Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-02-2017
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA August 2, 2017 - 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Special Order of Business A. Discussion about Mounds View Blvd safety concerns with Erin Laberee, Traffic Engineer, Ramsey County Public Works 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the record.) 5. Planning Cases A. MU2017-001: MWF Properties. LLC: Resolution 1076-17, Recommending approval of a Development Review of “Boulevard”, a 60-unit apartment building, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Blvd. and Groveland Rd 6. Other Planning Activity A. Discussion of amending Zoning Code to decrease the front yard setback for covered porches 7. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity B. Staff Updates C. Council Updates D. Planning Commissioner Reports 8. Approval of Minutes: July 24, 2017 9. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. Wednesday, August 16, 2017 B. Wednesday, September 6, 2017 10. Meeting Conclusion Item No: ___5A Meeting Date: August 2, 2017 Type of Business: Planning Case MU2017-001 City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Planner Item Title/Subject: MU2017-001: MWF Properties. LLC: Resolution 1076-17, Recommending approval of a Development Review of “Boulevard”, a 60-unit apartment building, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Blvd. and Groveland Rd Introduction MWF Properties, requests approval of a Development Review for a 60-unit apartment building to be located at the northwest corner of Mounds View Blvd. and Groveland Rd. Discussion The project includes the following properties: PID Address Existing Use Zoning Comp Plan 06-30-23-31-0029 7980 Groveland Rd Vacant R-4 High Density Residential MU-PUD 06-30-23-31-0030 2865 Mounds View Blvd Single-Family R-4 High Density Residential MU-PUD 06-30-23-31-0031 2901 Mounds View Blvd Vacant R-4 High Density Residential MU-PUD 06-30-23-31-0241 80XX Groveland Rd (unaddressed parcel) Vacant R-4 High Density Residential MU-PUD A Development Review is required for construction activity in which a principal building is increased in size by more than 10%, or more than 10,000 sq ft (excludes single-family and two-family dwellings).1 In this case, the proposed 60-unit apartment building will be 25,000 sq ft in size. The property is zoned R-4 High Density Residential, is within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District, and is guided as Mixed Use Planned Unit Development in the Comprehensive Plan. 1 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1006.06, Subd 2 (Application of Development Controls) Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 2 This project includes multiple applications. Meeting dates include: Application Planning Commission Resolution City Council Resolution Zoning Map Amendment Apr 5, 2017 1067-17 Apr 19, 2017 Ord 934 May 8, 2017 CUP – Multiple Family Dwelling Apr 5, 2017 1068-17 May 8, 2017 8751 Preliminary Plat Jul 19, 2017 1075-17 Jul 24, 2017 8777 Aug 14, 2017 Development Review Jul 19, 2017 1076-17 Jul 24, 2017 8778 Aug 2, 2017 Aug 14, 2017 Tax Increment Financing N/A N/A TBD MWF Properties held a neighborhood meeting on February 16, 2017 at Lakes Run Apartments in New Brighton, an MWF project. Eleven residents attended. Additional discussions were held at City Council Work Sessions on January 3rd, March 6th, and April 3rd, 2017, in addition to discussions by the Mounds View EDA on May 8th and May 22nd, 2017, concerning Tax Increment Financing. During the City Council’s May 8th Public Hearing(s), several residents expressed concern about (1) additional traffic onto Groveland Rd to be generated by the project, and (2) if additional affordable housing in Mounds View is in the City’s best interest. During the City Council’s July 24th Public Hearing, four residents expressed concern about (1) additional traffic onto Groveland Rd to be generated by the project, (2) if the schools have capacity for additional students receiving free & reduced lunch, and (3) if the workforce housing project will attract crime. Described below is an attempt to address each concern: Traffic The project proposes a driveway access onto Groveland Rd. An earlier sketch plan proposing an access onto Mounds View Blvd (CSAH 10) has been denied by Ramsey County. All access onto a county road requires approval by the county. As a condition of approval for the CUP, allowing a Multiple-Family Dwelling (Resolution 8751), the applicant is required to complete a traffic study. MWF Properties commissioned a Traffic Impact Study (attached). The study focuses on traffic during Peak Hours, 7:30 – 8:30 AM, and 4:30 – 5:30 PM. Eighty-five percent of the traffic generated by this project is assumed to occur during peak hours. Please refer to Figure 4 for a diagram showing traffic movements. For each movement (e.g. north, south, etc.), there are three numbers; (1) 2017 traffic counts; (2) 2020 traffic forecast without the apartments (“no-build”); and, (3) 2020 traffic forecast with the apartments (“build”). Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 3 Currently (2017), there are 127 trips southbound on Groveland Rd during the AM peak hour, and 76 trips northbound on Groveland Rd during the PM peak hour. During peak hours, the apartments are forecasted to generate: 7:30 – 8:30 AM: 4 trips north on Groveland Rd 21 trips south on Groveland Rd 4:30 – 5:30 PM: 2 trips north on Groveland Rd 11 trips south on Groveland Rd The study states (page 5-2) that the project will have minimal impact to the capacity of the Mounds View Blvd & Groveland Rd intersection. Traffic capacity is rated on a Level of Service (LOS) scale, A through F (LOS A = free flow. LOS F = stop & go). The traffic capacity of this intersection is currently rated D in the AM peak hour and E during the PM peak hour. An LOS D or E is considered acceptable by industry standards.2 Workforce Housing The proposed apartments will include 60-units of affordable workforce housing. Residents will have an income restriction of 60% of the Area Median Income3 (AMI), based on household size. Household size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Max HH Income $36,060 $41,220 $46,380 $51,480 $56,620 $59,760 $63,840 $67,980 # of Apt Bedrooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 Max HH Rent $966 $1,159 $1,338 $1,494 $1,647 $1,801 Est Gross Rent at “Boulevard”4 $784 $942 $1,115 Avg. MV Rent 5 $1,036 $1,282 $1,795 $1,835 Avg. 2016 MV- SLP* Rent 6 $777 $894 $1,304 Avg. 2017 MV- SLP* Rent 7 $803 $902 * MV-SLP = Mounds View – Spring Lake Park prime market area 2 Institute of Transportation Engineers (1999). Transportation Planning Handbook, 2nd Addition. Washington D.C. Institute of Transportation Engineers, (p. 208). 3 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, Housing Tax Credits & Tax Exempt Bond Income and Rent Limits, Table I, p. 31 [Ramsey County, effective 03-28-2016]. 4 Bowen National Research (2017), Preliminary Tax Credit Support – The Boulevard, Pickerington, OH (p. 2) 5 Rupert, Craig, Bowen National Research, (2017). Price per sq ft – Mounds View, Minnesota. Re: Preliminary Tax Credit Support – The Boulevard (Mounds View, MN). 6 Bujold, M., Wilder, R. (2016). Table 7 Average Rents/Vacancies Trends Primary Market Area Third Quarter 2015. Initial Market Assessment for General Occupancy Market Rate rental housing in Mounds View, MN. 7 Bujold, M. (2017). Table 2 Average Rents/Vacancies Trends Mounds View Primary Market Area First Quarter 2016 and First Quarter 2017. Market Opinion Letter – Mix/Sizes/Pricing – Crossroad Pointe, Mounds View, MN. Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 4 The project will include: 15 one-bedroom units 30 two-bedroom units 15 three-bedroom units During a previous Planning Commission meeting, there were questions about how many rental units there are in the City, and how many are affordable. There are 5,280 housing units in Mounds View (2016). According to the City’s rental licensing records, there are 1,511 multi-family rental units and 240 single-family rental units (2017) (33% of total housing stock is rental). There are three apartment complexes in Mounds View that are dedicated for affordable housing, totaling 110 units8. It is unknown the total number of rental units in the city that have affordable rents. MWF Properties commissioned a rental housing study in 2017. In summary, within this market area, the number of rental households is projected to grow by 221 units (3.1%) between 2016 and 2021.9 The proposed project is 60-units. School Capacity MWF Properties estimates that there will be 72-120 children living in the complex, based on similar projects (1.2 – 2.0 children per unit). Based on conversations between City Staff and the school district Superintendent’s Office, the district has the capacity to serve the 60-unit apartment complex. Crime Mounds View crime statistics (2010 – present) may be found at https://communitycrimemap.com . Analysis Plans were submitted on June 15th by the Community Development Dept. to: Public Works Dept., City Attorney, SBM Fire Dept., Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD), Ramsey County Highway Dept., and Ramsey County Surveyor’s office. Comments were received from: 8 US Housing and Urban Development (HUD), HUD Electronic Geospatial Information Systems, accessed June 21, 2017. 9 Rupert, Craig, Bowen National Research, (2017). Price per sq ft – Mounds View, Minnesota. Re: Preliminary Tax Credit Support – The Boulevard (Mounds View, MN). Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 5 Brian Erickson, Mounds View Public Works, June 14, 2017 Samantha Berger, Rice Creek Watershed District, June 23, 2017 Mike Winfield, Ramsey County Surveyor’s office, July 17, 2017 Steve Thorp, Mounds View Community Development (fire), July 18, 2017 In general, comments referred to standard requirements from each agency. A Development Review includes the following items:10 Minimum Floor Area 11 Minimum Req. Proposed 1 bedroom units 630 sq ft 676 – 786 sq ft 2 bedroom units 750 sq ft 963 – 1,134 sq ft 3 bedroom units 870 sq ft 1,231 – 1,258 sq ft Public Utilities Sewer/water will be provided from Groveland Rd. Surface Water Drainage Storm water will drain into an infiltration basin in the southeast corner of the lot. The dry basin will be 6’ below grade. During the July 19th Planning Commission meeting, there was discussion if this should be a wet pond. Erosion Control A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) is included in the submitted plans. Driveways A 24’ wide driveway is proposed, accessing Groveland Rd (maximum permitted is 32’ in the R-4 district). During the July 19th Planning Commission meeting, there was discussion of adding a center median at the entrance. Trails The City maintains a trail system along Mounds View Blvd. between Groveland Rd and Co Rd H. The applicant proposes to extend this trail at their expense, along the south property line. The 10’ wide trail will be within the county’s right-of-way (ROW), and setback 33’ from the edge of the road pavement, and 13’ – 16’ from the edge of the apartment building. 10 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1006.06, Subd 3 (Development Plan) 11 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1104.02, Subd 4(c) (Minimum Floor Area Per Dwelling Unit) Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 6 Improvements within the county right-of-way will require approval by Ramsey County. During the July 19th Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended that the City extend this trail from the project, to Spring Lake Rd, using park dedication fees from this project, and that this trail be meandering. Parking Required* parking is 1½ uncovered stalls per dwelling unit, and one covered stall per dwelling unit.12 Required* Proposed Uncovered Stalls 90 63 Covered Stalls 60 63 * Within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay zoning district, parking requirements are intended as a “guideline”.13 Landscaping Usable open space is intended to be accessible for active and passive recreation by the apartment’s residents.14 Required Proposed Usable Open Space 625 sq ft p/unit 60 units = 37,500 sq ft 1,048 sq ft p/unit 60 units = 62,896 sq ft Within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay zoning district, a minimum of 15% of the lot shall be devoted to landscaped open space (57.8% proposed). A fenced playground is proposed, to be located near the NE corner of the building. Parking lots with more than five stalls must be screened.15 Minimum screening shall consist of a solid fence with a minimum height of 6’, or coniferous trees with a minimum height of 8’. A 6’ privacy fence is proposed as a buffer for homes along Groveland Rd, not otherwise screened by existing trees. 12 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1121.13 (Schedule of Off-Street Parking Requirements) 13 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1129.05, Subd 4 (Off-Street Parking) 14 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1102.02, Subd 127 (Usable Open Space), Section 1104.02, Subd 2(b)(4) 15 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1120., Subd 12 (Required Screening), Section 1103.08(6) Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 7 Landscape plant materials 16: Required Proposed Deciduous shade trees 13 32 Coniferous trees 13 25 Understory shrubs 83 94 Ornamental trees 13 13 Staff recommends that additional landscaping (shrubs and perennials) be installed between the building and the trail. Lighting Exterior lighting is required to have shielded fixtures to reduce glare, with a maximum 1.0 foot-candle (fc) measured from the center line of a public street and 0.4 fc measured from residential property lines.17 The photometric plan (p. E101) includes foot-candle (fc) measurements at the property line (not centerline of street). Light glare exceeds these standards at two points: 1. 0.5 fc at the common property line of 8020 Groveland Rd. The lighting source is: (1) parking lot light pole, 87’ away, and (2) light bollard 67’ away. Light trespass should be significantly reduced by the proposed 6’ privacy fence. 2. 0.6 fc at the common property line of 2925 Mounds View Blvd. The lighting source is a light next to an exterior door. The photometric plan may be approved as-is, or the Planning Commission/City Council may require it to comply with lighting maximums. Setbacks Within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay zoning district, buildings and parking lots “should be” setback 5’ from the Mounds View Blvd. property line.18 The building has a varying setback of 7’ – 9’ from the front property line, about 13’ – 16’ from the trail, and about 56’ – 59’ from the road pavement. 16 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1127.05, Subd 3 (Number of plant materials required) 17 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1103.09 (Glare) 18 Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1129.05, Subd 3 (Building and Parking Setback Requirements) Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 8 Exterior Materials Within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay zoning district, exterior building finishes shall consist of a minimum of 50% brick, natural stone or cultured stone, glass, masonry stucco, or other materials approved by the City. Proposed: Exterior Material Percentage North South East West Overall Brick 0% 05% 0% 0% 0% Natural stone or cultured stone 26% 29% 26% 31% 28% Glass 11% 22% 25% 26% 23% Masonry Stucco 22% 5% 3% 4% 7% Other comparable material 6% 1% 1% 0% 0.4% Total 65% 62% 55% 61% 58.4% All mechanical equipment shall be screened. Air conditioner units will be integrated into the exterior walls, and flush with the walls. Trash Disposal Dumpsters are required to be screened from view from Mounds View Blvd. The dumpsters will be kept within the parking garage and rolled out to a collection area outside the garage entrance on collection days. Construction Timetable Pending financial assistance from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (fall, 2017), construction will be completed in spring, 2019. Summary MWF Properties is requesting approval of a Development Review for a 60-unit apartment building to be located at the northwest corner of Mounds View Blvd. and Groveland Rd. MWF Properties has applied for financial assistance (Low Income Housing Tax Credits) from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). This is a competitive program. MHFA awards will be announced in October, 2017. If an award is not received, it is anticipated that MWF Properties will request an extension to the approvals (CUP, Preliminary Plat, and Development Review), and then reapply to MHFA in 2018. The Planning Commission considered this application at their July 19th meeting, tabling it to invite Ramsey County staff to attend the August 2nd Commission meeting to discuss access and traffic concerns. Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 9 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 1076-17, recommending approval of the Development Review. Recommendation The Planning Commission is requested to consider the following options: 1. Resolution 1076-17, recommending approval of a Development Review of “Boulevard”, a 60-unit apartment building. 