10634702v3 3 1.11 “Eligible Mortgagee” shall mean any Person owning a mortgage on any Homesite, which mortgage is first in priority upon foreclosure to all other mortgages that encumber such Homesite, and which has requested the Association, in writing, to notify it regarding any proposed action which requires approval by a specified percentage of Eligible Mortgagees. 1.12 “General Assessment” shall mean and refer to an Assessment levied against all of the Homesites in accordance with Section 6.1, below. 1.13 “Governing Documents” shall mean this Declaration, and the Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws of the Association, as amended from time to time, all of which shall govern the use and operation of the Property. 1.14 “Homebuilder” shall mean and refer to a builder in the business of constructing residential properties, and who has purchased one or more Homesites for purposes of resale of the Homesite containing a completed Dwelling, and not for personal use by the builder. 1.15 “Homesite” shall mean any platted lot within the Plat subject to this Declaration upon which a Dwelling is located or intended to be located, as shown on the Plat, including all improvements thereon, but excluding the Common Areas. 1.16 “Improvement” shall mean and refer to all structures or improvements of any kind located on the Property, including without limitation any building, wall, fence, sign, swimming pool, spa, patio, tennis court, screen enclosure or screening, utilities system, communications system, security system, driveway, roadway decorative structure, planting, landscape, grading or any other type of structure or physical improvement whether the purpose is decorative or otherwise and any additions or changes thereto. 1.17 “Limited Assessment” shall mean and refer to an assessment levied by the Association against fewer than all of the Homesites in the Association pursuant to Section 6.1, below. 1.18 “Landscaping Areas” shall mean and refer to the areas near the front entrance and on each side of Outlot A of the Property located within a Homesite as labeled and designated on Exhibit B attached hereto to be maintained by the Association. 1.19 “Member” shall mean all persons who are members of the Association by virtue of being Owners as defined in this Declaration. The words “Owner” and “Member” may be used interchangeably in the Governing Documents. 1.20 “Occupant” shall mean any person or persons, other than an Owner, in possession of or residing in a Homesite. 1.21 “Owner” shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of the fee simple title to any Homesite except that if (i) a Homesite is being sold in a contract for deed, (ii) the contract vendee is in possession of the Homesite and (iii) the contract so provides, then the vendee and not the vendor shall be deemed the “Owner”. 341 #10634702v3 4 1.22 “Person” shall mean a natural individual, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, trustee, other or legal entity capable of holding title to real property. 1.23 “Plat” shall mean the plat of Honey Hill on Lake Classen, recorded in the offices of the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and any amendments or supplements thereto, and replats thereof. 1.24 “Property” shall mean all of the real property submitted to this Declaration, including the Homesites, Common Areas and all structures and improvements located thereon now or in the future. The initial Property as of the date of this Declaration is legally described in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto. 1.25 “Rules and Regulations” shall mean the Rules and Regulations of the Association as approved from time to time pursuant to Section 7.6. 1.26 “Shared Roadway” shall mean that certain private roadway serving Honey Hill and platted as Outlot A as shown on the Plat. The Shared Roadway shall be Common Area owned by the Association. 1.27 “Special Assessment” shall mean and refer to an assessment levied against the Homesites in accordance with Section 6.3 of this Declaration. 1.28 “Special Declarant Rights” means rights reserved in the Declaration for the benefit of a Declarant to: (i) complete improvements indicated on the Plat; (ii) subdivide Homesites or convert Homesites into Common Areas and/or Homesites; (iii) maintain sales offices, management offices, signs advertising the Property, and model homes; (iv) use easements through the Property for the purpose of making improvements within the Property; (v) appoint or remove any officer or director of the Association where applicable, during any period of Declarant control; or (vi) any other rights as set forth in Section 14 or other provisions of this Declaration reserved for the benefit of Declarant. SECTION 2 DESCRIPTION OF HOMESITES AND APPURTENANCES 2.1 Homesites. There are six (6) Homesites comprising the intitial Homesites of the Property, and all Homesites shall be restricted exclusively to residential and allowable home office use as defined by code in the City of Orono. Each Homesite constitutes a separate parcel of real estate. No additional Homesites may be created by the subdivision or conversion of Homesites, except as allowed in Section 15, below, or as otherwise allowed by code as it relates to Accessory Dwelling Units within the same property. The Homesite identifiers and locations of the initial Homesites are as shown on the Plat, which is incorporated herein by reference, and a schedule of Homesites is set forth on Exhibit “A”. The Homesite identifier for a Homesite shall be its lot and block numbers and the subdivision name, and any additional Homesites made subject to this Declaration will be as set forth in any Supplemental Declaration as defined in Section 14. 342 #10634702v3 5 2.2 Homesite Boundaries. The front, rear and side boundaries of each Homesite shall be the boundary lines of the platted lot upon which the Dwelling is located or intended to be located as shown on the Plat. The Homesites shall have no upper or lower boundaries. 2.3 Use and Enjoyment Easements. Each Homesite shall be the beneficiary of appurtenant easements for use and enjoyment on and across the Common Areas, subject to any restrictions authorized by the Declaration. 2.4 Utility and Maintenance Easements. Each Homesite shall be subject to and shall be the beneficiary of appurtenant easements for all services and utilities servicing the Homesites and the Common Areas, and for maintenance, repair and replacement as described in Section 12. 2.5 Declarant’s Easements. Declarant shall have and be the beneficiary of easements for construction and sales activities as described in Section 14. 2.6 Recorded Easements. The Property shall be subject to such other easements as may be recorded against it or otherwise shown on the Plat. 2.7 Easements are Appurtenant. All easements and similar rights burdening or benefitting a Homesite or any other part of the Property shall be appurtenant thereto, and shall be permanent, subject only to termination in accordance with the terms of the easement. Any recorded easement benefitting or burdening the Property shall be construed in a manner consistent with, and not in conflict with, the easements created by this Declaration. 2.8 Impairment Prohibited. No person shall materially restrict or impair any easement benefitting or burdening the Property; subject to the Declaration and the right of the Association to impose reasonable Rules and Regulations governing the use of the Property. 2.9 Benefit of Easements. All easements benefitting a Homesite shall benefit the Owners and Occupants of the Homesite, and their families and guests. However, an Owner who has delegated the right to occupy the Homesite to an Occupant or Occupants, whether by a lease or otherwise, does not have the use and other easement rights in the Property during such delegated occupancy, except as a guest of an Owner or Occupant or in connection with the inspection of the Homesite or recovery of possession of the Homesite from the Occupant pursuant to law. SECTION 3 COMMON AREAS AND COMMUNITY FEATURES 3.1 Common Areas. The Common Areas and their characteristics are as follows: a. All improvements related to the entrance landscape feature and monument, located at the entrance to Honey Hill within Outlot A of the Plat. 343 #10634702v3 6 b. All of the Property except the Homesites shall constitute Common Areas and shall be owned by the Association for the common benefit of the Owners and Occupants. The Common Areas shall include, without limitation, all easements benefitting the Association, the Shared Roadway, all improvements and fixtures located thereon, including, without limitation, the entrance monument and landscaping; all proceeds paid or payable to the Association as a result of any damage to or condemnation of the Common Areas and all personal property the Association owns. c. The Common Areas shall be subject to appurtenant easements for services, public and private utilities and storm sewer, access, use and enjoyment in favor of each Homesite and its Owners and Occupants; subject to the right of the Association to establish reasonable Rules and Regulations governing the use of the Property. d. Subject to Sections 6, 7 and 9 of this Declaration, all maintenance, repair, replacement, management and operation of the Common Areas shall be the responsibility of the Association. e. Common Expenses for the maintenance, repair, replacement, management and operation of the Common Areas shall be assessed and collected from the Owners in accordance with Section 6. 3.2 Community Landscaping Area. Declarant hereby reserves to itself and grants to the Association easements to install, operate, maintain, repair and replace landscaping (including without limitation grading swales, retaining walls, annual and perennial plats, mulch, sod and other turf grasses, native grasses, wild flowers, trees and shrubs) within the Landscaping Areas as shown on Exhibit B, together with utilities to service the same. Declarant shall have the right, but not the obligation, to perform any such work. Subject to governmental requirements applicable to public rights-of-way, the Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to install landscaping within each Landscaping Area. The Association shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless any Owner on which a Landscaping Area is located from any claims, causes of action, judgments and liabilities arising out of damage to person or property from the Association’s activities within the Landscaping Areas. 3.3 Disposition of Outlot B. Outlot B of Honey Hill at Lake Classen is not intended to be maintained by the Association. It is intended that Outlot B will be conveyed to the adjacent owner located East of the Property and will not remain part of the Honey Hill community. SECTION 4 RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF PROPERTY All Owners and Occupants, and all secured parties, by their acceptance or assertion of an interest in the Property, or by their occupancy of a Homesite, covenant and agree that, in addition to any other restrictions which may be imposed by the Governing Documents, the occupancy, use, operation, alienation and conveyance of the Property shall be subject to the following restrictions. 4.1 General. The property shall be owned, conveyed, encumbered, leased, used and occupied subject to the Governing Documents, as amended from time to time. All covenants, restrictions and obligations set forth in the Governing Documents are in furtherance of a plan for the Property, and shall run with the Property and be a burden 344 #10634702v3 7 and benefit to all Owners and Occupants and to any other Person acquiring or owning an interest in the Property, their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. 4.2 Commercial Uses. No Homesite may be used for any commercial purpose, except that Homesites or portions of Homesites may be used by Declarant and other Homebuilders for the purpose of completing the development of the Property (including the construction of new homes on the Homesites). Notwithstanding the foregoing, it shall be permissible for Owners to conduct a business, receive deliveries, and/or have an office in their home so long as the same is permitted by the applicable municipal ordinances and does not change the residential character of the Homesite, and provided such use (i) is incidental to the residential use, (ii) does not involve any observable business activity such as signs or advertising displays, and (iii) does not involve use of the residence by customers or employees (other than the Owner and family members occupaying the Dwelling). Nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted as a general authorization for or prohibition of the rental or leasing of all or a portion of the home, and such issue shall be determined solely pursuant to applicable City and/or County ordinances and regulations. 4.3 Residential Care Uses. No Homesite may be used for licensed or unlicensed residential care facilities, licensed or unlicensed day care facilities, or public or private schools; even if such uses may be permitted by applicable zoning ordinances. The foregoing restriction does not restrict the care of any member of the family that resides in the home. 4.4 Pets. Household pets are permissible provided they are not kept, bred or maintained for commercial purposes. Pet owners shall be responsible for caring for their pets in a way so as to keep the pets from becoming a nuisance to others. Pets must be restrained on the Owner’s Homesite unless on a leash, and must not be allowed to become a threat or nuisance to other Owner or their pets. No exterior kennels, pet enclosures or dog runs are permitted. 4.5 Fences. Chain link fences are prohibited. All other fences shall be subject to municipal ordinances. 4.6 Parking; Storage. Operational passenger automobiles designed to carry no more than nine passengers and displaying current license tabs may be kept, stored or parked only on finished driveways, on finished parking areas, or in enclosed garages; and all other vehicles shall be kept, stored or parked only in enclosed garages or storage building. Outside storage of boats, trailers, fish houses, snowmobiles, recreation vehicles, campers, or canoes is not allowed; such items must be stored within a garage or storage building. Notwithstanding the foregoing prohibition, guests of the Owner of a Homesite visiting for less than 15 days in any 60-day period may park their vehicles on unenclosed paved areas serving only the Homesite. Outdoor storage of inoperable automobiles, other inoperable vehicles of any type, automobile parts, parts for vehicles, equipment, inventory or refuse of any type is prohibited throughout the Property. 4.7 Rubbish. No Homesite or Common Area shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish, trash, debris, or other waste. Each Owner shall contract with a third- party service provider for the weekly removal of household garbage and refuse from the Owner’s Homesite. Each Owner is responsible for the prompt removal from the Owner’s Homesite of any refuse that is not accepted by the Owner’s refuse contractor. Except for 345 #10634702v3 8 reasonable periods of time before and after collection, all trash and refuse containers shall be stored in the Owner’s garage or screened so they cannot be seen from any street. 4.8 Signs. No advertising sign of any kind shall be displayed in public view on any Homesite except one sign of not more than six (6) square feet advertising a Homesite for sale or signs used by a builder to advertise during active construction or sale. Signs expressing support for a political candidate, a political affiliation or commonly associated with a political ideology may be displayed for a period of 60 days prior to the applicable election and shall be removed promptly following the election. 4.9 Nuisance. No trade or activity shall be conducted upon any Homesite or Common Area in the Property that may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to any property within the Property. Examples include home occupations, trades or activities that violate any municipal codes or ordinances or state or federal laws, cause waste to the Property, or cause any unusual liability, health or safety risk, or expense for any Owner. Declarant’s development, sales or construction activities or operations within the Property do not violate this paragraph. 4.10 Tree Preservation Area. To protect the scenic attractiveness of the Property, and to preserve significant existing trees and site-line buffers within the Property, Declarant hereby creates the “Tree Preservation Area” identified on Lot 5 as shown on Exhibit “B” attached hereto and hereby incorporated by this reference. Within the Tree Preservation Areas no person shall (i) construct, install or maintain any device, structure, equipment other item within the dripline of a tree that has the potential to damage the tree; or (ii) cut or remove trees; or (iii) excavate or fill when such activities may contribute to damage or loss of protected trees. The foregoing restrictions do not apply to removal of dead or diseased trees as determined by a professional, licensed arborist, or trimming of trees to maintain health. No amendment to the Tree Preservation Areas shall be allowed without the prior written approval of the City of Orono. 4.11 Rights of Declarant and Homebuilders. Until the last Homesite is sold and conveyed to an Owner other than the Declarant or a builder whose business is to construct homes for resale, the following action by said persons, and their agents and assigns, will not be deemed violations of the foregoing restrictions: a. Use of a Dwelling for model and sales office purposes; b. Storage of equipment, materials or earth during the construction of new Dwellings on Homesites owned by the person doing such storage or construction; and Display of signs advertising Homesites in the Property as allowed by the City. SECTION 5 ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS 346 #10634702v3 9 Membership in the Association, and the allocation to each Homesite of a portion of the votes in the Association and a portion of the Common Expenses of the Association shall be governed by the following provisions: 5.1 Membership. Each Owner shall be a member of the Association by virtue of Homesite ownership, and the membership shall be transferred with the conveyance of the Owner’s interest in the Homesite. An Owner’s membership shall terminate when the Owner’s ownership terminates. When more than one Person is an Owner of a Homesite, all such Persons shall be members of the Association, but multiple ownership of a Homesite shall not increase the voting rights allocated to such Homesite nor authorize the division of the voting rights. 5.2 Voting and Common Expenses. Voting rights and Common Expense obligations are allocated equally among the Homesites (each Homesite shall be allocated one (1) vote); except that special allocations of Common Expenses shall be permitted as provided in Section 6.1, and provided that Declarant is entitled to ten (10) votes for each Homesite owned by Declarant. 5.3 Appurtenant Rights and Obligations. The ownership of a Homesite shall include the voting rights and Common Expense obligations described in Section 5.2. Said rights, obligations and interests, and the title to the Homesites, shall not be separated or conveyed separately. The allocation of the rights, obligations and interests described in this Section may not be changed, except in accordance with the Governing Documents. 5.4 Authority to Vote. The Owner, or some natural person designated to act as proxy on behalf of the Owner, and who need not be an Owner, may cast the vote allocated to such Homesite at meetings of the Association; provided, that if there are multiple Owners of a Homesite, only the Owner or other Person designated pursuant to the provisions of the By-Laws may cast such vote. The voting rights of Owners are more fully described in Section 3 of the By-Laws. 5.5 Declarant Control. Notwithstanding the vote of any Homesite Owner to the contrary, the Declarant hereby reserves a period of Declarant control of the Association during which the Declarant, or persons designated by the Declarant, may appoint and remove the officers and directors of the Association. Said reservation of Declarant control is subject to the following: a. The period of Declarant control shall mean the Declarant Control Period as defined above. b. Not later than the termination of Declarant control, the Homesite Owners shall elect a Board of Directors of at least three members. Thereafter, a majority of the directors shall be Homesite Owners other than Declarant or an affiliate of Declarant. All Homesite Owners, including the Declarant and its affiliates, may cast the votes allocated to any Homesite owned by them. The Board shall elect the officers. The directors and officers shall take office upon election. c. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, meetings of the Board of Directors must be open to all Homesite Owners. To the extent practicable, the 347 #10634702v3 10 Board shall give reasonable notice to the Homesite Owners of the date, time and place of a Board meeting. If the date, time and place of meetings are provided for in this Declaration, the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of the Association, were announced at a previous meeting of the Board, posted in a location accessible to the Homesite Owners and designated by the Board from time to time, or if an emergency requires immediate consideration of a matter by the Board, notice is not required. “Notice” has the meaning given in Minnesota Statutes Section 317A.011, subdivision 14. Meetings may be closed to discuss the following: (1) personal matters; (2) pending or potential litigation, arbitration or other potentially adversarial proceedings, between Homesite Owners, between the Board or Association and Homesite Owners, or other matters in which any Homesite Owner may have an adversarial interest, if the Board determines that closing the meeting is necessary to discuss strategy or to otherwise protect the position of the Board of Association or the privacy of a Homesite Owner or occupant of a Homesite; or (3) criminal activity arising within the Property if the Board determines that closing the meeting is necessary to protect the privacy of the victim or that opening the meeting would jeopardize the investigation of the activity. Nothing in this subsection imposes a duty upon the Board to provide special facilities for meetings. The failure to give notice as required by this subsection shall not invalidate the Board meeting or any action taken at the meeting. SECTION 6 ASSESSMENTS FOR COMMON EXPENSES 6.1 General. Assessments for Common Expenses shall be determined and assessed against the Homesites by the Board, in its discretion; subject to the limitations set forth in Sections 6.2 and 6.3, and the requirements of the By-Laws. Assessments for Common Expenses shall include annual assessments and may include special assessments. Assessments shall be allocated among the Homesites according to the Common Expense allocations set forth in Section 5.2, subject to the following qualifications: a. Any Common Expense associated with the maintenance, repair, or replacement of an improvement under the exclusive use or control of less than all Homesites undertaken by the Association may be assessed exclusively against the Homesite or Homesites to which that improvement is assigned, on the basis of (i) equality, or (ii) the actual cost incurred with respect to each such Homesite. b. Any Common Expense or portion thereof benefitting fewer than all of the Homesites may be assessed exclusively against the Homesites benefited, on the basis of (i) equality, or (ii) the actual cost incurred with respect to each Homesite. 348 #10634702v3 11 c. The costs of insurance obtained by the Association, if any, may be assessed in proportion to value, risk or coverage. d. Reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred by the Association in connection with (i) the collection of assessments and (ii) the enforcement of the Governing Documents, or the Rules and Regulations, against an Owner or Occupant or their guests, may be assessed against the Owner’s Homesite. e. Fees, charges, late charges, fines and interest may be assessed for failure to pay assessments when due, as determined by the Board of Directors. f. Assessments levied in a manner consistent with Section 515B.3-116 of MCIOA to pay a judgment against the Association may be levied only against the Homesites existing at the time the judgment was entered, in proportion to their Common Expense liabilities. g. If any damage to the Common Areas or another Homesite is caused by the act or omission of any Owner or Occupant, or their guests, the Association may assess the costs of repairing the damage exclusively against the Owner’s Homesite to the extent not covered by insurance. h. If any installment of an assessment becomes more than 30 days past due, then the Association may, upon 10 days written notice to the Owner, declare the entire amount of the assessment immediately due and payable in full. i. If Common Expense liabilities are reallocated for any purpose, Common Expense assessments and any installment thereof not yet due shall be recalculated in accordance with the reallocated Common Expense liabilities. j. Assessments under Subsections 6.1 a.-h. shall not be considered special assessments as described in Section 6.3. 6.2 Annual Assessments. Annual assessments shall be established and levied by the Board. Each annual assessment shall cover all of the anticipated Common Expenses of the Association for that year. Annual assessments shall provide, among other things, for contributions to a separate reserve fund sufficient to cover the periodic cost of maintenance, repair and replacement of the Common Areas. There shall be no limitation on the right of the Board to subsequently increase the amount of the annual assessment by the Board. a. Until a Common Expense assessment is levied, Declarant shall pay all accrued expenses of the Association. b. After a Common Expense assessment is levied, the assessment may be increased by the Board annually. 6.3 Special Assessments. In addition to annual assessments, the Board may levy in any assessment year a special assessment against all Homesites for the purpose of defraying 349 #10634702v3 12 in whole or in part (i) the cost of any unforeseen or unbudgeted Common Expense, (ii) general or specific reserves for maintenance, repair or replacement, and (iii) the maintenance, repair or replacement of any part of the Property, and any fixtures or other property related thereto. 6.4 Liability of Owners for Assessments. The obligation of an Owner to pay assessments shall commence at the later of (i) the time at which the Owner acquires title to the Homesite, or (ii) the due date of the first Assessment levied by the Board; provided, that neither Declarant nor a Homebuilder, nor any Homesite owned by such party, shall be liable for any Assessment, nor subject to any Assessment lien, for any period, as long as there is no one residing in the Dwelling located on the Homesite. Subject to the foregoing exemption, the Owner at the time an assessment is payable with respect to the Homesite shall be personally liable for the share of the Common Expenses assessed against such Homesite. Such liability shall be joint and several where there are multiple Owners of the Homesite. The liability is absolute and unconditional. No Owner is exempt from liability for payment of his or her share of Common Expenses by right of set-off, by waiver of use or enjoyment of any part of the Property, by absence from or abandonment of the Homesite, by the waiver of any other rights, or by reason of any claim against the Association or its officers, directors or agents, or for their failure to fulfill any duties under the Governing Documents. The Association may invoke the charges, sanctions and remedies set forth in Section 13, in addition to any remedies provided elsewhere in the Governing Documents or by law, for the purpose of enforcing its rights hereunder. 6.5 Assessment Lien. The Association has a lien on a Homesite for any assessment levied against that Homesite from the time the assessment becomes due. If an assessment is payable in installments, the full amount of the assessment is a lien from the time the first installment thereof becomes due. Fees, charges, late charges, fines and interest charges imposed by the Association in a manner consistent with Section 515B.3-102(a)(10), (11) and (12) of MCIOA are liens, and are enforceable as assessments, under this Section. Recording of the Declaration constitutes record notice and perfection of any lien under this Section, and no further recordation of any notice of or claim for the lien is required. 6.6 Foreclosure of Liens; Remedies. A lien for Common Expenses may be foreclosed against a Homesite under the laws of the State of Minnesota (i) by action, or (ii) by advertisement as a lien under a mortgage containing a power of sale. The Association, or its authorized representative, shall have the power to bid in at the foreclosure sale and to acquire, hold, lease, mortgage and convey any Homesite so acquired. The Owner and any other Person claiming an interest in the Homesite, by the acceptance or assertion of any interest in the Homesite, grants to the Association a power of sale and full authority to accomplish the foreclosure. The Association shall, in addition, have the right to pursue any other remedy at law or in equity against the Owner who fails to pay any assessment or charge against the Homesite. 6.7 Lien Priority; Foreclosure. A lien under this Section is prior to all other liens and encumbrances on a Homesite except (i) liens and encumbrances recorded before the Declaration, (ii) any first mortgage on the Homesite, and (iii) liens for real estate taxes and other governmental assessments or charges against the Homesite. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a first mortgage on a Homesite is foreclosed, and the first mortgage was 350 #10634702v3 13 recorded on or after the date hereof, and no Owner redeems during the Owner’s period of redemption provided by Chapters 580, 581, or 582, then the holder of the sheriff’s certificate of sale from the foreclosure of the first mortgage shall take title to the Homesite subject to a lien in favor of the Association for the unpaid assessments for Common Expenses levied in a manner consistent with Sections 515B.3-115(a), (e)(1) to (3), (f), and (i) of MCIOA which became due, without acceleration, during the six months immediately preceding the first day following the end of the Owner’s period of redemption. 6.8 Voluntary conveyance; Statement of Assessments. In a voluntary conveyance of a Homesite the buyer shall not be personally liable for any unpaid assessments and other charges made by the Association against the seller or the seller’s Homesite prior to the time of conveyance to the buyer, unless expressly assumed by the buyer. However, the lien of such assessments shall remain against the Homesite until satisfied. Any seller or buyer shall be entitled to a statement, in recordable form, from the Association setting forth the amount of the unpaid assessments against the Homesite, including all assessments payable in the Association’s current fiscal year, which statement shall be binding on the Association, seller and buyer. 6.9 Working Capital Contribution. When each Homesite is first sold to a homebuyer by Declarant or another home builder and the sale is closed, the buyer of the Homesite shall make a working capital contribution to or for the benefit of the Association on a one-time basis in an amount determined by Declarant from time to time, that shall be at least equal to two months’ of the then current estimated general Assessments for Common Expenses for the Homesite being conveyed. If said working capital contribution is not paid at the closing, then it shall be a Special Assessment against the homebuyer and the Homesite. The working capital contributions are in addition to the regular payments of general Assessments for Common Expenses and may be used to (a) fund expenses of the Association; or (b) reduce funding deficits of the Association; and/or (c) repay loans that Declarant may make to the Association to fund deficits. SECTION 7 ADMINISTRATION The administration and operation of the Association and the Property, including but not limited to the acts required of the Association, shall be governed by the following provisions: 7.1 General. The operation and administration of the Association and the Property shall be governed by the Governing Documents. The Association shall, subject to the rights of the Owners set forth in the Governing Documents, be responsible for the operation, management and control of the Property. The Association shall have all powers described in the Governing Documents, and the statute under which it is incorporated. All power and authority of the Association shall be vested in the Board, unless action or approval by the individual Owners is specifically required by the Governing Documents. All references to the Association shall mean the Association acting through the Board unless specifically state to the contrary. 7.2 Operational Purposes. The Association shall operate and manage the Property for the purposes of (i) administering and enforcing the covenants, restrictions, easements, 351 #10634702v3 14 charges and liens set forth in the Governing Documents and the Rules and Regulations (ii) maintaining, repairing and replacing those portions of the Property for which it is responsible and (iii) preserving the value and architectural uniformity and character of the Property. 7.3 Binding Effect of Actions. All agreements and determinations made by the Association in accordance with the powers and voting rights established by the Governing Documents shall be binding upon all Owners and Occupants, and their lessees, guests, heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, and all secured parties. 7.4 By-Laws. The Association shall have By-Laws. The By-Laws and any amendments thereto shall govern the operation and administration of the Association. 7.5 Management. The Board may delegate to a manager or managing agent the management duties imposed upon the Association’s officers and directors by the Governing Documents; provided, however, that such delegation shall not relieve the officers and directors of the ultimate responsibility for the performance of their duties as described by the Governing Documents and by law. 7.6 Rules and Regulations. The Board shall have exclusive authority to approve and implement such reasonable Rules and Regulations as it deems necessary from time to time for the purpose of operating and administering the affairs of the Association and regulating the use of the Property; provided that the Rules and Regulations shall not be inconsistent with the Governing Documents. The inclusion in other parts of the Governing Documents of authority to approve Rules and Regulations shall be deemed to be in furtherance, and not in limitation, of the authority granted by this Section. New or amended Rules and Regulations shall be effective only after reasonable notice thereof has been given to the Owners and, following expiration of the Declarant Control Period, the affirmative approval of not less than 67% of voting members. 7.7 Association Assets; Surplus Funds. All funds and real or personal property acquired by the Association shall be held and used for the benefit of the Owners for the purposes stated in the Governing Documents. Surplus funds remaining after payment of or provision for Common Expenses and reserves shall be credited against future assessments or added to reserves, as determined by the Board. SECTION 8 RESERVED SECTION 9 MAINTENANCE 9.1 Maintenance by Association. The Association shall provide for all maintenance, repair and replacement (collectively referred to as “Maintenance”) of the Common Areas. This includes, without limitation, maintenance of the entrance monument, landscaping, lighting, and irrigation system located within the easement that lies adjacent to the project entry. If the Association fails to maintain the Shared Roadway, then the City of Orono shall have the right to do so and assess the costs thereof against the Homesites. 352 #10634702v3 15 9.2 Association Maintenance of Landscaping Areas. If Declarant or the Association installs any landscaping within the Landscaping Areas, then the Association shall have the right and the obligation to operate, maintain, repair and replace the landscaping within the Landscaping Areas. Maintenance may include fertilizing, weeding, watering, mowing, raking, pruning, controlling erosion, repair and replacement of landscaping, and any other work reasonably required to keep the Landscaping Areas attractive and sound. For so long as Declarant owns any Homesite, Declarant’s written consent is required before any landscaping is removed within the Landscaping Areas without being replaced. 9.3 Maintenance by Owner. Except for the Maintenance provided by the Association under Section 9.1 and 9.2, all Maintenance of the Dwellings and Homesites shall be the sole responsibility and expense of the Owners thereof. 9.4 Damage Caused by Owner. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Section, if, in the judgment of the Association, the need for Maintenance of any part of the Property is caused by the willful or negligent act or omission of an Owner or Occupant, or their guests, or by a condition in a Homesite which the Owner or Occupant has willfully or negligently allowed to exist, the Association may cause such damage or condition to be repaired or corrected (and enter upon any Homesite to do so), and the cost thereof may be assessed against the Homesite of the Owner responsible for the damage. SECTION 10 INSURANCE 10.1 Required Insurance. The Association shall obtain and maintain, at a minimum, a master policy of insurance in accordance with the requirements set forth herein, issued by a reputable insurance company or companies authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota, as follows: a. The Association shall have the option, but not the obligation to obtain and maintain property insurance covering the risk of physical loss of the Common Areas. The policy or policies may cover personal property owned by the Association. The type and amount of any such coverage shall be determined by the Board. b. Comprehensive public liability insurance covering the use, operation and Maintenance of the Common Areas, with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence, against claims or death, bodily injury and property damage, and such other risks as are customarily covered by such policies for projects similar in construction, location and use to the Property. The policy shall contain a “severability of interest” endorsement which shall preclude the insurer from denying the claim of an Owner or Occupant because of negligent acts of the Association or other Owners or Occupants. The policy shall include such additional endorsements, coverages and limits with respect to such hazards as may be required by the regulations of the FHA or FNMA as a precondition to their insuring, purchasing or financing a mortgage on a Homesite. 353 #10634702v3 16 c. Fidelity bond or insurance coverage against dishonest acts on the part of directors, officers, managers, trustees, employees or persons responsible for handling funds belonging to or administered by the Association if deemed to be advisable by the Board or required by the regulations of the FHA or FNMA as a precondition to the purchase or financing of a mortgage on a Homesite. The fidelity bond or insurance shall name the Association as the named insured and shall, if required by the regulations of the FHA or FNMA as a precondition to their insuring, purchasing or financing of a mortgage on a Homesite, be written in an amount equal to the greater of (i) the estimated maximum of Association funds, including reserves, in the custody of the Association or management agent at any given time while the bond is in force, or (ii) a sum equal to three months aggregate assessments on all Homesites plus reserves. An appropriate endorsement to the policy to cover any persons who serve without compensation shall be added if the policy would not otherwise cover volunteers, or a waiver of defense based upon the exclusion of persons serving without compensation shall be added. d. Worker’s Compensation insurance as required by law. e. Such other insurance as the Board may determine from time to time to be in the best interests of the Association and the Owners. 10.2 Property Insurance for Homesites. Each Owner shall obtain and maintain the Owner’s own property and liability insurance coverage relating to the ownership of the Owner’s Homesite and any structures constructed thereon. 10.3 Premiums; Improvements; Deductibles. All premiums for insurance coverage maintained by the Association shall be assessed and paid as a Common Expense. 10.4 Loss Payee; Insurance Trustee. All insurance coverage maintained by the Association shall be written in the name of, and the proceeds thereof shall be payable to, the Association (or a qualified insurance trustee selected by it). The Association, or any insurance trustee selected by it, shall have exclusive authority to negotiate, settle and collect upon any claims or losses under any insurance policy maintained by the Association. 10.5 Waivers of Subrogation. All policies of insurance shall contain waivers of subrogation by the insurer against the Association, or an Owner, members of the Owner’s household, officers or directors, as applicable, and, if available, waivers of any defense based on co- insurance or of invalidity from any acts of the insured. 10.6 Effect of Acts Not Within Association’s Control. All policies of insurance maintained by the Association shall provide that the coverage shall not be voided by or conditioned upon (i) any act or omission of an Owner or Eligible Mortgagee, unless acting within the scope of authority on behalf of the Association, or (ii) any failure of the Association to comply with any warranty or condition regarding any portion of the Property over which the Association has no control. SECTION 11 354 #10634702v3 17 RECONSTRUCTION, CONDEMNATION AND EMINENT DOMAIN 11.1 Condemnation and Eminent Domain. In the event of a taking of any part of the Property by condemnation or eminent domain, notice shall be given pursuant to Section 17. Eligible Mortgagees shall be entitled to priority for condemnation awards in accordance with the priorities established by the Governing Documents, as their interests may appear. 