2. The Planning Commission may choose to recommend denial of the Resolution. If the Commission chooses these options, Staff would need to be directed to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the denial. 3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided. MN Statutes requires that the City take action within 60-days (Aug 13, 2017), but allows the City to extend its review for an additional 60-days (Oct 13, 2017), which the City has done in order to allow additional discussion by the Planning Commission and City Council. Please note, that if the Commission wishes to recommend any changes to the proposed plans, The Commission should specify what should be changed, and for this to be included in the Resolution. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Jon Sevald, AICP Planner Attachments 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Map 3. Site Photos 4. Elevation Rendering 5. Resolution 1076-17 (Development Review) 6. Traffic Impact Study, dated June 29, 2017 7. Housing Study, dated April 28, 2017 8. Site Plan and related drawings, dated, July 13, 2017 Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 10 Zoning Map Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 11 Aerial Map Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 12 Site Photos Figure 1: View looking north toward Groveland Rd. Figure 2: View looking southeast along Mounds View Blvd, from the western edge of the project. Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 13 Figure 3: View looking south toward Groveland Rd & Mounds View Blvd intersection. Figure 4: Sept 12, 2017 storm damage, looking north from NW corner of Groveland Rd & Mounds View Blvd. Planning Case MU2017-001 August 2, 2017 Page 14 Elevation Rendering RESOLUTION 1076-17 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF “BOULEVARD”, A 60-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MOUNDS VIEW BOULEVARD AND GROVELAND ROAD; PLANNING CASE MU2017-001 WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1006.06, Subd 2 (Application of Development Controls) requires a Development Review for construction of a principal building consisting of 10,000 sq ft or greater, or an addition onto a principal building increasing its size by 10% or greater (excludes single-family and two-family dwellings); and, WHEREAS, MWF Properties, LLC, representing Cynthia Johnson, owner of PID: 06- 30-23-31-0029 and PID: 06-30-23-31-0030; and representing the State of Minnesota, owner of PID: 06-30-23-31-0031 and PID: 06-30-23-31-0241, has requested approval of a Development Review for a 60-unit apartment building (principal building), consisting of 25,000 sq ft., and located on land legally described as: Certificate of Title No. 582367 (PID No. 06-30-23-31-0031): Parcel 1: Lot 50, except that part which lies southwesterly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet Northeasterly of the Southwesterly boundary of said Lot 50, also except that part described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 50; thence East 7 feet along the North line of said Lot 50; thence Southerly 100 feet to a point of intersection on the West line of said Lot 50; thence North along said West line of said Lot 50 to the point of commencement; Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey Co., Minn. the said excepted part of the above described property, the Southwesterly 100 feet has been taken by the State of Minnesota for public Highway purposes. Resolution 1076-17 Page 2 Parcel 2: All that part of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey Co., Minn., described as follows, to-wit: Commencing at a point on the West line of Lot 50, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, which point is 100 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 50; thence South to a line 100 feet Northeasterly from and parallel with the Southerly line of Lot 32; thence Northwesterly on said parallel line 32 feet; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning. Certificate of Title No. 582368 (PID No. 06-30-23-31-0241): The South 135.00 feet, front and rear, of Lot 47, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, lying westerly of the East 187.00 feet. Certificate of Title No. 616319 (PID No. 06-30-23-31-0030): Lot 49, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Certificate of Title No. 593365 (PID No. 06-30-23-31-0029): That part of Lot 48, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89 lying South of the North 300 feet front and rear thereof, except that portion taken for the Highway right of way purposes. WHEREAS, the properties are zoned R-4 High Density Residential, and are within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District, and are guided for Mixed Use PUD within the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, MWF Properties, LLC, received a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Multiple-Family Dwelling within an R-4 zoning district, on the subject properties on May 8, 2017 (Resolution 8751); and, WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View Municipal Code, Section 1006.06 (Development Controls) provides for a Development Review of plans for utility service, surface water drainage, erosion and sediment control, streets, driveways, trails, parking, landscaping, screening and buffering, lighting, setbacks, exterior construction design and materials, trash disposal, construction timetable, and other items; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request on July 19, 2017 and August 2, 2017, including the following documents: Resolution 1076-17 Page 3 Staff Report, dated August 2, 2017 Site Plan and related drawings dated July 13, 2017, and July 18, 2017 Traffic Impact Study, dated June 29, 2017 Housing Study, dated April 28, 2017 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission finds that the request is consistent with the City of Mounds View Municipal Code, Title 1000 (Building and Development Regulations), Title 1100 (Zoning Code), and the Comprehensive Plan; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, based upon the above findings, the information and documents regarding the proposed plans within the Staff Report, and testimony of the applicant, and in consideration of public testimony, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Development Review of “Boulevard”, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant, MWF Properties, LLC, shall construct the project consistent with: A. Site Plan, dated July 13, 2017 B. Grading Plan, dated July 13, 2017, or approved as part of the Preliminary Plat of “Boulevard” C. Landscape Plan, dated July 13, 2017 D. Photometric Plan, dated May 31, 2017 E. Exterior Elevation Plans, dated June 15, 2017 F. Exterior Rendering included in the August 2, 2017 Planning Commission staff report 2. The applicant, MWF Properties, LLC, shall obtain all applicable permits from the City of Mounds View (Building, Right-of-Way, Zoning), Ramsey County (Right-of-way), Rice Creek Watershed District, and other applicable agencies. 3. The applicant shall consent to a Developers Agreement, to be completed as part of the Final Plat approval process. 4. Approval of this Development Review is contingent upon approval of the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat of “Boulevard”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 2nd day of August, 2017 Gary Stevenson, Chair Resolution 1076-17 Page 4 ATTEST: Jon Sevald, Planner (SEAL) WENCK File #2306-12 June 29, 2017 Prepared by: WENCK Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: MWF Properties 7645 Lyndale Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55423 Traffic Impact Study for Apartment Building in Mounds View, MN June 2017 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-1 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 6-1 7.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 7-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN ................................................................................ 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY AM AND PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..... 4-3 I hereby certify that this 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. __________________________________ DATE: June 29, 2017 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 June 2017 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new apartment building located in the northwest quadrant of the CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection in Mounds View, MN. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • CSAH 10/Groveland Road • Groveland Road/proposed access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve the construction of a 60-unit apartment building. One vehicle access point to the site will be located on Groveland Road on the east side of the building. The project includes 63 underground parking stalls for residents and 60 above ground parking stalls for residents and visitors. The project is expected to be completed and fully occupied in March 2019. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is expected to add 31 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 37 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 399 weekday trips. • One vehicle access point to the site is provided on Groveland Road on the east side of the building. • The CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection is expected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all existing and future scenarios. Trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on the operations at the CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection. • The addition of a southbound right turn lane on Groveland Road would separate the southbound right turns from the through/left turns, which would reduce delay for the right turn movement. However, the volume of southbound right turn traffic is small compared to the total volume on CSAH 10, resulting in minimal improvements to the overall intersection operations. June 2017 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new apartment building located in the northwest quadrant of the CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection in Mounds View, MN. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • CSAH 10/Groveland Road • Groveland Road/proposed access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve the construction of a 60-unit apartment building. The site plan is shown in Figure 2. One vehicle access point to the site will be located on Groveland Road on the east side of the building. The project includes 63 underground parking stalls for residents and 60 above ground parking stalls for residents and visitors. The project is expected to be completed and fully occupied in March 2019. June 2017 2-2 June 2017 2-3 June 2017 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site currently contains one single family house. The site is bounded by CSAH 10 on the south, Groveland Road on the east, and residential uses on the north and west. Near the site location, CSAH 10 is a four-lane divided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. Groveland Road is a two-lane north/south roadway. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. CSAH 10/Groveland Road (minor street stop control) This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. The eastbound and westbound CSAH 10 approaches provide one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one lane shared by left turn, through, and right turn movements. The median on CSAH 10 is approximately 30 feet wide, which creates space between the eastbound and westbound lanes for a vehicle to wait before completing a turn onto CSAH 10. This allows for a two-stage crossing maneuver of CSAH 10 for northbound and southbound traffic. Traffic Volume Data Data at the intersection was recorded in May 2017. June 2017 3-2 June 2017 4-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2020. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2017 Existing. Turn movement volumes collected in May 2017 were used for existing conditions. The existing volume information includes trips generated by uses near the project site. • 2020 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2020 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was based on recent historic traffic volume growth in the project area. • 2020 Build. Trips generated by the proposed use were then added to the 2020 No- Build volumes to determine 2020 Build volumes. Trip Generation-Proposed Project The expected new development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Ninth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Apartment Building Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Proposed Apartments 60 DU 6 25 31 24 13 37 399 Net Total 6 25 31 24 13 37 399 Notes: DU=dwelling units As shown in Table 4-1, the proposed development will add a net total of 31 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 37 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 399 trips on a daily basis. June 2017 4-2 Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for new trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: •40 percent to/from the west on CSAH 10 •40 percent to/from the east on CSAH 10 •15 percent to/from the north on Groveland Road •5 percent to/from the south on Groveland Road Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figure 4. FIGURE4WEEKDAY A.M. ANDP.M.PEAKHOURVOLUMESNTRAFFICIMPACT STUDYFOR A PROPOSEDAPARTMENT BUILDINGINMOUNDSVIEW,MNA.M.PEAKP.M.PEAKGROVELAND ROADGROVELAND ROAD65/67/7724/25/2638/39/4934/35/4011/11/1211/11/1614/14/161299/1338/13386/6/650/52/62828/853/85316/16/166/6/8687/708/7082/2/220/21/311501/1546/15469/9/94/4/45/5/93/3/312/12/126/6/73/3/3-/-/1127/131/131-/-/356/58/58-/-/4-/-/21-/-/2-/-/11-/-/525/26/26-/-/2176/78/78ACCESSACCESSCR 10CR 1020172020NO-BUILD2020BUILDLEGENDXX/XX/XX June 2017 5-1 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle usi ng the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. June 2017 5-2 The LOS results for the study intersections are described below. All LOS worksheets are included in the Appendix for further detail. CSAH 10/Groveland Road (minor street stop control) During the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS D or better under all existing and future scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS E or better under all existing and future scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. Groveland Road/proposed access (minor street stop control) During the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS A under the future scenario. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS A under the future scenario. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. Overall Intersection Impacts The CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection is expected to operate at acceptab le levels of service in the year 2020 both without and with the proposed project. Trips generated by the proposed development will have minimal impact on the operations at the intersection. The CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection has a wide median on CSAH 10, which allows northbound and southbound drivers to complete a two-stage crossing. In addition, the traffic signals located at Silver Lake Road and at Pleasant View Drive create gaps in the CSAH 10 through traffic, allowing vehicles to enter from Groveland Road at times with minimal cross traffic. These operational items were confirmed through field observations completed during the data collection. The combination of these items results in acceptable levels of service for the intersection. The addition of a southbound right turn lane on Groveland Road was also considered. The addition of a right turn lane would separate the southbound right turns from the through/left turns, which would reduce delay for the right turn movement. However, the volume of southbound right turn traffic is small compared to the total volume on CSAH 10, resulting in minimal improvements to the overall intersection operations. Groveland Road Impacts The most recent traffic volume avail able indicates a daily volume of 1,250 vehicle per day on Groveland Road between CSAH 10 and Ardan Avenue. North of Arden Avenue the daily volume drops to 710 vehicles per day. The proposed project is expected to add 60 vehicles per day to Groveland Road north of the development access. This level of increase will have minimal impacts traffic operations. Two-lane local streets can accommodate the traffic volume levels expected on Groveland Road. June 2017 6-1 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is expected to add 31 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 37 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 399 weekday trips. • One vehicle access point to the site is provided on Groveland Road on the east side of the building. • The CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection is expected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all existing and future scenarios. Trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on the operations at the CSAH 10/Groveland Road intersection. • The addition of a southbound right turn lane on Groveland Road would separate the southbound right turns from the through/left turns, which would reduce delay for th e right turn movement. However, the volume of southbound right turn traffic is small compared to the total volume on CSAH 10, resulting in minimal improvements to the overall intersection operations. June 2017 7-1 7.0 Appendix 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2017 am.