11.2 Notice. All Eligible Mortgagees shall be entitled to receive notice of any condemnation proceedings or substantial destruction of the Property, and the Association shall give written notice thereof to an Eligible Mortgagee pursuant to Section 17. SECTION 12 EASEMENTS 12.1 Utilities Easements. The Property shall be subject to non-exclusive appurtenant easements for all utilities, storm sewer, water and sewer, and similar services, which exist from time to time, as constructed or referred to in the Plat, or as otherwise described in this Declaration or any other duly recorded instrument. Each Homesite, and the rights of the Owners and Occupants thereof, shall be subject to a non-exclusive easement in favor of the other Homesites for all such services, including without limitations any sewer or water lines servicing other Homesites. Each Homesite shall also be subject to an exclusive easement in favor of the Association and all utilities companies providing service to the Homesites for the installation and maintenance of utilities metering devices. 12.2 Continuation and Scope of Easements. Notwithstanding anything in this Declaration to the contrary, in no event shall an Owner or Occupant be denied reasonable access to his or her Homesite or the right to utility services thereto. The easements set forth in this Section shall supplement and not limit any easements described elsewhere in this Declaration or recorded, and shall include reasonable access to the easement areas through the Homesites and the Common Areas for purposes of maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction. SECTION 13 COMPLIANCE AND REMEDIES Each Owner and Occupant, and any other Person owning or acquiring any interest in the Property, shall be governed by and comply with the provisions of the Governing Documents, the Rules and Regulations, the decisions of the Association, and such amendments thereto as may be made from time to time. A failure to comply shall entitle the Association to the relief set forth in this Section, in addition to the rights and remedies authorized elsewhere by the Governing Documents. 13.1 Entitlement to Relief. The Association may commence legal action to recover sums due, for damages, for injunctive relief or to foreclose a lien owned by it, or any combination thereof, or an action for any other relief authorized by the Governing Documents or available at law or in equity. Legal relief may be sought by the Association against any Owner, or by an Owner against the Association or other Owner, 355 #10634702v3 18 to enforce compliance with the Governing Documents, the Rules and Regulations, or the decisions of the Association. However, no Owner may withhold any assessments payable to the Association, or take (or omit) other action in violation of the Governing Documents or the Rules and Regulations, as a measure to enforce such Owner’s position, or for any other reason. 13.2 Sanctions and Remedies. In addition to any other remedies or sanctions, expressed or implied, administrative or legal, the Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to implement any one or more of the following actions against Owners and Occupants and/or their guests, who violate the provisions of the Governing Documents or the Rules and Regulations: a. Commence legal action for damages or equitable relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. b. Impose late charges of up to 15% of each late payment of an assessment or installment thereof. c. In the event of default of more than 30 days in the payment of any assessment or installment thereof, all remaining installments of assessments assessed against the Homesite owned by the defaulting Owner may be accelerated and shall then be payable in full if all delinquent assessments, together with all costs of collection and late charges, are not paid in full prior to the effective date of the acceleration. Reasonable advance written notice of the effective date of the acceleration shall be given to the defaulting Owner. d. Restore any portions of the Common Areas or Limited Common Areas damaged or altered, or allowed to be damaged or altered, by any Owner or Occupant or their guests in violation of the Governing Documents. e. Foreclose any lien arising under the provisions of the Governing Documents or under law, in the manner provided for the foreclosure of mortgages by action or under a power of sale in the state where the property is located. 13.3 Rights to Hearing. In the case of imposition of any of the remedies authorized by Section 13.2.d., or e. of this Section, the Board shall upon written request of the offender, grant to the offender a fair and equitable hearing. The offender shall be given notice of the nature of the violation and the right to a hearing, and at least 10 days within which to request a hearing. The hearing shall be scheduled by the Board and held within thirty (30) days of receipt of the hearing request by the Board, and with at least ten (10) days prior written notice to the offender. If the offending Owner fails to appear at the hearing then the right to a hearing shall be waived and the Board may take such action as it deems appropriate. The decision of the Board and the rules for the conduct of hearings established by the Board shall be final and binding on all parties. The Board’s decision shall be delivered in writing to the offender within ten (10) days following the hearing, if not delivered to the offender at the hearing. 13.4 Lien for Charges, Penalties, Etc. Any assessments, charges, fines, penalties or interest imposed under this Section shall be a lien against the Homesite of the Owner or Occupant 356 #10634702v3 19 against whom the same are imposed and the personal obligation of such Owner in the same manner and with the same priority and effect as assessments under Section 6. The lien shall attach as of the date of imposition of the remedy, but shall not be final as to violations for which a hearing is held until the Board gives written notice following the hearing. All remedies shall be cumulative, and the exercise of, or failure to exercise, any remedy shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to pursue any others. 13.5 Costs of Proceeding and Attorneys Fees. With respect to any collection measures, or any measures or action, legal administration, or otherwise, which the Association takes to enforce the provisions of the Governing Documents or Rules and Regulations, whether or not finally determined by a court or arbitrator, the Association may assess the violator and his or her Homesite with any expenses incurred in connection with such enforcement, including without limitation fines or charges previously imposed by the Association, reasonable attorneys’ fees, and interest (at the highest rate allowed by law) on the delinquent amounts owed to the Association. 13.6 Liability for Owners’ and Occupants’ Acts. An Owner shall be liable for the expense of any maintenance, repair or replacement of the Property rendered necessary by such Owner’s acts or omissions, or by that of Occupants or guests in the Owner’s Homesite, to the extent that such expense is not covered by the proceeds of insurance carried by the Association or such Owner or Occupant. However, any insurance deductible amount and/or increase in insurance rates, resulting from the Owner’s acts or omissions may be assessed against the Owner responsible for the condition and against his or her Homesite. 13.7 Enforcement by Owners. The provisions of this Section shall not limit or impair the independent rights of other Owners to enforce the provisions of the Governing Documents, the Rules and Regulations, as provided therein. 357 #10634702v3 20 SECTION 14 SPECIAL DECLARANT RIGHTS Declarant, its agents and assigns, hereby reserves exclusive and unconditional authority to exercise the following special declarant rights for as long as it owns a Homesite, or for such shorter period as may be specifically indicated: 14.1 Complete Improvements. To complete all improvements indicated on any Plat, described herein, or otherwise included in Declarant’s development plans or allowed by the Declaration, and to make alterations in the Homesites and Common Areas to accommodate its sales facilities. 14.2 Sales Facilities. To construct, operate and maintain a sales office, management office, model Homesites and other development, sales and rental facilities within the Common Areas and any Homesites owned by Declarant from time to time, located anywhere on the Property. 14.3 Signs. To erect and maintain signs and other sales displays offering the Homesites for sale or lease, in or on any Homesite owned by Declarant and on the Common Areas, and to erect a permanent marker or markers at the entrance to the development. 14.4 Easements. To have and use easements, for itself, its employees, contractors, representatives, agents and prospective purchasers through and over the Property for the purpose of exercising its special declarant rights. 14.5 Control of Association. To control the operation and administration of the Association, including without limitation the power to appoint and remove the members of the Board during the Declarant Control Period. 14.6 Consent to Certain Amendments. As long as Declarant owns any unsold Homesite, Declarant’s written consent shall be required for any amendment to the Governing Documents or Rules and Regulations which directly or indirectly affect or may affect Declarant’s rights under the Governing Documents. 14.7 Use in Advertising. To photograph the exterior of the Homesites and use said photographs or reproductions for advertising purposes. 14.8 Product Charactaristics. The right to market multiple product lines of Dwellings in the Property and Additional Property; and to vary those product lines in terms of style, floor plans, general size, height and width, quality of construction and principal materials employed in construction, price range, designation and mix of floor plan and streetscape elements for specific Homesites, the identity of the builder of the Dwellings, and other characteristics (collectively “Product Characteristics”). Declarant makes no guaranties, assurances or representations concerning the Product Characteristics of Dwellings in different portions of the Property. Declarant reserves the right to introduce new and different product lines and Product Characteristics in the Property and to sell Homesites to other builders who will construct Dwellings according to their own Product Characteristics. 358 #10634702v3 21 14.9 Special Assignment of Declarant Rights. Declarant’s Rights contained in the Declaration are separately assignable by Declarant, and may be transferred by Declarant executing and recording one or more Special Assignment of Declarant Rights with the County Recorder, setting forth a description of the right being assigned, and the identity of the assignee. SECTION 15 RIGHTS TO RELOCATE BOUNDARIES AND CONVERT HOMESITES Declarant shall have the right, without the consent of the Owners or the Association, to: 1) relocate boundaries between platted lots owned by Declarant; 2) combine platted lots, by removing boundaries between adjacent lots owned by Declarant;3) convert platted lots owned by Declarant, or any part thereof, into additional Homesites or Common Areas; and 4) include any newly created or converted lots or Homesites in the Plant into the Assocation. SECTION 16 AMENDMENTS 16.1 By Declarant. In addition to specific amendment rights granted elsewhere in this Declaration, until expiration of the Declarant Control Period, Declarant may unilaterally amend this Declaration for any purpose. Such amendments may include, without limitation (i) the creation of easements for telecommunications systems, utility, drainage, ingress or egress over any portion of the Property; (ii) additions or deletions from the Property and/or the properties comprising the Common Areas; (iii) changes in the Rules and Regulations; (iv) changes in maintenance, repair and replacement obligations; and (v) modifications of the use restrictions for Dwellings. Declarant’s right to amend under this provision is to be construed as broadly as possible. By way of example, and not as a limitation, Declarant may create easements over, under and across Homesites conveyed to Owners, provided that such easements do not prohibit the use of Homesites as residential dwellings. In the event that the Association shall desire to amend this Declaration prior to expiration of the Declarant Control Period, the Association must first obtain Declarant’s prior written consent to any proposed amendment. Thereafter, an amendment identical to that approved by Declarant may be adopted by the Association pursuant to the requirement for amendments from and after expiration of the Declarant Control Period. Declarant shall join in such identical amendment so that its consent to the same is reflected in public records. To the extent legally required, each Owner shall be deemed to have granted to Declarant and, thereafter, the Association, an irrevocable power of attorney, coupled with an interest, for the purposes herein expressed. 16.2 By Association. Following expiration of the Declarant Control Period, this Declaration may be amended by (a) the consent of Owners of Homesites to which are allocated at least 67% of the votes in the Association; and (b) the consent of Declarant if required pursuant to Section 14, and (c) the consent of first Eligible Mortgagees, as applicable, if required. Consent of the Owners may be obtained in writing, (including by electronic signature), by written (including electronic) ballot, or at a meeting of the Association duly held in accordance with the Bylaws. The consent of Declarant shall be in writing. (including by electronic signature). Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph, the percentage of votes necessary to amend a specific clause shall not be less than the prescribed percentage. 359 #10634702v3 22 SECTION 17 RIGHTS OF ELIGIBLE MORTGAGEES 17.1 Priority of Lien. Any holder of a first mortgage on a Homesite or any purchaser of a first mortgage at a foreclosure sale, that comes into possession of a Homesite by foreclosure of the first mortgage or by deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure, takes the Homesite free of any claims for unpaid assessments or any other charges or liens imposed against the Homesite by the Association which have accrued against such Homesite prior to the acquisition of possession of the Homesite by said first mortgage holder or purchaser except for (i) a lien in favor of the Association for unpaid assessments for common expenses levied pursuant to this Declaration, and (ii) which became due, without acceleration, during the six months immediately preceding the first day following the end of the Owner’s period of redemption; and (iii) except that any unreimbursed assessments or charges may be reallocated among all Homesites in accordance with their interests in the Common Areas. 17.2 Priority of Taxes and Other Charges. All taxes, assessments and charges which may become liens prior to the first mortgage under state law shall relate only to the individual Homesites and not to the Property as a whole. 17.3 Priority for Condemnation Awards. No provision of the Governing Documents shall give an Owner, or any other part, priority over any rights of the Eligible Mortgagee of the Homesite pursuant to its mortgage in case of a distribution to such Owner of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards for losses to or a taking of the Homesite and/or the Common Areas. The Association shall give written notice to all Eligible Mortgagees of any condemnation or eminent domain proceeding affecting the Property promptly upon receipt of notice from the condemning authority. 17.4 Access to Books and Records/Audit. Eligible Mortgagees shall have the right to examine the books and records of the Association upon reasonable notice during normal business hours, and to receive free of charge, upon written request, copies of the Association’s annual reports and other financial statements. Financial statements, including those which are audited, shall be available within one hundred twenty (120) days of the end of the Association’s fiscal year. If a request is made by FNMA or any institutional guarantor or insurer of a mortgage loan against a Homesite, for an audit of the Association’s financial statements for the preceding year, the Association shall cause an audit to be made and deliver a copy to the requesting party. 17.5 Notice Requirements. Upon written request to the Association, identifying the name and address of the holder, insurer or guarantor of a mortgage on a Homesite, and the Homesite number or address, the holder, insurer or guarantor shall be entitled to timely written notice of: a. a condemnation loss or any casualty loss which affects a material portion on the Property or the Homesite securing the mortgage; b. a 60 day delinquency in the payment of assessments or charges owned by the Owner of a Homesite on which it holds a mortgage; 360 #10634702v3 23 c. a lapse, cancellation or material modification of any insurance policy maintained by the Association; and d. a proposed action which requires the consent of a specific percentage of Eligible Mortgagees. SECTION 18 MISCELLANEOUS 18.1 Severability. If any term, covenant, or provision of this instrument or any exhibit attached hereto is held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, such determination shall not be deemed to alter, affect or impair in any manner whatsoever any other portion of this instrument or exhibits. 18.2 Construction. Where applicable the masculine gender of any word used herein shall mean the feminine or neutral gender, or vice versa, and the singular of any word used herein shall mean the plural, or vice versa. References to MCIOA, or any section thereof, shall be deemed to include any statutes amending or replacing MCIOA, and the comparable sections thereof. References to MCIOA shall not be interpreted so as to subject the Association or the Declarant to any provision of MCIOA, unless otherwise specifically set forth herein 18.3 Tender of Claims. In the event that any incident occurs which could reasonably give rise to a demand by the Association against Declarant for indemnification, the Association shall promptly render the defense of the action to its insurance carrier, and give Declarant written notice of such tender, the specific nature of the action and an opportunity to defend against the action. 18.4 Notices. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the Governing Documents all notices required to be given by or to the Association, the Board of Directors, the Association officers or the Owners or Occupants shall be in writing and shall be effective upon hand delivery, or mailing if properly addressed with postage prepaid and deposited in the United States mail; except that registrations pursuant to Section 2.2 of the By-Laws shall be effective upon receipt by the Association. 18.5 Conflicts Among Documents. In the event of any conflict among the provisions of the Declaration, the By-Laws or any Rules or Regulations approved by the Association, the Declaration shall control, and as between the By-Laws and the Rules and Regulations, the By-Laws shall control. [Signature on following page.] 361 #10634702v3 24 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Declarant has executed this instrument the day and year first above set forth. Aspect Design Build L.L.C. By:______________________________ ______________________________ Its: ______________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF __________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of _________, 2024, by __________, as __________of Aspect Design Build L.L.C., a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company. ________________________________________ Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS PREPARED BY, AND WHEN RECORDED SHOULD BE MAILED TO: VANTAGE LAW GROUP, PLLC 125 SE MAIN ST., SUITE 250 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55414 362 #10634702v3 25 HONEY HILL EXHIBIT A TO DECLARATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (HOMESITES AND COMMON AREA) HOMESITES Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 1, Honey Hill on Lake Classen, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. [Confirm] COMMON AREAS Outlot A, Honey Hill on Lake Classen, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 363 #10634702v3 26 HONEY HILL EXHIBIT B TO DECLARATION Depictin of Common Area, Landscaping Area and Tree Preservation Easement Areas 364 CONSERVATION DESIGN MASTER PLAN 13605 1st Avenue North #100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com HONEY HILL LAKE CLASSEN365 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 PHASE 1: INVENTORY & ANALYSIS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS & PROCEDURES…………………………………………………………………………………………….1 RURAL OASIS STUDY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2 EXSISTING DRAINAGE & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT………………………………………………………………………………2 LAND USE & CLASSIFICATION……………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………..3 NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY.……………………………..……………… ……………………………………………………………….3 PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY……………………………………..…………..……………………………………………………………………3 NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY……………………………..……………………………………………………………………………….3 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 RURAL OASIS STUDY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 LAND USE &CLASSIFICATION……………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………4 NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY.……………………………..………………………………..………………………………………………5 PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY……………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………6 NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY & WETLAND DELINEATION………..……………………………..…………………………..7 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 366 APPENDICES Appendix A: Conservation Design Plan Figures Figure 1. Project Location Figure 2. National Wetland Inventory Figure 3. Hennepin Co. Soil Survey Figure 4. MnDNR Public Water Inventory Figure 5. Wetland Delineation Figure 6. MLCCS Vegetation Communities Figure 7. Priority Natural Resource Corridors Figure 8. Tree Survey Figure 9. Rural Oasis Analysis Corridors Figure 10. Shoreland Overlay District and PRD Buffers Figure 11. City of Orono Zoning Map Figure 12: Honey Hill Landscaping Plan Appendix B: Tree Survey Report & Tree Preservation Plan Appendix C: Drainage Analysis & Erosion Control Plan 367 CONTACT INFORMATION PREPARED FOR: Aspect Design Build Tom Preissing 422 2nd St, Excelsior, MN 55331 612-300-0025 tom@aspectdesignbuild.com PREPARED BY: Robert Bergstrom Environmental Technician Ben Hodapp Environmental Services Manager Certified MN Wetland Delineator #1016 bhodapp@ae-mn.com Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100 Plymouth, MN 55441 Phone: (763) 412-4000 Fax: (763) 412-4090 368 PHASE 1: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS BACKGROUND Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC, (Anderson) was contracted by Aspect Design & Build to perform Wetland Delineation and Conservation Design services for a proposed development property located in the City of Orono. The location of the proposed development, Honey Hill on Lake Classen, is 3465 and 3515 Sixth Ave, Orono, Minnesota, 55356 (Appendix A, Figure 1). The proposed development on the property would be combining the current parcels on the site and subdividing the combined acreage into single family residential home lots. Rocky Knoll Drive provides access to each proposed parcel from 6th street north. The overall size of the proposed development exceeds the 5-acre threshold triggering the need for the Conservation Design Plan per the City of Orono’s Code of Ordinances, Title VI-LAND USE, Chapter 78-ZONING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE XII. CONSE RVATION DESIGN PHASE 1: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS Per the city of Orono’s Code of Ordinances Article XII. CONSERVATION DESIGN, Sec. 78-1633: “Conservation design means a two-phased approach to design and development that maintains or improves ecological assets, provides infrastructure that works with the land, and incorporates people's instinctive desire to experience nature. Some conservation design strategies include identifying and avoiding sensitive natural features, planning roads along contours, allowing lots to border natural open space, integrating ecological stormwater management, using smaller lots, and educating developer and buyers about the ecological values of the landscape. The first phase entails inventory and analysis of the potential development site's natural features, existing land uses, and wetland delineation. The second phase entails analyzing the design implications of the findings from the initial phase, alternative stormwater design, and a conceptual design for road and lot layouts.” APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS & PROCEDURES Anderson has prepared the Conservation Design Plan for Aspect Design Build in accordance with the application requirements and procedures as described below in city of Orono’s Code of Ordinances Article XII. CONSERVATION DESIGN Sec. 78-1634: The developer shall follow the steps outlined below as part of the development review process: (1) Review and respond to the Goals and Policies for Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management as established in the Orono Community Management Plan and the recommendations contained within the Orono Natural Resources Inventory. The intent is to establish the property's ecological connections both within Orono and as part of the regional ecological system. (2) If the property exists adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study, review and respond to the existing aesthetic and ecological analysis. (3) If the property is not adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study, developer shall have a qualified consultant prepare a similar analysis and submit it to the city for review. This analysis shall include the documentation of views, corridor enclosure, and landmarks through a plan analysis and photographs. Developer shall be charged a standard fee established in the city fee schedule to cover the expenses of the city in hiring a consultant to review the ecological site analysis submitted by the developer. (4) Additionally, submit a natural resources inventory of the site, including all of the following elements: a. Review of the MLCCS data pertinent to the site. b. Tree survey, including all significant individual trees greater than six feet diameter, and stands of trees, identifying tree species and size. c. Wetland inventory, including delineation reports. d. Topographic survey indicating existing drainage patterns. 369 PHASE 1: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS e. Analysis of the site based on the findings and recommendations of the Orono Natural Resources Inventory with regards to: • Conceptual greenways and open space corridors. • Existence of rare plant communities; • Potential need for proactive management and protection. RURAL OASIS STUDY The Orono Rural Oasis study is one of the key guiding documents in the process of future developments in the City of Orono. The Rural Oasis study outlines two primary goals that future developments must meet: Goal #1: To promote the conservation and enhancement of the quality of surface water and wetlands throughout the city, particularly Lake Minnetonka. Goal #2: To ensure the preservation and enhancement of the existing rural character of the city. The property is directly adjacent to County Road 6 west, a corridor identified in Orono’s Rural Oasis Study (R.O.S) (Appendix A, Figure 9). Case Study #1 of the Rural Oasis Study identifies the corridor along County road 6 from Brown road to Highway 12, as an Open Enclosure Corridor. The R.O.S defines Open Enclosure Corridors as having “Long views beyond the right of way, and no real sense of corridor enclosure.” Positive views of the natural landscape extending from Open Enclosure Corridors are tied to the rural feel of the area. “Non-rural” land uses and new developments can degrade the positive views associated with Open Enclosure Corridors. With proper mitigation planning the threats to positive views and thus rural character, can be remedied through specific property design measures. EXISTING DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER SYSTEMS The site is currently occupied by 2 single family homes, an outbuilding, and a barn garage. Each dwelling is accessible from 6th Ave North by Rocky Knoll drive. Rocky Knoll drive is an unimproved gravel surface road that acts as the primary topographic drainage divide. Hydrology to the east of Rocky Knoll drive flows downslope towards lake Classen. Hydrology to the west of Rocky Knoll drive flows in the opposite direction and drains the landscape westward to the localized depressional wetlands. Currently the site does not have any dedicated stormwater infrastructure or stormwater treatment facilities. Drainage analysis and erosion control plan can be found attached as Appendix C. LAND USE & CLASSIFICATION The site of the development is zoned as RR-1B - One Family Rural Residential - 2 Acres. (Appendix A, Figure 11) The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) identified 6 land cover classes on the property (Appendix A, Figure 6). The land cover classes are Tree Plantation, Short Grasses, 76-100% Impervious Surfaces, Forest, and Wetland Emergent Vegetation. Land cover type and corresponding percentage on the site are identified in Table 1. Table 1 MLCCS Land Cover Data. Cover Type Percentage Covered Forest 2.1% Short Grasses 31% Tree Plantation 69.9% Wetland Emergent Vegetation 0.2% 76-100% Impervious surfaces 17.4% 370 PHASE 1: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY Hennepin counties Natural Resources GIS maps identif ied a Priority Natural Resource Corridor (PNRC) to the east and south of the site boundaries (Appendix A, Figure 7). A tree survey was conducted on 3/18/2024 by Stephen Nicholson, C.F., of TreeBiz LLC. The property was surveyed in 8 sections of tree stands. Appendix A, Figure 8 depicts the tree survey areas on the property. Appendix B provides the full tree survey report and field measurements. No trees in the surveyed areas surpassed 6 ft (72 inches) DBH (diameter breast height). Data from Web Soil Survey for Hennepin county identified 5 soil types on the property (Appendix A, Figure 3). Soils classes identified are surficial and not reliably representative greater than a depth of 36-48 inches. PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY The eastern side of the site abuts Lake Classen, Public Waters Inventory ID #27016200 (Appendix A, Figure 4). The property is within the Shoreland Overlay District of the City of Orono (Appendix A, Figure 10) and is subject to corresponding Shoreland Overlay District City Ordinances. The Shoreland Overlay District extends 1000 feet outwards from the OHWL (ordinary high-water level) of Lake Classen. The OHWL for Lake Claasen is 974.5 feet. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY The National Wetlands Inventory identifies 3 types of wetlands in 4 different sites on the property (Appendix A, Figure 2). On April 18th, 2024, Anderson performed a level 2 Wetland Delineation of the site (Appendix A, Figure 5). The wetland delineation revealed 5 wetlands present on site. The wetland delineation was completed in accordance with the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the published regional supplement to the Army Corps Wetland Delineation Manual, Midwest Regional Supplement. The purpose of this study was to identify areas meeting the technical criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins, and classify the wetland habitats in the project area. The Local Government Unit (LGU) responsible for implementing the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act at this project location is Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The MCWD and the City of Orono may require vegetated buffers around all regulated wetland areas. Wetland buffers must meet the standards specified by the MCWD and the city for any project that is regulated under the Wetland Conservation Act. The wetland investigation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and all applicable subsequent guidance for an on-site determination. The results of the investigation reflect the conditions present at the time of the delineation.371 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS Phase 2 of the Conservation Design Plan considers the resources inventoried in Phase 1 and the corresponding design implications for the developer. The purpose of this section is to identify and address areas of potential design and building constraints as they relate to local, state, and federal regulations. Phase 2 additionally considers design implications that have potential to affect the rural character of the city of Orono as defined by the Rural Oasis Study. RURAL OASIS STUDY The northern border of the property is directly adjacent to an area identified by the Rural Oasis Study, Case Study #1: County Road 6 West- Open Enclosure Corridor (Appendix A, Figure 9). The study determined novel “non-rural” land uses as new residential or industrial structures, can threaten the rural character of the open corridors identified in the study. The study identified potential solutions to these threats through ecological and conservation design measures such as berming, landscaping, and planting techniques that preserve the rural character of the area. The design plan for the site includes integrating the existing natural environment in a way that will minimize negative impacts to the current rural character as described in the Rural Oasis Study. Landscaping and planting techniques (Appendix A, Figure 12) along the northern boundary of the property will be utilized to preserve the positive and natural viewsheds identified along County Road 6 West. The project will not impact the natural view-shed of Lake Classen, regardless of travel direction (east or west) along County Road 6. EXISTING DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER SYSTEMS The site design plans include the improvement of Rocky Knoll drive through installation of a bituminous surface on the existing roadway (Appendix C). Developments increa sing the amount of impervious surfaces are subject to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater Management Ru le pursuant to Minnesota Statues §103D.34. Site development plans follow the necessary requirements for development. Increasing impervious surfaces through the future development and residential home constr uction will require additional storm water management and dedicated treatment facilities. The site as it currently exists does not have any dedicated stormwater treatment or management facilities, thus the additi on of such facilities in accordance with MCWD and the City of Orono regulations would be an improvement fro m the existing site conditions. LAND USE & CLASSIFICATION A review of the MLCCS data pertinent to the site indicated the primary land classification of the area is anthropogenically influenced. Tree plantation and 76-100 percent Impervious surface make up 87.3% of the total MLCCS inventoried area on the property. Site development is planned to occur almost entirely within the 87.3% of area already impacted by human activities, thus the risk of impacting the remaining natural ecological classes will be ultimately minimized. Figure 8 of the Orono Natural Resource Inventory identified the eastern portion of the site along Lake Classen as Cattail Marsh-seasonally flooded. This area is contained entirely within the field delineated wetland boundary, performed by Anderson on April 8th, 2024. As a regulated wetland, any potential impacts to this area will be minimized or mitigated in accordance with the Wetland Conservation Act (W.C.A) regulations. Overall, the analysis of available data of the site indicates site development would present no negative impact to the present ecological communities, nor any modifications to lower-level ecological community quality as described by the MLCCS. 372 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY Hennepin County GIS mapping identifies a Priority Natural Resource Corridor (PNRC) along the eastern and southern border of the site (Appendix A, Figure 7). The southwestern corner of the site intersects the PNRC for approximately 265 feet laterally in a parallel line. Site design plans included offsetting the building footprint from the property boundary by 30 feet in this area. This setback will prevent any potential impacts to the PNRC in this area. The eastern extent of property, where the lot extends to Lake Classen, overlaps with a section of the PNRC. Due to the proximity of Lake Classen and the wetlands preceding the lake, the regulatory protections for wetlands and public waters will prevent or mitigate any negative impacts to the PNRC in this area. The tree survey conducted on 3/18/2024 by Stephen Nicholson, CF, of TreeBiz LLC, (Appendix B), found several invasive and diseased trees. Sec. 78-1635- Basic Conservation Design Master Plan requirements and evaluation criteria, #3, establishes that the developer addresses the topic of diseased and invasive trees with a removal and management plan. The site design plans will include a Tree Mitigation and Landscape plan that will involve removing and treating invasive buckthorn, and removing trees afflicted by Emerald Ash Borer (Appendix A, Figure 12, Appendix B). Replanting of removed trees along the northern property border will be done as necessary to preserve the rural character of the open enclosure corridor along 6th Avenue North, as defined by the R.O.S. An analysis of Hennepin county Web Soil Survey data revealed that a majority of the surficial soil coverage on the site is non-hydric and suitable for the construction of dwellings (Table 2). MAP UNIT SYMBOL MAP UNIT NAME HYDRIC STATUS PERCENT COVER DRAINAGE CLASSIFICATION L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes 45% 23.37% Somewhat poorly drained L16A Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes 100% 14.98% Very poorly drained L37B Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 5% 5.80% Well drained L22C2 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 2% 0.01% Well drained L22C2 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded 2% 35.87% Well drained L37B Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 5% 19.51% Well drained L24A Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 100% 0.45% Very poorly drained Table 2 Honey Hill Surficial Soil Classes 373 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY The City of Orono’s code of ordinances identifies Lake Classen as “Natural Environment” (NE) lake. The site is entirely within the City of Orono’s Shoreland Overlay District, (Appendix A, Figure 10). When developing in the Shoreland Overlay district, development is subject to additional regulations as described by the City of Orono’s Code of Ordinances Title VI-LAND USE, Chapter 78- ZONING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE IX. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT. The primary regulation impacting site design is, “ARTICLE IX. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT- DIVISION 3- SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS- Sec. 78-1279 Placement of buildings and structures on lots.” (Table 2) If the site is classified as a Planned Residential Development (PRD), additional building setback regulations will be required and incorporated into site design plans. Setbacks for PRDs are shown in Table 3, and are determined by the following procedure: 1. The project parcel must be divided into tiers by locating one or more lines approximately parallel to a line that identifies the ordinary high-water level at the following intervals, proceeding landward: 2. The suitable area within each tier is next calculated by excluding from the tier area all wetlands, bluffs, or land below the ordinary high-water level of public waters. This suitable area and the proposed project are then subjected to the PRD density evaluation steps to arrive at an allowable number of dwelling units or sites. If site development requires work below the OHWL of Lake Classen or has the potential of impacting Lake Classen or other inventoried Public Waters, additional federal, state, and local regulations apply. Regulatory authority is federally administered through the Army Corps of Engineers Permit Program under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The regulatory authority in the state of Minnesota is the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, under the Public Waters Work Permit Program. The local government unit, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), regulates through the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). Design plans for the site are in accordance with the proper building setback regulations. When multiple building setback requirements are present, the largest setback area takes precedence. Public Water Classification Setbacks (feet) Building/Structure Unsewered Sewered Natural Environment 150 150 Recreational development 100 75 General development 75 75 Tributary 100 75 Table 3 Shoreland District Building Setbacks Lake Class Unsewered (feet) Sewered (feet) General development lakes—First tier 200 200 General development lakes—Second and additional tiers 267 200 Recreational development lakes 267 267 Natural environment lakes 400 320 Tributaries 300 300 Table 4 Shoreland District PRD Building Setbacks 374 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY & WETLAND DELINEATION All wetlands within the City of Orono are regulated by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). To avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the city defers jurisdiction for the establishment and maintenance of wetland buffers to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. If application of MCWD buffer regulations conflicts with city regulations, the Watershed District requirements shall apply. (Orono, Minnesota - Code of Ordinances Title VI - LAND USE Chapter 78 - ZONING REGULATIONS ARTICLE XI. - WETLANDS PROTECTION DIVISION 3. - BUFFER AREAS Sec. 78-1605. - Wetland buffer areas and setbacks.) The level 2 Wetland delineation performed by Anderson delineated 5 wetlands within the boundaries of the property, (Appendix A, Figure 5). Following field delineation, Anderson used the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) tool to determine individual management classifications for the delineated wetlands on site. Management classification is the primary factor determining wetland buffers, and thus building setbacks that will impact site design plans. Delineated wetlands 1, 2, 3, and 5 were classified as management class 2. Wetland 4 is classified as management class Preserve. Table 4 illustrates MCWD management class buffer regulations. Table 5 MCWD Wetland Management Class Buffers MCWD Regulations, Wetland Protections Rules pursuant to Minnesota statues §103D.341, section 4, requires a property owner must obtain a permit establishing a permanent vegetated buffer adjacent to wetlands or public waters wetlands in accordance with the following. A buffer is required if: 1. If an approval is issued under this rule for a wetland impact that requires replacement or if a permit is issued under the Waterbody Crossings and Structures rule for a new structure in a wetland or public water wetland, a buffer is required around the wetland; 2. If an activity requires a permit under the Stormwater Management rule, a buffer is required on that part of the wetland that is downgradient of the new or reconstructed impervious surface. 