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 1299 6 2 687 6 4 5 3 38 24 65 Future Vol, veh/h 14 1299 6 2 687 6 4 5 3 38 24 65 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 15 1412 7 2 747 7 4 5 3 41 26 71 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 747 0 0 1412 0 0 1833 2193 706 1490 2193 373 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1442 1442 - 751 751 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 391 751 - 739 1442 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *826 - - *249 *218 *552 *249 *218 *795 Stage 1 - - - - - - *520 *456 - *750 *657 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *750 *657 - *520 *456 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *826 - - *203 *215 *552 *240 *215 *795 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *203 *215 - *240 *215 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *514 *450 - *740 *655 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *654 *655 - *505 *450 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 20.3 21 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 248 * 1189 - - * 826 - - 361 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 0.013 - - 0.003 - - 0.382 HCM Control Delay (s) 20.3 8.1 - - 9.4 - - 21 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 1.7 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 am nb.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 1338 6 2 708 6 4 5 3 39 25 67 Future Vol, veh/h 14 1338 6 2 708 6 4 5 3 39 25 67 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 15 1454 7 2 770 7 4 5 3 42 27 73 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 770 0 0 1454 0 0 1888 2259 727 1534 2259 385 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1485 1485 - 774 774 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 403 774 - 760 1485 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *774 - - *216 *189 *517 *216 *189 *795 Stage 1 - - - - - - *488 *427 - *750 *657 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *750 *657 - *488 *427 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *774 - - *172 *186 *517 *208 *186 *795 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *172 *186 - *208 *186 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *481 *422 - *740 *655 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *651 *655 - *472 *422 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 22.8 24.6 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 215 * 1189 - - * 774 - - 323 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.013 - - 0.003 - - 0.441 HCM Control Delay (s) 22.8 8.1 - - 9.7 - - 24.6 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 2.2 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 am b.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 1338 6 2 708 8 4 6 3 49 26 77 Future Vol, veh/h 16 1338 6 2 708 8 4 6 3 49 26 77 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 17 1454 7 2 770 9 4 7 3 53 28 84 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 770 0 0 1454 0 0 1892 2263 727 1539 2263 385 Stage 1 - - - - - - 1489 1489 - 774 774 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 403 774 - 765 1489 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *774 - - *216 *189 *517 *216 *189 *795 Stage 1 - - - - - - *488 *427 - *750 *657 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *750 *657 - *488 *427 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *1189 - - *774 - - *169 *186 *517 *206 *186 *795 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *169 *186 - *206 *186 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *481 *421 - *739 *655 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *640 *655 - *470 *421 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 23.3 27.7 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 211 * 1189 - - * 774 - - 320 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.067 0.015 - - 0.003 - - 0.516 HCM Control Delay (s) 23.3 8.1 - - 9.7 - - 27.7 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 2.8 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2017 pm.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 50 828 16 9 1501 20 13 6 3 11 11 34 Future Vol, veh/h 50 828 16 9 1501 20 13 6 3 11 11 34 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 51 845 16 9 1532 20 13 6 3 11 11 35 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1532 0 0 845 0 0 1737 2497 422 2078 2497 766 Stage 1 - - - - - - 947 947 - 1550 1550 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 790 1550 - 528 947 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *174 *143 *759 *174 *143 *446 Stage 1 - - - - - - *653 *585 - *421 *369 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *421 *369 - *716 *585 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *141 *131 *759 *157 *131 *446 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *141 *131 - *157 *131 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *603 *541 - *389 *366 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *373 *366 - *651 *541 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 32.1 24.3 HCM LOS D C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 155 * 668 - - * 1135 - - 243 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.145 0.076 - - 0.008 - - 0.235 HCM Control Delay (s) 32.1 10.8 - - 8.2 - - 24.3 HCM Lane LOS D B - - A - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0.2 - - 0 - - 0.9 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 pm nb.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 853 16 9 1546 21 13 6 3 11 11 35 Future Vol, veh/h 52 853 16 9 1546 21 13 6 3 11 11 35 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 53 870 16 9 1578 21 13 6 3 11 11 36 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1578 0 0 870 0 0 1790 2573 435 2140 2573 789 Stage 1 - - - - - - 977 977 - 1596 1596 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 813 1596 - 544 977 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *123 *108 *759 *123 *108 *446 Stage 1 - - - - - - *616 *561 - *421 *369 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *421 *369 - *716 *561 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *97 *98 *759 *109 *98 *446 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *97 *98 - *109 *98 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *567 *516 - *388 *366 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *372 *366 - *648 *516 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 45.9 31.1 HCM LOS E D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 110 * 668 - - * 1135 - - 195 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.204 0.079 - - 0.008 - - 0.298 HCM Control Delay (s) 45.9 10.9 - - 8.2 - - 31.1 HCM Lane LOS E B - - A - - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 0.3 - - 0 - - 1.2 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 3: Groveland & CR 10 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 pm b.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 62 853 16 9 1546 31 13 7 3 16 12 40 Future Vol, veh/h 62 853 16 9 1546 31 13 7 3 16 12 40 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - 200 200 - 200 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 63 870 16 9 1578 32 13 7 3 16 12 41 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1578 0 0 870 0 0 1810 2593 435 2161 2593 789 Stage 1 - - - - - - 997 997 - 1596 1596 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 813 1596 - 565 997 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *174 *69 *759 *174 *69 *446 Stage 1 - - - - - - *593 *545 - *421 *369 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *421 *369 - *716 *545 - Platoon blocked, % 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *668 - - *1135 - - *124 *62 *759 *146 *62 *446 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - *124 *62 - *146 *62 - Stage 1 - - - - - - *537 *494 - *381 *366 - Stage 2 - - - - - - *367 *366 - *636 *494 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 49.4 39.1 HCM LOS E E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 104 * 668 - - * 1135 - - 173 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.226 0.095 - - 0.008 - - 0.401 HCM Control Delay (s) 49.4 11 - - 8.2 - - 39.1 HCM Lane LOS E B - - A - - E HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 0.3 - - 0 - - 1.8 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 12: Groveland & access 06/07/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 am b.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 21 5 26 131 1 Future Vol, veh/h 4 21 5 26 131 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 23 5 28 142 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 182 143 143 0 - 0 Stage 1 143 - - - - - Stage 2 39 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 779 905 1440 - - - Stage 1 860 - - - - - Stage 2 976 - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 777 905 1440 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 777 - - - - - Stage 1 857 - - - - - Stage 2 972 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 1.2 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1440 - 882 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - 0.031 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 9.2 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - - 12: Groveland & access 06/29/2017 T:\2306\12\synchro\with signals\2020 pm b.syn Synchro 9 Report Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1> 0 0 <1 1> 0 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 11 21 78 58 3 Future Vol, veh/h 2 11 21 78 58 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 11 21 80 59 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 183 61 62 0 - 0 Stage 1 61 - - - - - Stage 2 122 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 806 1004 1541 - - - Stage 1 962 - - - - - Stage 2 903 - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 795 1004 1541 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 795 - - - - - Stage 1 962 - - - - - Stage 2 890 - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 8.8 1.6 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1541 - 965 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.014 - 0.014 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 8.8 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - - Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 April 28, 2017 Mr. Chris Stokka MWF Properties 7645 Lyndale Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55423 Sent via email: ChrisStokka@MWFProperties.com Re: Preliminary Tax Credit Support – The Boulevard (Mounds View, MN) Dear Mr. Stokka, The purpose of this letter is to address the preliminary market support for The Boulevard, a proposed affordable general-occupancy rental community to be located at 2901 Mounds View Boulevard in Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota. It is our understanding that the project will contain a total of 60 units and will operate under the guidelines and restrictions of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. To determine support for the 60 proposed units at the subject site, we have established a preliminary Primary Market Area (PMA), surveyed existing Tax Credit and market-rate properties to establish occupancies and rent levels and analyzed the demographic trends that impact the preliminary PMA. We conclude our analysis by providing preliminary demand estimates for your project and comment on the market’s ability to support additional Tax Credit units. In addition to analyzing the depth of support for the subject project within the Mounds View market, this letter also serves as a guide to help establish certain features and/or amenities that should be included at the subject project to ensure its competitive position within the Site PMA. The key findings of this report are summarized as follows: Demographic trends are projected to be positive within the Mounds View Site PMA between 2016 and 2021, in terms of both total population and households. A good base of potential renter support exists in the market, as it was estimated that 7,191 renter households existed in the market in 2016. The number of renter households is projected to increase by 221 (3.1%) between 2016 and 2021. The subject project has an overall capture rate of 2.7%, which is considered achievable and demonstrates a good base of income-appropriate renter support within the market for the subject project. 2 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 The subject project is expected to help fill a void in the Mounds View rental housing market, as only one (1) general-occupancy LIHTC property containing 16 units exists within the Site PMA. The three remaining LIHTC properties identified within the Site PMA are all age-restricted properties. The three comparable general-occupancy LIHTC properties surveyed outside the Site PMA, but within the nearby region, are 99.3% occupied, which is reflective of just two (2) vacant units among these three properties. This is a clear indication of strong demand for family-oriented LIHTC product within the region. The subject project is considered very competitive in terms of unit design (square feet and number of bathrooms offered), amenities offered, and price point (gross rent). In fact, the subject’s proposed gross Tax Credit rents will be the lowest in the region, relative to those reported among similar unit types at the comparable properties. The subject’s proposed rents also represent market rent advantages ranging from 27.5% to 28.4%, depending upon unit type. This further indicates that the subject rents will represent significant values within the market. Subject Development It is our understanding that the subject project (The Boulevard) will contain a total of 60 units which will target family (general-occupancy) households earning up to 60% of Area Median Household Income (AMHI) under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. The subject project is expected to offer one- through three-bedroom garden style units. Construction of the subject project is expected to be complete in February of 2019. The following table details the unit configuration for the subject project, based on information provided at the time of this analysis. Total Units Bedroom Type Baths Style Square Feet % AMHI Proposed Rents Max. Allowable LIHTC Gross Rent Collected Rent Utility Allowance Gross Rent 15 One-Br. 1.0 Garden 690 60% $740 $44 $784 $1,017 30 Two-Br. 2.0 Garden 929 60% $885 $57 $942 $1,221 15 Three-Br. 2.0 Garden 1,045 60% $1,045 $70 $1,115 $1,410 60 Total Source: MWF Properties AMHI - Area Median Household Income (Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD Metro FMR Area; 2017) The following are unit and project amenities expected to be offered at the subject project: Unit Amenities Electric Range Wall-Unit Air Conditioning Refrigerator Window Blinds Dishwasher Washer/Dryer Appliances Carpet 3 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Project Amenities On-Site Management Fitness Center Community Room Playground Elevator Access Key Fob Access Additional Storage Units Underground Parking Garage Utility Responsibility We assume that the cost of gas heat, gas hot water heat, cold water, sewer and trash collection will be included in the rent. The following summarizes the utility expenses expected to be the responsibility of the tenant at the subject property: General Electricity Electric Cooking Preliminary Primary Market Area (PMA) For the purposes of this Snapshot Analysis, we have defined a preliminary Primary Market Area (PMA), the smallest geographic region from which we believe the majority of support for the proposed project will originate. Given that an in-person evaluation of the Mounds View market was not conducted at the time of this analysis, the Mounds View PMA was primarily determined through a demographic analysis of the surrounding area. The Mounds View Site PMA utilized in this analysis includes the majority of Mounds View, as well as the municipalities, or portions of, New Brighton, Fridley, Coon Rapids, Blaine, and Spring Lake. The boundaries of the Site PMA consist of U.S. Highway 10 to the north; Interstate 35W to the east; Interstate 694 to the south; and the Mississippi River to the west. While some additional support for the proposed subject project will undoubtedly come from outside of this area, we do not anticipate this additional support component will be significant. This is particularly true of areas located north, east, and west of the Site PMA, as the areas to the north and east are primarily comprised of owner-occupied households which would not likely respond to affordable rental product at the subject site, while the Mississippi River serves as a good natural boundary which limits access to the PMA from the west. It is important to reiterate that this PMA is in fact preliminary, and should be considered as such. A full market feasibility analysis with on-site evaluation would enable us to better determine/confirm the specific Site PMA boundaries. A map delineating the boundaries of the preliminary Site PMA is illustrated on the following page of this letter. !H Blaine Fridley Brooklyn Park Arden Hills Coon Rapids New BrightonBrooklyn Center Mounds View ShoreviewSpring Lake Park Lexington Columbia Heights Circle Pines Hilltop Champlin Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, EsriChina (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunity 0 0.55 1.1 1.650.275 Miles1:75,000 N SITE Mounds View, MNPrimary Market Area !H Site Primary Market Area 5 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Area Demographics Population and household trends for the Mounds View PMA are as follows. All Ages Population Households 2010 Census 56,945 23,398 2016 Estimated 58,104 23,942 Change 2010-2016 1,159 544 Percent Change 2010-2016 2.0% 2.3% 2021 Projected 59,870 24,704 Change 2016-2021 1,766 762 Percent Change 2016-2021 3.0% 3.2% Source: 2000, 2010 Census; ESRI; Urban Decision Group; Bowen National Research As illustrated in the preceding table, the Mounds View Site PMA experienced a decline in population but an increase in households between 2000 and 2010. However, between 2010 and 2016, the population increased by 1,159, or 2.0%. During the same period, households increased by 544, or 2.3%. Projections through 2021 indicate there will be 59,870 people in 24,704 households within the Site PMA. This represents a population increase of 1,766 (3.0%) and a household increase of 762 (3.2%). The distribution of households by income within the Mounds View Site PMA is summarized as follows: Household Income 2010 (Census) 2016 (Estimated) 2021 (Projected) Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent Less Than $15,000 2,059 8.8% 1,922 8.0% 2,140 8.7% $15,000 to $24,999 1,906 8.1% 2,044 8.5% 2,141 8.7% $25,000 to $34,999 2,460 10.5% 2,404 10.0% 2,392 9.7% $35,000 to $49,999 3,490 14.9% 3,270 13.7% 3,529 14.3% $50,000 to $74,999 5,041 21.5% 5,075 21.2% 4,382 17.7% $75,000 to $99,999 3,479 14.9% 3,719 15.5% 4,042 16.4% $100,000 to $149,999 3,377 14.4% 3,584 15.0% 3,943 16.0% $150,000 to $199,999 961 4.1% 1,170 4.9% 1,324 5.4% $200,000 & Over 627 2.7% 755 3.2% 811 3.3% Total 23,400 100.0% 23,943 100.0% 24,704 100.0% Median Income $58,852 $61,485 $62,266 Source: 2010 Census; ESRI; Urban Decision Group; Bowen National Research In 2010, the median household income was $58,852. This increased by 4.5% to $61,485 in 2016. By 2021, it is projected that the median household income will be $62,266, an increase of 1.3% over 2016. 6 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 The following tables illustrate renter household income by household size for 2010, 2016, 2019 (projected, year open) and 2021 for the Mounds View Site PMA: Renter Households 2010 (Census) 1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5-Person+ Total Less Than $15,000 676 283 124 86 137 1,306 $15,000 to $24,999 534 208 91 64 99 996 $25,000 to $34,999 474 262 113 79 127 1,055 $35,000 to $49,999 515 336 147 102 161 1,261 $50,000 to $74,999 403 320 140 97 153 1,113 $75,000 to $99,999 171 142 62 42 68 485 $100,000 to $149,999 144 122 53 36 59 414 $150,000 to $199,999 21 18 8 4 8 59 $200,000 & Over 11 11 6 2 4 34 Total 2,949 1,702 744 512 816 6,723 Source: ESRI; Urban Decision Group Renter Households 2016 (Estimated) 1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5-Person+ Total Less Than $15,000 582 292 138 98 116 1,226 $15,000 to $24,999 564 266 125 88 107 1,150 $25,000 to $34,999 428 281 132 92 108 1,041 $35,000 to $49,999 472 366 170 120 144 1,272 $50,000 to $74,999 395 398 187 132 155 1,267 $75,000 to $99,999 173 185 86 63 71 578 $100,000 to $149,999 143 156 74 52 62 487 $150,000 to $199,999 31 34 16 11 13 105 $200,000 & Over 22 21 9 7 6 65 Total 2,810 1,999 937 663 782 7,191 Source: ESRI; Urban Decision Group Renter Households 2019 (Projected) 1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5-Person+ Total Less Than $15,000 630 313 147 105 122 1,317 $15,000 to $24,999 572 271 127 90 108 1,168 $25,000 to $34,999 376 261 122 86 101 947 $35,000 to $49,999 455 356 165 118 139 1,233 $50,000 to $74,999 332 329 154 109 128 1,052 $75,000 to $99,999 190 196 91 65 75 618 $100,000 to $149,999 217 218 103 73 86 698 $150,000 to $199,999 57 57 27 19 22 182 $200,000 & Over 39 34 15 11 11 110 Total 2,868 2,035 953 676 792 7,324 Source: ESRI; Urban Decision Group 7 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Renter Households 2021 (Projected) 1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5-Person+ Total Less Than $15,000 662 327 153 109 126 1,377 $15,000 to $24,999 577 274 129 91 109 1,180 $25,000 to $34,999 341 248 116 82 97 884 $35,000 to $49,999 444 349 162 116 136 1,207 $50,000 to $74,999 290 283 132 94 110 909 $75,000 to $99,999 202 203 95 67 77 644 $100,000 to $149,999 267 260 122 87 102 838 $150,000 to $199,999 74 72 35 24 28 233 $200,000 & Over 50 43 19 14 14 140 Total 2,907 2,059 963 684 799 7,412 Source: ESRI; Urban Decision Group As illustrated by the preceding tables, the total number of renter households is projected to increase by 221, or 3.1%, between 2016 and 2021. This demonstrates an expanding base of renter households which will likely increase demand for rental product within the Site PMA. The following table further details renter growth by income between 2016 and 2019, the projection period utilized in our demand calculations later in this letter, for the Site PMA: Annual Income Renter Households 2016 2019 Change % Change Less Than $15,000 1,226 1,317 91 7.4% $15,000 to $24,999 1,150 1,168 18 1.6% $25,000 to $34,999 1,041 947 -94 -9.0% $35,000 to $49,999 1,272 1,233 -39 -3.1% $50,000 to $74,999 1,267 1,052 -215 -17.0% $75,000 to $99,999 578 618 40 6.9% $100,000 to $149,999 487 698 211 43.3% $150,000 to $199,999 105 182 77 73.3% $200,000 & Over 65 110 45 69.2% Total 7,191 7,324 133 1.8% Source: ESRI; Urban Decision Group; Bowen National Research As the preceding table illustrates, renter households are projected to increase by 133 (1.8%) within the Site PMA between 2016 and 2019. More specific to low-income housing, renter households earning less than $35,000 are projected to increase by 15, or 0.4%, during this same time period. This is considered modest renter growth among lower-income households. However, it is also important to note that nearly 47.0% of all renter households are projected to earn below $35,000 in 2019. This is a good indication that demand exists for affordable rental product within the Mounds View market. 8 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Conventional Apartments Overview For the purpose of this report, our survey focused on non-subsidized market-rate and Tax Credit rental product within the Mounds View Site PMA. We identified and telephone surveyed 12 conventional rental housing projects containing a total of 2,064 units within the Site PMA. This survey was conducted to establish the overall strength of the rental market and to identify those properties most comparable to the subject site. These rentals have a combined occupancy rate of 98.8%, a strong rate for rental housing. All 12 of the properties surveyed offer unrestricted market-rate units, while only one (Silver Lake Pointe Apartments) offers units which operate under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. It should also be noted that the one LIHTC property surveyed in the Site PMA is age-restricted to seniors age 62 and older. Thus, this property will not be competitive with the proposed general-occupancy subject project and therefore has not been included in our comparable/competitive analysis later in this report. It is of note that in addition to the one property surveyed, we are aware of three additional properties within the Site PMA which operate and/or were awarded a Tax Credit allocation under the LIHTC program. Despite numerous attempts, we were unable to survey these properties via telephone at the time of this analysis. The known details of these projects based on our research are summarized in the following table: Name Location Year Allocated Total Units Target Population Additional Notes Cottages of Spring Lake Park 8263 Fillmore St. NE, Spring Lake Park, MN N/A 86 Seniors (55+) - Brandes Place 6160 5th St. NE, Fridley, MN 2005 16 Family Offers two- and three- bedroom units. Silver Lake Commons (fka Mounds View Family) 2665 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 1997 50 Seniors (62+) - N/A – Not Available As the preceding illustrates, two of the three LIHTC properties unable to be surveyed are age-restricted properties which will not be directly competitive with the subject project. The one remaining property, Brandes Place, offers general-occupancy LIHTC units similar to those being considered at the subject site. Thus, this property will likely have some competitive overlap with the subject project. Note, however, that this property is comprised of only 16 two- and three-bedroom units and therefore will likely only have minimal competitive overlap. Regardless, since we were unable to survey this property, it has been excluded from our survey and comparable LIHTC analysis. 9 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Comparable Tax Credit Analysis Due to the lack of family (general-occupancy) LIHTC product surveyed in the Site PMA, it was necessary to identify and survey such product located outside the Site PMA, but within the nearby region, in order to establish a base of comparison for the subject project. Thus, we surveyed three general-occupancy LIHTC properties which offer one-, two-, and/or three-bedroom units targeting households earning up to 60% of Area Median Household Income (AMHI) and are located within the region in the Anoka and St. Paul areas. Note, however, that since these properties are located outside the Site PMA they will not be directly competitive with the proposed subject project. Thus, they have been included only for comparability purposes. These three properties and the proposed subject development are summarized in the following table: Map I.D. Project Name Year Built/ Renovated Total Units Occ. Rate Distance to Site Waiting List Target Market Site The Boulevard 2019 60 - - - Families; 60% AMHI 901 Woodland Park Apts. 1993 / 2012 90 98.9% 12.7 Miles None Families; 60% AMHI 902 Centennial Commons 1966 / 2007 144* 99.3% 7.8 Miles 2 & 3-Br TAX: 3-5 Years Families; 60% AMHI 904 Lakes Run Apts. 2004 52 100.0% 5.9 Miles 35 H.H. Families; 60% AMHI 900 Series Map IDs are located outside the Site PMA OCC. – Occupancy H.H. - Households *Tax Credit units only The three LIHTC projects have a combined occupancy rate of 99.3%, which is reflective of just two (2) vacant units among these three properties. This is a clear indication of strong demand for family-oriented LIHTC product within the region. It is also important to reiterate that all three of the comparable properties are located outside the Site PMA and only one general-occupancy LIHTC property containing 16 units was identified within the Site PMA. Thus, the proposed subject project will help fill a void in the Mounds View rental market. The gross rents for the comparable projects and the proposed rents at the subject site, as well as their unit mixes and vacancies by bedroom are listed in the following table: Gross Rent/Percent of AMHI (Number of Units/Vacancies) Map I.D. Project Name Studio One- Br. Two- Br. Three- Br. Rent Special Site The Boulevard - $784/60% (15) $942/60% (30)$1,115/60% (15)- 901 Woodland Park Apts. - $975/60% (10/0) $1,086/60% (56/1) $1,351/60% (24/0) None 902 Centennial Commons $729/60% (1/0) $945/60% (61/1) $1,157/60% (77/0) $1,270/60% (5/0) None 904 Lakes Run Apts. - - $1,096/60% (39/0) $1,272/60% (13/0) None 900 Series Map IDs are located outside the Site PMA 10 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 As the preceding illustrates, the subject rents will be the lowest in the region, relative to similar unit types offered among the comparable properties surveyed. It is also important to note that the subject project will be significantly newer than each of the comparable properties, which were originally built between 1966 and 2004. In addition, the subject project will offer some of the largest units in terms of square footage and generally a greater number of bathrooms within its two- and three-bedroom units, as compared to similar unit types offered among the comparable properties. The amenity package to be offered at the subject project is also considered superior to those offered among most of the comparable properties surveyed. Most notably, in-unit washer/dryer appliances will be offered, a feature which is not offered among most of the comparable properties. Based on the preceding factors and considering our demand estimates included later in this letter, the subject rents are considered marketable and will likely represent a significant value within the Mounds View Site PMA. The unit sizes (square footage) and number of bathrooms included in each of the different LIHTC unit types offered in the region are compared with the subject development in the following table: Square Footage Map I.D. Project Name Studio One- Br. Two- Br. Three- Br. Site The Boulevard - 690 929 1,045 901 Woodland Park Apts. - 600 - 624 810 - 884 1,000 - 1,248 902 Centennial Commons 338 650 - 700 836 - 890 974 - 1,672 904 Lakes Run Apts. - - 914 1,205 900 Series Map IDs are located outside the Site PMA Number of Baths Map I.D. Project Name Studio One- Br. Two- Br. Three- Br. Site The Boulevard - 1.0 2.0 2.0 901 Woodland Park Apts. - 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 902 Centennial Commons 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 904 Lakes Run Apts. - - 2.0 2.0 900 Series Map IDs are located outside the Site PMA As the preceding illustrates, the subject project will be competitively positioned in terms of unit size (square feet), as the proposed unit sizes fall within range of, or are larger than, those offered among the comparable properties. The number of bathrooms offered is also considered competitive and will contribute to the subject’s marketability within the Mounds View market. The following tables compare the amenities of the proposed project to the comparable Tax Credit projects in the region. COMPARABLE PROPERTIES AMENITIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA MAP IDCENTRAL ACWINDOW ACFLOOR COVERINGWASHER AND DRYERW/D HOOKUPPATIO/DECK/BALCONYCEILING FANPARKINGBASEMENTINTERCOMSECURITYWINDOW TREATMENTSE-CALL BUTTONSOTHER UNIT AMENITIES REFRIGERATORICEMAKERDISHWASHERDISPOSALMICROWAVERANGEAPPLIANCES SITE X C X X BXXX G 902 X C S X X BXXXX O,S,G 901 X C X X X BXXX D(o),S 904 X C X X X BXXX S MAP IDPOOLON-SITE MGMTLAUNDRYCLUB HOUSECOMMUNITY SPACEFITNESS CENTERJACUZZI / SAUNAPLAYGROUNDTENNIS COURTSPORTS COURTSTORAGEELEVATORCOMPUTER LABLIBRARYPICNIC AREASOCIAL SERVICESSECURITY GATEOTHER PROJECT AMENITIES BUSINESS CENTERSITE X X X X X X Key Fob Access 902 XXX AX X X X 901 XXXXX X V X 904 XXXXXXXXX X S All Units Some Units - - OOptional- C H Carpet Hardwood - - VVinyl- B C Blinds Curtains - - DDrapes- Floor Covering Window Treatments Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Senior Restricted W Wood- T Tile- A L Activity Room Lounge/Gathering Room - - T Training Room- Community Space A C Attached Carport - - D Detached- O On Street- S Surface- G Parking Garage- Parking (o) Optional- B D Basketball Baseball Diamonds - - P Putting Green- Sports Courts T Tennis- V Volleyball- X Multiple- (s) Some- 11Survey Date: April 2017 12 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 The amenity package expected to be offered at the subject project will be very competitive, relative to those offered among the comparable properties. In fact, the subject project will include washer/dryer appliances within each unit, a feature which is not offered among most of the comparable properties and will likely create a competitive advantage for the property. Comparable LIHTC Summary The subject project is expected to help fill a void within the Mounds View Site PMA, as currently only one (1) general-occupancy LIHTC property containing 16 units exists within the Site PMA. This property was, however, unable to be surveyed at the time of this analysis and thus has been excluded from our analysis. The three comparable LIHTC properties surveyed outside the Site PMA have a combined occupancy rate of 99.3%, which is reflective of just two vacant units and strong demand for family-oriented LIHTC product within the region. The subject’s proposed gross rents will be the lowest among the comparable properties and thus will represent a significant value within the Mounds View market. This is especially true when considering the newness and competitive position of the subject project in terms of unit design (square feet) and number of bathrooms, as well as amenities offered. The map on the following page depicts the location of the surveyed comparable LIHTC projects in relation to the subject site location. !H !( !( !( 902 904 901 Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, EsriChina (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunity 0 1 2 30.5 Miles1:170,000 N SITE Mounds View, MNComparable LIHTC Property Locations !H Site ApartmentsType !(Mkt rate/Tax Credit !