3. If a New Principal Residential Structure that increases site impervious surface is constructed, a buffer is required on that part of the wetland that is downgradient of the new or reconstructed impervious surface. Following concurrence of the delineated boundaries and management classifications of the inventoried wetlands on site, the design plans will reflect the necessary buffer widths in accordance with MCDW regulations. Current design plans do not anticipate wetland impacts. Should future design plans include impacts to wetlands, permitting for impacts and mitigation will occur in accordance with WCA regulations. Management Class Base Width Base Width Minimum Delineated Wetlands Preserve 75 feet 67 feet 4 Manage 1 40 feet 34 feet N/A Manage 2 30 feet 24 feet 1, 2, 3, 5 Manage 3 20 feet 16 feet N/A 375 PHASE 2: DESIGN IMPLICATIONS CONCLUSION In accordance with the City of Orono’s Code of Ordinances, Article XII. CONSERVATION DESIGN, Sec. 78-1633, Anderson performed an analysis of the inventoried natural resources found on the site of Aspect Design Build’s proposed development, Honey Hill on Lake Classen. The findings of the analysis indicate that while inventoried natural resources are present on the site, Aspect Design Build’s proposed site development would not have significant impact on these resources, nor would it negatively impact the rural character of the City of Orono. This determination was made considering the following factors: 1. The inventoried natural resources and ecologic communities primarily occur on the periphery of the site. Site development plans are focused on areas of the site that have already been impacted by human development, thus the risk of impacting the remaining resources and ecological communities is minimized. 2. Aspect Design Build’s site development plans would maintain the rural character of the City of Orono through the necessary site design plans, as described in the Rural Oasis Study. 3. Aspect Design Build’s site development plans are in accordance with the City of Orono’s Shoreland Overlay District building setback standards and Minnehaha Creek Watershed district wetland buffer standards. I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or reviewed work completed by above staff. I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or wrote the report for this determination. May 23, 2024 Robert Bergstrom Environmental Technician Date May 23, 2024 Benjamin J. Hodapp, PWS Environmental Services Manager MN Certified Wetland Delineator #1016 Date 376 Appendix A FIGURES 377 ^_ Legend ^_Project Location SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 1 Project Location I1 inch = 3,0 00 feet03,000 6,0001,500 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 Proje ct L oca tion 378 PABHP U B F x PUBH PEM1CPEM1A P E M 1 C PEM1CPEM1C PEM1APEM1A PEM1A PEM1APEM1APEM1CL2UBHLegend Project Extent County Parcels National Wetland Inventory SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 2 National Wetland Inventory I1 inch = 300 feet0300 600150 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 379 L50A L132A L132A L36A L36A L36A L36A L36A L36A L16A L37B L37B L22C2 L22C2 L22C2 L37B L37B W L40B L22E L40B L22D2 L22D2 L24A L24A L24A L25A Legend Project Extent County ParcelsHydric Rating by Map Unit 0% Hydric Components 1-32% Hydric Components 33-65% Hydric Components 66-99% Hydric Components 100% Hydric Components SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 3 Hennepin Co. Soil Survey I1 inch = 300 feet0300 600150 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 380 27091601 27091602 27091800 27052100 27051900 Katrina Lake27015400 27051300 27051300 27083900 27084100 27052000 27052000 27084200 27110100 Lake Classen27016200 Lake Classen27016200 Thies Lake27015600 27091700 27052200 27084300 27040800 P a in te r C r e e k (M -0 5 6 -0 1 2 ) Legend Project Extent County Parcels MN DNR Inventoried Public Watercourse MN DNR Inventoried Public Waterbasin SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 4 MnDNR Public Water Inventory I1 inch = 2,0 00 feet02,000 4,0001,000 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 381 Type 3Type 3Type 5Type 3Type 3 Type 2Type 3B Type 3 EF Wetland 5 Type 2 PEM1B Fresh Wet Meadow 0.01 Ac. A B Ephe meral Trib utary A Type 90 R6SB Channel 0.00 Ac. (58 8 S.F. /196 L.F.) Lake Classen27016200 Wetland 1 Type 1/3 PEM 1C/FO1Ad Floodplain Forest/ Shallow Marsh 0.18 Ac. Wetland 2 Type 2 PEM 1B Fresh Wet Meadow 0.17 Ac. Wetland 3 Type 1 PFO1A Floodplain Forest 0.01 Ac. Wetland 4-1 Type 2/3/5 PABH/EM1C/Bx Fresh Wet Meadow/ Shallow Marsh/Open Water 1.67 Ac. Wetland 4-2 Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh 0.01 Ac. Lake Classen Type 3 PEM1C Shallow Marsh 0.04 Ac. C D B A A B A AB Legend Project Extent County Parcels Oridnary High Water Line Wetland Field Delineated April 18th, 2024 TEP Rev. May 22nd, 2024 Sample Point Culvert SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 5 Delineation I1 inch = 250 feet0250 500125 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 5.23.2024 382 Legend Project Extent County Parcels SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota MLCCS Vegetation Communities I1 inch = 300 feet0300 600150 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.3.2024 Land Cover - M LCCS 5-10% Impervious 11-25 % Impervious 26-50 % Impervious 51-75 % Impervious 76-10 0% Impervious Short Grasses Agricultural Land Tree Plantation Forest Wetland Forest Wetland Shrubs Tall Grasses Wetland Emergent Veg. Dry Tall G rasses Wetland Open Water 383 Legend Project Extent County Parcels Priority Natural Resource Corridors SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure Priority Natural Resource Corridors I1 inch = 500 feet0500 1,000250 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.19.2024 384 Legend Project Extent County Parcels SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure Tree Survey I1 inch = 200 feet0200 400100 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.19.2024 385 Legend Project Extent County Parcels SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure Rural Oasis Analysis Corridors I1 inch = 5,2 80 feet05,200 10,4002,600 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 4.19.2024 Proje ct L oca tion 386 150'320' 1000' Legend Project Extent County Parcels Oridnary High Water Line Shorela nd Ove rlay District (1000') PRD Building Setback (320') Non-PRD Building Setback (150') SOURCE : MN DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Hennepin Co ., Anderson Engineering Project Location City of OronoHennepin County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com Sixth Avenue Properties Orono, Minnesota Figure 9 Shoreland Overlay District and PRD Buffers I1 inch = 200 feet0200 400100 Feet Address: 3465, 3515 Sixth Ave Orono, MinnesotaLat/Long: 44.994041,-93.611275PID: MultipleProject No: 17981Date: 5.22.2024 387 Carman's Bay West Arm West Crystal Bay East Crystal Bay Maxwell Bay North Arm Forest Lake Stubbs Bay Lafayette Bay Lower Lake Minnetonka Smith's Bay Brown's Bay Tanager Lake Lake Classen Dickey Lake Long Lake Lydiard Lake Mooney Lake French LakeNARMD RN S horeDr WoodhillR d SHADYWOODRDOLD CRYSTAL BAY RD SOLD CRYSTAL BAY RD NBAYSIDE R DSIXTHAVEN LUCELINE TR TONK A WARDCO RD NO 19BROWNRDSShoreline Dr S u ss ex Rd PARK D R Fox St WATERTOWN RD Shoreline DrWILLOW DR NFAG E R N ESSPOINTRD ORONOORCHARDRDSWAYZATABLVDWMCCULLEYRDW BRANCHR D FrenchCreek Dr Dahl Rd WillowVie wDr USHWYNO12NFar m R d N ARMLATruffula TrAugustaS t Lill i a n Ln HIG H LASTARKEYRD Colin Dr BRIAR STSu garw oo dDrOxfordRdCascoPointRdDeer R u n Tr Some r s etL a W F armRd Devin La Pin e hurstCtWol verton Pl CHERRYAVETURNHAMRD PHEASANTRD S M I T HAVEN ARM DR W MooneyLakeDrTOGO RD GrahamHil l R d MYRTLE W O O DRDWak efieldRdWildhurstTrLyric Ave W h ite OakCirWILLOW DR SAbin gdon W a yHuntFarmRdJamestownRd LongLake Blvd O r o n o O a ks Dr TONKAVIE WL ABROWN RDN LAKEVIE WTERConcordiaStH o llander RdSTUBBS BAY RD SBohnsPointRdDeborahDr WEBBE R HI LLS RD HERITAGELA CHE VYC HASEDRC R YS T A L B AYRD W AYZ ATA B LV D W F A R V I EW LA C Y G NETPLLEAF STU S H W Y N O 1 2 ORCHARD PARK RDKELLEY PKW YTOWN LINE RDF erndale Rd WELONG L AKERDLomaL i ndaAveSTUBBS BAY RD NK E L L Y AVE La k evi e wPkwy FERNDALE RD NO L D L O N GLAKE RD SPRINGHILLRD CA SCOC IR B-3 I B-1 B-1 B-2 B-4 B-5 B-6 PUD LR-1A LR-1A LR-1A LR-1A LR-1A LR-1B LR-1B LR-1B LR-1B LR-1C LR-1C LR-1C-1 PRD PRD PRD PRD PRD PRD R-1AR-1B RPUD RPUD RR-1A RR-1A RR-1B RR-1B RR-1B RR-1BRR-1B RR-1B RR-1B RR-1BRR-1B RS RS B-2 LR-1C R-1A PRD RPUD LR-1A RR-1B MINNETONKA BEACH LONG LAKE SPRING PARK SHADY WOOD R D Shoreline Dr H illsid e P L CRYSTAL PL Carman StLyricAve OL I V E A V E NAVARRE AVENA V A R R ELABlaine AveB A Y V IE W PL DUNWOODYAVENORTHERN A V E KELLY AVECasco Point RdL ivingsto n Ave B-3 B-1 B-4 B-4 B-5 B-5 LR-1B LR-1BLR-1C LR-1C LR-1C-1 LR-1C-1 PRD PRD RPUD SPRING PARK WAYZATA BLVD WWILLOW DR NSandstone C tCascade La SANDHILLDROLD CRYSTAL BAY RD NDICKEY L A K EDRS u garwoo d Dr BROWN RD NKELLEY PKWY I B-1 B-6 PUD B-6 PUD PRD PRD RPUD RPUD RR-1B RR-1B PUD RR-1B R-1A LONG LAKE Map Document: \\arcserver1\gis\ORNO\_Basemap\ESRI\Pro\2021\Orono_ZoningMap\Orono_ZoningMap.aprx | Username: dmalm | Date Saved: 12/1/2021 4:42 PMZoning Districts Business B-1 - Retail Sales B-2 - Lakeshore B-3 - Shopping Center B-4 - Office/Professional B-5 - Limited Neighborhood B-6 PUD - Highway Commercial Industrial I - Industrial Recreational RS - Seasonal Recreational Rural Residential RR-1A - One Family Rural Residential - 5 Acres RR-1B - One Family Rural Residential - 2 Acres Lakeshore Residential LR-1A - One Family Lakeshore Residential - 2 Acres LR-1B - One Family Lakeshore Residential - 1 Acre LR-1C - One Family Lakeshore Residential - 1/2 Acre LR-1C-1 - One Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict - 1/2 Acre Residential R-1A - One Familyl Residential - 1 Acre R-1B - One Family Residential - 1/2 Acre Planned Unit Development RPUD - Residential Planned Unit Development RR-1B PUD PRD - Planned Residential Development PUD/RR-1B City Limits Lakes Parcels!I 0 3,000 Feet The Zoning Designations on this map are a representation of a combination of maps, ordinances and City Code requirements which make up the complete City of Orono Zoning Regulations. Information on Planned Development is available at the City Hall. All Zoning requirements and Zoning designations on specific properties are subject to change. For updated Zoning information, please contact the City of Orono Planning and Zoning Department at planning@ci.orono.mn.us or call (952) 249-4620. This map reflects all valid Zoning amendments up to and including Ordinance no. 228, third Series adopted July 8, 2019 Source: Zoning data created and maintained by the City of Orono Planning and Zoning Department. Parcel data obtained from Hennepin County Taxpayer Division. INSET 2 INSET 1 INSET 2 INSET 1 388 389 Appendix 390 Honey Hill - Tree Information 391 392 Appendix 393 394 Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC ● 13605 1st Avenue North, Suite 100 ● Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 ● (763) 412-4000 Main ● (763) 412-4090 Fax ● www.ae-mn.com 1 | Page Table of Contents • Cover / Certification Page • Table of Contents • Project Overview • Existing Site Conditions • Soils • Proposed Site Conditions • Methodology • Rate Control • Volume Control • Summary Appendix – Exhibits and Calculations • A – Existing Drainage Map & HydroCAD Report • B – Proposed Drainage Map & HydroCAD Report • C – Master Grading and Site Plan • D – County Soils Data for Project Area 395 Stormwater Narrative/Summary June 14, 2024 Honey Hill on Lake Classen Orono, MN 2 | Page Project Overview Honey Hill on Lake Classen is a proposed 6-lot residential development in Orono, MN. The site encompasses 18.92 acres. The property is in Hennepin County and within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The project will require an Erosion Control Permit and Stormwater Management Permit from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The project includes site clearing and demolition of existing structures and pavement found on site. The proposed development will consist of 6 residential lots, each having its own private driveway. A new public road with cul-de-sac will be built to provide access off 6th Avenue North. For this submittal, only the public road and two basins (1 & 4) are being proposed for construction. The rest of the development and lots will be custom graded and constructed at a later date. We were asked to provide a concept master grading and site plan as well as stormwater treatment for the entire site to illustrate that the impervious runoff has the capability to be treated. Existing Site Conditions The 18.92-acre property is located on 6th Avenue North (Co Rd 6) in Orono, MN. Runoff is generally directed to the east and west, entering multiple wetland areas, one that is contiguous with Lake Classen. The existing site features two single-family dwellings with detached garages and pole barns. A gravel road is currently provided to access the two dwellings that connects to Co Rd. 6. The area surrounding the residence is vegetated with a variety of grasses and brush with scattered trees beyond. The existing drainage pattern can be seen in Exhibit A: Existing Drainage Map within the appendices of this report. The property does not have city water or sewer services and is instead served by private well and septic. Soils County Soils data indicates the in-situ soils are Lester Loam and Hamel which consists of loam and clay loam. These soils area classified as Hydrologic Soil Group C. For our hydrologic modeling we used curve numbers for “C” soils for the existing conditions and “C” soils for the proposed conditions. Proposed Site Conditions The proposed development will consist of 6 single-family residential lots served by private driveways and a shared public road leading into the development. For this submittal, only the public road and two basins (1 & 4) are being proposed for construction. The rest of the development and lots will be custom graded and constructed at a later date. We were asked to provide a concept master grading and site plan as well as stormwater treatment for the entire site to illustrate that the impervious runoff has the capability to be treated. The entire post-developed impervious surface area is 85,556sf. There are 4 infiltration basins that are being proposed to provide stormwater treatment that can be referenced in Exhibit B: Proposed Drainage Map. The proposed infiltration basins include retention of 14,180 cubic feet of runoff for infiltration prior to outletting into their respective wetland area. 396 Stormwater Narrative/Summary June 14, 2024 Honey Hill on Lake Classen Orono, MN 3 | Page The proposed grading plan allows for overland drainage of the entire site. The proposed impervious areas are being routed to their respective infiltration basin. The proposed drainage pattern can be seen in Exhibit C: Master Grading and Site Plan in the appendices of this report. Methodology HydroCAD The hydrologic characteristics of the site were modeled using HydroCAD software. TR55/TR20 methods were utilized. Existing and proposed drainage areas were determined based on existing survey and proposed grading. The 2, 10, & 100-year frequency events were analyzed for peak runoff rate control in the existing and proposed conditions. The MSE Type III- 24 hr distribution was used in analysis. Runoff from pervious and impervious surfaces were calculated separately to more accurately model the runoff volume from the site surfaces. For our purposes, only the portion of the property that will be modified as a result of this project has been modeled. Results of this analysis are summarized below, and a report can be seen in Exhibit B: HydroCAD Report. Infiltration Basin The project proposes to use 4 infiltration basins to control and treat stormwater runoff. The proposed basins are situated to most efficiently gather a majority of runoff from impervious surfaces prior to discharging to the wetland areas. The proposed filtration basins will provide a minimum 14.5” of water retention prior to outletting via earthen weir. Phosphorus Control Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires control phosphorus within stormwater runoff. For redevelopment projects, the requirement is considered met if the proposed conditions meet the requirements of the Volume Control regulations. See below for more information. 397 Stormwater Narrative/Summary June 14, 2024 Honey Hill on Lake Classen Orono, MN 4 | Page Rate Control Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires post-development conditions to maintain pre-development peak runoff rates. The table below summarizes the pre- and post-development peak rates for the property: RATES (CFS) 2YR - 2.86 10YR - 4.26 100YR - 7.32 WETLAND EX. 2YR PROP. 2YR EX. 10YR PROP. 10YR EX. 100YR PROP. 100YR W1 5.46 1.87 9.27 6.03 18.27 15.88 W2 3.71 2.17 14.95 11.05 35.44 31.79 W3 0.53 0.53 1.19 1.19 2.85 2.85 W4-1 9.69 8.58 19.84 17.8 44.08 39.48 Volume Control Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires the retention and infiltration of 1.0” of stormwater runoff from new impervious surfaces, where feasible. The project has an impervious surface area of 85,556 square feet, which requires 7,130 cubic feet of volume retention. The proposed infiltration basins provides 14,180 cubic feet of retention, almost twice the volume required for infiltration. Summary The implementation of infiltration basins will provide the necessary stormwater control to meet MCWD regulations. 398 399 Engineering Properties This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area. Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions. The criteria for determining Hydrologic soil group is found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx? content=17757.wba). Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series. Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas. The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 1 of 10 400 Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly." Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004). The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML. The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection. If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves, numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). References: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 2 of 10 401 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 3 of 10 402 Report—Engineering Properties Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; other possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/ OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba). Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L16A—Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes Muskego, ponded 35 C/D 0-9 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 95-98-1 00 0-0 -0 NP 9-36 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 95-98-1 00 0-0 -0 NP 36-60 Coprogenous earth OL A-5 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 40-45 -50 2-5 -8 Blue earth, ponded 30 B/D 0-50 Silt loam OL A-5 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 85-90- 95 80-88- 95 41-46 -50 2-5 -8 50-60 Silty clay loam, clay loam, silt loam OL A-5 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 80-90-1 00 80-88- 95 80-88- 95 41-46 -50 2-5 -8 Houghton, ponded 25 A/D 0-80 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 95-98-1 00 0-0 -0 NP Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 4 of 10 403 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L22C2—Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded Lester, moderately eroded 85 C 0-6 Loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 91 52-61- 68 32-39 -44 13-16-1 9 6-38 Clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 91 55-66- 72 35-41 -44 16-21-2 3 38-79 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 86-93- 99 74-85- 95 54-64- 72 28-34 -40 11-16-2 0 L22D2—Lester loam, 10 to 16 percent slopes, moderately eroded Lester, moderately eroded 85 C 0-6 Loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 91 52-61- 68 32-39 -44 13-16-1 9 6-38 Clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 91 55-66- 72 35-41 -44 16-21-2 3 38-79 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 86-93- 99 74-85- 95 54-64- 72 28-34 -40 11-16-2 0 L22E—Lester loam, 10 to 22 percent slopes Lester 85 C 0-9 Loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 91 52-61- 68 34-40 -45 13-16-1 8 9-12 Loam CL A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 73-83- 91 53-61- 68 32-36 -41 13-16-1 9 12-38 Clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 91 55-66- 72 35-41 -44 16-21-2 3 38-79 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 86-93- 99 74-85- 95 54-64- 72 28-34 -40 11-16-2 0 Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 5 of 10 404 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L24A—Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Glencoe 80 C/D 0-9 Silty clay loam, clay loam MH, OH, ML, CL, OL A-7-5, A-7-6 0- 0- 5 0- 0- 2 98-100- 100 85-97-1 00 79-95-1 00 66-80- 88 47-60 -71 19-23-2 6 9-39 Silty clay loam, clay loam MH, OH, CL, OL A-7-5, A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 98-100- 100 89-98-1 00 81-96-1 00 64-77- 83 40-54 -62 18-22-2 5 39-50 Silty clay loam, clay loam CH, CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 88-98-1 00 73-93- 98 67-90- 98 56-75- 84 38-44 -51 19-22-2 5 50-79 Clay loam, loam CL, SC A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 89-98-1 00 75-93- 98 65-86- 97 49-66- 75 30-37 -44 12-18-2 4 L25A—Le Sueur loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Le sueur 80 C/D 0-8 Loam, clay loam ML A-7-5, A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 94 52-61- 71 37-45 -55 13-17-2 1 8-14 Loam, clay loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 94 52-61- 71 34-40 -48 13-16-2 1 14-52 Clay loam, loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 94 55-66- 75 35-41 -47 16-20-2 5 52-79 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 86-93- 99 74-85- 95 54-64- 72 28-34 -40 11-16-2 0 Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 6 of 10 405 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L36A—Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes Hamel, overwash 50 C/D 0-12 Loam OH, ML, CL, SM A-7-5, A-6 0- 1- 4 0- 1- 2 85-98-1 00 66-90- 98 60-84- 94 41-58- 67 38-47 -57 13-15-1 8 12-26 Loam, clay loam MH, ML, CL, SC A-7-5, A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 87-98-1 00 72-92- 98 63-87- 96 44-62- 70 34-46 -52 13-18-2 1 26-48 Clay loam, loam CH, CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 88-98-1 00 73-93- 98 66-89- 98 48-65- 74 36-43 -51 17-21-2 5 48-79 Clay loam, loam CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 89-98-1 00 75-93- 98 65-86- 97 49-66- 75 30-37 -44 12-18-2 4 Hamel 43 C/D 0-10 Loam, clay loam CL, OH, ML, SM A-7-5, A-6 0- 1- 4 0- 1- 2 85-98-1 00 66-90- 98 60-84- 97 41-58- 70 38-47 -60 13-16-2 0 10-24 Loam, clay loam CL, MH, ML, SC A-7-5, A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 87-98-1 00 72-92- 98 63-87- 96 44-62- 70 34-46 -52 13-18-2 1 24-46 Clay loam, loam CH, CL, SC A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 88-98-1 00 73-93- 98 66-89- 98 48-65- 74 36-43 -51 17-21-2 5 46-79 Clay loam, loam CL, SC A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 89-98-1 00 75-93- 98 65-86- 97 49-66- 75 30-37 -44 12-18-2 4 Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 7 of 10 406 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L37B—Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Angus 80 C 0-7 Loam CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 5 95-96- 99 84-92- 98 72-83- 91 52-61- 68 34-40 -45 13-16-1 8 7-37 Loam, clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 91 55-66- 72 35-41 -44 16-21-2 3 37-50 Loam, clay loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 85-93- 99 72-84- 91 55-65- 71 30-37 -40 12-18-2 0 50-79 Loam, clay loam CL A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 2- 4 95-97- 99 86-93- 99 74-85- 95 54-64- 72 28-34 -40 11-16-2 0 L40B—Angus- Kilkenny complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes Angus 45 B 0-8 Loam CL A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 5 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 80-88- 95 50-68- 85 30-35 -40 11-13-1 5 8-35 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 3- 5 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 80-88- 95 55-65- 75 35-38 -40 15-18-2 0 35-40 Loam, clay loam CL A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 3- 5 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 75-83- 90 50-60- 75 32-36 -39 13-16-1 8 40-80 Clay loam, loam CL A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 3- 5 95-97-1 00 90-95- 98 75-82- 90 50-62- 75 30-35 -40 12-16-2 0 Kilkenny 40 C/D 0-11 Clay loam ML, CL A-7, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 95-98-1 00 80-88- 95 70-78- 85 35-40 -50 10-18-2 5 11-35 Clay loam, clay, silty clay loam CH, MH A-7 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 80-88- 95 65-73- 80 50-60 -70 25-30-3 5 35-80 Loam, clay loam CL A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 1- 2 95-97-1 00 90-95- 98 75-82- 90 50-62- 75 30-35 -40 12-16-2 0 Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 8 of 10 407 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L50A—Muskego and Houghton soils, 0 to 1 percent slopes Muskego, surface drained 45 C/D 0-10 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 —————— 10-28 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 —————— 28-79 Coprogenous mucky silt loam OH A-7-5 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 85-100- 100 80-95-1 00 0-55 -77 NP-11-1 6 Houghton, ponded 40 A/D 0-9 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 —————— 9-79 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 —————— Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 9 of 10 408 Engineering Properties–Hennepin County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L132A—Hamel- Glencoe complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes Hamel 55 C/D 0-10 Loam, clay loam OH, ML, CL, SM A-7-5, A-6 0- 1- 4 0- 1- 2 85-98-1 00 66-90- 98 60-84- 97 41-58- 70 38-47 -60 13-16-2 0 10-24 Loam, clay loam MH, ML, CL, SC A-7-5, A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 87-98-1 00 72-92- 98 63-87- 96 44-62- 70 34-46 -52 13-18-2 1 24-46 Clay loam, loam CH, CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 88-98-1 00 73-93- 98 66-89- 98 48-65- 74 36-43 -51 17-21-2 5 46-79 Clay loam, loam CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 89-98-1 00 75-93- 98 65-86- 97 49-66- 75 30-37 -44 12-18-2 4 Glencoe 35 C/D 0-9 Clay loam, silty clay loam MH, OH, ML, CL, OL A-7-5, A-7-6 0- 0- 5 0- 0- 2 98-100- 100 85-97-1 00 79-95-1 00 66-80- 88 47-60 -71 19-23-2 6 9-39 Clay loam, silty clay loam MH, OH, CL, OL A-7-5, A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 98-100- 100 89-98-1 00 81-96-1 00 64-77- 83 40-54 -62 18-22-2 5 39-50 Silty clay loam, clay loam CH, CL A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 88-98-1 00 73-93- 98 67-90- 98 56-75- 84 38-44 -51 19-22-2 5 50-79 Clay loam, loam CL, SC A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 3 0- 0- 1 89-98-1 00 75-93- 98 65-86- 97 49-66- 75 30-37 -44 12-18-2 4 Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Hennepin County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 10, 2023 Engineering Properties---Hennepin County, Minnesota bhmvjm Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/14/2024 Page 10 of 10 409 N 0 60'120' EXISTING CONT.990 DRAINAGE DIVIDE DRAINAGE BOUNDARY PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA EXISTING WETLAND EXISTING DRAINAGE MAP 1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e n u e N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1 | a e -m n .c o m P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C CHECKED BY:DRAWN:DESIGNED: XXXXXXXXX REVISION LOG DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONSNO.DATE HONEY HILL ON LAKE CLASSEN 3465-3515 6TH AVE N. ORONO, MN 55356 ASPECT DESIGN BUILD EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA DELINEATED WETLAND EXHIBIT A 410 XL1-OFFSITE XL1W1 XL1W2 XL2W1 XL2W2 XL2W3 XL3W2 XL3W4-1 XL4W2 XL4W4-1 XL4W5 XL5W4-1 XL5W5 XL6-OFFSITE XL6W5 XROADOFFSITE XROADW1 XROADW5 W1 W2 W3 W4-1 W5 1L Routing Diagram for 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC, Printed 6/14/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 411 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 2-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 2.86 2 2 10-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 4.26 2 3 100-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 7.32 2 412 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 0.026 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C (XL4W2) 3.573 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (XL2W1, XL2W2, XL2W3, XROADOFFSITE, XROADW1, XROADW5) 0.208 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C (XL1-OFFSITE) 0.298 96 Gravel surface, HSG C (XL3W2, XROADOFFSITE, XROADW1, XROADW5) 1.220 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C (XL1W1) 0.747 79 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG C (XL6W5) 1.257 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C (XL6-OFFSITE) 0.280 98 Roofs, HSG C (XL3W4-1, XL4W4-1, XL4W5, XL5W5) 0.243 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C (XL2W1, XL2W2) 0.963 98 Water Surface, HSG C (XL1W1, XL1W2, XL2W3, XL4W4-1, XL4W5, XL5W5) 9.036 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C (XL3W2, XL3W4-1, XL4W4-1, XL4W5, XL5W5) 0.849 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C (XL1W2) 0.116 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C (XL5W4-1) 18.816 77 TOTAL AREA 413 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 18.816 HSG C XL1-OFFSITE, XL1W1, XL1W2, XL2W1, XL2W2, XL2W3, XL3W2, XL3W4-1, XL4W2, XL4W4-1, XL4W5, XL5W4-1, XL5W5, XL6-OFFSITE, XL6W5, XROADOFFSITE, XROADW1, XROADW5 0.000 HSG D 0.000 Other 18.816 TOTAL AREA 414 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.026 50-75% Grass cover, Fair XL4 W2 0.000 0.000 3.573 0.000 0.000 3.573 >75% Grass cover, Good XL2 W1, XL2 W2, XL2 W3, XR OA DO FFS ITE, XR OA DW 1, XR OA DW5 0.000 0.000 0.208 0.000 0.000 0.208 Brush, Fair XL1 -OF FSI TE 0.000 0.000 0.298 0.000 0.000 0.298 Gravel surface XL3 W2, XR OA DO FFS ITE, XR OA DW 1, XR OA DW5 415 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) (continued) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 1.220 0.000 0.000 1.220 Meadow, non-grazed XL1 W1 0.000 0.000 0.747 0.000 0.000 0.747 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair XL6 W5 0.000 0.000 1.257 0.000 0.000 1.257 Pasture/grassland/range, Good XL6 -OF FSI TE 0.000 0.000 0.280 0.000 0.000 0.280 Roofs XL3 W4- 1, XL4 W4- 1, XL4 W5, XL5 W5 0.000 0.000 0.243 0.000 0.000 0.243 Unconnected roofs XL2 W1, XL2 W2 0.000 0.000 0.963 0.000 0.000 0.963 Water Surface XL1 W1, XL1 W2, XL2 W3, XL4 W4- 1, XL4 W5, XL5 W5 416 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) (continued) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 9.036 0.000 0.000 9.036 Woods/grass comb., Fair XL3 W2, XL3 W4- 1, XL4 W4- 1, XL4 W5, XL5 W5 0.000 0.000 0.849 0.000 0.000 0.849 Woods/grass comb., Good XL1 W2 0.000 0.000 0.116 0.000 0.000 0.116 Woods/grass comb., Poor XL5 W4-10.000 0.000 18.816 0.000 0.000 18.816 TOTAL AREA 417 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.60"Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=0.23 cfs 0.010 af Runoff Area=59,482 sf 10.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment XL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=2.01 cfs 0.088 af Runoff Area=39,471 sf 6.26% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment XL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=0.90 cfs 0.058 af Runoff Area=24,965 sf 8.57% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.82"Subcatchment XL2W1: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=0.61 cfs 0.039 af Runoff Area=102,100 sf 8.28% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.82"Subcatchment XL2W2: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=2.51 cfs 0.160 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment XL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=0.53 cfs 0.023 af Runoff Area=10,480 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment XL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.29 cfs 0.021 af Runoff Area=134,570 sf 3.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.92"Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=77 Runoff=3.24 cfs 0.237 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment XL4W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.04 cfs 0.002 af Runoff Area=196,565 sf 17.86% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.09"Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=6.59 cfs 0.409 af Runoff Area=16,070 sf 27.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.21"Subcatchment XL4W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.60 cfs 0.037 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.21"Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Tc=5.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.27 cfs 0.012 af Runoff Area=82,550 sf 0.73% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.87"Subcatchment XL5W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=2.17 cfs 0.137 af Runoff Area=54,775 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=10.0 min CN=74 Runoff=1.50 cfs 0.081 af Runoff Area=32,520 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment XL6W5: Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=1.49 cfs 0.064 af Runoff Area=3,100 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.09"Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.17 cfs 0.006 af 418 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=16,420 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.15"Subcatchment XROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=0.58 cfs 0.036 af Runoff Area=15,610 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.15"Subcatchment XROADW5: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=0.55 cfs 0.034 af Peak Elev=979.07' Storage=10,041 cf Inflow=5.46 cfs 0.433 afPond W1: Outflow=2.17 cfs 0.212 af Peak Elev=973.19' Storage=44,705 cf Inflow=3.71 cfs 0.453 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.10' Storage=1,014 cf Inflow=0.53 cfs 0.023 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=974.77' Storage=28,604 cf Inflow=9.69 cfs 0.657 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=982.30' Storage=1,173 cf Inflow=3.95 cfs 0.273 afPond W5: Primary=2.95 cfs 0.270 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=2.95 cfs 0.270 af Inflow=1.71 cfs 0.098 afLink 1L: Primary=1.71 cfs 0.098 af Total Runoff Area = 18.816 ac Runoff Volume = 1.455 af Average Runoff Depth = 0.93" 92.10% Pervious = 17.330 ac 7.90% Impervious = 1.486 ac 419 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth> 0.60" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.010 af Runoff Depth>0.60" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 0.23 cfs 420 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 2.01 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.088 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 53,152 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 59,482 74 Weighted Average 53,152 89.36% Pervious Area 6,330 10.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=59,482 sf Runoff Volume=0.088 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 2.01 cfs 421 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff = 0.90 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.058 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 37,000 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 39,471 74 Weighted Average 37,000 93.74% Pervious Area 2,471 6.26% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=39,471 sf Runoff Volume=0.058 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 0.90 cfs 422 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff = 0.61 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.039 af, Depth> 0.82" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 22,825 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,140 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 24,965 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 22,825 91.43% Pervious Area 2,140 8.57% Impervious Area 2,140 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=24,965 sf Runoff Volume=0.039 af Runoff Depth>0.82" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 0.61 cfs 423 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff = 2.51 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.160 af, Depth> 0.82" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 93,650 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,450 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 102,100 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 93,650 91.72% Pervious Area 8,450 8.28% Impervious Area 8,450 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=102,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.160 af Runoff Depth>0.82" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 2.51 cfs 424 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.53 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.023 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 0.53 cfs 425 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff = 0.29 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 8,900 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 1,580 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 10,480 79 Weighted Average 10,480 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=10,480 sf Runoff Volume=0.021 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 0.29 cfs 426 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff = 3.24 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.237 af, Depth> 0.92" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 129,670 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,900 98 Roofs, HSG C 134,570 77 Weighted Average 129,670 96.36% Pervious Area 4,900 3.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=134,570 sf Runoff Volume=0.237 af Runoff Depth>0.92" Tc=20.0 min CN=77 3.24 cfs 427 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.002 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.0020 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.002 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.04 cfs 428 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff = 6.59 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.409 af, Depth> 1.09" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 161,455 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 2,865 98 Roofs, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 196,565 80 Weighted Average 161,455 82.14% Pervious Area 35,110 17.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=196,565 sf Runoff Volume=0.409 af Runoff Depth>1.09" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 6.59 cfs 429 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff = 0.60 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.037 af, Depth> 1.21" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 11,650 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,120 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,070 82 Weighted Average 11,650 72.50% Pervious Area 4,420 27.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=16,070 sf Runoff Volume=0.037 af Runoff Depth>1.21" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 0.60 cfs 430 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W4-1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.27 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth> 1.21" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.012 af Runoff Depth>1.21" Tc=5.0 min CN=82 0.27 cfs 431 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff = 2.17 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.137 af, Depth> 0.87" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 81,950 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 300 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,550 76 Weighted Average 81,950 99.27% Pervious Area 600 0.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=82,550 sf Runoff Volume=0.137 af Runoff Depth>0.87" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 2.17 cfs 432 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 23HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 1.50 cfs @ 12.19 hrs, Volume= 0.081 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 54,775 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,775 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=54,775 sf Runoff Volume=0.081 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=10.0 min CN=74 1.50 cfs 433 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 24HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6W5: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.49 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.064 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 32,520 79 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG C 32,520 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=32,520 sf Runoff Volume=0.064 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 1.49 cfs 434 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 25HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.17 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.006 af, Depth> 1.09" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 2,200 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 900 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 3,100 80 Weighted Average 3,100 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=3,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.006 af Runoff Depth>1.09" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.17 cfs 435 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 26HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff = 0.58 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.036 af, Depth> 1.15" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 10,920 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,500 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 16,420 81 Weighted Average 16,420 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=16,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.036 af Runoff Depth>1.15" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 0.58 cfs 436 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 27HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff = 0.55 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.034 af, Depth> 1.15" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 10,610 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,000 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 15,610 81 Weighted Average 15,610 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=15,610 sf Runoff Volume=0.034 af Runoff Depth>1.15" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 0.55 cfs 437 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 28HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.685 ac, 5.45% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.91" for 2-Year event Inflow = 5.46 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 0.433 af Outflow = 2.17 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 0.212 af, Atten= 60%, Lag= 30.7 min Primary = 2.17 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 0.212 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 979.07' @ 12.67 hrs Surf.Area= 6,403 sf Storage= 10,041 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 149.0 min calculated for 0.212 af (49% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 77.1 min ( 883.4 - 806.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=1.93 cfs @ 12.67 hrs HW=979.06' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 1.93 cfs @ 0.62 fps) 438 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 29HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210Inflow Area=5.685 ac Peak Elev=979.07' Storage=10,041 cf 5.46 cfs 2.17 cfs 439 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 30HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.201 ac, 6.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.59" for 2-Year event Inflow = 3.71 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 0.453 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 972.00' Surf.Area= 15,000 sf Storage= 25,000 cf Peak Elev= 973.19' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 17,987 sf Storage= 44,705 cf (19,705 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,400 77,400 227,400 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)43210Inflow Area=9.201 ac Peak Elev=973.19' Storage=44,705 cf 3.71 cfs 440 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 31HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.77" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.53 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.023 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.10' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 10,250 sf Storage= 1,014 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.10' Storage=1,014 cf 0.53 cfs 441 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 32HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 11.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.02" for 2-Year event Inflow = 9.69 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 0.657 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 974.77' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 41,940 sf Storage= 28,604 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=974.77' Storage=28,604 cf 9.69 cfs 442 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 33HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W5: Inflow Area = 3.369 ac, 3.42% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.97" for 2-Year event Inflow = 3.95 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.273 af Outflow = 2.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 0.270 af, Atten= 25%, Lag= 8.0 min Primary = 2.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 0.270 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 982.30' @ 12.35 hrs Surf.Area= 3,932 sf Storage= 1,173 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 8.2 min calculated for 0.269 af (99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 4.2 min ( 807.0 - 802.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 51,865 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 200 0 0 982.00 325 525 525 984.00 24,010 24,335 24,860 985.00 30,000 27,005 51,865 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 980.40'12.0" Round Culvert L= 35.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 980.40' / 980.00' S= 0.0114 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.50'3.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=2.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs HW=982.30' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 2.95 cfs @ 3.75 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=980.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 443 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 34HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W5: Inflow Outflow Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)43210Inflow Area=3.369 ac Peak Elev=982.30' Storage=1,173 cf 3.95 cfs 2.95 cfs 2.95 cfs 0.00 cfs 444 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 35HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.536 ac, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.76" for 2-Year event Inflow = 1.71 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.098 af Primary = 1.71 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.098 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10Inflow Area=1.536 ac 1.71 cfs 1.71 cfs 445 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 36HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.43"Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=0.57 cfs 0.025 af Runoff Area=59,482 sf 10.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment XL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=4.50 cfs 0.194 af Runoff Area=39,471 sf 6.26% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment XL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=2.08 cfs 0.128 af Runoff Area=24,965 sf 8.57% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.77"Subcatchment XL2W1: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=1.37 cfs 0.085 af Runoff Area=102,100 sf 8.28% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.77"Subcatchment XL2W2: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=5.61 cfs 0.346 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment XL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=1.19 cfs 0.051 af Runoff Area=10,480 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.07"Subcatchment XL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.58 cfs 0.042 af Runoff Area=134,570 sf 3.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.92"Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=77 Runoff=6.93 cfs 0.494 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.08"Subcatchment XL4W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.07 cfs 0.004 af Runoff Area=196,565 sf 17.86% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.16"Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=13.16 cfs 0.811 af Runoff Area=16,070 sf 27.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.32"Subcatchment XL4W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=1.15 cfs 0.071 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.33"Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Tc=5.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.51 cfs 0.022 af Runoff Area=82,550 sf 0.73% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.85"Subcatchment XL5W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=4.73 cfs 0.292 af Runoff Area=54,775 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=10.0 min CN=74 Runoff=3.41 cfs 0.178 af Runoff Area=32,520 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.08"Subcatchment XL6W5: Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=2.99 cfs 0.130 af Runoff Area=3,100 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.17"Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.33 cfs 0.013 af 446 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 37HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=16,420 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.24"Subcatchment XROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=1.14 cfs 0.070 af Runoff Area=15,610 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.24"Subcatchment XROADW5: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=1.08 cfs 0.067 af Peak Elev=979.15' Storage=10,602 cf Inflow=9.27 cfs 0.905 afPond W1: Outflow=7.46 cfs 0.683 af Peak Elev=974.85' Storage=77,394 cf Inflow=14.95 cfs 1.204 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.22' Storage=2,235 cf Inflow=1.19 cfs 0.051 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=975.41' Storage=57,808 cf Inflow=19.84 cfs 1.328 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=982.89' Storage=5,554 cf Inflow=8.27 cfs 0.559 afPond W5: Primary=3.55 cfs 0.556 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=3.55 cfs 0.556 af Inflow=3.95 cfs 0.216 afLink 1L: Primary=3.95 cfs 0.216 af Total Runoff Area = 18.816 ac Runoff Volume = 3.024 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.93" 92.10% Pervious = 17.330 ac 7.90% Impervious = 1.486 ac 447 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 38HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.57 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.025 af, Depth> 1.43" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.025 af Runoff Depth>1.43" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 0.57 cfs 448 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 39HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 4.50 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.194 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 53,152 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 59,482 74 Weighted Average 53,152 89.36% Pervious Area 6,330 10.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=59,482 sf Runoff Volume=0.194 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 4.50 cfs 449 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 40HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff = 2.08 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.128 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 37,000 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 39,471 74 Weighted Average 37,000 93.74% Pervious Area 2,471 6.26% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=39,471 sf Runoff Volume=0.128 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 2.08 cfs 450 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 41HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff = 1.37 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.085 af, Depth> 1.77" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 22,825 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,140 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 24,965 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 22,825 91.43% Pervious Area 2,140 8.57% Impervious Area 2,140 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=24,965 sf Runoff Volume=0.085 af Runoff Depth>1.77" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 1.37 cfs 451 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 42HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff = 5.61 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.346 af, Depth> 1.77" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 93,650 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,450 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 102,100 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 93,650 91.72% Pervious Area 8,450 8.28% Impervious Area 8,450 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=102,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.346 af Runoff Depth>1.77" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 5.61 cfs 452 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 43HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.19 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.051 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 1.19 cfs 453 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 44HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff = 0.58 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.042 af, Depth> 2.07" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 8,900 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 1,580 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 10,480 79 Weighted Average 10,480 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=10,480 sf Runoff Volume=0.042 af Runoff Depth>2.07" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 0.58 cfs 454 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 45HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff = 6.93 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.494 af, Depth> 1.92" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 129,670 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,900 98 Roofs, HSG C 134,570 77 Weighted Average 129,670 96.36% Pervious Area 4,900 3.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=134,570 sf Runoff Volume=0.494 af Runoff Depth>1.92" Tc=20.0 min CN=77 6.93 cfs 455 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 46HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth> 2.08" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.0050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.004 af Runoff Depth>2.08" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.07 cfs 456 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 47HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff = 13.16 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.811 af, Depth> 2.16" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 161,455 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 2,865 98 Roofs, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 196,565 80 Weighted Average 161,455 82.14% Pervious Area 35,110 17.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)14 13 12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=196,565 sf Runoff Volume=0.811 af Runoff Depth>2.16" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 13.16 cfs 457 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 48HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff = 1.15 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.071 af, Depth> 2.32" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 11,650 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,120 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,070 82 Weighted Average 11,650 72.50% Pervious Area 4,420 27.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=16,070 sf Runoff Volume=0.071 af Runoff Depth>2.32" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 1.15 cfs 458 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 49HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W4-1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.51 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.022 af, Depth> 2.33" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.022 af Runoff Depth>2.33" Tc=5.0 min CN=82 0.51 cfs 459 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 50HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff = 4.73 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.292 af, Depth> 1.85" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 81,950 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 300 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,550 76 Weighted Average 81,950 99.27% Pervious Area 600 0.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=82,550 sf Runoff Volume=0.292 af Runoff Depth>1.85" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 4.73 cfs 460 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 51HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 3.41 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.178 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 54,775 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,775 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=54,775 sf Runoff Volume=0.178 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=10.0 min CN=74 3.41 cfs 461 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 52HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6W5: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 2.99 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.130 af, Depth> 2.08" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 32,520 79 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG C 32,520 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=32,520 sf Runoff Volume=0.130 af Runoff Depth>2.08" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 2.99 cfs 462 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 53HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.013 af, Depth> 2.17" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 2,200 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 900 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 3,100 80 Weighted Average 3,100 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=3,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.013 af Runoff Depth>2.17" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.33 cfs 463 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 54HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff = 1.14 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.070 af, Depth> 2.24" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 10,920 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,500 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 16,420 81 Weighted Average 16,420 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=16,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.070 af Runoff Depth>2.24" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 1.14 cfs 464 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 55HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff = 1.08 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.067 af, Depth> 2.24" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 10,610 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,000 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 15,610 81 Weighted Average 15,610 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=15,610 sf Runoff Volume=0.067 af Runoff Depth>2.24" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 1.08 cfs 465 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 56HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.685 ac, 5.45% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.91" for 10-Year event Inflow = 9.27 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 0.905 af Outflow = 7.46 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.683 af, Atten= 20%, Lag= 10.3 min Primary = 7.46 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.683 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 979.15' @ 12.32 hrs Surf.Area= 6,612 sf Storage= 10,602 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 78.2 min calculated for 0.681 af (75% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 28.7 min ( 827.5 - 798.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=7.14 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=979.15' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 7.14 cfs @ 0.96 fps) 466 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 57HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 Inflow Area=5.685 ac Peak Elev=979.15' Storage=10,602 cf 9.27 cfs 7.46 cfs 467 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 58HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.201 ac, 6.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.57" for 10-Year event Inflow = 14.95 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 1.204 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 972.00' Surf.Area= 15,000 sf Storage= 25,000 cf Peak Elev= 974.85' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 21,059 sf Storage= 77,394 cf (52,394 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,400 77,400 227,400 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=9.201 ac Peak Elev=974.85' Storage=77,394 cf 14.95 cfs 468 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 59HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.70" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.19 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.22' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 10,544 sf Storage= 2,235 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.22' Storage=2,235 cf 1.19 cfs 469 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 60HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 11.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.06" for 10-Year event Inflow = 19.84 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 1.328 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 975.41' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 49,933 sf Storage= 57,808 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=975.41' Storage=57,808 cf 19.84 cfs 470 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 61HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W5: Inflow Area = 3.369 ac, 3.42% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.99" for 10-Year event Inflow = 8.27 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 0.559 af Outflow = 3.55 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.556 af, Atten= 57%, Lag= 17.2 min Primary = 3.55 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.556 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 982.89' @ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area= 10,919 sf Storage= 5,554 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 14.0 min calculated for 0.554 af (99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 11.8 min ( 802.9 - 791.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 51,865 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 200 0 0 982.00 325 525 525 984.00 24,010 24,335 24,860 985.00 30,000 27,005 51,865 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 980.40'12.0" Round Culvert L= 35.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 980.40' / 980.00' S= 0.0114 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.50'3.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=3.55 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=982.89' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 3.55 cfs @ 4.52 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=980.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 471 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 62HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W5: Inflow Outflow Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)9876543210Inflow Area=3.369 ac Peak Elev=982.89' Storage=5,554 cf 8.27 cfs 3.55 cfs 3.55 cfs 0.00 cfs 472 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 63HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.536 ac, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.69" for 10-Year event Inflow = 3.95 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.216 af Primary = 3.95 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.216 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)43210Inflow Area=1.536 ac 3.95 cfs 3.95 cfs 473 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 64HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.72"Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=1.48 cfs 0.064 af Runoff Area=59,482 sf 10.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.15"Subcatchment XL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=10.76 cfs 0.472 af Runoff Area=39,471 sf 6.26% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.14"Subcatchment XL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=5.04 cfs 0.313 af Runoff Area=24,965 sf 8.57% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.25"Subcatchment XL2W1: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=3.27 cfs 0.203 af Runoff Area=102,100 sf 8.28% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.25"Subcatchment XL2W2: Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 Runoff=13.35 cfs 0.830 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.15"Subcatchment XL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=2.85 cfs 0.125 af Runoff Area=10,480 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.68"Subcatchment XL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff=1.30 cfs 0.094 af Runoff Area=134,570 sf 3.64% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.46"Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=77 Runoff=15.96 cfs 1.149 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.69"Subcatchment XL4W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.16 cfs 0.010 af Runoff Area=196,565 sf 17.86% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.80"Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=28.61 cfs 1.805 af Runoff Area=16,070 sf 27.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.02"Subcatchment XL4W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=2.43 cfs 0.154 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.03"Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Tc=5.0 min CN=82 Runoff=1.07 cfs 0.049 af Runoff Area=82,550 sf 0.73% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.36"Subcatchment XL5W5: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=11.05 cfs 0.688 af Runoff Area=54,775 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.15"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=10.0 min CN=74 Runoff=8.20 cfs 0.434 af Runoff Area=32,520 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.70"Subcatchment XL6W5: Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=6.54 cfs 0.292 af Runoff Area=3,100 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.81"Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.71 cfs 0.029 af 474 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 65HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=16,420 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.91"Subcatchment XROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=2.44 cfs 0.154 af Runoff Area=15,610 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.91"Subcatchment XROADW5: Tc=15.0 min CN=81 Runoff=2.32 cfs 0.147 af Peak Elev=979.27' Storage=11,420 cf Inflow=18.27 cfs 2.107 afPond W1: Outflow=18.03 cfs 1.884 af Peak Elev=978.41' Storage=161,308 cf Inflow=35.44 cfs 3.131 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.51' Storage=5,443 cf Inflow=2.85 cfs 0.125 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=976.64' Storage=130,705 cf Inflow=44.08 cfs 3.002 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=983.81' Storage=20,468 cf Inflow=18.75 cfs 1.282 afPond W5: Primary=4.32 cfs 1.278 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=4.32 cfs 1.278 af Inflow=9.60 cfs 0.527 afLink 1L: Primary=9.60 cfs 0.527 af Total Runoff Area = 18.816 ac Runoff Volume = 7.012 af Average Runoff Depth = 4.47" 92.10% Pervious = 17.330 ac 7.90% Impervious = 1.486 ac 475 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 66HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.48 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.064 af, Depth> 3.72" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment XL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.064 af Runoff Depth>3.72" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 1.48 cfs 476 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 67HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 10.76 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.472 af, Depth> 4.15" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 53,152 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 59,482 74 Weighted Average 53,152 89.36% Pervious Area 6,330 10.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=59,482 sf Runoff Volume=0.472 af Runoff Depth>4.15" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 10.76 cfs 477 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 68HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff = 5.04 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.313 af, Depth> 4.14" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 37,000 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 39,471 74 Weighted Average 37,000 93.74% Pervious Area 2,471 6.26% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=39,471 sf Runoff Volume=0.313 af Runoff Depth>4.14" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 5.04 cfs 478 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 69HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff = 3.27 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.203 af, Depth> 4.25" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 22,825 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,140 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 24,965 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 22,825 91.43% Pervious Area 2,140 8.57% Impervious Area 2,140 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=24,965 sf Runoff Volume=0.203 af Runoff Depth>4.25" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 3.27 cfs 479 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 70HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff = 13.35 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.830 af, Depth> 4.25" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 93,650 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,450 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 102,100 76 75 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 93,650 91.72% Pervious Area 8,450 8.28% Impervious Area 8,450 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)14 13 12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=102,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.830 af Runoff Depth>4.25" Tc=15.0 min UI Adjusted CN=75 13.35 cfs 480 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 71HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 2.85 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.125 af, Depth> 4.15" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.125 af Runoff Depth>4.15" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 2.85 cfs 481 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 72HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff = 1.30 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.094 af, Depth> 4.68" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 8,900 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 1,580 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 10,480 79 Weighted Average 10,480 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=10,480 sf Runoff Volume=0.094 af Runoff Depth>4.68" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 1.30 cfs 482 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 73HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff = 15.96 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 1.149 af, Depth> 4.46" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 129,670 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,900 98 Roofs, HSG C 134,570 77 Weighted Average 129,670 96.36% Pervious Area 4,900 3.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL3W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=134,570 sf Runoff Volume=1.149 af Runoff Depth>4.46" Tc=20.0 min CN=77 15.96 cfs 483 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 74HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth> 4.69" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.010 af Runoff Depth>4.69" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.16 cfs 484 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 75HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff = 28.61 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 1.805 af, Depth> 4.80" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 161,455 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 2,865 98 Roofs, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 196,565 80 Weighted Average 161,455 82.14% Pervious Area 35,110 17.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=196,565 sf Runoff Volume=1.805 af Runoff Depth>4.80" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 28.61 cfs 485 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 76HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff = 2.43 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.154 af, Depth> 5.02" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 11,650 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 4,120 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,070 82 Weighted Average 11,650 72.50% Pervious Area 4,420 27.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL4W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=16,070 sf Runoff Volume=0.154 af Runoff Depth>5.02" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 2.43 cfs 486 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 77HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W4-1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.07 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.049 af, Depth> 5.03" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.049 af Runoff Depth>5.03" Tc=5.0 min CN=82 1.07 cfs 487 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 78HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff = 11.05 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.688 af, Depth> 4.36" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 81,950 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 300 98 Roofs, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,550 76 Weighted Average 81,950 99.27% Pervious Area 600 0.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL5W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=82,550 sf Runoff Volume=0.688 af Runoff Depth>4.36" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 11.05 cfs 488 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 79HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 8.20 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.434 af, Depth> 4.15" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 54,775 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,775 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)9876543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=54,775 sf Runoff Volume=0.434 af Runoff Depth>4.15" Tc=10.0 min CN=74 8.20 cfs 489 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 80HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6W5: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 6.54 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.292 af, Depth> 4.70" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 32,520 79 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG C 32,520 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6W5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=32,520 sf Runoff Volume=0.292 af Runoff Depth>4.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 6.54 cfs 490 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 81HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.71 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.029 af, Depth> 4.81" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 2,200 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 900 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 3,100 80 Weighted Average 3,100 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADOFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=3,100 sf Runoff Volume=0.029 af Runoff Depth>4.81" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.71 cfs 491 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 82HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff = 2.44 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.154 af, Depth> 4.91" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 10,920 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,500 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 16,420 81 Weighted Average 16,420 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=16,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.154 af Runoff Depth>4.91" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 2.44 cfs 492 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 83HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff = 2.32 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af, Depth> 4.91" Routed to Pond W5 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 10,610 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 5,000 96 Gravel surface, HSG C 15,610 81 Weighted Average 15,610 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XROADW5: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=15,610 sf Runoff Volume=0.147 af Runoff Depth>4.91" Tc=15.0 min CN=81 2.32 cfs 493 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 84HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.685 ac, 5.45% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.45" for 100-Year event Inflow = 18.27 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2.107 af Outflow = 18.03 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 1.884 af, Atten= 1%, Lag= 1.2 min Primary = 18.03 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 1.884 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 979.27' @ 12.16 hrs Surf.Area= 6,905 sf Storage= 11,420 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 45.4 min calculated for 1.878 af (89% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 17.2 min ( 818.3 - 801.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=17.78 cfs @ 12.16 hrs HW=979.27' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 17.78 cfs @ 1.31 fps) 494 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 85HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=5.685 ac Peak Elev=979.27' Storage=11,420 cf 18.27 cfs 18.03 cfs 495 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 86HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.201 ac, 6.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.08" for 100-Year event Inflow = 35.44 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3.131 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 972.00' Surf.Area= 15,000 sf Storage= 25,000 cf Peak Elev= 978.41' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 30,575 sf Storage= 161,308 cf (136,308 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,400 77,400 227,400 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 Inflow Area=9.201 ac Peak Elev=978.41' Storage=161,308 cf 35.44 cfs 496 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 87HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.15" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.85 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.125 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.51' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 11,279 sf Storage= 5,443 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.51' Storage=5,443 cf 2.85 cfs 497 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 88HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 11.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.67" for 100-Year event Inflow = 44.08 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 3.002 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 976.64' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 70,592 sf Storage= 130,705 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=976.64' Storage=130,705 cf 44.08 cfs 498 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 89HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W5: Inflow Area = 3.369 ac, 3.42% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.56" for 100-Year event Inflow = 18.75 cfs @ 12.19 hrs, Volume= 1.282 af Outflow = 4.32 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 1.278 af, Atten= 77%, Lag= 27.8 min Primary = 4.32 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 1.278 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 983.81' @ 12.65 hrs Surf.Area= 21,736 sf Storage= 20,468 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 39.6 min calculated for 1.274 af (99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 38.4 min ( 816.0 - 777.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 51,865 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 200 0 0 982.00 325 525 525 984.00 24,010 24,335 24,860 985.00 30,000 27,005 51,865 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 980.40'12.0" Round Culvert L= 35.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 980.40' / 980.00' S= 0.0114 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.50'3.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=4.32 cfs @ 12.65 hrs HW=983.81' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 4.32 cfs @ 5.51 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=980.