(Tax Credit 14 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Market-Rate In order to further assess the proposed project’s overall market position and the perceived value of its rents, we identified the most comparable market-rate properties within the Site PMA, based on the proposed project concept as detailed within this report, which are summarized as follows: Map I.D. Project Name Year Built Units Occupancy Rate Distance to Site Rent Special Site The Boulevard 2019 60 - - - 1 Woodlawn Terrace 1978 113 100.0% 1.3 Miles None 4 Cielo Apts. 2016 101 100.0% 4.5 Miles None 5 Spring Brook Apts. 1986 361 99.2% 2.7 Miles None 9 Landmark Estates 1985 132 100.0% 1.9 Miles None 11 River Pointe Apts. 1972 300 97.7% 3.7 Miles None The five selected market-rate projects have a combined total of 1,007 units with an overall occupancy rate of 99.0%. None of the selected properties reports an occupancy rate below 97.7%, demonstrating that each of the selected properties has been well- received within the Mounds View market and will therefore serve as accurate benchmarks with which to compare the subject project. The gross rents for the comparable market-rate projects and the proposed rents at the subject site, as well as their unit mixes and vacancies by bedroom are listed in the following table: Gross Rent (Number of Units/Vacancies) Map I.D. Project Name Studio One- Br. Two- Br. Three- Br. Four- Br. Site The Boulevard - $784 (15) $942 (30)$1,115 (15) - 1 Woodlawn Terrace - $779 (30/0) $892 (83/0) - - 4 Cielo Apts. $1,138 (5/0) $1,255-$1,495 (36/0) $1,498-$1,918 (49/0) $1,973-$2,223 (11/0) - 5 Spring Brook Apts. - $1,069-$1,199 (109/1) $1,270-$1,400 (210/2) $1,591-$1,681 (40/0) $1,835 (2/0) 9 Landmark Estates - $1,011-$1,101 (66/0) $1,291-$1,401 (66/0) - - 11 River Pointe Apts. $788 (5/0) $911-$990 (130/3) $1,041-$1,121 (130/3) $1,341-$1,481 (35/1) - As the preceding illustrates, the proposed gross rents at the subject project are lower than those reported among most of the selected market-rate properties. While this suggests that the proposed rents will represent a value as compared to market-rate product within the Site PMA, this is based solely on price point alone and does not consider factors such as the age of the property, unit design (square feet and number of baths), or amenities offered. 15 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 Therefore, in order to more accurately assess the value that the proposed rents will represent, achievable market rents have been derived utilizing HUD Rent Comparability Grids, which are illustrated in Addendum B. It was determined that the present-day achievable market rent for units similar to the proposed development are $1,020 for a one-bedroom unit, $1,225 for a two-bedroom unit and $1,460 for a three-bedroom unit, which are illustrated as follows: Bedroom Type Proposed Collected Rent (%AMHI) Achievable Market Rent Market-Rent Advantage One-Bedroom $740 (60%) $1,020 27.5% Two-Bedroom $885 (60%) $1,225 27.8% Three-Bedroom $1,045 (60%) $1,460 28.4% As the preceding illustrates, the subject’s proposed rents represent market rent advantages ranging from 27.5% to 28.4%, depending upon unit type. Typically, Tax Credit product should represent a market rent advantage of at least 10.0% to be perceived a value and ensure a sufficient flow of qualified applicants within a given market. This suggests that the subject rents will represent significant values within the market as compared to similar market-rate product. Pipeline Development Based on our interviews with local planning and building representatives, it was determined that there is one rental property currently in the development pipeline within the Mounds View Site PMA. This planned development is summarized as follows: A 194-unit property is being developed by Dominium Development at 1066 County Highway 10 in Spring Lake Park. This property is anticipated to target seniors age 50 and older and is expected to operate with an affordable component. Note, however, that this property is not listed on the state Tax Credit allocation list. This project has been approved, but has not yet begun construction. Construction is anticipated to begin sometime in summer of 2017. Additional details pertaining to this property were unavailable at the time of this analysis. Regardless, as this property is anticipated to be age-restricted, and will not operate under the LIHTC program, it is not expected to be directly competitive with the proposed general-occupancy LIHTC property. MHFA-Formatted Demographic Demand Analysis Based on the proposed gross Tax Credit rents previously illustrated in this letter and assuming the subject project will generally house up to five-person households and that management of the subject project qualify residents utilizing a 35% rent-to-income ratio, the income-appropriate range required to live at the proposed project is $26,880 to $55,620. 16 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 For the purposes of this analysis we assume an opening date of sometime in 2019 for the subject project. Based on the preceding analysis and MHFA methodology, the following is a summary of our demand calculations for the proposed subject project, based on the household projections for the Mounds View Site PMA. Capture Rate Number of Proposed Units 60 Income-Eligible Renter Households – 2019 / 2,239 Capture Rate = 2.7% Generally, capture rates up to 10.0% are considered achievable for general-occupancy properties located in urban/suburban markets such as the Mounds View Site PMA. Therefore, the subject’s 2.7% capture rate is considered low and easily achievable, particularly when considering the general lack of family-oriented LIHTC product within the Mounds View Site PMA. Conclusions Based on the findings of this preliminary analysis, it is our opinion that a development opportunity exists for a new family-oriented LIHTC property within the Mounds View Site PMA. Notably, while a total of four LIHTC properties were identified (one surveyed) within the Site PMA, three are age-restricted. The fourth property, although general-occupancy, only offers a total of 16 units. Thus, the subject project is expected to help fill a void within the Mounds View rental market. The three comparable LIHTC projects surveyed outside the Site PMA, but within the nearby region, are 99.3% occupied, demonstrating strong demand for family-oriented LIHTC product within the region. The subject’s proposed gross rents will be the lowest in the market, relative to those reported among similar unit types at the comparable LIHTC properties surveyed outside the Site PMA. These low proposed gross rents will contribute to the subject’s marketability within the market, particularly when considering the newness and thus superior anticipated quality of the subject project as compared to the existing comparable properties which were originally built between 1966 and 2004. Demographic trends within the Mounds View Site PMA have been, and are projected to continue to be, positive in terms of both total population and households. It is projected that 7,412 (30.0%) of all households within the Site PMA will be renters in 2021, which is an increase of 221, or 3.1%, renter households over 2016 levels. More specific to the subject project, it is estimated that there will be 2,239 income-qualified renter households in the market for the subject project in 2019. This results in a low overall capture rate of 2.7% for the 60 proposed units at the subject site, which is considered easily achievable within the Mounds View market. 17 Bowen National Research 155 E. Columbus Street, Suite 220 Pickerington, Ohio 43147 (614) 833-9300 It is important to reiterate, however, that the information contained within this preliminary report as it relates to existing conventional Tax Credit product in and near the Mounds View Site PMA is based on a telephone survey of area apartments. Additionally, an on-site visit was not conducted to evaluate the proposed subject site’s location. An in-person evaluation of the subject site location and Mounds View rental market could potentially reveal site attributes that could positively or negatively impact marketability of the subject development, while also potentially revealing additional comparable properties which could impact the findings of this report. Nonetheless, we believe sufficient evidence exists to conclude that a market exists for a new family- oriented (general-occupancy) LIHTC property within the Mounds View market. We hope you find this information useful. Please call us if you have questions or need additional information regarding this matter. Sincerely, Craig Rupert Bowen National Research MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA properties were identified through a variety of sources including area apartment · Collected rent by unit type and bedrooms.· Unit size by unit type and bedrooms.· guides, yellow page listings, government agencies, the Chamber of Commerce, and previous field inspection conducted by our firm. The intent of this phone survey is to evaluate the overall strength of the existing rental market, identify trends that impact future development, and identify those properties that would be considered most comparable to the subject site. None of these properties were visited in person. Because this information is collected by phone, we cannot verify the accuracy of this data. The phone survey has been organized by the type of project surveyed. Properties have been color coded to reflect the project type. Projects have been designated as A color-coded map indicating each property surveyed and the project type followed by a list of properties surveyed. ·Properties surveyed by name, address, telephone number, project type, year built project type. or renovated (if applicable), number of floors, total units, occupancy rate, quality rating, rent incentives, and Tax Credit designation. Housing Choice Vouchers and Rental Assistance are also noted here. Note that projects are organized by ·Distribution of non-subsidized and subsidized units and vacancies in properties surveyed. ·Listings for unit and project amenities, parking options, optional charges, utilities (including responsibility), and appliances. ·Calculations of rent per square foot (all utilities are adjusted to reflect similar utility responsibility). Data is summarized by unit type. ·An analysis of units, vacancies, and median rent. Where applicable, non- subsidized units are distributed separately. ·An analysis of units added to the area by project construction date and, when applicable, by year of renovation. ·Aggregate data and distributions for all non-subsidized properties are provided for appliances, unit amenities and project amenities. market-rate, Tax Credit, government-subsidized, or a combination of the three project types. The field survey is organized as follows: The following section is a phone survey of conventional rental properties. These ADDENDUM A: PHONE SURVEY OF CONVENTIONAL RENTALS A-1Survey Date: April 2017 A utility allowance worksheet.· ·A rent distribution is provided for all market-rate and non-subsidized Tax Credit units by unit type. Note that rents are adjusted to reflect common utility ·Aggregation of projects by utility responsibility (market-rate and non-subsidized Tax Credit only). responsibility. Note that other than the property listing following the map, data is organized by project types. Market-rate properties (blue designation) are first followed by variations of market-rate and Tax Credit properties. Non-government subsidized Tax Credit properties are red and government-subsidized properties are yellow. See the color codes at the bottom of each page for specific project types. Finally, it should be noted that this is not likely a complete inventory of all rental properties. An in-person visit would allow verification of data collected by telephone, as well as an opportunity to identify other potential competitive properties. A-2Survey Date: April 2017 !H !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1211 10 Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, EsriChina (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunity 0 0.35 0.7 1.050.175 Miles1:45,000 N SITE Mounds View, MNApartment Locations !H Site ApartmentsType !(Mkt rate !(Mkt rate/Tax C re dit MAP IDENTIFICATION LIST - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA MAP ID PROJECT NAME PROJ. TYPE TOTAL UNITS VACANT YEAR BUILT OCC. RATE DISTANCE TO SITE* QUALITY RATING 1.3100.0%1 Woodlawn Terrace MRR 113 01978N 2.797.3%2 Banfill Crossing MRR 110 31999N 2.3100.0%3 Twin Homes MRR 20 01977N 4.5100.0%4 Cielo Apts.MRR 101 02016N 2.799.2%5 Spring Brook Apts.MRR 361 31986N 2.7100.0%6 Silver Oaks Court Apts.MRR 96 01972N 5.498.1%7 Georgetown on the River MRR 462 91975N 1.6100.0%8 Greenfield Estates MRR 125 01969N 1.9100.0%9 Landmark Estates MRR 132 01985N 1.0100.0%10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts.MRT 83 01995N 3.797.7%11 River Pointe Apts.MRR 300 71972N 2.898.1%12 Northtown Village Apts.MRR 161 31972N PROJECT TYPE PROJECTS SURVEYED TOTAL UNITS OCCUPANCY RATEVACANT U/C MRR 11 1,981 25 98.7% 0 MRT 1830100.0% 0 * - Drive Distance (Miles) Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Senior Restricted A-4Survey Date: April 2017 DISTRIBUTION OF UNITS - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA BEDROOMS BATHS UNITS VACANT MARKET-RATE DISTRIBUTION %VACANT MEDIAN GROSS RENT 0 1 10 00.5%0.0%$788 1 1 877 1544.0%1.7%$992 2 1 756 637.9%0.8%$1,228 2 1.5 65 23.3%3.1%$1,121 2 2 197 19.9%0.5%$1,400 3 2 86 14.3%1.2%$1,591 4 2 2 00.1%0.0%$1,835 1,993 25100.0%1.3%TOTAL BEDROOMS BATHS UNITS VACANT TAX CREDIT, NON-SUBSIDIZED DISTRIBUTION %VACANT MEDIAN GROSS RENT 1 1 59 083.1%0.0%$828 2 1 12 016.9%0.0%$966 71 0100.0%0.0%TOTAL 2,064 25-1.2%GRAND TOTAL NON-SUBSIDIZED 10 0% 936 45% 1030 51% 86 4% 2 0%0 BEDROOMS 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOMS 3 BEDROOMS 4 BEDROOMS DISTRIBUTION OF UNITS BY BEDROOM A-5Survey Date: April 2017 SURVEY OF PROPERTIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA 1 Woodlawn Terrace 100.0% Floors 3 Contact Sue Waiting List None Total Units 113 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 7639 Woodlawn Dr.Phone (763) 784-2511 Year Built 1978Mounds View, MN 55112 Comments Does not accept HCV; Select units have dishwasher (Contact by phone) 2 Banfill Crossing 97.3% Floors 4 Contact Anne Waiting List None Total Units 110 Vacancies 3 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 8310 Univeristy Ave. NE Phone (763) 785-2278 Year Built 1999Fridley, MN 55432 Comments HCV (2 units); Larger 2-br units include washer/dryer; Random units have tenant installed ceiling fan (Contact by phone) Senior Restricted (55+) 3 Twin Homes 100.0% Floors 1,2 Contact Wendy Waiting List None Total Units 20 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 5312 Raymond Ave.Phone (703) 784-1666 Year Built 1977Mounds View, MN 55112 Comments Accepts HCV (0 currently); Approx 10 units have dishwasher; Rent range based on updated units; Duplexes (Contact by phone) 4 Cielo Apts. 100.0% Floors 4 Contact Todd Waiting List 8 households Total Units 101 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 6051 Univeristy Ave.Phone (612) 500-7299 Year Built 2016Fridley, MN 55432 Comments Does not accept HCV; Opened 2/2016, 100% occupied 9/2016 (Contact by phone) 5 Spring Brook Apts. 99.2% Floors 3 Contact Maddie Waiting List None Total Units 361 Vacancies 3 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 111 83rd Ave. NE Phone (763) 785-2500 Year Built 1986Fridley, MN 55432 Comments Does not accept HCV; Rent range based on floor level, unit location & view; Only one 3-br unit has fireplace (Contact by phone) Rent Special Storage unit, 12 months no charge Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Project Type A-6Survey Date: April 2017 SURVEY OF PROPERTIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA 6 Silver Oaks Court Apts. 100.0% Floors 3 Contact Cindy Waiting List None Total Units 96 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 2657 Rice Creek Rd.Phone (651) 968-8795 Year Built 1972New Brighton, MN 55112 Comments Does not accept HCV; Removing disposal as they break (Contact by phone) 7 Georgetown on the River 98.1% Floors 3 Contact Jennifer Waiting List None Total Units 462 Vacancies 9 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 5750 E. River Rd.Phone (763) 571-3055 Year Built 1975Fridley, MN 55432 Comments Does not accept HCV; Select units have patio/balcony (Contact by phone) 8 Greenfield Estates 100.0% Floors 2.5 Contact Michelle Waiting List None Total Units 125 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 7635 Greenfield Ave.Phone (763) 273-8142 Year Built 1969Mounds View, MN 55112 Comments Does not accept HCV; 2nd & 3rd floor units have balcony (Contact by phone) 9 Landmark Estates 100.0% Floors 3 Contact Steve Waiting List None Total Units 132 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 5400 Landmark Cir.Phone (888) 636-1446 Year Built 1985Mounds View, MN 55112 Comments Does not accept HCV; One 3-br maintenance not included in total (Contact by phone) 10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts. 100.0% Floors 3 Contact Name not given Waiting List 50 households Total Units 83 Vacancies 0 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 2701 Country Rd. I Phone (763) 785-4771 Year Built 1995Mounds View, MN 55112 Comments Market-rate (12 units); 60% AMHI (71 units); HCV (9 units) (Contact by phone) Senior Restricted (62+) Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Project Type A-7Survey Date: April 2017 SURVEY OF PROPERTIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA 11 River Pointe Apts. 97.7% Floors 2.5 Contact Missy Waiting List None Total Units 300 Vacancies 7 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 7855 E. River Rd.Phone (763) 571-8161 Year Built 1972Fridley, MN 55432 Comments Does not accept HCV; Rent range based on unit location; Unit mix estimated (Contact by phone) 12 Northtown Village Apts. 98.1% Floors 3 Contact Alexis Waiting List None Total Units 161 Vacancies 3 Occupied Quality Rating N Address 7779 University Ave. NE Phone (763) 273-8746 Year Built 1972Spring Lake Park, MN 55432 Comments Accepts HCV; Rent range based on dishwasher, unit location & balcony; Rents change daily; Unit mix estimated (Contact in person) Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Project Type A-8Survey Date: April 2017 STUDIO 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4+ BR 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4+ BR GARDEN UNITS TOWNHOUSE UNITSMAP ID COLLECTED RENTS - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA 1 $735 $835 2 $878 to $1013 $1187 to $1509 3 $830 to $865 $970 to $1050 4 $1050 $1155 to $1395 $1375 to $1795 $1825 to $2075 5 $929 to $1059 $1099 to $1229 $1389 to $1479 $1600 6 $885 $1015 to $1200 7 $860 to $925 $1100 to $1160 8 $795 $895 9 $925 to $1015 $1185 to $1295 10 $784 $909 to $1097 11 $709 $820 to $899 $929 to $1009 $1209 to $1349 12 $935 to $985 $1010 to $1085 Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Senior Restricted A-9Survey Date: April 2017 PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS STUDIO UNITS 4 Cielo Apts.