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 499 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 90HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W5: Inflow Outflow Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=3.369 ac Peak Elev=983.81' Storage=20,468 cf 18.75 cfs 4.32 cfs 4.32 cfs 0.00 cfs 500 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Ex_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 91HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.536 ac, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.12" for 100-Year event Inflow = 9.60 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 0.527 af Primary = 9.60 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 0.527 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 Inflow Area=1.536 ac 9.60 cfs 9.60 cfs 501 984 982980 980 978 976 974988992 990 994 996 998 998996994992 99 8 99 6 9 9 4 99 2 990 988 9 8 6 9 8 4 9 8 2 9809969949 9 2 1000 998 996 994 99 2 992990994990 988 988 9869789 8 0 9 8 2 9 9 2 990988 98 6988986986988 9 8 2 980982980 9 9 0 984986 984 PLOTTED:COMM. NO. DRAWING NO. ----XXXXX PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP 1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e n u e N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1 | a e -m n .c o m P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C DRAWING TITLE CHECKED BY:DRAWN:DESIGNED: XXXXXXXXX REVISION LOG DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONSNO.DATE HONEY HILL ON LAKE CLASSEN 3465-3515 6TH AVE N. ORONO, MN 55356 ASPECT DESIGN BUILD STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA N 0 60'120' 987 990 PROPOSED MINOR CONT. PROPOSED MAJOR CONT. EXISTING CONT.990 DRAINAGE DIVIDE DRAINAGE BOUNDARY PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA EXISTING WETLAND/PROPOSED BASIN PROPOSED IMP. AREA DELINEATED WETLAND EXHIBIT B 502 PL1-OFFSITE PL1B1 PL1W1 PL1W2 PL2-B1 PL2B2 PL2W2 PL2W3 PL3-W4-1 PL3B2 PL3B3 PL3W2 PL4B2 PL4B3 PL4B4 PL4W4-1 PL5B4 PL5W4-1 PL6B4 PROAD-OFFSITE PROADB4 PROADW1 XL6-OFFSITE B1 B2 B3 B4 W1 W2 W3 W4-1 1L Routing Diagram for 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC, Printed 6/14/2024 HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 503 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 2-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 2.86 2 2 10-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 4.26 2 3 100-Year MSE 24-hr 3 Default 24.00 1 7.32 2 504 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 0.026 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C (PL4B2) 5.910 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (PL1B1, PL2-B1, PL2B2, PL2W2, PL2W3, PL3B2, PL3B3, PL4B3, PL6B4, PROAD-OFFSITE, PROADB4, PROADW1) 0.208 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C (PL1-OFFSITE) 0.262 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C (PL1W1) 1.251 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C (XL6-OFFSITE) 0.967 98 Paved parking, HSG C (PL3B2, PL3B3, PL4B3, PL4B4, PL5B4, PL6B4) 0.837 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C (PL1B1, PL3W2, PROAD-OFFSITE, PROADB4, PROADW1) 0.034 98 ROOF (PL2-B1) 0.216 98 Roofs, HSG C (PL1W2, PL2B2) 0.051 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C (PL2W2) 0.963 98 Water Surface, HSG C (PL1W1, PL1W2, PL2W3, PL4B4, PL4W4-1, PL5B4) 7.295 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C (PL3-W4-1, PL3W2, PL4B4, PL4W4-1, PL5B4) 0.874 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C (PL1W2) 0.116 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C (PL5W4-1) 19.008 79 TOTAL AREA 505 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 18.974 HSG C PL1-OFFSITE, PL1B1, PL1W1, PL1W2, PL2-B1, PL2B2, PL2W2, PL2W3, PL3-W4-1, PL3B2, PL3B3, PL3W2, PL4B2, PL4B3, PL4B4, PL4W4-1, PL5B4, PL5W4-1, PL6B4, PROAD-OFFSITE, PROADB4, PROADW1, XL6-OFFSITE 0.000 HSG D 0.034 Other PL2-B1 19.008 TOTAL AREA 506 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.026 50-75% Grass cover, Fair PL4 B2 0.000 0.000 5.910 0.000 0.000 5.910 >75% Grass cover, Good PL1 B1, PL2 -B1, PL2 B2, PL2 W2, PL2 W3, PL3 B2, PL3 B3, PL4 B3, PL6 B4, PR OA D-O FFS ITE, PR OA DB4 , PR OA DW1 0.000 0.000 0.208 0.000 0.000 0.208 Brush, Fair PL1 -OF FSI TE 507 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) (continued) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.262 0.000 0.000 0.262 Meadow, non-grazed PL1 W1 0.000 0.000 1.251 0.000 0.000 1.251 Pasture/grassland/range, Good XL6 -OF FSI TE 0.000 0.000 0.967 0.000 0.000 0.967 Paved parking PL3 B2, PL3 B3, PL4 B3, PL4 B4, PL5 B4, PL6 B4 0.000 0.000 0.837 0.000 0.000 0.837 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers PL1 B1, PL3 W2, PR OA D-O FFS ITE, PR OA DB4 , PR OA DW1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.034 0.034 ROOF PL2 -B1 0.000 0.000 0.216 0.000 0.000 0.216 Roofs PL1 W2, PL2 B2 508 17981 - Honey Hill 17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) (continued) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.051 0.000 0.000 0.051 Unconnected roofs PL2 W2 0.000 0.000 0.963 0.000 0.000 0.963 Water Surface PL1 W1, PL1 W2, PL2 W3, PL4 B4, PL4 W4- 1, PL5 B4 0.000 0.000 7.295 0.000 0.000 7.295 Woods/grass comb., Fair PL3 -W4 -1, PL3 W2, PL4 B4, PL4 W4- 1, PL5 B4 0.000 0.000 0.874 0.000 0.000 0.874 Woods/grass comb., Good PL1 W2 0.000 0.000 0.116 0.000 0.000 0.116 Woods/grass comb., Poor PL5 W4-10.000 0.000 18.974 0.000 0.034 19.008 TOTAL AREA 509 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.60"Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=0.23 cfs 0.010 af Runoff Area=41,735 sf 30.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.15"Subcatchment PL1B1: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=2.43 cfs 0.092 af Runoff Area=17,750 sf 35.66% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.15"Subcatchment PL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=81 Runoff=0.91 cfs 0.039 af Runoff Area=43,507 sf 12.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.82"Subcatchment PL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=75 Runoff=1.07 cfs 0.068 af Runoff Area=20,505 sf 7.17% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.87"Subcatchment PL2-B1: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=0.54 cfs 0.034 af Runoff Area=51,620 sf 12.45% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.92"Subcatchment PL2B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=77 Runoff=1.45 cfs 0.091 af Runoff Area=55,700 sf 3.98% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment PL2W2: Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 Runoff=1.09 cfs 0.082 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment PL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=0.53 cfs 0.023 af Runoff Area=98,322 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.87"Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=76 Runoff=2.22 cfs 0.163 af Runoff Area=4,325 sf 53.87% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.55"Subcatchment PL3B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=87 Runoff=0.21 cfs 0.013 af Runoff Area=36,268 sf 22.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.09"Subcatchment PL3B3: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=1.22 cfs 0.075 af Runoff Area=2,420 sf 35.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.33"Subcatchment PL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=84 Runoff=0.09 cfs 0.006 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment PL4B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.04 cfs 0.002 af Runoff Area=31,575 sf 30.09% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.15"Subcatchment PL4B3: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=1.84 cfs 0.070 af Runoff Area=16,095 sf 7.46% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.97"Subcatchment PL4B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=78 Runoff=0.48 cfs 0.030 af Runoff Area=164,960 sf 19.55% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.09"Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=80 Runoff=4.77 cfs 0.342 af 510 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=82,790 sf 15.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment PL5B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=2.62 cfs 0.163 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.21"Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.19 cfs 0.012 af Runoff Area=39,835 sf 22.15% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.03"Subcatchment PL6B4: Tc=10.0 min CN=79 Runoff=1.49 cfs 0.079 af Runoff Area=3,095 sf 76.74% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.96"Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=92 Runoff=0.29 cfs 0.012 af Runoff Area=16,050 sf 64.49% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment PROADB4: Tc=15.0 min CN=89 Runoff=0.84 cfs 0.052 af Runoff Area=15,980 sf 64.77% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.78"Subcatchment PROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=90 Runoff=0.87 cfs 0.054 af Runoff Area=54,500 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>0.77"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=1.25 cfs 0.080 af Peak Elev=981.31' Storage=3,979 cf Inflow=2.96 cfs 0.181 afPond B1: Discarded=0.02 cfs 0.016 af Primary=0.89 cfs 0.085 af Outflow=0.91 cfs 0.101 af Peak Elev=981.52' Storage=3,622 cf Inflow=1.69 cfs 0.106 afPond B2: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.009 af Primary=0.06 cfs 0.015 af Outflow=0.08 cfs 0.024 af Peak Elev=981.65' Storage=2,426 cf Inflow=2.25 cfs 0.145 afPond B3: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.006 af Primary=1.45 cfs 0.090 af Outflow=1.45 cfs 0.096 af Peak Elev=981.80' Storage=7,456 cf Inflow=5.29 cfs 0.324 afPond B4: Discarded=0.02 cfs 0.010 af Primary=1.03 cfs 0.185 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=1.05 cfs 0.194 af Peak Elev=979.04' Storage=9,903 cf Inflow=1.87 cfs 0.309 afPond W1: Outflow=1.21 cfs 0.193 af Peak Elev=971.35' Storage=15,817 cf Inflow=2.17 cfs 0.364 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.10' Storage=1,014 cf Inflow=0.53 cfs 0.023 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=974.72' Storage=26,417 cf Inflow=8.58 cfs 0.607 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Inflow=1.41 cfs 0.102 afLink 1L: Primary=1.41 cfs 0.102 af Total Runoff Area = 19.008 ac Runoff Volume = 1.594 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.01" 83.87% Pervious = 15.941 ac 16.13% Impervious = 3.067 ac 511 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth> 0.60" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.010 af Runoff Depth>0.60" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 0.23 cfs 512 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1B1: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 2.43 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.092 af, Depth> 1.15" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 29,215 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 12,520 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 41,735 81 Weighted Average 29,215 70.00% Pervious Area 12,520 30.00% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL1B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=41,735 sf Runoff Volume=0.092 af Runoff Depth>1.15" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 2.43 cfs 513 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.91 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.039 af, Depth> 1.15" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 11,420 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 17,750 81 Weighted Average 11,420 64.34% Pervious Area 6,330 35.66% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=17,750 sf Runoff Volume=0.039 af Runoff Depth>1.15" Tc=5.0 min CN=81 0.91 cfs 514 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff = 1.07 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.068 af, Depth> 0.82" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 38,068 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 2,968 98 Roofs, HSG C 43,507 75 Weighted Average 38,068 87.50% Pervious Area 5,439 12.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=43,507 sf Runoff Volume=0.068 af Runoff Depth>0.82" Tc=15.0 min CN=75 1.07 cfs 515 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff = 0.54 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.034 af, Depth> 0.87" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 19,035 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C * 1,470 98 ROOF 20,505 76 Weighted Average 19,035 92.83% Pervious Area 1,470 7.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=20,505 sf Runoff Volume=0.034 af Runoff Depth>0.87" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 0.54 cfs 516 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff = 1.45 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.091 af, Depth> 0.92" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 45,193 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 6,427 98 Roofs, HSG C 51,620 77 Weighted Average 45,193 87.55% Pervious Area 6,427 12.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=51,620 sf Runoff Volume=0.091 af Runoff Depth>0.92" Tc=15.0 min CN=77 1.45 cfs 517 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff = 1.09 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.082 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 53,485 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,215 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 55,700 75 74 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 53,485 96.02% Pervious Area 2,215 3.98% Impervious Area 2,215 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=55,700 sf Runoff Volume=0.082 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 1.09 cfs 518 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.53 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.023 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 0.53 cfs 519 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff = 2.22 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.163 af, Depth> 0.87" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 98,322 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 98,322 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=98,322 sf Runoff Volume=0.163 af Runoff Depth>0.87" Tc=20.0 min CN=76 2.22 cfs 520 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.013 af, Depth> 1.55" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 1,995 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 4,325 87 Weighted Average 1,995 46.13% Pervious Area 2,330 53.87% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=4,325 sf Runoff Volume=0.013 af Runoff Depth>1.55" Tc=15.0 min CN=87 0.21 cfs 521 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff = 1.22 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.075 af, Depth> 1.09" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 27,938 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 36,268 80 Weighted Average 27,938 77.03% Pervious Area 8,330 22.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=36,268 sf Runoff Volume=0.075 af Runoff Depth>1.09" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 1.22 cfs 522 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff = 0.09 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.006 af, Depth> 1.33" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 1,570 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 850 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 2,420 84 Weighted Average 1,570 64.88% Pervious Area 850 35.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.095 0.09 0.085 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.0050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=2,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.006 af Runoff Depth>1.33" Tc=20.0 min CN=84 0.09 cfs 523 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.002 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.0020 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.002 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.04 cfs 524 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 23HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B3: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 1.84 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.070 af, Depth> 1.15" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 22,075 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 9,500 98 Paved parking, HSG C 31,575 81 Weighted Average 22,075 69.91% Pervious Area 9,500 30.09% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL4B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=31,575 sf Runoff Volume=0.070 af Runoff Depth>1.15" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 1.84 cfs 525 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 24HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff = 0.48 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.030 af, Depth> 0.97" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 14,895 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 900 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,095 78 Weighted Average 14,895 92.54% Pervious Area 1,200 7.46% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=16,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.030 af Runoff Depth>0.97" Tc=15.0 min CN=78 0.48 cfs 526 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 25HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff = 4.77 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.342 af, Depth> 1.09" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 132,715 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 164,960 80 Weighted Average 132,715 80.45% Pervious Area 32,245 19.55% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=164,960 sf Runoff Volume=0.342 af Runoff Depth>1.09" Tc=20.0 min CN=80 4.77 cfs 527 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 26HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff = 2.62 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.163 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 70,270 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 12,220 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,790 79 Weighted Average 70,270 84.88% Pervious Area 12,520 15.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=82,790 sf Runoff Volume=0.163 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 2.62 cfs 528 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 27HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth> 1.21" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.012 af Runoff Depth>1.21" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 0.19 cfs 529 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 28HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff = 1.49 cfs @ 12.19 hrs, Volume= 0.079 af, Depth> 1.03" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 31,010 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,825 98 Paved parking, HSG C 39,835 79 Weighted Average 31,010 77.85% Pervious Area 8,825 22.15% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=39,835 sf Runoff Volume=0.079 af Runoff Depth>1.03" Tc=10.0 min CN=79 1.49 cfs 530 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 29HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.29 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth> 1.96" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 720 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,375 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 3,095 92 Weighted Average 720 23.26% Pervious Area 2,375 76.74% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=3,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.012 af Runoff Depth>1.96" Tc=1.0 min CN=92 0.29 cfs 531 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 30HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff = 0.84 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.052 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 5,700 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 16,050 89 Weighted Average 5,700 35.51% Pervious Area 10,350 64.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=16,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.052 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=15.0 min CN=89 0.84 cfs 532 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 31HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff = 0.87 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.054 af, Depth> 1.78" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 5,630 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 15,980 90 Weighted Average 5,630 35.23% Pervious Area 10,350 64.77% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=15,980 sf Runoff Volume=0.054 af Runoff Depth>1.78" Tc=15.0 min CN=90 0.87 cfs 533 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 32HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 1.25 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.080 af, Depth> 0.77" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Area (sf) CN Description 54,500 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,500 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86" Runoff Area=54,500 sf Runoff Volume=0.080 af Runoff Depth>0.77" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 1.25 cfs 534 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 33HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B1: Inflow Area = 1.796 ac, 31.12% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.21" for 2-Year event Inflow = 2.96 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.181 af Outflow = 0.91 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.101 af, Atten= 69%, Lag= 26.1 min Discarded = 0.02 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.016 af Primary = 0.89 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.085 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.31' @ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area= 5,210 sf Storage= 3,979 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 129.2 min calculated for 0.101 af (56% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 64.5 min ( 853.5 - 789.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,365 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 865 0 0 982.00 7,500 8,365 8,365 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.20'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=981.31' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.02 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.88 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=981.31' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 0.88 cfs @ 0.81 fps) 535 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 34HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B1: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210Inflow Area=1.796 ac Peak Elev=981.31' Storage=3,979 cf 2.96 cfs 0.91 cfs 0.02 cfs 0.89 cfs 536 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 35HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B2: Inflow Area = 1.310 ac, 15.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.97" for 2-Year event Inflow = 1.69 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 0.106 af Outflow = 0.08 cfs @ 15.10 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af, Atten= 95%, Lag= 171.0 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 15.10 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af Primary = 0.06 cfs @ 15.10 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.52' @ 15.10 hrs Surf.Area= 2,924 sf Storage= 3,622 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 257.2 min calculated for 0.024 af (22% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 177.6 min ( 981.9 - 804.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 5,111 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 1,846 0 0 982.00 3,265 5,111 5,111 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 15.10 hrs HW=981.52' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.06 cfs @ 15.10 hrs HW=981.52' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 0.06 cfs @ 0.33 fps) 537 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 36HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B2: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10Inflow Area=1.310 ac Peak Elev=981.52' Storage=3,622 cf 1.69 cfs 0.08 cfs 0.01 cfs0.06 cfs 538 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 37HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B3: Inflow Area = 1.557 ac, 26.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.12" for 2-Year event Inflow = 2.25 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.145 af Outflow = 1.45 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.096 af, Atten= 35%, Lag= 15.9 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.006 af Primary = 1.45 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.090 af Routed to Pond W4-1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.65' @ 12.32 hrs Surf.Area= 1,987 sf Storage= 2,426 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 104.3 min calculated for 0.096 af (66% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 42.4 min ( 836.8 - 794.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,160 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 950 0 0 982.00 2,205 3,155 3,155 984.00 2,800 5,005 8,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=981.65' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.37 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=981.65' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 1.37 cfs @ 0.93 fps) 539 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 38HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B3: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210Inflow Area=1.557 ac Peak Elev=981.65' Storage=2,426 cf 2.25 cfs 1.45 cfs 0.01 cfs 1.45 cfs 540 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 39HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B4: Inflow Area = 3.553 ac, 21.25% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.09" for 2-Year event Inflow = 5.29 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.324 af Outflow = 1.05 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 0.194 af, Atten= 80%, Lag= 30.8 min Discarded = 0.02 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af Primary = 1.03 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 0.185 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.80' @ 12.73 hrs Surf.Area= 3,301 sf Storage= 7,456 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 138.5 min calculated for 0.194 af (60% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 73.9 min ( 872.7 - 798.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 978.00' 62,570 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 978.00 910 0 0 980.00 1,875 2,785 2,785 982.00 3,455 5,330 8,115 984.00 24,000 27,455 35,570 985.00 30,000 27,000 62,570 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.00'12.0" Round Culvert L= 55.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 981.00' / 980.70' S= 0.0055 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.70'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #3 Discarded 978.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 12.73 hrs HW=981.80' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.02 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.03 cfs @ 12.73 hrs HW=981.80' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.03 cfs @ 2.08 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=978.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 541 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 40HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B4: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210Inflow Area=3.553 ac Peak Elev=981.80' Storage=7,456 cf 5.29 cfs 1.05 cfs 0.02 cfs 1.03 cfs 0.00 cfs 542 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 41HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.756 ac, 25.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.64" for 2-Year event Inflow = 1.87 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 0.309 af Outflow = 1.21 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 0.193 af, Atten= 35%, Lag= 40.0 min Primary = 1.21 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 0.193 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 978.00' Surf.Area= 3,820 sf Storage= 4,590 cf Peak Elev= 979.04' @ 13.24 hrs Surf.Area= 6,351 sf Storage= 9,903 cf (5,313 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= 264.0 min calculated for 0.087 af (28% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 60.3 min ( 910.8 - 850.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=1.17 cfs @ 13.24 hrs HW=979.04' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 1.17 cfs @ 0.53 fps) 543 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 42HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210Inflow Area=5.756 ac Peak Elev=979.04' Storage=9,903 cf 1.87 cfs 1.21 cfs 544 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 43HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.399 ac, 19.74% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.46" for 2-Year event Inflow = 2.17 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 0.364 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 971.35' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 13,382 sf Storage= 15,817 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,490 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,490 77,490 227,490 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210Inflow Area=9.399 ac Peak Elev=971.35' Storage=15,817 cf 2.17 cfs 545 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 44HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.77" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.53 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 0.023 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.10' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 10,250 sf Storage= 1,014 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.10' Storage=1,014 cf 0.53 cfs 546 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 45HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 14.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.94" for 2-Year event Inflow = 8.58 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 0.607 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 974.72' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 41,280 sf Storage= 26,417 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)9876543210Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=974.72' Storage=26,417 cf 8.58 cfs 547 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.86"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 46HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.530 ac, 3.56% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.80" for 2-Year event Inflow = 1.41 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.102 af Primary = 1.41 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.102 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10Inflow Area=1.530 ac 1.41 cfs 1.41 cfs 548 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 47HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.43"Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=0.57 cfs 0.025 af Runoff Area=41,735 sf 30.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.25"Subcatchment PL1B1: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=4.66 cfs 0.179 af Runoff Area=17,750 sf 35.66% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.25"Subcatchment PL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=81 Runoff=1.75 cfs 0.076 af Runoff Area=43,507 sf 12.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.77"Subcatchment PL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=75 Runoff=2.39 cfs 0.147 af Runoff Area=20,505 sf 7.17% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.85"Subcatchment PL2-B1: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=1.17 cfs 0.072 af Runoff Area=51,620 sf 12.45% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.92"Subcatchment PL2B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=77 Runoff=3.08 cfs 0.190 af Runoff Area=55,700 sf 3.98% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment PL2W2: Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 Runoff=2.52 cfs 0.181 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment PL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=1.19 cfs 0.051 af Runoff Area=98,322 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.84"Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=76 Runoff=4.86 cfs 0.347 af Runoff Area=4,325 sf 53.87% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.76"Subcatchment PL3B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=87 Runoff=0.36 cfs 0.023 af Runoff Area=36,268 sf 22.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.16"Subcatchment PL3B3: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=2.43 cfs 0.150 af Runoff Area=2,420 sf 35.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.49"Subcatchment PL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=84 Runoff=0.16 cfs 0.012 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.08"Subcatchment PL4B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.07 cfs 0.004 af Runoff Area=31,575 sf 30.09% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.25"Subcatchment PL4B3: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=3.53 cfs 0.136 af Runoff Area=16,095 sf 7.46% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.00"Subcatchment PL4B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=78 Runoff=1.00 cfs 0.062 af Runoff Area=164,960 sf 19.55% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.15"Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=80 Runoff=9.55 cfs 0.680 af 549 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 48HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=82,790 sf 15.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.08"Subcatchment PL5B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=5.34 cfs 0.329 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.32"Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.36 cfs 0.022 af Runoff Area=39,835 sf 22.15% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.08"Subcatchment PL6B4: Tc=10.0 min CN=79 Runoff=3.02 cfs 0.159 af Runoff Area=3,095 sf 76.74% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.26"Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=92 Runoff=0.46 cfs 0.019 af Runoff Area=16,050 sf 64.49% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.95"Subcatchment PROADB4: Tc=15.0 min CN=89 Runoff=1.42 cfs 0.091 af Runoff Area=15,980 sf 64.77% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.05"Subcatchment PROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=90 Runoff=1.45 cfs 0.093 af Runoff Area=54,500 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>1.70"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=2.87 cfs 0.177 af Peak Elev=981.47' Storage=4,873 cf Inflow=5.73 cfs 0.345 afPond B1: Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.018 af Primary=3.55 cfs 0.247 af Outflow=3.58 cfs 0.265 af Peak Elev=981.68' Storage=4,103 cf Inflow=3.52 cfs 0.217 afPond B2: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.010 af Primary=1.86 cfs 0.124 af Outflow=1.88 cfs 0.134 af Peak Elev=981.80' Storage=2,717 cf Inflow=4.47 cfs 0.285 afPond B3: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.007 af Primary=4.02 cfs 0.229 af Outflow=4.03 cfs 0.236 af Peak Elev=982.77' Storage=13,873 cf Inflow=10.52 cfs 0.640 afPond B4: Discarded=0.05 cfs 0.015 af Primary=2.27 cfs 0.491 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=2.32 cfs 0.506 af Peak Elev=979.12' Storage=10,418 cf Inflow=6.03 cfs 0.814 afPond W1: Outflow=5.49 cfs 0.698 af Peak Elev=973.51' Storage=50,574 cf Inflow=11.05 cfs 1.162 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.22' Storage=2,235 cf Inflow=1.19 cfs 0.051 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=975.36' Storage=55,650 cf Inflow=17.80 cfs 1.278 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Inflow=3.22 cfs 0.221 afLink 1L: Primary=3.22 cfs 0.221 af Total Runoff Area = 19.008 ac Runoff Volume = 3.225 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.04" 83.87% Pervious = 15.941 ac 16.13% Impervious = 3.067 ac 550 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 49HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.57 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.025 af, Depth> 1.43" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.025 af Runoff Depth>1.43" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 0.57 cfs 551 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 50HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1B1: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 4.66 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.179 af, Depth> 2.25" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 29,215 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 12,520 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 41,735 81 Weighted Average 29,215 70.00% Pervious Area 12,520 30.00% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL1B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=41,735 sf Runoff Volume=0.179 af Runoff Depth>2.25" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 4.66 cfs 552 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 51HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.75 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.076 af, Depth> 2.25" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 11,420 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 17,750 81 Weighted Average 11,420 64.34% Pervious Area 6,330 35.66% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=17,750 sf Runoff Volume=0.076 af Runoff Depth>2.25" Tc=5.0 min CN=81 1.75 cfs 553 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 52HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff = 2.39 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af, Depth> 1.77" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 38,068 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 2,968 98 Roofs, HSG C 43,507 75 Weighted Average 38,068 87.50% Pervious Area 5,439 12.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=43,507 sf Runoff Volume=0.147 af Runoff Depth>1.77" Tc=15.0 min CN=75 2.39 cfs 554 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 53HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff = 1.17 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.072 af, Depth> 1.85" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 19,035 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C * 1,470 98 ROOF 20,505 76 Weighted Average 19,035 92.83% Pervious Area 1,470 7.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=20,505 sf Runoff Volume=0.072 af Runoff Depth>1.85" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 1.17 cfs 555 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 54HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff = 3.08 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.190 af, Depth> 1.92" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 45,193 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 6,427 98 Roofs, HSG C 51,620 77 Weighted Average 45,193 87.55% Pervious Area 6,427 12.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=51,620 sf Runoff Volume=0.190 af Runoff Depth>1.92" Tc=15.0 min CN=77 3.08 cfs 556 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 55HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff = 2.52 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.181 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 53,485 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,215 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 55,700 75 74 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 53,485 96.02% Pervious Area 2,215 3.98% Impervious Area 2,215 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=55,700 sf Runoff Volume=0.181 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 2.52 cfs 557 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 56HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.19 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.051 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 1.19 cfs 558 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 57HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff = 4.86 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.347 af, Depth> 1.84" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 98,322 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 98,322 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=98,322 sf Runoff Volume=0.347 af Runoff Depth>1.84" Tc=20.0 min CN=76 4.86 cfs 559 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 58HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff = 0.36 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.023 af, Depth> 2.76" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 1,995 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 4,325 87 Weighted Average 1,995 46.13% Pervious Area 2,330 53.87% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=4,325 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth>2.76" Tc=15.0 min CN=87 0.36 cfs 560 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 59HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff = 2.43 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.150 af, Depth> 2.16" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 27,938 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 36,268 80 Weighted Average 27,938 77.03% Pervious Area 8,330 22.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=36,268 sf Runoff Volume=0.150 af Runoff Depth>2.16" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 2.43 cfs 561 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 60HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth> 2.49" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 1,570 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 850 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 2,420 84 Weighted Average 1,570 64.88% Pervious Area 850 35.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=2,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.012 af Runoff Depth>2.49" Tc=20.0 min CN=84 0.16 cfs 562 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 61HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth> 2.08" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.0050 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.004 af Runoff Depth>2.08" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.07 cfs 563 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 62HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B3: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 3.53 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.136 af, Depth> 2.25" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 22,075 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 9,500 98 Paved parking, HSG C 31,575 81 Weighted Average 22,075 69.91% Pervious Area 9,500 30.09% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL4B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=31,575 sf Runoff Volume=0.136 af Runoff Depth>2.25" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 3.53 cfs 564 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 63HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff = 1.00 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.062 af, Depth> 2.00" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 14,895 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 900 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,095 78 Weighted Average 14,895 92.54% Pervious Area 1,200 7.46% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=16,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.062 af Runoff Depth>2.00" Tc=15.0 min CN=78 1.00 cfs 565 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 64HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff = 9.55 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.680 af, Depth> 2.15" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 132,715 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 164,960 80 Weighted Average 132,715 80.45% Pervious Area 32,245 19.55% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=164,960 sf Runoff Volume=0.680 af Runoff Depth>2.15" Tc=20.0 min CN=80 9.55 cfs 566 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 65HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff = 5.34 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.329 af, Depth> 2.08" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 70,270 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 12,220 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,790 79 Weighted Average 70,270 84.88% Pervious Area 12,520 15.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=82,790 sf Runoff Volume=0.329 af Runoff Depth>2.08" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 5.34 cfs 567 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 66HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff = 0.36 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.022 af, Depth> 2.32" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.022 af Runoff Depth>2.32" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 0.36 cfs 568 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 67HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff = 3.02 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.159 af, Depth> 2.08" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 31,010 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,825 98 Paved parking, HSG C 39,835 79 Weighted Average 31,010 77.85% Pervious Area 8,825 22.15% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=39,835 sf Runoff Volume=0.159 af Runoff Depth>2.08" Tc=10.0 min CN=79 3.02 cfs 569 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 68HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.46 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.019 af, Depth> 3.26" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 720 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,375 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 3,095 92 Weighted Average 720 23.26% Pervious Area 2,375 76.74% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.5 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=3,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.019 af Runoff Depth>3.26" Tc=1.0 min CN=92 0.46 cfs 570 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 69HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff = 1.42 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.091 af, Depth> 2.95" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 5,700 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 16,050 89 Weighted Average 5,700 35.51% Pervious Area 10,350 64.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=16,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.091 af Runoff Depth>2.95" Tc=15.0 min CN=89 1.42 cfs 571 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 70HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff = 1.45 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.093 af, Depth> 3.05" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 5,630 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 15,980 90 Weighted Average 5,630 35.23% Pervious Area 10,350 64.77% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=15,980 sf Runoff Volume=0.093 af Runoff Depth>3.05" Tc=15.0 min CN=90 1.45 cfs 572 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 71HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 2.87 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.177 af, Depth> 1.70" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Area (sf) CN Description 54,500 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,500 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26" Runoff Area=54,500 sf Runoff Volume=0.177 af Runoff Depth>1.70" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 2.87 cfs 573 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 72HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B1: Inflow Area = 1.796 ac, 31.12% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.31" for 10-Year event Inflow = 5.73 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.345 af Outflow = 3.58 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 0.265 af, Atten= 37%, Lag= 12.4 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af Primary = 3.55 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 0.247 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.47' @ 12.26 hrs Surf.Area= 5,751 sf Storage= 4,873 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 80.4 min calculated for 0.264 af (76% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 31.5 min ( 810.4 - 778.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,365 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 865 0 0 982.00 7,500 8,365 8,365 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.20'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 12.26 hrs HW=981.47' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.53 cfs @ 12.26 hrs HW=981.47' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 3.53 cfs @ 1.30 fps) 574 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 73HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B1: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210Inflow Area=1.796 ac Peak Elev=981.47' Storage=4,873 cf 5.73 cfs 3.58 cfs 0.03 cfs 3.55 cfs 575 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 74HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B2: Inflow Area = 1.310 ac, 15.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.99" for 10-Year event Inflow = 3.52 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.217 af Outflow = 1.88 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 0.134 af, Atten= 47%, Lag= 12.3 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af Primary = 1.86 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 0.124 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.68' @ 12.44 hrs Surf.Area= 3,038 sf Storage= 4,103 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 106.9 min calculated for 0.134 af (62% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 47.5 min ( 840.3 - 792.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 5,111 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 1,846 0 0 982.00 3,265 5,111 5,111 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.44 hrs HW=981.68' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.85 cfs @ 12.44 hrs HW=981.68' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 1.85 cfs @ 1.03 fps) 576 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 75HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B2: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210Inflow Area=1.310 ac Peak Elev=981.68' Storage=4,103 cf 3.52 cfs 1.88 cfs 0.01 cfs 1.86 cfs 577 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 76HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B3: Inflow Area = 1.557 ac, 26.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.20" for 10-Year event Inflow = 4.47 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.285 af Outflow = 4.03 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.236 af, Atten= 10%, Lag= 2.9 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af Primary = 4.02 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.229 af Routed to Pond W4-1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.80' @ 12.11 hrs Surf.Area= 2,076 sf Storage= 2,717 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 64.2 min calculated for 0.236 af (83% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 20.4 min ( 803.8 - 783.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,160 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 950 0 0 982.00 2,205 3,155 3,155 984.00 2,800 5,005 8,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=981.79' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.95 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=981.79' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 3.95 cfs @ 1.35 fps) 578 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 77HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B3: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210Inflow Area=1.557 ac Peak Elev=981.80' Storage=2,717 cf 4.47 cfs 4.03 cfs 0.01 cfs 4.02 cfs 579 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 78HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B4: Inflow Area = 3.553 ac, 21.25% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.16" for 10-Year event Inflow = 10.52 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.640 af Outflow = 2.32 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 0.506 af, Atten= 78%, Lag= 26.7 min Discarded = 0.05 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af Primary = 2.27 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 0.491 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 982.77' @ 12.66 hrs Surf.Area= 11,412 sf Storage= 13,873 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 106.0 min calculated for 0.506 af (79% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 58.4 min ( 846.5 - 788.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 978.00' 62,570 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 978.00 910 0 0 980.00 1,875 2,785 2,785 982.00 3,455 5,330 8,115 984.00 24,000 27,455 35,570 985.00 30,000 27,000 62,570 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.00'12.0" Round Culvert L= 55.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 981.00' / 980.70' S= 0.0055 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.70'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #3 Discarded 978.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.05 cfs @ 12.66 hrs HW=982.77' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.05 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=2.27 cfs @ 12.66 hrs HW=982.77' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 2.27 cfs @ 2.89 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=978.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 580 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 79HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B4: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)11 109876543210 Inflow Area=3.553 ac Peak Elev=982.77' Storage=13,873 cf 10.52 cfs 2.32 cfs 0.05 cfs 2.27 cfs 0.00 cfs 581 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 80HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.756 ac, 25.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.70" for 10-Year event Inflow = 6.03 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 0.814 af Outflow = 5.49 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.698 af, Atten= 9%, Lag= 8.6 min Primary = 5.49 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.698 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 978.00' Surf.Area= 3,820 sf Storage= 4,590 cf Peak Elev= 979.12' @ 12.41 hrs Surf.Area= 6,544 sf Storage= 10,418 cf (5,828 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= 91.2 min calculated for 0.592 af (73% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 19.2 min ( 845.6 - 826.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=5.41 cfs @ 12.41 hrs HW=979.12' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 5.41 cfs @ 0.88 fps) 582 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 81HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210Inflow Area=5.756 ac Peak Elev=979.12' Storage=10,418 cf 6.03 cfs 5.49 cfs 583 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 82HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.399 ac, 19.74% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.48" for 10-Year event Inflow = 11.05 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 1.162 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 973.51' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 18,785 sf Storage= 50,574 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,490 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,490 77,490 227,490 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=9.399 ac Peak Elev=973.51' Storage=50,574 cf 11.05 cfs 584 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 83HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.70" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.19 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.22' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 10,544 sf Storage= 2,235 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.22' Storage=2,235 cf 1.19 cfs 585 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 84HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 14.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.99" for 10-Year event Inflow = 17.80 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 1.278 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 975.36' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 49,387 sf Storage= 55,650 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=975.36' Storage=55,650 cf 17.80 cfs 586 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.26"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 85HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.530 ac, 3.56% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.74" for 10-Year event Inflow = 3.22 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.221 af Primary = 3.22 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.221 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210Inflow Area=1.530 ac 3.22 cfs 3.22 cfs 587 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 86HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=5.00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,040 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.72"Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Tc=5.0 min CN=70 Runoff=1.48 cfs 0.064 af Runoff Area=41,735 sf 30.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.93"Subcatchment PL1B1: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=9.79 cfs 0.393 af Runoff Area=17,750 sf 35.66% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.92"Subcatchment PL1W1: Tc=5.0 min CN=81 Runoff=3.70 cfs 0.167 af Runoff Area=43,507 sf 12.50% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.25"Subcatchment PL1W2: Tc=15.0 min CN=75 Runoff=5.69 cfs 0.354 af Runoff Area=20,505 sf 7.17% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.36"Subcatchment PL2-B1: Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=2.74 cfs 0.171 af Runoff Area=51,620 sf 12.45% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.47"Subcatchment PL2B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=77 Runoff=7.06 cfs 0.441 af Runoff Area=55,700 sf 3.98% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.14"Subcatchment PL2W2: Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 Runoff=6.16 cfs 0.441 af Runoff Area=15,745 sf 1.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.15"Subcatchment PL2W3: Tc=5.0 min CN=74 Runoff=2.85 cfs 0.125 af Runoff Area=98,322 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.35"Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=76 Runoff=11.40 cfs 0.819 af Runoff Area=4,325 sf 53.87% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.59"Subcatchment PL3B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=87 Runoff=0.71 cfs 0.046 af Runoff Area=36,268 sf 22.97% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.80"Subcatchment PL3B3: Tc=15.0 min CN=80 Runoff=5.28 cfs 0.333 af Runoff Area=2,420 sf 35.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.24"Subcatchment PL3W2: Tc=20.0 min CN=84 Runoff=0.33 cfs 0.024 af Runoff Area=1,115 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.69"Subcatchment PL4B2: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=0.16 cfs 0.010 af Runoff Area=31,575 sf 30.09% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.93"Subcatchment PL4B3: Tc=0.0 min CN=81 Runoff=7.41 cfs 0.298 af Runoff Area=16,095 sf 7.46% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.58"Subcatchment PL4B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=78 Runoff=2.25 cfs 0.141 af Runoff Area=164,960 sf 19.55% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.79"Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Tc=20.0 min CN=80 Runoff=20.84 cfs 1.513 af 588 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 87HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Runoff Area=82,790 sf 15.12% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.69"Subcatchment PL5B4: Tc=15.0 min CN=79 Runoff=11.81 cfs 0.742 af Runoff Area=5,050 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.02"Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Tc=15.0 min CN=82 Runoff=0.76 cfs 0.049 af Runoff Area=39,835 sf 22.15% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.69"Subcatchment PL6B4: Tc=10.0 min CN=79 Runoff=6.66 cfs 0.358 af Runoff Area=3,095 sf 76.74% Impervious Runoff Depth>6.17"Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Tc=1.0 min CN=92 Runoff=0.84 cfs 0.037 af Runoff Area=16,050 sf 64.49% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.82"Subcatchment PROADB4: Tc=15.0 min CN=89 Runoff=2.70 cfs 0.179 af Runoff Area=15,980 sf 64.77% Impervious Runoff Depth>5.93"Subcatchment PROADW1: Tc=15.0 min CN=90 Runoff=2.72 cfs 0.181 af Runoff Area=54,500 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>4.14"Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Tc=15.0 min CN=74 Runoff=6.96 cfs 0.432 af Peak Elev=981.72' Storage=6,410 cf Inflow=12.17 cfs 0.746 afPond B1: Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.021 af Primary=9.97 cfs 0.643 af Outflow=10.00 cfs 0.664 af Peak Elev=981.94' Storage=4,926 cf Inflow=7.93 cfs 0.497 afPond B2: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.012 af Primary=7.67 cfs 0.402 af Outflow=7.69 cfs 0.414 af Peak Elev=981.99' Storage=3,130 cf Inflow=9.67 cfs 0.631 afPond B3: Discarded=0.01 cfs 0.008 af Primary=8.97 cfs 0.572 af Outflow=8.98 cfs 0.581 af Peak Elev=983.93' Storage=33,987 cf Inflow=22.86 cfs 1.420 afPond B4: Discarded=0.11 cfs 0.037 af Primary=3.27 cfs 1.241 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=3.38 cfs 1.278 af Peak Elev=979.25' Storage=11,241 cf Inflow=15.88 cfs 2.052 afPond W1: Outflow=15.46 cfs 1.934 af Peak Elev=977.49' Storage=137,333 cf Inflow=31.79 cfs 3.154 afPond W2: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=990.51' Storage=5,443 cf Inflow=2.85 cfs 0.125 afPond W3: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Peak Elev=976.61' Storage=128,544 cf Inflow=39.48 cfs 2.952 afPond W4-1: Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Inflow=7.81 cfs 0.533 afLink 1L: Primary=7.81 cfs 0.533 af Total Runoff Area = 19.008 ac Runoff Volume = 7.316 af Average Runoff Depth = 4.62" 83.87% Pervious = 15.941 ac 16.13% Impervious = 3.067 ac 589 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 88HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 1.48 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.064 af, Depth> 3.72" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 9,040 70 Brush, Fair, HSG C 9,040 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Subcatchment PL1-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)10MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=9,040 sf Runoff Volume=0.064 af Runoff Depth>3.72" Tc=5.0 min CN=70 1.48 cfs 590 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 89HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1B1: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 9.79 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.393 af, Depth> 4.93" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 29,215 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 12,520 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 41,735 81 Weighted Average 29,215 70.00% Pervious Area 12,520 30.00% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL1B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=41,735 sf Runoff Volume=0.393 af Runoff Depth>4.93" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 9.79 cfs 591 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 90HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W1: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 3.70 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.167 af, Depth> 4.92" Routed to Pond W1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 11,420 71 Meadow, non-grazed, HSG C 6,330 98 Water Surface, HSG C 17,750 81 Weighted Average 11,420 64.34% Pervious Area 6,330 35.66% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)43210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=17,750 sf Runoff Volume=0.167 af Runoff Depth>4.92" Tc=5.0 min CN=81 3.70 cfs 592 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 91HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff = 5.69 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.354 af, Depth> 4.25" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 38,068 72 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG C 2,471 98 Water Surface, HSG C 2,968 98 Roofs, HSG C 43,507 75 Weighted Average 38,068 87.50% Pervious Area 5,439 12.50% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL1W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=43,507 sf Runoff Volume=0.354 af Runoff Depth>4.25" Tc=15.0 min CN=75 5.69 cfs 593 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 92HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff = 2.74 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.171 af, Depth> 4.36" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 19,035 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C * 1,470 98 ROOF 20,505 76 Weighted Average 19,035 92.83% Pervious Area 1,470 7.17% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2-B1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=20,505 sf Runoff Volume=0.171 af Runoff Depth>4.36" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 2.74 cfs 594 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 93HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff = 7.06 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.441 af, Depth> 4.47" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 45,193 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 6,427 98 Roofs, HSG C 51,620 77 Weighted Average 45,193 87.55% Pervious Area 6,427 12.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=51,620 sf Runoff Volume=0.441 af Runoff Depth>4.47" Tc=15.0 min CN=77 7.06 cfs 595 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 94HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff = 6.16 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.441 af, Depth> 4.14" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Adj Description 53,485 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,215 98 Unconnected roofs, HSG C 55,700 75 74 Weighted Average, UI Adjusted 53,485 96.02% Pervious Area 2,215 3.98% Impervious Area 2,215 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)6543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=55,700 sf Runoff Volume=0.441 af Runoff Depth>4.14" Tc=20.0 min UI Adjusted CN=74 6.16 cfs 596 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 95HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL2W3: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 2.85 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.125 af, Depth> 4.15" Routed to Pond W3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 15,435 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 310 98 Water Surface, HSG C 15,745 74 Weighted Average 15,435 98.03% Pervious Area 310 1.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL2W3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=15,745 sf Runoff Volume=0.125 af Runoff Depth>4.15" Tc=5.0 min CN=74 2.85 cfs 597 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 96HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff = 11.40 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 0.819 af, Depth> 4.35" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 98,322 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 98,322 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3-W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=98,322 sf Runoff Volume=0.819 af Runoff Depth>4.35" Tc=20.0 min CN=76 11.40 cfs 598 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 97HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff = 0.71 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.046 af, Depth> 5.59" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 1,995 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 4,325 87 Weighted Average 1,995 46.13% Pervious Area 2,330 53.87% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=4,325 sf Runoff Volume=0.046 af Runoff Depth>5.59" Tc=15.0 min CN=87 0.71 cfs 599 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 98HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff = 5.28 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.333 af, Depth> 4.80" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 27,938 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,330 98 Paved parking, HSG C 36,268 80 Weighted Average 27,938 77.03% Pervious Area 8,330 22.97% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=36,268 sf Runoff Volume=0.333 af Runoff Depth>4.80" Tc=15.0 min CN=80 5.28 cfs 600 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 99HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af, Depth> 5.24" Routed to Pond W2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 1,570 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 850 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 2,420 84 Weighted Average 1,570 64.88% Pervious Area 850 35.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL3W2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.020 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=2,420 sf Runoff Volume=0.024 af Runoff Depth>5.24" Tc=20.0 min CN=84 0.33 cfs 601 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 100HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth> 4.69" Routed to Pond B2 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 1,115 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1,115 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B2: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.010 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=1,115 sf Runoff Volume=0.010 af Runoff Depth>4.69" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 0.16 cfs 602 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 101HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B3: [46] Hint: Tc=0 (Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 7.41 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.298 af, Depth> 4.93" Routed to Pond B3 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 22,075 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 9,500 98 Paved parking, HSG C 31,575 81 Weighted Average 22,075 69.91% Pervious Area 9,500 30.09% Impervious Area Subcatchment PL4B3: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)876543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=31,575 sf Runoff Volume=0.298 af Runoff Depth>4.93" Tc=0.0 min CN=81 7.41 cfs 603 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 102HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff = 2.25 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.141 af, Depth> 4.58" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 14,895 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 900 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 16,095 78 Weighted Average 14,895 92.54% Pervious Area 1,200 7.46% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=16,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.141 af Runoff Depth>4.58" Tc=15.0 min CN=78 2.25 cfs 604 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 103HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff = 20.84 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 1.513 af, Depth> 4.79" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 132,715 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 32,245 98 Water Surface, HSG C 164,960 80 Weighted Average 132,715 80.45% Pervious Area 32,245 19.55% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL4W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=164,960 sf Runoff Volume=1.513 af Runoff Depth>4.79" Tc=20.0 min CN=80 20.84 cfs 605 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 104HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff = 11.81 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.742 af, Depth> 4.69" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 70,270 76 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG C 12,220 98 Paved parking, HSG C 300 98 Water Surface, HSG C 82,790 79 Weighted Average 70,270 84.88% Pervious Area 12,520 15.12% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)13 12 11 109876543210 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=82,790 sf Runoff Volume=0.742 af Runoff Depth>4.69" Tc=15.0 min CN=79 11.81 cfs 606 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 105HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff = 0.76 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.049 af, Depth> 5.02" Routed to Pond W4-1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 5,050 82 Woods/grass comb., Poor, HSG C 5,050 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL5W4-1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=5,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.049 af Runoff Depth>5.02" Tc=15.0 min CN=82 0.76 cfs 607 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 106HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff = 6.66 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.358 af, Depth> 4.69" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 31,010 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 8,825 98 Paved parking, HSG C 39,835 79 Weighted Average 31,010 77.85% Pervious Area 8,825 22.15% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PL6B4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=39,835 sf Runoff Volume=0.358 af Runoff Depth>4.69" Tc=10.0 min CN=79 6.66 cfs 608 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 107HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff = 0.84 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.037 af, Depth> 6.17" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 720 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 2,375 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 3,095 92 Weighted Average 720 23.26% Pervious Area 2,375 76.74% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROAD-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.050 MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=3,095 sf Runoff Volume=0.037 af Runoff Depth>6.17" Tc=1.0 min CN=92 0.84 cfs 609 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 108HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff = 2.70 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.179 af, Depth> 5.82" Routed to Pond B4 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 5,700 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 16,050 89 Weighted Average 5,700 35.51% Pervious Area 10,350 64.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADB4: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=16,050 sf Runoff Volume=0.179 af Runoff Depth>5.82" Tc=15.0 min CN=89 2.70 cfs 610 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 109HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff = 2.72 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.181 af, Depth> 5.93" Routed to Pond B1 : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 5,630 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 10,350 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG C 15,980 90 Weighted Average 5,630 35.23% Pervious Area 10,350 64.77% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment PROADW1: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=15,980 sf Runoff Volume=0.181 af Runoff Depth>5.93" Tc=15.0 min CN=90 2.72 cfs 611 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 110HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff = 6.96 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 0.432 af, Depth> 4.14" Routed to Link 1L : Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Area (sf) CN Description 54,500 74 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG C 54,500 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment XL6-OFFSITE: Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)76543210MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32" Runoff Area=54,500 sf Runoff Volume=0.432 af Runoff Depth>4.14" Tc=15.0 min CN=74 6.96 cfs 612 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 111HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B1: Inflow Area = 1.796 ac, 31.12% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.98" for 100-Year event Inflow = 12.17 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.746 af Outflow = 10.00 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.664 af, Atten= 18%, Lag= 3.2 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af Primary = 9.97 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.643 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.72' @ 12.11 hrs Surf.Area= 6,579 sf Storage= 6,410 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 52.8 min calculated for 0.662 af (89% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 21.0 min ( 787.4 - 766.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,365 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 865 0 0 982.00 7,500 8,365 8,365 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.20'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=981.72' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=9.85 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=981.72' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 9.85 cfs @ 1.90 fps) 613 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 112HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B1: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=1.796 ac Peak Elev=981.72' Storage=6,410 cf 12.17 cfs 10.00 cfs 0.03 cfs 9.97 cfs 614 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 113HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B2: Inflow Area = 1.310 ac, 15.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.56" for 100-Year event Inflow = 7.93 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 0.497 af Outflow = 7.69 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 0.414 af, Atten= 3%, Lag= 2.1 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af Primary = 7.67 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 0.402 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.94' @ 12.27 hrs Surf.Area= 3,225 sf Storage= 4,926 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 63.0 min calculated for 0.414 af (83% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 21.7 min ( 801.2 - 779.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 5,111 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 1,846 0 0 982.00 3,265 5,111 5,111 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.27 hrs HW=981.94' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=7.53 cfs @ 12.27 hrs HW=981.94' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 7.53 cfs @ 1.72 fps) 615 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 114HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B2: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)876543210Inflow Area=1.310 ac Peak Elev=981.94' Storage=4,926 cf 7.93 cfs 7.69 cfs 0.01 cfs 7.67 cfs 616 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 115HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B3: Inflow Area = 1.557 ac, 26.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.86" for 100-Year event Inflow = 9.67 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.631 af Outflow = 8.98 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.581 af, Atten= 7%, Lag= 1.6 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.008 af Primary = 8.97 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.572 af Routed to Pond W4-1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 981.99' @ 12.08 hrs Surf.Area= 2,198 sf Storage= 3,130 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 39.7 min calculated for 0.581 af (92% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 13.6 min ( 783.8 - 770.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 980.00' 8,160 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 980.00 950 0 0 982.00 2,205 3,155 3,155 984.00 2,800 5,005 8,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.50'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #2 Discarded 980.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.08 hrs HW=981.98' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=8.73 cfs @ 12.08 hrs HW=981.98' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 8.73 cfs @ 1.82 fps) 617 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 116HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B3: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)109876543210 Inflow Area=1.557 ac Peak Elev=981.99' Storage=3,130 cf 9.67 cfs 8.98 cfs 0.01 cfs 8.97 cfs 618 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 117HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond B4: Inflow Area = 3.553 ac, 21.25% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.79" for 100-Year event Inflow = 22.86 cfs @ 12.21 hrs, Volume= 1.420 af Outflow = 3.38 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 1.278 af, Atten= 85%, Lag= 34.3 min Discarded = 0.11 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 0.037 af Primary = 3.27 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 1.241 af Routed to Pond W1 : Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af Routed to Pond W1 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 983.93' @ 12.78 hrs Surf.Area= 23,312 sf Storage= 33,987 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 129.1 min calculated for 1.274 af (90% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 99.4 min ( 874.5 - 775.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 978.00' 62,570 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 978.00 910 0 0 980.00 1,875 2,785 2,785 982.00 3,455 5,330 8,115 984.00 24,000 27,455 35,570 985.00 30,000 27,000 62,570 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 981.00'12.0" Round Culvert L= 55.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 981.00' / 980.70' S= 0.0055 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 984.70'10.0' long x 3.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Coef. (English) 2.44 2.58 2.68 2.67 2.65 2.64 2.64 2.68 2.68 2.72 2.81 2.92 2.97 3.07 3.32 #3 Discarded 978.00'0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 12.78 hrs HW=983.93' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.11 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.27 cfs @ 12.78 hrs HW=983.93' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 3.27 cfs @ 4.17 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=978.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 619 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 118HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond B4: Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 Inflow Area=3.553 ac Peak Elev=983.93' Storage=33,987 cf 22.86 cfs 3.38 cfs 0.11 cfs 3.27 cfs 0.00 cfs 620 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 119HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W1: Inflow Area = 5.756 ac, 25.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.28" for 100-Year event Inflow = 15.88 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 2.052 af Outflow = 15.46 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 1.934 af, Atten= 3%, Lag= 1.6 min Primary = 15.46 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 1.934 af Routed to Pond W2 : Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 978.00' Surf.Area= 3,820 sf Storage= 4,590 cf Peak Elev= 979.25' @ 12.14 hrs Surf.Area= 6,842 sf Storage= 11,241 cf (6,651 cf above start) Plug-Flow detention time= 45.9 min calculated for 1.822 af (89% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 10.4 min ( 848.4 - 838.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 976.00' 17,075 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 976.00 770 0 0 978.00 3,820 4,590 4,590 980.00 8,665 12,485 17,075 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 979.00'50.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=15.24 cfs @ 12.14 hrs HW=979.25' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 15.24 cfs @ 1.24 fps) 621 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 120HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond W1: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)17 16 15 14 13 12 11 109876543210 Inflow Area=5.756 ac Peak Elev=979.25' Storage=11,241 cf 15.88 cfs 15.46 cfs 622 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 121HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W2: Inflow Area = 9.399 ac, 19.74% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.03" for 100-Year event Inflow = 31.79 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 3.154 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 977.49' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 24,358 sf Storage= 137,333 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 970.00' 227,490 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 970.00 10,000 0 0 972.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 974.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 978.00 25,000 90,000 150,000 980.00 52,490 77,490 227,490 Pond W2: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 Inflow Area=9.399 ac Peak Elev=977.49' Storage=137,333 cf 31.79 cfs 623 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 122HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W3: Inflow Area = 0.361 ac, 1.97% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.15" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.85 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.125 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 990.51' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 11,279 sf Storage= 5,443 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 990.00' 105,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 990.00 10,000 0 0 992.00 15,000 25,000 25,000 994.00 20,000 35,000 60,000 996.00 25,000 45,000 105,000 Pond W3: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)3210Inflow Area=0.361 ac Peak Elev=990.51' Storage=5,443 cf 2.85 cfs 624 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 123HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond W4-1: Inflow Area = 7.718 ac, 14.