$1.68 to $1.86613 to 676 $11381 11 River Pointe Apts.$1.58500$7881 MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS ONE-BEDROOM UNITS 1 Woodlawn Terrace $1.07725$7791 2 Banfill Crossing $1.32 to $1.34697 to 790 $922 to $10571 3 Twin Homes $1.15 to $1.19800$916 to $9511 4 Cielo Apts.$1.34 to $1.59790 to 1114 $1255 to $14951 5 Spring Brook Apts.$1.49 to $1.52718 to 789 $1069 to $11991 6 Silver Oaks Court Apts.$1.10842$9291 7 Georgetown on the River $1.28 to $1.60600 to 800 $958 to $10231 8 Greenfield Estates $1.12750$8391 9 Landmark Estates $1.14 to $1.19850 to 970 $1011 to $11011 11 River Pointe Apts.$1.17 to $1.27780$911 to $9901 12 Northtown Village Apts.$1.32 to $1.39750$992 to $10421 10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts.$1.13731$8281 MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS TWO-BEDROOM UNITS 1 Woodlawn Terrace $0.91975$8921 2 Banfill Crossing $1.30 to $1.31947 to 1148 $1244 to $14951 $1.301205$15662 3 Twin Homes $1.09 to $1.17990$1076 to $11561 4 Cielo Apts.$1.36 to $1.421104 to 1180 $1498 to $16781 $1.24 to $1.421104 to 1553 $1573 to $19182 5 Spring Brook Apts.$1.28 to $1.30980 to 1094 $1270 to $14001 to 2 6 Silver Oaks Court Apts.$1.10 to $1.11967 to 1147 $1072 to $12571 7 Georgetown on the River $1.16 to $1.54800 to 1110 $1228 to $12881 8 Greenfield Estates $0.951000$9521 9 Landmark Estates $1.151120$12911 $1.101270$14012 11 River Pointe Apts.$1.08 to $1.17962$1041 to $11211 to 1.5 12 Northtown Village Apts.$1.14 to $1.22950$1083 to $11581 10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts.$1.03 to $1.03934 to 1119 $966 to $11541 MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS THREE-BEDROOM UNITS Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Senior Restricted A-10Survey Date: April 2017 PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS THREE-BEDROOM UNITS 4 Cielo Apts.$1.43 to $1.531286 to 1553 $1973 to $22232 5 Spring Brook Apts.$1.39 to $1.461148$1591 to $16812 11 River Pointe Apts.$1.17 to $1.291150$1341 to $14812 MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNIT SIZE GROSS RENT $ / SQ. FT.BATHS FOUR+ BEDROOM UNITS 5 Spring Brook Apts.$1.411300$18352 Market-rate Market-rate/Tax Credit Market-rate/Government-subsidized Tax Credit Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Government-subsidized Market-rate/Tax Credit/Government-subsidized Senior Restricted A-11Survey Date: April 2017 AVERAGE GROSS RENT PER SQUARE FOOT - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA $1.33 $1.19 $1.35 UNIT TYPE ONE-BR TWO-BR THREE-BR GARDEN $0.00 $0.00 $0.00TOWNHOUSE MARKET-RATE $1.13 $0.97 $0.00 UNIT TYPE ONE-BR TWO-BR THREE-BR GARDEN $0.00 $0.00 $0.00TOWNHOUSE TAX CREDIT (NON-SUBSIDIZED) $1.32 $1.19 $1.35 UNIT TYPE ONE-BR TWO-BR THREE-BR GARDEN $0.00 $0.00 $0.00TOWNHOUSE COMBINED A-12Survey Date: April 2017 TAX CREDIT UNITS - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA ONE-BEDROOM UNITS MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNITS # OF BATHSSQUARE FEET % AMHI COLLECTED RENT 10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts.59 731 1 60%$784 TWO-BEDROOM UNITS MAP ID PROJECT NAME UNITS # OF BATHSSQUARE FEET % AMHI COLLECTED RENT 10 Silver Lake Pointe Apts.12 934 - 1119 1 60% $909 - $947 - Senior Restricted A-13Survey Date: April 2017 QUALITY RATING - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA MARKET-RATE PROJECTS AND UNITS RATING PROJECTS MEDIAN GROSS RENT ONE-BR TWO-BR THREE-BR QUALITY UNITS TOTAL RATE VACANCY STUDIOS FOUR-BR 12 1,993 1.3%$992 $1,228 $1,591N.A.$788 $1,835 MARKET-RATE UNITS N 100% TAX CREDIT UNITS N 100% DISTRIBUTION OF UNITS BY QUALITY RATING TAX CREDIT (NON-SUBSIDIZED) PROJECTS AND UNITS RATING PROJECTS MEDIAN GROSS RENT ONE-BR TWO-BR THREE-BR QUALITY UNITS TOTAL RATE VACANCY STUDIOS FOUR-BR $828 $9661710.0%N.A. A-14Survey Date: April 2017 YEAR RANGE UNITS % VACANT TOTAL UNITSPROJECTSVACANT DISTRIBUTION YEAR BUILT - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA * 0.0%Before 1970 1 125 1250 6.1% 1970 to 1979 6 1152 1277191.6%55.8% 1980 to 1989 2 493 177030.6%23.9% 1990 to 1999 2 193 196331.6%9.4% 0.0%2000 to 2005 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2006 to 2010 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2011 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2012 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2013 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2014 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2015 0 0 19630 0.0% 0.0%2016 1 101 20640 4.9% 0.0%2017**0 0 20640 0.0% TOTAL 2064 25 100.0 %12 1.2%2064 * Only Market-Rate and Tax Credit projects. Does not include government-subsidized projects. ** As of April 2017 A-15Survey Date: April 2017 APPLIANCES AND UNIT AMENITIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA RANGE 12 APPLIANCES APPLIANCE PROJECTS PERCENT 100.0% REFRIGERATOR 12 100.0% ICEMAKER 0 0.0% DISHWASHER 11 91.7% DISPOSAL 8 66.7% MICROWAVE 4 33.3% UNIT AMENITIES AMENITY PROJECTS PERCENT AC - CENTRAL 3 25.0% AC - WINDOW 9 75.0% FLOOR COVERING 12 100.0% WASHER/DRYER 4 33.3% WASHER/DRYER HOOK-UP 4 33.3% PATIO/DECK/BALCONY 9 75.0% CEILING FAN 8 66.7% FIREPLACE 2 16.7% BASEMENT 1 8.3% INTERCOM SYSTEM 6 50.0% SECURITY SYSTEM 0 0.0% WINDOW TREATMENTS 11 91.7% FURNISHED UNITS 0 0.0% E-CALL BUTTON 0 0.0% UNITS* 2,064 2,064 1,939 1,349 685 533 UNITS* 1,531 2,064 363 363 1,851 1,511 462 20 1,213 1,968 * - Does not include units where appliances/amenities are optional; Only includes market-rate or non-government subsidized Tax Credit. A-16Survey Date: April 2017 PROJECT AMENITIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA PROJECT AMENITIES AMENITY PROJECTS PERCENT POOL 7 58.3% ON-SITE MANAGEMENT 11 91.7% LAUNDRY 7 58.3% CLUB HOUSE 4 33.3% MEETING ROOM 2 16.7% FITNESS CENTER 6 50.0% JACUZZI/SAUNA 2 16.7% PLAYGROUND 5 41.7% COMPUTER LAB 1 8.3% SPORTS COURT 1 8.3% STORAGE 2 16.7% LAKE 1 8.3% ELEVATOR 4 33.3% SECURITY GATE 1 8.3% BUSINESS CENTER 1 8.3% CAR WASH AREA 0 0.0% PICNIC AREA 9 75.0% CONCIERGE SERVICE 0 0.0% SOCIAL SERVICE PACKAGE 2 16.7% UNITS 1,639 2,044 1,239 1,233 184 1,439 493 1,031 83 457 257 361 756 161 361 1,799 193 A-17Survey Date: April 2017 DISTRIBUTION OF UTILITIES - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA WATER LLANDLORD 9 1,242 60.2% TTENANT 3 822 39.8% 100.0% HEAT NUMBER OF PROJECTS NUMBER OF UNITS DISTRIBUTION OF UNITS UTILITY (RESPONSIBILITY) LANDLORD GGAS 7 988 47.9% TENANT EELECTRIC 1 462 22.4% GGAS 4 614 29.7% 100.0% COOKING FUEL LANDLORD GGAS 1 300 14.5% TENANT EELECTRIC 11 1,764 85.5% 100.0% HOT WATER LANDLORD GGAS 7 988 47.9% TENANT EELECTRIC 2 563 27.3% GGAS 3 513 24.9% 100.0% ELECTRIC TTENANT 12 2,064 100.0% 100.0% SEWER LLANDLORD 10 1,403 68.0% TTENANT 2 661 32.0% 100.0%TRASH PICK-UP LLANDLORD 10 1,403 68.0% TTENANT 2 661 32.0% 100.0% A-18Survey Date: April 2017 UTILITY ALLOWANCE - MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA HOT WATER UNIT TYPEBR GAS ELEC STEAM OTHER GAS ELEC GAS ELEC ELEC SEWER TRASH CABLE HEATING COOKING WATER 0 $30 $27 $44 $7 $19 $3 $5 $34 $9 $24 $20GARDEN$12 1 $34 $32 $51 $8 $22 $4 $7 $37 $13 $24 $20GARDEN$17 1 $40 $46 $64 $8 $22 $4 $7 $45 $13 $24 $20TOWNHOUSE$17 2 $38 $43 $60 $11 $28 $5 $10 $47 $16 $27 $20GARDEN$22 2 $51 $60 $75 $11 $28 $5 $10 $57 $16 $27 $20TOWNHOUSE$22 3 $43 $55 $69 $14 $35 $6 $13 $57 $20 $28 $20GARDEN$27 3 $62 $75 $86 $14 $35 $6 $13 $70 $20 $28 $20TOWNHOUSE$27 4 $47 $67 $78 $17 $41 $7 $16 $67 $25 $28 $20GARDEN$35 4 $74 $89 $97 $17 $41 $7 $16 $81 $25 $28 $20TOWNHOUSE$35 MN-Metro HRA (12/2016) A-19Survey Date: April 2017 B-1 Addendum B: HUD Rent Comparability Grids Rent Comparability Grid Unit Type ONE BEDROOM Subject Comp #1 Comp #2 Comp #3 Comp #4 Comp #5 The Boulevard Data Woodlawn Terrace Cielo Apts. Spring Brook Apts. Landmark Estates River Pointe Apts. 2901 Mounds View Boulevard on 7639 Woodlawn Dr. 6051 Univeristy Ave. 111 83rd Ave. NE 5400 Landmark Cir. 7855 E. River Rd. Mounds View, MN Subject Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN Fridley, MN Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN A. Rents Charged Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 1 $ Last Rent / Restricted?$735 $1,155 $929 $925 $860 2 Date Surveyed Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 3 Rent Concessions None None None None None 4 Occupancy for Unit Type 100% 100% 99% 100% 98% 5 Effective Rent & Rent/ sq. ft $735 1.01 $1,155 1.46 $929 1.29 $925 1.09 $860 1.10 B. Design, Location, Condition Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 6 Structure / Stories EE/3 WU/3 EE/4 WU/3 WU/3 WU/2.5 7 Yr. Built/Yr. Renovated 2019 1978 $41 2016 $3 1986 $33 1985 $34 1972 $47 8 Condition /Street Appeal E G $15 E G $15 G $15 G $15 9 Neighborhood G GGGGG 10 Same Market? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Unit Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 11 # Bedrooms 1 11111 12 # Baths 1 11111 13 Unit Interior Sq. Ft.690 725 ($10)790 ($30)718 ($8)850 ($48)780 ($27) 14 Balcony/ Patio N NY($5)Y ($5)Y ($5)N 15 AC: Central/ Wall W WC($5)WC($5)C ($5) 16 Range/ Refrigerator R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F 17 Microwave/ Dishwasher N/Y N/Y Y/Y ($5)Y/Y ($5)N/Y N/Y 18 Washer/Dryer W/D L $35 W/D L $35 W/D L $35 19 Floor Coverings C CCCCC 20 Window Coverings B BBBBB 21 Intercom/Security System N/N N/N Y/N ($3)Y/N ($3)N/N N/N 22 Garbage Disposal N Y ($5)NY($5)NY($5) 23 Ceiling Fans N Y ($5)NY($5)NN D Site Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 24 Parking ( $ Fee)P-GAR LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 25 On-Site Management Y YYYYY 26 Security Gate N NNNNN 27 Clubhouse/ Meeting Space Y N$5YYN$5Y 28 Pool/ Recreation Areas F P ($5)F P/F/J/S ($16)P/F/J ($13)P/F ($10) 29 Computer/Business Center N NNNNN 30 Picnic Area/Storage N/Y N/N $5 Y/N Y/N N/N $5 Y/N 31 Playground Y YN$3YN$3Y 32 Social Services N NNNNN E.Utilities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 33 Heat (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/G $34 N/G $34 N/G $34 Y/G 34 Cooling (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E 35 Cooking (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E Y/G ($4) 36 Hot Water (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/E $22 N/G $8 N/G $8 Y/G 37 Other Electric N NNNNN 38 Cold Water/ Sewer Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y N/N $30 Y/Y N/N $30 39 Trash /Recycling Y/N Y/N Y/N N/N $24 Y/N N/N $24 F. Adjustments Recap Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg 40 # Adjustments B to D 6 4 3 5 4 7 6 4 4 4 41 Sum Adjustments B to D $131 ($25)$36 ($48)$113 ($47)$92 ($71)$127 ($47) 42 Sum Utility Adjustments $56 $96 $42 $54 ($4)Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross 43 Net/ Gross Adjmts B to E $106 $156 $44 $140 $162 $256 $63 $205 $130 $232 G.Adjusted & Market Rents Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent 44 Adjusted Rent (5+ 43)$841 $1,199 $1,091 $988 $990 45 Adj Rent/Last rent 114% 104% 117% 107% 115% 46 Estimated Market Rent $1,020 $1.48 Estimated Market Rent/ Sq. Ft Rent Comparability Grid Unit Type TWO BEDROOM Subject Comp #1 Comp #2 Comp #3 Comp #4 Comp #5 The Boulevard Data Woodlawn Terrace Cielo Apts. Spring Brook Apts. Landmark Estates River Pointe Apts. 2901 Mounds View Boulevard on 7639 Woodlawn Dr. 6051 Univeristy Ave. 111 83rd Ave. NE 5400 Landmark Cir. 7855 E. River Rd. Mounds View, MN Subject Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN Fridley, MN Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN A. Rents Charged Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 1 $ Last Rent / Restricted?$835 $1,375 $1,099 $1,185 $929 2 Date Surveyed Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 3 Rent Concessions None None None None None 4 Occupancy for Unit Type 100% 100% 99% 100% 98% 5 Effective Rent & Rent/ sq. ft $835 0.86 $1,375 1.25 $1,099 1.12 $1,185 1.06 $929 0.97 B. Design, Location, Condition Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 6 Structure / Stories EE/3 WU/3 EE/4 WU/3 WU/3 WU/2.5 7 Yr. Built/Yr. Renovated 2019 1978 $41 2016 $3 1986 $33 1985 $34 1972 $47 8 Condition /Street Appeal E G $15 E G $15 G $15 G $15 9 Neighborhood G GGGGG 10 Same Market? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Unit Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 11 # Bedrooms 2 22222 12 # Baths 2 1 $30 1 $30 1 $30 1 $30 1 $30 13 Unit Interior Sq. Ft.929 975 ($12)1104 ($46)980 ($13)1120 ($50)962 ($9) 14 Balcony/ Patio N NY($5)Y ($5)Y ($5)N 15 AC: Central/ Wall W WC($5)WC($5)C ($5) 16 Range/ Refrigerator R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F 17 Microwave/ Dishwasher N/Y N/Y Y/Y ($5)Y/Y ($5)N/Y N/Y 18 Washer/Dryer W/D L $35 W/D L $35 W/D L $35 19 Floor Coverings C CCCCC 20 Window Coverings B BBBBB 21 Intercom/Security System N/N N/N Y/N ($3)Y/N ($3)N/N N/N 22 Garbage Disposal N Y ($5)NY($5)NY($5) 23 Ceiling Fans N Y ($5)NY($5)NN D Site Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 24 Parking ( $ Fee)P-GAR LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 25 On-Site Management Y YYYYY 26 Security Gate N NNNNN 27 Clubhouse/ Meeting Space Y N$5YYN$5Y 28 Pool/ Recreation Areas F P ($5)F P/F/J/S ($16)P/F/J ($13)P/F ($10) 29 Computer/Business Center N NNNNN 30 Picnic Area/Storage N/Y N/N $5 Y/N Y/N N/N $5 Y/N 31 Playground Y YN$3YN$3Y 32 Social Services N NNNNN E.Utilities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 33 Heat (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/G $38 N/G $38 N/G $38 Y/G 34 Cooling (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E 35 Cooking (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E Y/G ($5) 36 Hot Water (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/E $28 N/G $11 N/G $11 Y/G 37 Other Electric N NNNNN 38 Cold Water/ Sewer Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y N/N $38 Y/Y N/N $38 39 Trash /Recycling Y/N Y/N Y/N N/N $27 Y/N N/N $27 F. Adjustments Recap Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg 40 # Adjustments B to D 7 4 4 5 5 7 7 4 5 4 41 Sum Adjustments B to D $161 ($27)$66 ($64)$143 ($52)$122 ($73)$157 ($29) 42 Sum Utility Adjustments $66 $114 $49 $65 ($5)Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross 43 Net/ Gross Adjmts B to E $134 $188 $68 $196 $205 $309 $98 $244 $188 $256 G.Adjusted & Market Rents Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent 44 Adjusted Rent (5+ 43)$969 $1,443 $1,304 $1,283 $1,117 45 Adj Rent/Last rent 116% 105% 119% 108% 120% 46 Estimated Market Rent $1,225 $1.32 Estimated Market Rent/ Sq. Ft Rent Comparability Grid Unit Type THREE BEDROOM Subject Comp #1 Comp #2 Comp #3 Comp #4 Comp #5 The Boulevard Data Woodlawn Terrace Cielo Apts. Spring Brook Apts. Landmark Estates River Pointe Apts. 2901 Mounds View Boulevard on 7639 Woodlawn Dr. 6051 Univeristy Ave. 111 83rd Ave. NE 5400 Landmark Cir. 7855 E. River Rd. Mounds View, MN Subject Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN Fridley, MN Mounds View, MN Fridley, MN A. Rents Charged Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 1 $ Last Rent / Restricted?$835 $1,825 $1,434 $1,185 $1,279 2 Date Surveyed Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 Apr-17 3 Rent Concessions None None None None None 4 Occupancy for Unit Type 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 5 Effective Rent & Rent/ sq. ft $835 0.86 $1,825 1.42 $1,434 1.25 $1,185 1.06 $1,279 1.11 B. Design, Location, Condition Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 6 Structure / Stories EE/3 WU/3 EE/4 WU/3 WU/3 WU/2.5 7 Yr. Built/Yr. Renovated 2019 1978 $41 2016 $3 1986 $33 1985 $34 1972 $47 8 Condition /Street Appeal E G $15 E G $15 G $15 G $15 9 Neighborhood G GGGGG 10 Same Market? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Unit Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 11 # Bedrooms 3 2 $50 3 3 2 $50 3 12 # Baths 2 1 $30 2 2 1 $30 2 13 Unit Interior Sq. Ft.1045 975 $20 1286 ($70)1148 ($30)1120 ($22)1150 ($30) 14 Balcony/ Patio N NY($5)Y ($5)Y ($5)N 15 AC: Central/ Wall W WC($5)WC($5)C ($5) 16 Range/ Refrigerator R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F R/F 17 Microwave/ Dishwasher N/Y N/Y Y/Y ($5)Y/Y ($5)N/Y N/Y 18 Washer/Dryer W/D L $35 W/D L $35 W/D L $35 19 Floor Coverings C CCCCC 20 Window Coverings B BBBBB 21 Intercom/Security System N/N N/N Y/N ($3)Y/N ($3)N/N N/N 22 Garbage Disposal N Y ($5)NY($5)NY($5) 23 Ceiling Fans N Y ($5)NY($5)NN D Site Equipment/ Amenities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 24 Parking ( $ Fee)P-GAR LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 LOT/$0 $30 25 On-Site Management Y YYYYY 26 Security Gate N NNNNN 27 Clubhouse/ Meeting Space Y N$5YYN$5Y 28 Pool/ Recreation Areas F P ($5)F P/F/J/S ($16)P/F/J ($13)P/F ($10) 29 Computer/Business Center N NNNNN 30 Picnic Area/Storage N/Y N/N $5 Y/N Y/N N/N $5 Y/N 31 Playground Y YN$3YN$3Y 32 Social Services N NNNNN E.Utilities Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj Data $ Adj 33 Heat (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/G $43 N/G $43 N/G $43 Y/G 34 Cooling (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E 35 Cooking (in rent?/ type)N/E N/E N/E N/E N/E Y/G ($6) 36 Hot Water (in rent?/ type)Y/G Y/G N/E $35 N/G $14 N/G $14 Y/G 37 Other Electric N NNNNN 38 Cold Water/ Sewer Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y N/N $47 Y/Y N/N $47 39 Trash /Recycling Y/N Y/N Y/N N/N $28 Y/N N/N $28 F. Adjustments Recap Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg 40 # Adjustments B to D 9 3 3 5 4 7 8 4 4 4 41 Sum Adjustments B to D $231 ($15)$36 ($88)$113 ($69)$172 ($45)$127 ($50) 42 Sum Utility Adjustments $78 $132 $57 $75 ($6)Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Gross 43 Net/ Gross Adjmts B to E $216 $246 $26 $202 $176 $314 $184 $274 $146 $258 G.Adjusted & Market Rents Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent Adj. Rent 44 Adjusted Rent (5+ 43)$1,051 $1,851 $1,610 $1,369 $1,425 45 Adj Rent/Last rent 126% 101% 112% 116% 111% 46 Estimated Market Rent $1,460 $1.40 Estimated Market Rent/ Sq. Ft 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET............BOULEVARDMOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC0.0TITLE SHEETSITE LOCATIONSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE SURVEYC0.1UTILITY PLANC4.0ISSUED FOR: CITY RESUBMITTALMASTER LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALCURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURB (GUTTER TOP)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALLSOIL BORING LOCATIONSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALLEMERGENCY OVERFLOWPROPOSED MANHOLE STORMPROPOSED GATE VALVEPROPOSED SANITARY SEWERPROPOSED STORM SEWERPROPOSED WATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING LIGHTEXISTING GAS METEREXISTING MANHOLEEXISTING CATCH BASINEXISTING GATE VALVEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING GAS VALVEEXISTING ELECTRIC BOXEXISTING STOPBOXPROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARYPROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORMDYH PROPOSED SIGNEXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATIONINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROWDEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:MWF PROPERTIES7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTHMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416612-615-0060SURVEYOR:GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:SWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0C5.0C5.1L1.0DETAILSLANDSCAPE PLANSWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0SITE PLANSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3DETAILSC1.0REMOVALS PLANC5.2DETAILSCLARK ENGINEERING12755 HIGHWAY 55, SUITE 100MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55422763-545-9196GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALSWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.5L1.1LANDSCAPE NOTESEOF=1135.52SB-1TOPROPOSED LIGHTEXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING GAS MAINEXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRICEXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITPRELIMINARY PLATC0.2 REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.1SITE SURVEY............01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"N REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.2PRELIMINARY PLAT............01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"N CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGEREMOVE EXISTINGOVERHEAD WIRES,COORDINATE WITHUTILITY OWNERREMOVE EXISTING TREEAND BALL ROOT, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREEAND BALL ROOT, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.REMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES,FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS & BASEMATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE & FEDERALSTANDARDS. REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALLSERVICES & UTILITIES PER UTILITYCOMPANY AND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGPAVEMENT AND BASEMATERIAL, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPAVEMENT AND BASEMATERIAL, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGMECHANICALEQUIPMENTREMOVE EXISTINGFENCE AND FOOTING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGFENCE AND FOOTING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGFENCE ANDFOOTING, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPONDREMOVE EXISTINGPAVEMENT AND BASEMATERIAL, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER TO NEARESTJOINT BEYOND TAPER.SAW CUT EXISTING CURBJOINT AND BITUMINOUSPAVEMENT AT LIP OF CURBPRIOR TO REMOVAL, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGUNDERGROUNDUTILITY, COORDINATEWITH UTILITY OWNERREMOVE EXISTINGSANITARY BACK TOMAIN, COORDINATEWITH CITYEXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.ALL UNUSED EXISTING WATER SERVICES ANDSANITARY SERVICES WITHIN THE PROPOSEDLIMITS SHALL BE REMOVED BACK TO THE MAINPER CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW STANDARDS.REMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER TO NEARESTJOINT BEYOND TAPER.SAW CUT EXISTING CURBJOINT AND BITUMINOUSPAVEMENT AT LIP OF CURBPRIOR TO REMOVAL, TYP.REMOVAL NOTES:1.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN.2.REMOVAL OF MATERIALS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT, STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.3.REMOVAL OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.4.EXISTING PAVEMENTS SHALL BE SAWCUT IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR THE NEAREST JOINT FOR PROPOSED PAVEMENTCONNECTIONS.5.REMOVED MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF TO A LEGAL OFF-SITE LOCATION AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.6.ABANDON, REMOVAL, CONNECTION, AND PROTECTION NOTES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE. COORDINATE WITH PROPOSED PLANS.7.EXISTING ON-SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT.8.PROPERTY LINES SHALL BE CONSIDERED GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS. WORK WITHIN THEGENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL INCLUDE STAGING, DEMOLITION AND CLEAN-UP OPERATIONS AS WELL AS CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THEDRAWINGS.9.MINOR WORK OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.10.DAMAGE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LIMITS CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE REPAIRED IN A MANNER APPROVED BY THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.11.PROPOSED WORK (BUILDING AND CIVIL) SHALL NOT DISTURB EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND APPROVED BYTHE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.12.SITE SECURITY MAY BE NECESSARY AND PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO PROHIBIT VANDALISM, AND THEFT, DURING AND AFTER NORMAL WORK HOURS,THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. SECURITY MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.13.VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR DELIVERY AND INSPECTION ACCESS DURING NORMAL OPERATING HOURS. AT NO POINTTHROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT SHALL CIRCULATION OF ADJACENT STREETS BE BLOCKED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.14.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFICCONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS ASNEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL REMAIN OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BYTHE CITY.15.SHORING FOR BUILDING EXCAVATION MAY BE USED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR AND AS APPROVED BY THE OWNERSREPRESENTATIVE AND THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.16.STAGING, DEMOLITION, AND CLEAN-UP AREAS SHALL BE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNERAS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW REMOVAL NOTES:1.PAVEMENT REMOVALS WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE RECTANGULAR IN SHAPE, SAW CUT PLUMB, AND IF IT ENTERS THE DRIVING LANE,SHALL BE EXTENDED TO THE CENTERLINE AS A MINIMUM. IF IT EXTENDS PAST THE CENTERLINE, THE PATCH SHALL BE FULL WIDTH (SEE "CITY OFMOUNDS VIEW RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR EXCAVATION AND OBSTRUCTION PERMITS" FOR MORE INFORMATION).REMOVALS LEGEND:TREE PROTECTIONREMOVAL OF PAVEMENT AND ALL BASE MATERIAL,INCLUDING BIT., CONC., AND GRAVEL PVMTS.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALLFOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING ROOTS AND STUMPS4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.0REMOVALS PLAN............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALEX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.1TREE PRESERVATIONPLAN............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALTREE SURVEY: GROVELAND ROADMOUNDS VIEW BOULEVARDTWO-WAY PARKINGLOT ENTRANCE / EXITPROPOSED 10'WIDE BIT. PATH20' SIDE YARD BUILDING SETBACK50' BACK YARD BUILDING SETBACK30' SIDE YARD BUILDING SETBACK5' FRONT YARD BUILDING SETBACK20' SIDE YARD BUILDING SETBACKTWO-WAY UNDERGROUNDLOT ENTRANCE / EXITPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT18.0'30.0'18.0'18.0'30.0'18.0'24.0' 3 6 . 0 ' 2 4 . 0 '9.0'9.0'R22.0'R3.0'R3.0'R18.0' R 4 2 . 0 'R20.0 ' R3.0'R18.0 'R8.0'R3.0'R20.0 ' R3.0' R3 2 . 0 'R134.7'R18.0'R8.0'R42.0'R42.0'R3.0' R 6 9 . 0 'R76.0'R 2 0 . 0 'R20.0'R10.0'R80.0'R74.0'R42.0 ' R 4 5 . 0 'R100.0'6.7'21.3'6.7'21.3'10.0'8.0' 24.0'BIT. PVMT.,TYPBIT. PVMT.,TYPBIT. PVMT.,TYPBIT. PVMT.,TYPCONCRETESIDEWALK PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.INFILTRATIONBASIN 1PACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPSRETAININGWALL, TYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSMATCH EXISTING,TYP.MATCH EXISTINGB618 C & G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.RETAININGWALL, TYP.CONCRETESIDEWALK PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.231119151CONCRETESIDEWALK PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.MATCH EXISTINGB618 C & G, TYP.CONCRETESIDEWALK PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ESMT.EXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGEFOR CONNECTION OF NEW CURB TO EXISTINGCURB, DRILL AND GROUT TWO NO. 4 EPOXYCOATED DEFORMED REINFORCEMENT BARSINTO EXISTING CURB AND EMBED AT LEAST SIXINCHES. NEW CURB MUST BE CONSTRUCTEDWITHIN 24 HOURS OF REMOVAL OF OLD CURBUNLESS PRE-APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER.PROTECT EXPOSED BITUMINOUS STREET EDGEAND TAKE CARE NOT TO UNDERMINE ORDISTURB UNDERLYING AGGREGATE BASE.6' TALL CEDARFENCING, TYP.6' TALL CEDARFENCING, TYP.1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR ISRESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUETO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BYTHE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENTMATERIALS.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THEOWNERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.5.LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THEFIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TOBUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING,FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNERRESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.8.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEEDETAIL.9.CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OFCROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA ORLOCAL GOVERNING BODIES.10.CURB AND GUTTER TYPE SHALL BE B618 WITHIN THE ROW AND B612 ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS-TAPERBETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.11.ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.13.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.14.PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.15.ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.16.BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS.17.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPEDOCUMENTS.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:SITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROWSCITY OF MOUNDS VIEW SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN............SITE AREA TABLE:1.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE TO PUBLIC WORKS FOR ALL WORK RELATED TO OR AFFECTING MUNICIPALINFRASTRUCTURE (763-717-4050).2.USE OF MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION WILL BE ALLOWED FROM A HYDRANT DESIGNATED BY PUBLIC WORKS NEAR THECONSTRUCTION SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A HYDRANT METER FROM PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD WATER USAGE AND PAY THEASSOCIATED DEPOSITS AND FEES FOR THE USE OF THE HYDRANT, METER AND WATER CONSUMPTION.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE HAUL TRUCK ROUTES WITH PUBLIC WORKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION (763-717-4050).4.STREET CLOSURES/DETOURS SHALL BE APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS PRIOR TO BEING PLACED (763-717-4050).GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALCONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK)PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTHEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTCONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOUSEABLE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS: CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION,EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BECOMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS ANDINSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM(NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS & PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1% MIN. AND 2% MAX. CROSS SLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS. MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:17.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4' IN HEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED ANDENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL ENGINEER. DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISHPROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.9.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREASELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.10.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTORSHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS,OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TOA DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.11.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENTTRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTSWHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTEDFROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODEDBY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TOEQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.12.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THECONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OFTHE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICHSECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.13. TOLERANCES13.1.THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THEPRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.2.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOTBELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.3.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESSDIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.13.4.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.14.MAINTENANCE14.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION, AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.14.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THECONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD, ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDEDAND MULCHED.14.