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.59" for 100-Year event Inflow = 39.48 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 2.952 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 976.61' @ 20.00 hrs Surf.Area= 69,960 sf Storage= 128,544 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 974.00' 245,555 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 974.00 32,245 0 0 976.00 57,390 89,635 89,635 978.00 98,530 155,920 245,555 Pond W4-1: Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1086420 Inflow Area=7.718 ac Peak Elev=976.61' Storage=128,544 cf 39.48 cfs 625 17981 - Honey Hill MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.32"17981_Prop_HydroCAD Printed 6/14/2024Prepared by Anderson Engineering Of MN, LLC Page 124HydroCAD® 10.20-4a s/n 00837 © 2023 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 1L: Inflow Area = 1.530 ac, 3.56% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.18" for 100-Year event Inflow = 7.81 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.533 af Primary = 7.81 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 0.533 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Link 1L: Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 201918171615141312111098765Flow (cfs)876543210Inflow Area=1.530 ac 7.81 cfs 7.81 cfs 626 38 29-118-23 34 0007 PARK GUN CLUB C/O TOM LYNCH 3100 BRYANT AVE S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55408 38 29-118-23 42 0006 THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT 3000 XENIUM LA N PLYMOUTH MN 55441 38 29-118-23 43 0001 WILLIAM T & DONNA M OSTVIG 3560 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 43 0002 DIANNE MILIANTA DALE PETERSON 3515 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 43 0003 WILLIAM/LAUREL MACLACHLAN 3565 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 43 0004 RICK D ANDERSON DAVID J LIND 3220 W BDE MAKA SKA PKWY 301 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55416 38 29-118-23 43 0010 THOMAS & NANCY SAWYER 3405 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 43 0011 GAIL A LEDSTROM 23439 MIDLAND TR E LEWISBURG WV 24901 38 29-118-23 43 0013 GAIL A LEDSTROM 23439 MIDLAND TR E LEWISBURG WV 24901 38 29-118-23 43 0014 THOMAS L & NANCY L SAWYER 3405 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 44 0004 GAIL A LEDSTROM 23439 MIDLAND TRAIL E LEWISBURG WV 24901 38 29-118-23 44 0005 THOMAS & NANCY SAWYER 3405 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 44 0006 GAIL A LEDSTROM 23439 MIDLAND TR E LEWISBURG WY 24901 38 32-118-23 11 0001 BARBARA LUPIENT C/O LUPIENT AUTOMOTIVE GRP 7100 WAYZATA BLVD #200 GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55426 38 32-118-23 12 0001 CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 627 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 3465 6th Ave N 0 410 820205 Feet Date: 5/22/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 628 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.6 Presenter: Natalie Nye, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000031, Peter Eskuche, 3120 North Shore Drive, Variance (Natalie Nye) 1.Purpose: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance for a deck expansion. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was received on May 22, 2024 and deemed complete on May 23, 2024. The 60-Day timeline for review expires on July 22, 2024 3.Background: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance in order to reconstruct and expand a lakeside deck beyond the average lakeshore setback line. The proposal meets all other zoning requirements including the 75-foot setback and hardcover. 4.Public Comment: Neighbor acknowledgment forms were provided by the applicant and are included in Exhibit G. 5.Staff Recommendation: Staff is supportive of the average lakeshore setback variance required for a new lakeside deck. 6.Planning Commission Action Requested: Motion to recommend approval of the average lakeshore setback variance as applied. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Practical Difficulties Form Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plans Exhibit F - Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G - Neighbor Support Letters Exhibit H - Mailing List & Map 629 Date Application Received: 05/22/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/23/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/22/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Natalie Nye, Planner Date: June 17, 2024 Subject: #LA24-000031, Peter Eskuche o/b/o Richard and Tracey Born 3120 North Shore Drive, Variance - Public Hearing Background The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance in order to reconstruct and expand a lakeside deck beyond the average lakeshore setback line. The proposal meets all other zoning requirements including the 75-foot setback and hardcover. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has identified the location of the existing home in relation to the neighbors as a practical difficulty. The applicant added that the existing deck is shallow and oddly shaped making it difficult to use. The proposed expansion of less than 7 feet into the average lakeshore setback is minimal and does not impact neighboring views of the lake. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Staff agrees with the applicant’s assessment. The current deck abuts the average lakeshore setback line and an expansion of the deck would require a variance. The deck is significantly set back from the lake at approximately 115 feet and will not negatively impact neighboring lake views. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330 & 78-1279 – Setbacks: LR-1B District Required Existing Proposed Rear/Street 35’ 300’+ 300’+ – no change East Side 10’ 13.7’ 13.7 – no change West Side 10’ 11.1’ 11.1’ – no change Lakeshore 75’ 122.3’ 115.7 Average Lakeshore Meets ALS 6.7’ encroachment Section 78-330 – Lot Area/Width: LR-1B District Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (1.0 acres) 140’ Actual 81,188 s.f. (1.86 acre) 150’ @ 75’ / 152’ @ OHWL Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance for a deck expansion. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. 630 FILE #LA24-000031 June 17, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Tier Total Area Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 1 81,188 s.f. 20,297 s.f. (25 %) 18,152 s.f. (22.18%) 18,839 s.f. (23.02%) Applicable Regulations: Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) The intent of the ordinance is to protect the lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties. Structures over 42 inches in height are prohibited in front of the average lakeshore setback line. The existing deck abuts the average lakeshore setback line and any expansion lakeward requires a variance. The proposed encroachment into the average lakeshore setback is at the most 6.7 feet. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. An average lakeshore setback variance is required for the reconstruction and expansion of the lakeside deck on the property. The current deck abuts the average lakeshore setback line and is proposed to encroach 6.7 feet. The intent of the ordinance is to preserve and protect lake views enjoyed from neighboring properties. The neighboring properties are not impacted by the minor deck expansion as the house is setback over 100 feet from the lake. All other setbacks including the 75-foot lake setback are met. The hardcover on the subject property will continue to be below the maximum of 25%. This criterion is met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variance resulting in an expanded lakeside deck is consistent with the comprehensive plan. There have been instances when the City has granted variances from average lakeshore setback when the proposal does not disrupt neighboring views of the lake and is not within the 75-foot setback. The proposed expansion is minor and is not likely to impact any lake views. This criterion is met. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The current deck abuts the average lakeshore setback and any 631 FILE #LA24-000031 June 17, 2024 Page 3 of 4 expansion would likely require a variance. The existing deck is shallow and the expansion creates a more reasonable shaped deck. The proposal preserves the intent of the ordinance by not disrupting any neighboring lake views. This criterion is met. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The location of the neighboring homes is out of the control of the homeowner. The applicant is requesting the average lakeshore setback variance to construct an expanded deck to a more reasonable size and shape; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed variance resulting in an expanded lakeside deck will not alter the character of the locality. The project will meet the 75-foot lake setback, meet hardcover requirements and limit impact to the neighbors. This criterion is met. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a residential home is a permitted use in the LR-1B District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The existing position of the property in relation to the neighboring homes is unique. The neighboring properties will not have their lake view impacted by the proposed deck expansion. This criterion is met. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The request is specific to this property as it relates to an existing deck. This criterion is met. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The proposed deck expansion allows the property owner to fully enjoy the deck and lakeyard. The minor expansion does not negatively impact the neighboring properties or their views of the lake. This criterion is met. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variance will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals of the community. This criterion is met. 632 FILE #LA24-000031 June 17, 2024 Page 4 of 4 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variance allows for the reconstruction and expansion of a lakeside deck that will encroach 6.7 feet into the average lakeshore setback. The proposed addition will allow the current property owners to fully use and enjoy deck and lakeyard and is a reasonable expansion. This criterion is met. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments The applicant has provided neighborhood support letters from both impacted neighbors shown in Exhibit G. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance for a deck expansion. 633 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/22/2024 Address:3120 North Shore DR Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number:0911723320007 Land Use Number:LA24-000031 Application Submitted By:Agent on behalf of property owner Owner:Name: RICHARD A BORN & TRACEY BORN Address: 3120 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 Applicant:Name: Peter Eskuche Company: Eskuche Design Address: 18318 MInnetonka Blvd Deephaven, MN 55391 peter@eskuche.us Contact Information:Associated Contact: Mitch Shepheard mitch@mdsremodeling.com Associated Contact: Peter Eskuche peter@eskuche.us Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Deck Renovation Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 6/3/24, 2:43 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420344&WorkOrder_ID=884…1/1634 PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA24-000031 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: The use of the deck does not change. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: The variance request is for the ALS infringement. This was created by the adjacent property structures which have evolved over time. Creating the current condition. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: It is does not alter the character of the property. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: It is not an economic consideration. 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: The practical difficulty is from the arbitrary created setback of the current ALS determined by the structures located on the neighboring properties. In order to create a more useable deck it is necessary to straighten out the odd existing angles of the deck and in doing so the proposed deck requires a variance. Both neighbors are in full support of the proposed design. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: N/A 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: N/A 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: The nature of the ALS line is created uniquely to the property as the neighboring structures determine this setback. Those structures have evolved over time and creates the current condition. 6/3/24, 2:46 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420344&WorkOrder_ID=884…1/2635 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: The nature of the ALS line is created uniquely to the property as the neighboring structures determine this setback. Those structures have evolved over time and creates the current condition. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: The existing deck is shallow and oddly shaped making furniture layouts difficult. We can only extend it 1’ until we reach the average lakeshore setback. Our request is to extend our deck 6’-8” into the setback to provide a reasonable sized deck. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: The granting of the variance will keep in the spirit of the intent of the ordinance in its' use, safety, and neighborhood aesthetic 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: The existing deck is shallow and oddly shaped making furniture layouts difficult. We can only extend it 1’ until we reach the average lakeshore setback. Our request is to extend our deck 6’-8” into the setback to provide a reasonable sized deck. 6/3/24, 2:46 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420344&WorkOrder_ID=884…2/2636 PC Exhibit D637 16'-0"SITE VERIFY27'-1"19'-6"PROPOSED6'-8"45'-0"EXISTIN G & PROPOSE D119'-4"PROPOSED115'-8"PROPOSEDEXT DECK TO REMAIN 4'-9"PROPO SE D DECK ALS LINE EXISTIN G DECK 0 20'40'60'80' 70 60 50 40 30 80 20 10 N W E S PROPOSED EXPANSION OF DECK SUMMER SOLSTICE SUNRISE WINTER SOLSTICE SUNRISE SUMMER SOLSTICE SUNSET WINTER SOLSTICE SUNSET EXISTING LAKESIDE ARIEL VIEW OF PROPOSED DECK TO NEIGHBOR NEIGHBOR 3120 N SHORE DR PROPOSED DECK FROM WEST PROPOERTY LINE VARIANCE 7 MAY 2024 952-544-3844 18318 Minnetonka Blvd Deephaven, MN 55391 Copyright 2023 MAXWELL RENO 3120 N SHORE DR ORONO, MN 55391 EXIS TI N G H O U S E 3120 N S H O R E D R PROPOSED EXPANSION OF DECK 638 639 640 From:Melanie Curtis To:Natalie Nye Subject:FW: Neighbor Support Doc for Variance on Date:Monday, June 10, 2024 2:47:19 PM Attachments:image001.png Melanie CurtisDirect: 952.249.4627mcurtis@oronomn.gov From: Erin Tadych <Erin@ESKUCHE.US> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 12:56 PM To: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Cc: Peter Eskuche <peter@eskuche.us>; Rick Born <rick.born@rbaconsulting.com>; Tracey Born <traceyborn@mac.com> Subject: Neighbor Support Doc for Variance on Melanie, Here is supporting documentation for the 3120 N Shore Drive (Born) deck variance. Below is from the neighbor on the East. (will send the West next). Erin Tadych Project Designer m. 218.820.3994 o. 952-544-3844 Subscribe to our YouTube channel! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjUWtzjE92Hd9ejGrZi6I9g?view_as=subscriber https://www.houzz.com/projects/users/eskuche www.eskuche.us From: Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 12:42 PM To: Erin Tadych <Erin@ESKUCHE.US> Subject: Fwd: Variance Here is the approval from the neighbor to the east. Rick Sent from my iPhone 641 Begin forwarded message: From: "McGlynn, Deb" <deb@danmcglynn.com> Date: June 10, 2024 at 11:42:07 AM CDT To: Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> Cc: Tracey Born <traceyborn@mac.com> Subject: Re: Variance You are welcome. On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 11:26 AM Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> wrote: Thanks Deb! Rick and Tracey Sent from my iPhone On Jun 10, 2024, at 10:24 AM, McGlynn, Deb <deb@danmcglynn.com> wrote: Rick/Tracey, I approve, thank you for letting me know. Deb McGlynn On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 3:48 PM Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> wrote: Deb, It was nice to see you today. Here is the email copy of what we discussed today. If you’re ok with it please respond that you approve of our request and we will forward it to the city. It would be great if we could submit it by the end of the day. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 239-777-4765 or Tracey at 612-961-9447. Thank you, Rick and Tracey Sent from my iPhone 642 From:Melanie Curtis To:Natalie Nye Subject:FW: Rick Born Variance ( 3120 N Shore Dr) Date:Monday, June 10, 2024 2:47:27 PM Attachments:image001.png Melanie CurtisDirect: 952.249.4627mcurtis@oronomn.gov From: Erin Tadych <Erin@ESKUCHE.US> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 12:58 PM To: Melanie Curtis <MCurtis@oronomn.gov> Cc: Peter Eskuche <peter@eskuche.us>; Rick Born <rick.born@rbaconsulting.com>; Tracey Born <traceyborn@mac.com> Subject: FW: Rick Born Variance ( 3120 N Shore Dr) Melanie, Here is the supporting approval from the neighbor on the West for 3120 N Shore Drive Deck Variance. (Neighbor from the east approval was sent in previous email). Erin Tadych Project Designer m. 218.820.3994 o. 952-544-3844 Subscribe to our YouTube channel! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjUWtzjE92Hd9ejGrZi6I9g?view_as=subscriber https://www.houzz.com/projects/users/eskuche www.eskuche.us From: Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 12:41 PM To: Erin Tadych <Erin@ESKUCHE.US> Subject: Fwd: Rick Born Variance Erin, Here is the approval from the neighbor to the West. Thanks, 643 Rick Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Mike Wallace <mwallace@whitepinecapital.com> Date: June 8, 2024 at 9:19:03 PM CDT To: Rick Born <Rick.Born@rbaconsulting.com> Subject: Rick Born Variance You don't often get email from mwallace@whitepinecapital.com. Learn why this is important Our names are Mike and Donna Wallace. Rick and Tracy's are our neighbor. We have read and reviewed Rick and Tracy variance request and we support the changes they have proposed. Mike Wallace, CFA Managing Partner, CIO White Pine Capital 8421 Wayzata Blvd, Suite 302 Golden Valley, MN 55426 612-376-2961 Office 612-325-4173 Cell Mwallace@whitepinecapital.com 644 38 08-117-23 41 0001 SCOTT FALKUM/NATALIA FALKUM 3200 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0002 MARK FINNEY KRIS FINNEY 3210 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0003 ROBERT & JANET LABATT 3202 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0004 RLA FAMILY L P ATTN RICHARD A ANDERSON 3222 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0005 RLA FAMILY L P ATTN RICHARD A ANDERSON 3222 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0001 NANCY KUHL EDWARDS 3065 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0003 NORTH SHORE SERENITY LLC 225 S 6TH ST STE 1400 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 38 09-117-23 32 0004 KATHRYN D KALLAS 3048 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0006 DANIEL J MCGLYNN 13841 WILLISTON WAY NAPLES FL 34119-0920 38 09-117-23 32 0007 RICHARD A BORN & TRACEY BORN 3120 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0008 MICHAEL S & DONNA D WALLACE 3160 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0009 CASEY CAPITAL VI LLC 1161 WAYZATA BLVD E #302 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0010 MICHAEL & NATELE J N JONES 3186 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0011 MICHAEL RUCINSKI HOLLY RUCINSKI 3188 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0012 JAMES A DAHL 3190 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0013 THOMAS K CONNELLY ET AL 3115 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0014 MICHAEL R & PAMELA L SIME 3095 NORTHSHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0015 MARTHANN OLSON 3085 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0016 JOSEPH T MORTON 3105 NORTH SHORE DR ORONA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0017 MICHAEL W SMITH VANESSA M SMITH 3060 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0018 KELLY J & MELODEE S MARX 3135 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0019 LAURENCE V REARDON 3080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0020 REARDON PROPERTIES LLC 3080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0001 J L MANDEL & P MANDEL 3155 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0002 WAGENER PROPERTIES LLC 2605 W WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 09-117-23 33 0003 MAURICE J WAGENER 1420 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0009 MICHAEL & CATHERINE RUSSIN 3175 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0013 BRIAN P O'CONNELL LYNNE M RASMUSSEN 3145 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0015 HUTCHINS B COBURN RANDI HOLLYN MORITZ 1406 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0016 U S BANK N A C/O FAY SERV LLC 1601 LBJ FREEWAY #150 FARMERS BRANCH TX 75234 645 646 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 3120 North Shore Dr 0 200 400100 Feet Date: 5/22/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 647 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.7 Presenter: Natalie Nye, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000032, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, 3745 Shoreline Drive, Variances (Natalie Nye) 1.Purpose: The applicant is requesting sign area variances for a new digital sign. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was received on May 22, 2024 and deemed complete on May 23, 2024. The 60- Day timeline for review expires on July 22, 2024 3.Background: The applicant, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, is proposing to update an existing freestanding sign on the property. The existing sign includes a changeable copy area and the new sign will replace this portion of the sign with a digital display. The existing sign is 40.6 square feet, exceeding the maximum size area of 32 square feet that the code allows. The code also limits digital displays to 35% of the sign area. The existing sign’s changeable copy area exceeds this at approximately 61% (25 square feet). The proposed sign requires variances from total sign area as well as percentage of digital sign area. 4.Public Comment: Neighbor support letters were provided by the applicant and are included in Exhibit F. 5.Staff Recommendation: Staff is supportive of the sign area variances required for a freestanding sign with a digital display. 6.Planning Commission Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances as applied for a new sign at 3745 Shoreline Drive. AGENDA ITEM Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Report Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Practical Difficulties Form Exhibit D - Sign Plans Exhibit E - Site Photos Exhibit F - Neighbor Support Letters Exhibit G - Mailing List & Map 648 Date Application Received: 05/22/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 05/23/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/22/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Natalie Nye, Planner Date: June 17, 2024 Subject: #LA24-000032, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, 3745 Shoreline Drive Variance - Public Hearing Background The applicant, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, is proposing to update an existing freestanding sign on the property. The existing sign includes a changeable copy area and the new sign will replace this portion of the sign with a digital display. The existing sign is 40.6 square feet, exceeding the maximum size area of 32 square feet that the code allows. The code also limits digital displays to 35% of the sign area. The existing sign’s changeable copy area exceeds this at approximately 61% (25 square feet). The proposed sign requires variances from total sign area as well as percentage of digital sign area. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has stated that the sign is no longer serving the congregation adequately. The changeable copy sign is difficult to manually change in the cold weather months and a digital sign would be able to display important messages effectively and easily. The applicant is proposing that the new sign will be the same height and size as the existing sign and will be in the same location. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Staff recognizes the existing sign is larger than the code allows today. The nonconforming sign is permitted to remain and be replaced in kind. Staff also recognizes the existing sign has a changeable copy area that exceeds the 35% allowed by the code. The proposed upgrade to the changeable copy area to a digital display is a reasonable request that allows a more modern sign. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-1478 & 78-1479 – District 2 Sign Limitations: Freestanding Sign Maximum Existing Proposed Area 32 sq.ft. 40.6 sq.ft. 40.6 sq.ft. Height 8’ 7’ 7’ Changeable Copy 35% of area 61% (25 sq.ft.) 61% (25 sq.ft.) Applicable Regulations: Permitted Sign Area Variance (Section 78-1478) The subject property is considered to be in District 2 per the Sign District Standards. The maximum total area for a freestanding sign in District 2 is 32 square feet. The existing sign on the property serving Good Shepherd Lutheran Church is over 40 square feet. The existing sign on the property is proposed to be Application Summary: The applicant is requesting sign area variances for a new digital sign. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. 649 FILE #LA24-000032 June 17, 2024 Page 2 of 4 updated and replaced with a new sign of the same size. Changeable Message Sign Variance (Section 78-1479) The Sign Code limits that no more than 35% of a sign be capable of displaying a changing message. The existing sign on the property contains a freestanding sign of approximately 40 square feet, with 25 square feet of that being manual changeable copy. The existing sign is about 61% changeable copy and the proposal is to keep this percentage with a new sign that will have a digital display. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The subject property currently contains a freestanding sign on the property. The existing sign is nonconforming, but permitted to remain and to be replaced. The proposal is to replace the sign with a new, modernized sign of the same size. The dimensions of the changeable copy area is also nonconforming for the existing sign The proposal will modify the manual changeable copy area to a digital display. The new sign is not increasing the nonconformity and therefore in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the ordinance. The new digital display will not impact neighboring residential properties. This criterion is met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The replacement of a nonconforming sign is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has identified the necessary practical difficulties inherent to the land supporting their requests. The proposal will meet all other zoning requirements. This criterion is met. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The addition of a digital display sign for a place of worship is a reasonable improvement. The existing sign on the property is nonconforming as it relates to area and amount of changeable copy area and this will not increase with the proposed replacement sign. A digital display will allow Good Shepherd Lutheran Church to adequately present information to their congregation without impacting any residential properties. This criterion is met. 650 FILE #LA24-000032 June 17, 2024 Page 3 of 4 b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The existing sign size and location is not the result of the current property owner’s actions; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed variance resulting in a new sign of the same size and location will not alter the character of the locality. A digital display sign for a place of worship is common and will be used to display mass times, events, and other important messages. There will be no animation or blinking lights and is not visible from neighboring residential properties. The church is located on a major roadway abutting the City’s commercial district (Navarre). The proposed sign would be in line with the character along Shoreline Drive. This criterion is met. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a sign is permitted on the subject property. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The size and composition of the existing sign is unique and specific to the property. This criterion is met. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The unique and existing conditions do not apply to other properties in the neighborhood or district. This criterion is met. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The existing sign is in need of replacement. The manual changeable copy area is difficult for the church to manage in the cold weather months. A digital display message would greatly improve the communication for Good Shepherd Lutheran Church to their congregation without negatively impacting any neighboring properties. This criterion is met. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variance would allow a new sign to be built that is the same size and location as the existing sign on the property. The proposed change from manual changeable copy to a digital display is the only 651 FILE #LA24-000032 June 17, 2024 Page 4 of 4 difference. The digital display will follow all regulations and will not have any animation or blinking lights that would distract drivers along Shoreline Drive. The digital display will also not be visible from any neighboring residential properties. This criterion is met. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The sign area variances will allow Good Shepherd Lutheran Church to replace a sign with a modern digital display. The existing sign has proven to be difficult to manage and the updated sign will allow for better communication for the church to their congregation. This criterion is met. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments The applicant has provided neighbor acknowledgement forms from the adjacent neighbors found in Exhibit F. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find that the proposed sign should be reduced in size to meet the maximum size of 32 square feet? 4. Are there any other issues with the proposed size of the digital display? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the sign variances as applied. 652 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/22/2024 Address:3745 Shoreline DR Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number:2011723210025 Land Use Number:LA24-000032 Application Submitted By:Property Owner Owner:Name: GOOD SHEPHERD LUTH CHURCH Address: 3745 SHORELINE DRIVE WAYZATA MN 55391 Applicant:Name: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Company: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Address: 3745 Shoreline Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org Contact Information:Associated Contact: Derek Tronsgard pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org Associated Contact: John Grabow johng@aimele.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Digital Monument Sign Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 6/3/24, 3:13 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420569&WorkOrder_ID=872…1/1653 PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA24-000032 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: Our sign is currently used to convey relevant information to our congregation and community. We would use the digital sign in a similar tasteful and relevant way to convey important information such as service times, event announcements, etc. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: Our current sign with vinyl letters has issues of freezing in the winter. This is what led us to explore a digital sign for this project. In the winter we often have important messages that we wish to convey (Christmas Eve service times, Ash Wednesday service times, etc.) It is often impossible to change the sign during the winter months as the letters will freeze solid to our vinyl sign - especially after a storm. Our hope is that a digital sign would alleviate this issue. In addition, we have heard feedback from our congregation members, visitors, and clients of our in- house child care that it is difficult to locate our property from the road. We are blessed with beautiful trees and vegetation that can obscure our building from Shoreline Drive. We want to keep the wooded character of our property intact while at the same time making obvious signage for our location's property. We feel that a new digital sign would make our property easier to find for motorists on Shoreline Drive which would be a benefit. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: We do not feel that our proposed sign would alter the essential character of the locality. The design matches our current sign's design except for the digital copy area along with our updated logo. And, as mentioned earlier, the digital portion of the sign would only be visible by people traveling on Shoreline Drive and potentially by abutting properties to the east (Casco Run Offices), west (Calvary Memorial Church), and north (Long Lake Fire Dept.) 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: NA 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: NA 6/3/24, 3:15 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420569&WorkOrder_ID=872…1/2654 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: NA 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: NA 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: NA 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: NA 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: We feel that a sign is necessary our property to convey important information to our community and to identify the property from the road. Having a larger digital copy area would allow us to convey that information in the winter when we are unable to change our sign due to the freezing of letters. A larger digital copy area would also make our property more identifiable from the road for our members, visitors, and daycare clientele. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: We do not feel our project will impair these areas. In fact, we feel that by having a digital sign we will improve visibility of our property & motorist safety on Shoreline Drive for those trying to locate us. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: It is often impossible for us to change messages on our church sign during the winter - especially after winter storms. We need to convey information to our community such as service times, etc. - and we see it as a useful tool for new members and visitors. A larger digital copy area on our sign would alleviate this issue. 6/3/24, 3:15 PM Permit Details | Citizenserve https://www3.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14420569&WorkOrder_ID=872…2/2655 USE EXISTING 4” X 4” POLE? NEED PMS COLOR FOR POLE COVER NEED VECTOR ARTWORK AND BLUE COLOR FOR GOOD SHEPHARD CHURCH LOGO FILE NAME: GOOD-SHEPHARD-CHURCH-WAYZATA-MON-EMC-V1.AI All original designs are exclusive property of Scenic Sign Corp. BOX 881 ST. CLOUD MN 56302 (320) 252-9400 | 1320 5th AVE NE FARGO, ND 58078 1-800-486-8517 The client warrants that the subject matter to be printed is not copyrighted by a third party. The client also recognizes that because subject matter does not have to bear a copyright notice in order to be protected by copyright law, absence of such notice does not necessarily assure a right to reproduce. The client further warrants that no copyright notice has been removed from any material used in preparing the subject matter for reproduction. To support these warranties, the client agrees to indemnify and hold Scenic Sign harmless for all liability, damages and attorney fees that may be incurred in any legal action connected with copyright infringement involving the work production of provided. ELECTRICAL: THIS SIGN IS INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 600 OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE AND/OR OTHER APPLICABLE LOCAL CODES. THIS INCLUDES PROPER GROUND AND BONDING OF THE SIGN.0 11/2 1/4 3/4 1/8 3/8 5/8 7/8 21/2 1/4 3/4 1/8 3/8 5/8 7/8 PLEASE NOTE: ARTWORK NOT READY FOR PRODUCTION! DATE: 6/29/23 SALESMAN: JOHN DeZURIK DRAWN BY: BRET SCHWINGHAMMER LOCATION: WAYZATA, MN SQ FT: MONUMENT / EMC WO: # VOLTAGE: 120/277 PHOTO EYE:NO MONUMENT IS DOUBLE SIDED AFTER - NOT TO SCALE SCALE: 1/2” = 1’ BEFORE - NOT TO SCALE VIEWABLE AREA 3 ft - 8 in 44 in EMC HEIGHT 4 ft - 2 in 50 in 2 ft - 10 in 34 in 7 ft - 0 in 84 in VIEWABLE AREA 6 ft - 0 in 72 in VISIBLE OPENING 3 ft - 9 in 45 in CAB SIZE 3 ft - 11 in 47 in EMC WIDTH 6 ft - 3 in 75 in VISIBLE OPENING 4 ft - 0 in 48 in CAB SIZE 4 ft - 2 in 50 in 8 ft - 0 in 96 in FULL COLOR 6 MM DAKTRONICS EMC VIEWABLE AREA: 3’8” X 6’ EMC CAB SIZE: 4’2” X 6’3” 180 x 300 MATRIX POLE COVER PAINTED TBD TYPE 4 DOUBLE SIDED CABINET 1” RETAINER PAINTED BLACK WHITE LEXAN FACE 3M TRANS BLUE VINYL TBD NEED VECTOR ARTWORK WHITE LEDS 656 657 658 659 660 661 Derek Tronsgard <pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org> Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign 1 message Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org>Tue, May 21, 2024 at 11:56 AM To: Derek Tronsgard <pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: <info@calvarymemorial.org> Date: Tue, April 16, 2024 at 9:54 AM Subject: RE: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign To: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org>, <johngrunditz@gmail.com>, <rgrund32@yahoo.com> Hi Emily, Thanks for reaching out. Calvary is happy to support your digital sign, what a beautiful addition to your church it will be. With the heavy vegetation between our properties, I don't think we'd even see it and I don't forsee it being an issue with the light at night. Best wishes with your application! Thanks, Megan Basinger Office Administrator at Calvary Memorial Church Email: info@calvarymemorial.org Phone: 952-471-8511 2420 Dunwoody Ave, Wayzata (Navarre), MN, 55391 www.calvarymemorial.org -----Original Message----- From: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 9:34 AM To: johngrunditz@gmail.com; rgrund32@yahoo.com; info@calvarymemorial.org Subject: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign Hello and greetings from next door! My name is Emily Graff- I am the Communications Director and Office Manager at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. I am reaching out today to ask for assistance. Our congregation was given a generous donation to replace our current sign and upgrade to a digital sign. Our church is zoned residential so in order to do this we must seek a variance from the City of Orono. Part of the variance application is to reach out to neighboring businesses and residence to ask if they would support our change to a digital sign or if you would be against. If you are in support, we would appreciate an email back to attach to our application for the variance. Thank you for your consideration! Emily Graff 5/22/24, 10:19 AM Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Mail - Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ik=c632dec4e7&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1799682091463553592&simpl=msg-f:1799682091463553592 1/1662 Derek Tronsgard <pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org> Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign 1 message Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org>Wed, May 22, 2024 at 9:16 AM To: Derek Tronsgard <pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org> Date: April 16, 2024 at 2:59:28 PM CDT To: Orono <Orono@hopechest.com> Subject: Re: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign Hello! Thank you so much for your continued support of our ministry at Good Shepherd! Emily Sent from my iPhone On April 16, 2024, at 2:56 PM, Orono <Orono@hopechest.com> wrote: Hi Emily, Absolutely, go for it! And shepherd all those new people in the door. Good luck, Kathy and Team Thank you for your support The Orono Hope Chest For Breast Cancer Resale Shop 3850 Shoreline Drive Wayzata (Navarre), MN 55391 952.471.8700 ext - 0 www.hopechest.com facebook - hopechestforbreastcancer insta - HopeChestMN 5/22/24, 10:19 AM Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Mail - Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ik=c632dec4e7&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1799762654743344025&simpl=msg-f:1799762654743344025 1/2663 From: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 9:52 AM To: Orono <Orono@hopechest.com> Subject: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign Hello and greetings from down the road! My name is Emily Graff- I am the Communications Director and Office Manager at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. I am reaching out today to ask for assistance. Our congregation was given a generous donation to replace our current sign and upgrade to a digital sign. Our church is zoned residential so in order to do this we must seek a variance from the City of Orono. Part of the variance application is to reach out to neighboring businesses and residence to ask if they would support our change to a digital sign or if you would be against. If you are in support, we would appreciate an email back to attach to our application for the variance. We are on a time crunch, we just got word that our application is due tomorrow. Thank you for your consideration! Emily Graff 5/22/24, 10:19 AM Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Mail - Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ik=c632dec4e7&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1799762654743344025&simpl=msg-f:1799762654743344025 2/2664 Compose Labels More Inbox 174 Starred Snoozed Important Sent Dra s 301 Categories 2020 Saved Photos Christmas 2020 Candle … Follow Up Hold Notes Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign Inbox × to me Emily Gra ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: <Info@lakeshorefamilytherapy.com> Date: Tue, April 16, 2024 at 9:54 AM Subject: RE: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign To: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org> Greetings! Thank you for your email. We are happy to support the addition of a digital sign and do not see a conflict with our b Please let us know if we can help in any other way. Thanks, Lakeshore Family Therapy 3701 Shoreline Drive Suite 102 & 202 Wayzata, MN 55391, USA ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Emily Graff <emily@goodshepherdmn.org> Date: Tue, April 16, 2024 at 9:43 AM Subject: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign To: <Info@lakeshorefamilytherapy.com> Hello and greetings from next door! My name is Emily Graff- I am the Communications Director and Office Manager at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. I am rea donation to replace our current sign and upgrade to a digital sign. Our church is zoned residential so in order to do this we mu reach out to neighboring businesses and residence to ask if they would support our change to a digital sign or if you would be application for the variance. We are on a time crunch, we just got word that our application is due tomorrow. Thank you for your consideration! Emily Graff Mail Chat Meet 99+ Search in mail 5/22/24, 10:18 AM Fwd: Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Digital Sign - pastorderek@goodshepherdmn.org - Good Shepherd Lutheran Church Mail https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/#inbox/FMfcgzGxTPDrJlChKnhmrCCHzwTzrCQW 1/1665 38 17-117-23 33 0006 BARBARA S HENSLEY 3850 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 33 0007 DOGHAVEN LLC 3800 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 33 0151 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 300 S 6TH STREET MC228 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55487 38 17-117-23 34 0041 CHUN GUO 3625 GETTYSBURG AVE S #30 ST LOUIS PARK MN 55426 38 17-117-23 34 0042 ROXANNE ROCKVAM 3655 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0043 JANE V COX 5710 VILLAGE TRAIL MOUND MN 55364 38 17-117-23 34 0044 THE MIDWEST PROJECT LLC 735 MARIE CT DELANO MN 55328 38 17-117-23 34 0045 KATHLEEN L FINE 3625 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0046 CALLIE J ROBINSON JOHN R LANIE 3615 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0047 ROBERT H HARDING 2394 BLAINE AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0076 KARIE M TIMION 3739 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0077 BENJAMIN E KIEFFER 3741 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0078 KIMBERLY KALKBRENNER 3743 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0079 TIFFANY KATE WINTER 3745 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0080 JEFFREY A CARLSON 3747 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0081 PENNY MUELLER 3749 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0082 KATHLEEN LOEFFLER 3751 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0083 LAKE MINNETONKA WOODS ASSOC C/O COMPASS MANAGEMENT GROUP 3370 ANNAPOLIS LN N SUITE C PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 17-117-23 34 0084 LAKE MINNETONKA WOODS ASSOC C/O COMPASS MANAGEMENT GROUP 3370 ANNAPOLIS LN N SUITE C PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 17-117-23 34 0085 LAKE MINNETONKA WOODS ASSOC C/O COMPASS MANAGEMENT GROUP 3370 ANNAPOLIS LN N SUITE C PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 17-117-23 34 0086 CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 38 20-117-23 12 0015 SHERRI STRELOW-LUNDBLAD 2455 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0016 MICHAEL P & JANET D MALIK PO BOX 96 MINNETONKA BEACH MN 55361 38 20-117-23 12 0019 DENISE OLSZEWSKI 3580 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0020 JEREMY A STEWART MAGGIE L STEWART 2474 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0021 JANET E ROBERTS 2454 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0022 STEPHEN J SKORO 2428 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0067 JOHN T GORMAN 3585 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0068 JOHN DRAWZ AND JEAN DRAWZ 3565 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0001 MARGARET ANN PROEHL 2464 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 666 38 20-117-23 21 0002 SCOTT B GAYLORD AMY M STEELE GAYLORD MOUND MN 55364 38 20-117-23 21 0003 RONALD D NELSON CECILE E NELSON 2480 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0004 DREW MICHAEL LANDON CARLY J FELDMANN 2476 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0005 PAUL W LARSON 2470 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0006 PAULA ZACHMAN 2466 DUNWOODY AVE ORONO MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0007 MARGARET ANN PROEHL 2464 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0008 MARGARET ANN PROEHL 2464 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0010 RONALD L VANACORA SUZANNE VANACORA 2500 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0014 T & D Y CHALUPSKY PO BOX 217 SPRING PARK MN 55384 38 20-117-23 21 0015 MARIE A SVANG 4140 11TH AVE S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55407 38 20-117-23 21 0016 MICHAEL G HART KRISTIN J HART 2510 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0017 RONALD D & HOLLY S ROCCA 2520 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0018 CALVARY MEMORIAL CHURCH 2420 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0019 JACOB H ROSHOLT DEBRA A ROSHOLT 2500 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0020 LINDA K O'NEEL/ROBERT O'NEEL 2520 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0021 EMILY M DUNLAP 2540 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0022 CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 21 0023 KURT KENNAN KROLL JR AMY ELIZABETH KROLL 2560 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0024 CHARLES & CAROL PRICE 2813 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0025 GOOD SHEPHERD LUTH CHURCH 3745 SHORELINE DRIVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0028 CENTURY LINK ATTN PROPERTY TAX DEPT 1025 ELDORADO BLVD BROOMFIELD CO 80021 38 20-117-23 21 0029 STEVAN J & DEBRA J WAGNER 5440 MORNINGVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 20-117-23 21 0033 MERZ PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 163 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 21 0034 MATTHEW W & SARAH J DAVIS BLAKE E & JULIA J LARSON 2590 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0036 IGOR YURCHENKO NATALYA CHERNEVSKAYA 2490 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0037 STEPHEN J RUDOLPH SUSAN RUDOLPH 2480 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0038 ALLEN J & JUDY B SCHEFERS 2540 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 667 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 3745 Shoreline Dr 0 200 400100 Feet Date: 5/22/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 668 Date: June 17, 2024 Item: 5.8 Presenter: Melanie Curtis, Planner Section: Public Hearings Title: #LA24-000033, Brian & Sarah Muhlbauer, 1448 Baldur Park Road - Variances and CUP (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 1.Purpose: To review an application for variances and CUP in conjunction with the redevelopment of the property with a new single-family home: 1. Lot Area and Lot Width Variances; 2. Rear Yard Setback Variance; 3. Driveway Width Variance; 4. A Variance for hardcover exceeding 25% for the overall site; and 5. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to permit a deviation from the required 15-foot perimeter rescue bench to support the home elevated on fill above the floodplain. 2.MN§15.99 Application Deadline: The application was received on May 22, 2024, and considered to be complete on June 4. The 60- day review period expires on August 30, 2024. 3.Background: The applicants have requested variances to construct a new 2 ½-story home. The new home is proposed to meet all of the required setbacks except the rear setback where they request a 29 foot setback where a 30-foot setback is required. As drawn, their plan also requires a variance to permit a 24.5-foot-wide driveway at the property line where a maximum width of 20 feet is allowed (plus flares). A variance to permit 31.9% hardcover where 25% is permitted and 33.1% currently exists is requested. Because of the need for the above variances, lot area and lot width variances are also required. Thee propose to elevate the home on fill to achieve positive drainage away from the home on the flat lot which requires a 15-foot-wide perimeter rescue bench elevation of at least 931.5’ around the home. The property limits their ability to achieve the 15-foot width, therefore a CUP is also required. Please refer to Exhibit A for a full analysis and background. 4.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances and CUP to construct the new home based on the following changes: 1. Revision of the driveway to conform to the City Code standard of 20 feet wide at the property line. 2. Reduction of the front porch footprint to meet 20% lot coverage. 5.Planning Commission Action Requested: Planning Commission should consider a motion to approve based on the staff recommendation. AGENDA ITEM 669 Exhibits Exhibit A - LA24-000033 (1448 Baldur Park Rd) PCSR Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - Practical Difficulties Exhibit D - Proposed Survey Exhibit E - List_Map_Neighbors Exhibit F - Plans Exhibit G - Hardcover Calcs Exhibit H - Aerial Photos Exhibit I - Driveway Detail 670 Date Application Received: 05/22/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 06/04/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 08/30/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 17 June 2024 Subject: #LA24-000033, Ryan Muhlbauer and Sarah Frakes Muhlbauer, 1448 Baldur Park Road, Variances + CUP Public Hearing Background The subject property is situated at the intersection of Birch Lane and Baldur Park Road. The applicants have requested variances to construct a new 2 ½-story home. The new home is proposed to meet all of the required setbacks except the rear where an approximate 2 ½ square foot triangle is proposed to encroach into the 30-foot rear yard setback by ±18 inches. As drawn, their plan also requires a variance to permit a 24.5-foot-wide driveway at the property line where a maximum width of 20 feet is allowed (plus flares). A variance to permit 32% hardcover where 25% is permitted and 33.1% currently exists is requested. Because of the need for the above variances, lot area and lot width variances are also required. Due to the low, flat elevation on the property, they are proposing to elevate the home on fill which requires a 15-foot-wide perimeter rescue bench elevation of at least 931.5’ around the home. The property limits their ability to achieve the 15-foot width, therefore a CUP is also required. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicants have identified several factors supporting the requested variances including the existing lot conditions (lot size, elevation), the lot elevation eliminating their ability to construct a basement for storage, and the parking limitations along Baldur Park Road as some of the practical difficulties supporting the requested variances. Additionally, they have provided supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit C, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty, Staff finds that there are several challenging issues on this site. The lot’s depth and narrow configuration, the location along the curved shoreline and the intersection of Birch Lane and Baldur Park Road, and the low elevation all support granting variances. The proposed hardcover level is a 115 square foot reduction which improves the existing condition. Application Summary: The applicants request the following approvals in conjunction with the redevelopment of the property with a new single-family home: 1. Lot Area and Lot Width Variances; 2. Rear Yard Setback Variance; 3. Driveway Width Variance; 4. A Variance for hardcover exceeding 25% for the overall site; and 5. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to permit a deviation from the required 15-foot perimeter rescue bench to support the home elevated on fill above the floodplain. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval with conditions, see page 7. 671 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 2 of 7 Redevelopment of nonconforming properties can be challenging. The applicants tried to present a project with as few variances as possible. They are planning to remove the existing home and detached garage which have been in disrepair for several years, including an accumulation of junk and debris in exterior storage. They have received encouraging feedback from their neighbors as they designed the home for the property. The low elevation of the property presents a unique challenge from a grading standpoint and eliminates the ability to incorporate a basement which results in additional challenges relating to storage. The requested variances are reasonable and are supported by practical difficulties on the small, narrow property. The additional distance between the 75-foot and average lakeshore setback resulting from the placement of the home provides additional green space between the home and the lake to allow for more space for stormwater infiltration. The current driveway plan reflects a 24 ½ foot wide connection at the property line where 20 feet is the maximum permitted by City Code. The applicants are amenable to adjusting it to conform. Any variance approvals granted shall be subject to the driveway meeting City Code requirements; this will be confirmed with the building permit review. As designed, the roofed front entry porch has a 42.5 square foot footprint which bumps the lot coverage percentage to 20.1% where 20% is permitted. This was not intentional and the applicants have agreed to reduce the porch footprint accordingly LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350 & 78-1279 – Setbacks: LR-1C Required Existing Proposed Street/Rear 30’ 9.1’ detached garage 80’ home 29’ new home Northwest Side 7.5’ 5.1’ detached garage 10.6’ home 7.5’ Southeast Side 7.5’ 31.7’ detached garage 5.1’ home 7.6’ Lakeshore 75’ 85’ home 93’ new home 90’ deck Average Lakeshore The existing home encroaches ±12-18 inches into the ALS. The new home, patio, and deck will be situated behind the ALS to conform. Section 78-350 – Lot Area/Width: LR-1C Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100’ Actual 10,355 s.f. (0.23 acre) ±38’ at the OHWL / 50.5’ at the 75’ setback Section 78-1403 – Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 10,355 s.f. (0.23 acre) Allowed: 2,071 s.f. (20%) Existing: 1,304 s.f. (12.5%) Proposed: 2,084.5 s.f. (20.1%)* *As proposed, the structural coverage is approximately 13.5 square feet too high. The applicants will reduce the footprint of the covered front entry porch to resolve the overage. No building coverage variance is requested. 672 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 3 of 7 Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Tier Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 1 10,355 s.f. 2,588 s.f. (25 %) 3,427 s.f. (33.1%) 3,312 s.f. (31.9%) Applicable Regulations: Lot Width Variance (Section 78-350) Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots that do not meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, such as the subject lot, can be redeveloped without variances if specific standards are met; such as: 1. All setback requirements can be met; 2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and 3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed 25 percent of the entire lot area. 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. The applicants’ request for variances results in the property’s inability to conform to all of the standards above. Therefore, lot area and lot width variances are also required to redevelop the property. The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area variance is not granted. Rear Yard Setback Variance (Section 78-350) An approximate 2 square foot triangle of the garage footprint encroaches 1 foot into the rear yard (29-foot setback). The lot is slightly pie-shaped as it narrows more at the lake than at the road. To limit hardcover, the applicants have not pushed the home as close to the lake as the setbacks would permit; the home is approximately 7 ½ feet further back from the average lakeshore setback than required. Driveway Width Variances (Section 18-136) The applicant is proposing a driveway 25.4 feet wide at the property line where 20 feet is the maximum permitted. Hardcover Variance (Section 78-1700) With redevelopment, the applicants are proposing to reduce the hardcover by 115 square feet, reducing the hardcover from 33.1% to 32.9%. None of the hardcover is proposed within the 75-foot setback. Conditional Use Permit relating to elevating the home on fill (Section 78-1125) Wherever floodplain filling is proposed, DNR and MCWD regulations require the floodplain to be expanded elsewhere so there is no decrease in flood storage capacity. The home is proposed to be elevated on fill to ensure that positive drainage can be achieved. The City’s floodplain regulations require a rescue bench around all buildings proposed to be elevated above the floodplain on fill. The fill material must continue for around the perimeter of the building to create a 15-foot “rescue bench”. The subject property is not wide enough to comply with the 15-foot perimeter fill requirement. The Code requires a conditional use permit to formally address any departure from the fill bench requirement. The City’s Engineer has conducted a cursory review of the grading plan and finds that the proposed grades do 673 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 4 of 7 not appear to adversely impact neighboring properties. Initially, it appeared the need to elevate the home on fill would result in a nonconforming (defined) building height. The applicants’ practical difficulty analysis includes justification for the height increase. After the plans were adjusted, staff calculated the building height to 27.6 feet defined height where 30 feet is the maximum permitted. Because the defined building height is conforming, the applicants’ analysis has been clouded on the practical difficulties analysis (Exhibit C) so that it wasn’t a point of confusion. Governing Regulations Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The substandard lot has difficulties in its small size and narrow width, the lack of on-street parking, and the low elevation of the property making development difficult. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances propose to rebuild a new home on this nonconforming lot are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit the construction of a new residence on the substandard lot is reasonable The proposed hardcover is a reduction from the existing condition. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The substandard lot size is an existing condition, and there is no available land with which to make the property more conforming. The restricted roadway, low topography, lot size and shape, and location are challenges not created by the owners. There should be consideration for variances for the property which is substandard in area and setback requirements. The project has been designed with an effort toward limiting the additional hardcover without sacrificing functionality; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested to permit the construction of a new home on the residential property, which is reasonable. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 674 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 5 of 7 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a single-family residence is an allowed use in the LR-1C District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two- family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The property’s substandard size, location, elevation, and unique configuration create difficulties that also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. The proposed setback and hardcover level are not out of character. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property’s substandard area and width create difficulties that do apply other properties in the City. The neighboring properties have similar challenges. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The proposed size of the home will conform to the 20% building coverage limit. Reduction of the driveway footprint would result in additional pressure on the roadway for guest parking creating pressure on the neighborhood. Granting of the lot area and width, setback, and hardcover variances are necessary for the preservation of the property rights of the owners. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the variances for lot size, hardcover, and rear setback in this situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Without variances the property is unbuildable. The variances for lot size, setback, and hardcover are necessary and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant The Commission may recommend or the Council may impose conditions in granting variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Conditional Use Permit (Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan; the proposed development of the property for residential use is consistent with the community management plan. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; with the exception of the currently requested variances, the project will conform to all applicable zoning requirements. 3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; in the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; in the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 675 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 6 of 7 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; in the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; the development of the property for residential use is compatible and consistent with the neighborhood and surrounding uses. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; development of the property for residential use is compatible and consistent with the neighborhood and surrounding uses. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; in the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; if it is determined that the request includes grading and filling within the 100-year floodplain it shall be reviewed by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The proposed reduction of the rescue bench will not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The project should not result in undesirable views or sustained activity such as disturbing neighbors. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; The applicants will be required to adhere to the City’s erosion control regulations as well as the permitting requirements of the MCWD. Timely re-vegetation and stabilization will be a requirement of the permitting process. The project should not result in a nuisance condition. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; the applicant will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways; a haul route should be provided. The noise resulting from the trucks and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. The project will be evaluated and monitored by the City Engineer and planning staff to minimize nuisances during the project. 13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; the overall long-term effect of the project should result in minimal if any environmental impacts. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of- way or neighboring residential uses or districts; this project should result in no additional non- residential lighting or glare; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The project should not be a detriment to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Conditional Use Permit Analysis The applicants’ plan reflects a deviation from the 15-foot rescue bench requirement which is reasonable considering the narrow width of the property. As part of this project, and all building permits, the applicants will be required to install erosion/perimeter control to prevent impacting the neighboring properties additionally they shall keep debris off of the public roadways. Correction of damage to the 676 FILE # LA24-000033 17 June 2024 Page 7 of 7 public roadways will be required to be completed as part of the building permit compliance. Public Comments The applicants have provided signed acknowledgments from the neighbors on either side of the property which are attached as part of Exhibit E. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the variances and CUP to construct the new home based on the following changes: 1. Revision of the driveway to conform to the City Code standard of 20 feet wide at the property line. 2. Reduction of the front porch footprint to meet 20% lot coverage. The applicants’ plan involves filling/grading at or below the 100-year flood elevation, the activity may be subject to a floodplain alteration permit governed by the MCWD. 677 Land Use Application Summary Application Date:05/22/2024 Address:1448 Baldur Park Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number:0811723430003 Land Use Number:LA24-000033 Application Submitted By:Property Owner Owner:Name: JAY H & MARLIS R LAWRENCE Address: 1448 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 Applicant:Name: Sarah Frakes Muhlbauer Company: Address: 1448 Baldur Park Road Orono, MN 55391 sarahlovebeam@gmail.com Contact Information:Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description:Variances: lot area, lot width, rear yard setback, and hardcover for a new home Land Use Application Type:Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: 678 1.Correct Hardcover Variance -Substandard parcel with non conforming 40 ft of lakeshore -Existing conditions are not compliant with the required hardcover maximum of 25%(They are 33.1%) -We are asking for a 32%proposed hardcover,bringing closer to conformance -Proposed plan is a 19.7%home footprint (under 20%) -We will have a full home gutter system installed to properly drain water on the property. -Asking for additional hardcover to add extra storage area to the garage (2-car garage).We won’t have a basement and are worried about storage of lawn equipment and lake equipment while having adequate storage to keep our property well maintained. -Parking is an issue on Baldur Park Road.We own three vehicles and will have 1 vehicle in the driveway because of our 2-car garage.There is not ample parking on Baldur Park Rd and we need as much driveway space as possible to keep cars off narrow Baldur Park Road when we have guests over. -We are improving from the current hardcover condition from 33.1%to 32%. -The proposed development of the property will reduce the overall hardcover and bring the lot closer to compliance with the hardcover limitation. -Neighbors have received hardcover variances due to similar difficulties including our next door neighbor at 1444 Baldur Park Rd. Height Variance -We are asking for a 1-ft height increase (31 ft defined height). -The city curb is at elevation 932.8 at the street.To ensure proper slope of driveway/drainage so water isn’t being sloped towards the garage/home,proposed GFE needs to be raised to 933.5. -Two feet above the 100-year floodplain is a needed safety measure for our proposed home which is a slab on grade proposed plan. -The current street elevation at 932.9 is higher than the current home elevation at 932.5 which leads to water drainage issues toward the home. -We are asking for functional ceiling heights on three floors;there are areas on the 3rd floor where a 6-ft tall homeowner and 6’2 father of a homeowner among other relatives will hit their heads and/or have to duck if we are not granted the additional 1ft variance. Rear Yard Street Side Setback Variance -The current separated garage is well within the 30-ft street side setback,sitting 9.1ft from the property line and non compliant with side yard setbacks at 5.1ft and 6.1 ft. -We are the tiniest bit over the 30-ft street side setback.If we shift the house towards the Avg Lakeside setback (which we have lots of room to do)we would encroach on side yard setbacks (which are currently non conforming). We tried to meet every setback and this seemed the least intrusive to the current setback rules. 2.Correct,the variances resulting in a new single family home is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.There are practical difficulties inherent to the land supporting our requests.The overall reduction in total hardcover,from 33.1% to 32%,will bring the lot closer to compliance with the hardcover.We met every setback we can with the exception of a sliver over the street side setback which is much improved from current conditions. 3a.Correct,the construction of a new single-family home is a reasonable use of the property.The proposed home will comply drastically closer to street side setback,will conform to side yard setbacks and overall hardcover will be reduced. -Improving current conditions on side yard,rear yard and lake side setbacks -Current hardcover is 33.1% -Proposed hardcover is 32% 679 The current home was built in 1935 and was not maintained.It is dilapidated and falling apart and was a hoarder house.There is junk all over the property outside of the home and separate garage.The neighbors are all very excited for this eye sore to be torn down and for a new home to be built.Please see attached images of the current home and detached garage. 3b.The lot is substandard in area and width.The small lot size,substandard width,and existing improvements are not the result of the current homeowners (us)actions. 3c.The current home was built in 1935 and was not maintained.It is dilapidated and falling apart and was a hoarder house.There is junk all over the property outside of the home and separate garage.The separate garage does not meet side yard setbacks (6.1 ft and 5.1ft)and is 9.1 from the street not meeting rear yard setbacks.The current home also does not meet side yard setbacks on the south side of home at 5.1 ft from property line.The neighbors are all very excited for this eye sore to be torn down and for a new home to be built.Allowing these variances will add to the character of the locality with a new home that fits the neighborhood. 4.Economic considerations were not considered in the proposed plan. 5.NA 6.NA 7.NA 8.The substandard lot width and existing conditions of the property are unique conditions to this specific property. 9.Surrounding properties have received hardcover variances due to similar difficulties including our next door neighbor at 1444 Baldur Park Rd. 10.The existing home is in a non conforming location.The proposed home will be set further back from the lake and further back from average lake setback,will conform to side yard setbacks,and only slightly go into the rear yard (street side)setback.The overall hardcover will also be reduced on the site. 11.Granting the requested variances will not adversely impact health,safety,comfort,or morals of the community. 12.The variances allow for the construction of a new home in a similar location to the existing home,while improving some of the nonconformities. 680 Baldur Park RoadLake MinnnetonkaDWELLINGPROPOSED# 42379LICENSE NO.Thomas M. BloomDATES1MAY 8, 2024Phone (952) 474-7964Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET TITLEPROPOSED SURVEYSHEET NO.SHEET 1 OF 1DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE40200240565 JRDRAWING NUMBERDATE DRAFTED:DATE SURVEYED:DECEMBER 27, 2023MAY 8, 2024EXISTING HARDCOVERHouse 851 Sq. Ft.Bituminous Area 64 Sq. Ft.Garage 453 Sq. Ft.Concrete Surfaces 1,333 Sq. Ft.Pavers 726 Sq. Ft.TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 3,427 Sq. Ft.AREA OF LOT TO OHW 10,355 Sq. Ft.PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 33.1%LEGENDSHEET SIZE17 X 22SCALE - 1" = 20'LEGAL DESCRIPTION:Lot 3, Block 1, BALDUR PARK, Hennepin County, Minnesota.SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS:1.Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listedabove. The scope of our services does not include determining what you own,which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records orconsult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correctand that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish to be included onthe survey have been shown.2.Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for thesurvey.3.Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the cornersof the property.4.This survey has been completed without the benefit of a current title commitment.There may be existing easements or other encumbrances that would be revealed bya current title commitment. Therefore, this survey does not purport to show anyeasements or encumbrances other than the ones shown hereon.5.Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines,are taken from the siding and or stucco of the building.6.Showing and tabulating impervious surface coverage of the lot for your review andfor the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over theserequirements to verify they are correctly shown before proceeding withconstruction.7.Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of thetopography of the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use indetermining elevations for construction on this site. The elevations shown relateonly to the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark and check atleast one other feature shown on the survey when determining other elevations foruse on this site or before beginning construction.8.While we show a proposed location for this home or addition, we are not as familiarwith your proposed plans as you, your architect, or the builder are. Review ourproposed location of the improvements and proposed yard grades carefully to verifythat they match your plans before construction begins. Also, we are not as familiarwith local codes and minimum requirements as the local building and zoningofficials in this community are. Be sure to show this survey to said officials, or anyother officials that may have jurisdiction over the proposed improvements andobtain their approvals before beginning construction or planning improvements tothe property.STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS:"●" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted.RYAN MUHLBAUER1448 BALDUR PARK ROADORONO, MNDeephaven, Minnesota 5539118202 Minnetonka Boulevard, Suite 401PROPOSED HARDCOVERHouse 2,042 Sq. Ft.Driveway 768 Sq. Ft.Walk 291 Sq. Ft.Front Stoop 42 Sq. Ft.Rear Deck 186 Sq. Ft.Rear Pavers 60 Sq. Ft.Deck Credit -100 Sq. Ft.AC Pad 8 Sq. Ft.Side Stoop 15 Sq. Ft.TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER 3,312 Sq. Ft.AREA OF LOT TO OHW 10,355 Sq. Ft.PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 32.0%FLOODPLAIN EARTHWORK NOTE:681 38 08-117-23 34 0013 R J ROHRER/D L S HUTCHINSON 1424 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0014 BRADLEY & CYNTHIA MCDONNELL 1420 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0015 JEFFREY ULKU/MARCIA PETERSON 1416 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0016 WILLIAM C ARONS 1207 PAR VIEW DRIVE SANIBEL FLA 33957 38 08-117-23 34 0017 WILLIAM L/KRISTI B ANDERSON 1408 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0018 BARBARA BRANDT JOHN RONALD ANDERSON 1404 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0019 THOMAS P LUTZ MARY LOU LUTZ 3570 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0020 KEVIN P LAWSON ELIZABETH LAWSON 3580 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0025 MICHAEL P LAUMANN 8959 SPRINGWOOD DR WOODBURY MN 55125 38 08-117-23 34 0028 RICHARD J ROHRER D L SONJA HUTCHINSON 1424 BALDUR PARK RD ORONO MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0055 KENT D & RUTH A WARDEN 3550 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0056 STEVEN R & JANNA S SUNDBY 3587 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0059 KENT ROTH 1428 BALDUR PARK ROAD ORONO MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0062 CELESTA OREL FRANK S ARONE 3590 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 42 0010 MICHAEL M LOOP TRUSTEE KRISTA J LOOP TRUSTEE 1355 TONKAWA RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0001 LYNETTE K BERNARD 3470 BIRCH LA WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0002 TODD A MISCHKE 3490 BIRCH LA WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0003 RYAN W MUHLBAUER SARAH E FRAKES 1448 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0004 BRYAN ANDERSON JILL ANDERSON 1444 BALDUR PK RD ORONO MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0005 JOHN & SUZANNE BOHN 6377 OXBOW BEND CHANHASSEN MN 55317 38 08-117-23 43 0006 JEFFREY PAUL MIKKELSON 1436 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0007 JOHN G & MAUREEN R NYQUIST 1432 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0008 MICHAEL & KIMBERLY LATTERNER 3510 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0009 JAMES POLK & LEXIE POLK 3520 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0010 MICHAEL P LAUMANN 3530 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0011 SETH J VICTORSEN 3540 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0012 KEVIN A BUESGENS CATHY M BUESGENS 501 LOUIS ST W COLOGNE MN 55322 38 08-117-23 43 0013 BRUCE A NUSBAUM 3480 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0014 WILLIAM L/LEANNE L KETELSEN 3490 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0015 SARA A SJOBERG 4960 ST ALBANS BAY RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 682 38 08-117-23 43 0019 DAVID J LINDBERG 3440 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0020 GERALD J RAY KATHLEEN M RAY 3442 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0021 WILLIAM C ODDEN 3450 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0022 LYDIARDS PARK LLC 3440 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0023 EDWARD R & BONNIE ENGLER 3450 BIRCH LA WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0024 MARY ERLER 3448 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0025 DEAN & MARY LINDBLOOM 3458 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0026 SARA A BISSON-ELLEFSON DOUGLAS J BISSON-ELLEFSON 3460 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0027 STEVE LISLE & ANGELA LISLE 3460 BIRCH LA WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 43 0028 CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 683 Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map 1448 Baldur Park 0 100 20050 Feet Date: 5/23/2024 Buffer Size:500 Map Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information, contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55487 / gis.info@hennepin.us 684 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) _______________________________ of ____________________________ [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ********************************************************************************************************************************* ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) _______________________________ of ____________________________ [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date Adjacent Property Owner Form – January 2023 If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 685 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) _______________________________ of ____________________________ [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ********************************************************************************************************************************* ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) _______________________________ of ____________________________ [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date ___________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Date Adjacent Property Owner Form – January 2023 If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 686 REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 06/04/2024 1:57:31 PM 687 REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 06/04/2024 1:57:35 PM 688 REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 06/04/2024 1:57:35 PM 689 REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 06/04/2024 1:57:35 PM 690 REVIEW PLAN This plan is at a review stage and is NOT a permit set. Please review the plan in its entirety and let DFP know if you have any changes prior to us proceeding. The plan will be placed on hold until we receive confirmation from you to proceed, meaning no additional work will be done on the plan until we receive your approval to move forward. 06/04/2024 1:57:35 PM 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 Facing southeast on Baldur Park Road toward North Shore Drive. 702 703 Comments RE: Item 5.8 / 1448 Baldur Park Rd / #LA24-000033 On Jun 16, 2024, at 12:34 PM, todd mischke <todd.mischke@icloud.com> wrote: Hi Ryan, Please see my below letter in support of the application. I am not sure if the format is correct. Dear Orono Council, We are writing in support of application number LA24-000033. We live at 3490 Birch Lane which is adjacent to the property proposed for redevelopment at 1448 Baldur Park Road. We have reviewed the building plans and application in detail. We wholeheartedly support the property redevelopment and proposed variances. We believe the application should be approved by the council. Feel free to contact us if needed. Best Regards, Todd and LuChin Mischke 612-296-5457 From:Rick Rohrer To:Melanie Curtis Cc:Scott Kirchner; jonressler@outlook.com; Bob Erickson; Dennis Libby; Mark McCutcheon; Gary Kraemer; tedmschultze@gmail.com; Christopher Bollis Subject:Application #LA24-000033, Ryan Muhlbauer and Sarah Frakes Muhlbauer, 1448 Baldur Park Road Variances and CUP Date:Friday, June 14, 2024 8:57:02 PM Dear Ms. Curtis, I live a few houses away from the address affected by this application, and I am writing in support of it. As the application notes, this is a particularly challenging lot to build on, and the requested variances are really necessary for the applicants to get reasonable use and enjoyment of the property. It is clear the Muhlbauers have carefully designed their new home to be as compliant as possible and to achieve the spirit of the zoning regulations in the few cases where they cannot achieve full compliance. In many cases what they propose will be a big improvement compared to the existing home on the property in terms of hardcover, setbacks, and protection of the neighbors’ interests. The proposed new home is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. My only suggestion regards the two changes recommended by planning staff. Given the vast improvements in setbacks and hardcover, it seems petty to require the Muhlbauers to remove a small piece of their driveway and downsize the front porch. I ask the Planning Commission to consider approving the application as originally submitted without the notch out of the driveway and the downsized porch. Cordially yours, Richard J Rohrer 1424 Baldur Park Rd Orono Public Comment: Item 5.8 - 1448 Baldur Park Rd, #LA24-000033 PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE %% 001'? G02 ❑ CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION ❑ PARK COMMISSION ❑ OTHER Assistive Listening Device available upon request Please complete the following information for City Records Name (please print) Address Present for (from agenda) Name or Number 2. CLIQ00h bey, I o i,) v vt A A)aw� StAy c t 3607 11 L69,!4 NV 6 re /\,v on pr�(- % 51 V\ L4 ft f As*. d000kk f� aI tA T,(A *W 12. �� ✓� CCU r [°��9� ����.������� ���- . � 2, PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION PARK COMMISSION OTHER Assistive Listening Device available upon request Please complete the following information for City Records Name (please print) 1. 2 3. 4. 5. L 7. 0 10. 11 12. Address Present for (from agenda) Name or Number