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTORSHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE, AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY xxxxxx ., DATED xxxxxx GROUNDWATER WAS NOT OBSERVEDIN BORINGS RANGING FROM xxxxxx FEET TO xxxxx FEET DEEP.GROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALEX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TO CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE6" COMBINED DIPWATER SERVICE ANDVALVE, STUB TO WITHIN5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/MECH'LSTUB SANITARY TO 5'FROM BUILDINGIE @ STUB=906.43IE @ BLDG=906.48COORD. W/MECH'L190 LF 8" PVC SDR26 SANITARYSERVICE @ 1.00%MAKE CONNECTION TOEXISTING SANITARYSEWEREX IE (N/S)=903.74(FIELD VERIFY)PROP IE (E)=903.84COORDINATE WITH CITYMAKE WET TAPCONNECTION TOEXISTING WATERMAIN, COORD. WITHCITY45º BEND45º BEND45º BEND59 LF 8" PVC SDR26 SANITARYSERVICE @ 1.00%SANITARY MH ARIM=915.05IE (E)=905.74IE (NW)=905.84CONSTRUCT PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.PROPOSED GATEVALVE AND VALVE BOXMH 2RIM=913.00IE (NE)=909.80IE (SW)=909.35FES 1IE=909.00INSTALL RIP RAP PERMNDOT STANDARDSCB 16RIM=914.22IE=910.85TRENCH DRAINRIM=905.38IE =903.38CONNECT TO INTERIORBUILDING MECH'L PUMP,SEE MECH'L PLANSCBMH 15RIM=914.00IE=910.67CBMH 14RIM=913.90IE=910.21CBMH 13RIM=913.08IE=909.74MH 12RIM=914.38IE=909.18SUMP=906.18PROVIDE SAFLBAFFLE AND HOOD35 LF OF 12" RCPSTORM @ 1.00%FES 3IE=910.00INSTALL RIP RAP PERMNDOT STANDARDS10 LF OF 12" RCPSTORM @ 2.00%FES 11IE=909.00INSTALL RIP RAP PERMNDOT STANDARDS36 LF OF 18"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%111 LF OF 18"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%93 LF OF 15"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%91 LF OF 15"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%35 LF OF 12"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%45º BENDCB 22RIM=913.20IE=909.31SUMP=906.31PROVIDE HOOD ONOUTLET PIPEFES 21IE=909.00INSTALL RIP RAPPER MNDOTSTANDARDS62 LF OF 12"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%FIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTION,COORD. W/MECH'LHYD.& GV PERCITY STANDARDSAREA DRAINNUMBERAREA DRAIN SCHEDULE (SEE DETAILS)RIMAD 32A916.00INVERTWYE909.47PIPE SIZE ANDMATERIAL6" PVC SCH40PIPE LENGTH(FT)4PIPE SLOPE(FT/FT)0.0800AD 32BAD 32CAD 32DAD 32EAD 33AAD 33B910.71AD 34A911.21916.50916.506" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406" PVC SCH406444774909.70910.02910.30910.53910.68910.96911.46CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATEALL FINAL AREA DRAIN ANDSPLASH BLOCK (DOWNSPOUT)LOCATIONS W/ ARCHITECTAD 34AFES 31IE=909.00INSTALL RIP RAP PERMNDOT STANDARDSMH 32RIM=915.27IE=909.22SUMP=906.22PROVIDE SAFLBAFFLE AND HOODMH 33RIM=915.73IE (N/SE)=910.37IE (E)=911.23MH 34RIM=915.00IE=911.21229 LF OF 12"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%168 LF OF 12"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%44 LF OF 12"HDPE STORM@ 0.50%AD 33BAD 33AAD 32EAD 32DAD 32CAD 32BAD 32A916.00916.00916.00916.00916.00INVERTPIPE/MH909.22909.45909.77910.05910.28910.43INVERTAD909.79910.18910.34910.62910.85911.24911.52911.780.08000.08000.08000.08000.08000.08000.0800REINSTALLEXISTING FESIE=909.20INSTALL RIP RAPPER MNDOTSTANDARDS11 LF OF 15"RCP STORM@ 0.40%CONNECT TO EXISTING 15"RCP PIPE AND EXTEND TODITCH BOTTOMIE=909.248" STORM SERVICE,STUB TO WITHIN 5'FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/MECH'LBLDG IE=911.37STUB IE=911.272 LF OF 8" SCH40PVC STORM @ 2.00%1. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS.3. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITYLOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILTIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINEINSTALLATION" AND "SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA(CEAM), AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AND THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.5. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED OR PLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE OWNER.6. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OF FLARED END SECTION.10. UTILTIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THE CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINALCONNECTION TO BUILDING LINES. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS.11. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET PERDETAILS. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CONNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. HYDRANT EXTENSIONS ARE INCIDENTAL.14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATERMAIN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN AMINIMUM OF 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTH WATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL.15. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITIES, UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.16. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS AND COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.17.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCUTRES SHALL BE CORE-DRILLED.18. COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS.19. COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES WITH ADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF.20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. ALL PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BESAWCUT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THEMINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO SIGNAGE,BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALLBE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADES WHERE REQUIRED. THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERSMUST BE COMPLIED WITH. STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL CORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES. COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVESNECESSARY AS TO NOT IMPACT INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND SUBMIT THESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OFWORK.25.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT. APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BEUSED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES.26.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED INACCORDANCE WITH MN RULES, CHAPTER 4714, SECTION 1109.0.GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:UTILITY LEGEND:CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW UTILITY NOTES:4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.0UTILITY PLAN............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALCATCH BASINGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLEFES AND RIP RAP1.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE TO PUBLIC WORKS FOR ALL WORK RELATED TO OR AFFECTING MUNICIPALINFRASTRUCTURE (763-717-4050).2.USE OF MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION WILL BE ALLOWED FROM A HYDRANT DESIGNATED BY PUBLIC WORKS NEAR THECONSTRUCTION SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A HYDRANT METER FROM PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD WATER USAGE AND PAY THEASSOCIATED DEPOSITS AND FEES FOR THE USE OF THE HYDRANT, METER AND WATER CONSUMPTION.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE HAUL TRUCK ROUTES WITH PUBLIC WORKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION (763-717-4050).4.STREET CLOSURES/DETOURS SHALL BE APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS PRIOR TO BEING PLACED (763-717-4050).5.PUBLIC WORKS TO OPERATE ALL WATER MAIN GATE VALVES. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO NOTIFY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS ATLEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF WATER SUPPLY DISRUPTION. PUBLIC WORKS WILL PROVIDE A MAP OF AFFECTED PROPERTIES FORCONTRACTOR'S USE.6.WET TAPPING OF EXISTING WATER MAIN SHALL BE DONE UNDER SUPERVISION OF PUBLIC WORKS STAFF. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATETHIS WORK AND PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS NOTICE. OUTSIDE OF NORMAL WORKING HOURS WORK (7:00 AM - 3:00 PM) MAY RESULT INADDITIONAL STAFF TIME CHARGES. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.0CIVIL DETAILS............6"8"12"13 1/2"6"1/2" RADIUSFINISHED GRADE3" RADIUS CORNERS1:3 BATTER SLOPE GUTTER3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPONSOIL CONDITIONSCLASS V AGGREGATE SUBBASE-SEEBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT DETAIL (6" MIN.)FINISHED GRADE0.5% SLOPE-CONSTRUCT WITH REVERSE SLOPEGUTTER (T.O. GUTTER) WHERE THE PAVEMENT SLOPESAWAY FROM CURB. SEE PLANN T SB-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER7"37"20"FINISHED GRADESLOPE GUTTER 3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT 10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPON SOIL CONDITIONSCONTINUOUS SLOPE CONCRETE CURBAND GUTTERPAVEMENT MATERIALSSEE DETAIL6"6"RIBBON CURBN T S4FINISHED GRADETOOLED CONTROL JOINTSEE DETAIL (TYP.)LIGHT BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TOTRAFFIC WITH 3" WIDE SMOOTHTROWELLED EDGE5" CONCRETE AS SPECIFIED6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASECOMPACTED SUBGRADENOTES:1. INSTALLATION AND REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CERTIFIED AND INACCORDANCE TO AN ON-SITE A.C.I. TECHNICIAN AS SPECIFIED.2. SEE GEO-TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GROSS WEIGHTREQUIREMENTS.3. SEE LAYOUT DRAWINGS FOR LIMITS OF WALKS.4. SEE CONCRETE JOINT DETAIL FOR REQUIREMENTS.5. 1/2" WIDE EXPANSION JOINT AND SEALANT AT ALL CURBS.6. WIRE MESH AND CHAIRS REQUIRED FOR ALL WALKS OR IN LOCATIONS FORVEHICULAR TRAFFIC.W1.6 X W1.6 WIRE MESH AND CHAIRS ASSPECIFIEDLIGHT DUTY CONCRETE WALK/PAD3"2"THIS OCCURS ONLY WHEREMULCH MEETS EDGE OF WALKLEAVE TOP OFMULCH DOWN 1"FROM TOP OF WALKN T S68"AS REQUIREDCONCRETE THRUST BLOCKWATERMAINGATE VALVEREFER TO DRAWINGSFOR SIZESVALVE BOXFINISH GRADECOVER SHALL BESTAMPED WITH "WATER"GATE VALVE BOXN T SADJUST TOP TO 1/2" BELOW FINISHEDPAVEMENT GRADE OR 1" BELOW FINISHEDTURF GRADE. SET SO AS TO PROVIDE 12" OFUPWARD ADJUSTMENT.9BENDCROSSTEE45° BENDWYENOTES:1. CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKING TO BE POURED AGAINST UNDISTURBED EARTH.2. KEEP CONCRETE CLEAR OF JOINT AND ACCESSORIES.3. IF NOT SHOWN ON PLANS, REQUIRED BEARING AT FITTING SHALL BE AS INDICATED ABOVE, ADJUSTED IFNECESSARY, TO CONFORM TO THE TEST PRESSURE(S) AND ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING STRESS(ES).4. BEARING AREAS AND SPECIAL BLOCKING DETAILS SHOWN ON PLANS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER BEARING AREASAND BLOCKING DETAILS SHOWN THIS STANDARD DETAIL.5. ABOVE BEARING AREAS BASED ON TEST PRESSURE OF 150 P.S.I. AND AN ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING STRESS OF2000 POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT. TO COMPUTE BEARING AREAS FOR DIFFERENT TEST PRESSURES AND SOILBEARING STRESSES, USE THE FOLLOWING EQUATION: BEARING AREA = (TEST PRESSURE/150) X (200/SOIL BEARINGSTRESS) X (TABLE VALUE).PLUGGED CROSSPLUGGED CROSSEACH AREA IS 1/2 OFTABULATED AREAPLUGGED TEEPLUG OR CAP1/4" PLYWOODOVER FACEOF BOLTSA1A2NOMINALFITTING SIZE(INCHES)TYE, WYE,PLUG, OR CAP90° BEND,PLUGGEDCROSSTEE PLUGGEDON RUNA1A245°BEND22.5°BEND11.25°BEND41.01.41.91.41.0--62.13.04.33.01.61.0-105.98.411.88.44.62.61.2128.512.017.012.06.63.41.71411.516.323.016.38.94.62.31615.021.330.021.311.66.03.01819.027.038.027.014.67.63.62023.533.347.033.318.19.44.72434.048.068.048.026.213.66.863.85.37.65.42.91.51.0THRUST BLOCKN T S116" PROVIDE INSULATION PER PLAN FIELD VERIFY DEPTH 6" 4" 6" (MIN.)NOTES:1. INSULATION BOARD TO BE CLOSED CELL. EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENE FOAM MEETINGASTM 578, TYPE VI, 40PSI COMPRESSING STRENGTH (ASTM D1621) 0.1%MAX. WATERABSORPTION (ASTM C272).2. BACKFILL MATERIAL AROUND INSULATION MUST BE FINE SAND FREE FROM ROOT,ORGANIC MATERIAL, OR OTHER INJURIOUS MATERIALS.3. OVERLAP ALL INSULATION BOARD JOINTS.UTILITY PIPE INSULATION DETAILN T S1'-6" (MIN)PIPE BEDDINGMATERIALBACKFILL MATERIALFINE SAND (FA7)MIN. 2' WIDE BY 4" THICKINSULATION BOARD (USE 2-2"THICK BOARDS). MASTIC ALL JOINTSEXTEND INSULATION BOARD DOWNSIDES TO 7.5' DEPTH.FINISH GRADED I A DIA + 3'UTILITY PIPE1018" RADIUS5'-6" SQUARE OVERALL3" LINE WIDTH6" LINE WIDTH12" DIAMETER6" RADIUS4"ACCESSIBLE PARKING PAVEMENT MARKINGN T SALL COLORS TO MATCH ADASTANDARD COLORS7HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTXX" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)XX" BINDER COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)XX" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T S1NOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.EXTEND POST PAST TOP OF POST10 DEGREE SLOPE1 INCH SILICONE RUBBEROR ASPHALTIC CAULKINGCOMPOUNDFILL ANNULAR SPACE TO 1 INCHFROM TOP WITH SILICA SANDCONCRETE FOOTING AS SPECIFIED6"3'-6"2'-6"60"-66"FROM PAVEMENT TOBOTTOM OF SIGN 1/2"MATERIAL VARIES-SEE PLANMETAL SIGN ACCORDINGTO MN STATE CODENOTE:1. SIGN SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED.2. VERIFY POST PAINT C0LOR WITH LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POSTN T S1'-6"6" O.D. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE PAINTED WITH 1COAT OF APPROPRIATE PRIMER AND TWO COATSSIGN ENAMEL. FILL ANNULAR SPACE WITH GROUT.COVER WITH YELLOW "IDEAL SHIELD" PLASTICCOVER.GREEN POWDER COATED STEEL SQUAREPOST AS SPECIFIED1/4" METAL PLATE WELDED TOBOTTOM OF 6” PIPEGALVANIZED STEEL FASTENER(TYP. OF 2)8LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTXX" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)XX" BINDER COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)XX" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T SNOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.2512"2'-0"1'-0"CONCRETEVALLEYGUTTERMIN. 6" AGGREGATE BASECOURSE TO BEPLACED BY PAVINGCONTRACTOR111'-0" TYP.VALLEY GUTTERN T S7"5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.1CIVIL DETAILS............18"MIN.12"112"27"112"16" O.C.STEPS ON DOWNSTREAM SIDECOVER SHALL BE STAMPED"SANITARY SEWER"BASES SHALL BE 8" STANDARD PRECAST WITH 2" LEAN GROUT, OR POURED 8" SLAB REINFORCED WITH 6" x6" 10/10 MESHPRECAST CONCRETE CONE SECTIONMETAL SEWER CASTING - REFER TOSTRUCTURE SCHEDULE FOR TYPEMIN. 2 AND MAX. 5 ADJUSTING RINGS.GROUT BETWEEN RINGS, CASTING,AND ALONG OUTSIDE.316"VARIABLE1'- 8" MAX.CLSLOPE AT 2 IN./FT. (TYP)FLOWRUBBER BOOTFLOWRUBBERBOOTRUBBER GASKET - TYPAT ALL JOINTSGROUT TO 1/2 PIPESLOPE @ 2 IN./FT.(TYP)SANITARY SEWER MANHOLEN T S1VARIES - TYP. 4'FLOWFLOW61"RIM ELEVATION"PRECAST COVER -8" THICKSTEPS - INSTALL ONDOWNSTREAM SIDE@ 16" O.C.PRECAST CONCRETESECTIONGROUT SHELF ANDCHANNELSMETAL SEWER CASTING -REFER TO STRUCTURESCHEDULE FOR TYPEMIN. 2 AND MAX. 5 ADJUSTINGRINGS. GROUT BETWEENRINGS, CASTING, AND ALONGOUTSIDE.STORM SEWER PIPE - SEEUTILITY PLAN FOR LOCATION,INVERT, AND SIZESBASES SHALL BE 8" STANDARDPRECAST WITH 2" LEAN GROUT, ORPOURED 8" SLAB REINFORCED WITH6" x 6" 10/10 MESHRUBBER GASKET -TYP AT ALL JOINTSCATCH BASINN T SDIMENSIONS FROM BACK OF CURB(BOC) TO CENTER OF PIPE:4' DIA. MH - 9" IN FROM BOC5' DIA. MH - 3" IN FROM BOC6' DIA. MH - 3" BEHIND BOC7' DIA. MH - 9" BEHIND BOC8' DIA. MH - 15" BEHIND BOC2MIN. 2 AND MAX. 5 ADJUSTING RINGS.GROUT BETWEEN RINGS, CASTING, ANDALONG OUTSIDE.METAL SEWER CASTING - REFER TOSTRUCTURE SCHEDULE FOR TYPEPRECAST CONCRETE CONE SECTIONBASES SHALL BE 8" STANDARD PRECASTWITH 2" LEAN GROUT, OR POURED 8"SLAB REINFORCED WITH 6" x 6" 10/10MESHCOVER SHALL BE STAMPED"STORM SEWER"STEPS ON DOWNSTREAM SIDEGROUT SHELF AND CHANNELS16" O.C.VARIABLE27"112"VARIABLE 18"MIN.STORM MANHOLEN T SDIMENSIONS FROM BACK OF CURB(BOC) TO CENTER OF PIPE:4' DIA. MH - 9" IN FROM BOC5' DIA. MH - 3" IN FROM BOC6' DIA. MH - 3" BEHIND BOC7' DIA. MH - 9" BEHIND BOC8' DIA. MH - 15" BEHIND BOC3PIPE BEDDING - RCP & DIPN T S4PIPE BEDDING - PVCN T S5CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE/RISERREMARKSCASTING SCHEDULENOTE:1.CASTINGS SHALL BE NEENAH FOUNDRY CASTINGS OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT.2.CASTINGS SHALL BE STAMPED WITH APPROPRIATE UTILITY NAME ("STORM SEWER", "SANITARY SEWER")CASTING SCHEDULEN T SGRATE TYPE(NEENAH)STORM CURB INLETR-306713, 16, 226STORM AREA DRAIN INLETR-25012, 14, 15STORM MANHOLER-164212, 32-34D24"3H:1L MAX.BIO-INFILTRATION BASIN (RAIN GARDEN - TYP.)N T STYPICAL SECTION VIEW1.INSTALL SILT FENCE AND/OR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TOPREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THE PRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENTLAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.4.INSTALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC, ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINALGRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.ROUGH GRADE THE SITE. IF BIORETENTION AREAS ARE BEING USED AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINSLEAVE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET OF COVER OVER THE PRACTICE TO PROTECT THE UNDERLYING SOILS FROMCLOGGING.6.PERFORM ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.7.PLANT ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE.8.CONSTRUCT BIORETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA.9.IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.10.PLANT AND/OR ROCK MULCH BIORETENTION DEVICE.11.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA ISADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWINGEXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUINGCONSTRUCTION.2.GRADING OF BIORETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USING LOW-COMPACTION EARTH-MOVINGEQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OF UNDERLYING SOILS.3.ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED BIORETENTION DEPTH (ELEVATION) SHALL BE UNDISTURBED,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCINGRIBBON CURB OR CURB CUT, SEESITE AND GRADING PLANSGRASS PRE-TREATMENT STRIP ORPRE-TREATMENT STRUCTURE, SEEUTILITY AND LANDSCAPE PLANSUNDISTURBED, UNCOMPACTED INSITU SOILNET LESS EROSION BLANKET IN BOTTOM OFBASIN. SLIT BLANKET TO ALLOW PLANTMATERIAL SURFACE IF PLUG PLANTING IS TOBE USED, SEE GRADING AND LANDSCAPEPLANSMIN.PLANTING MEDIUM DEPTH 24"WITH A WELL BLENDED MIXTURE (BY VOLUME):70% HOMOGENOUS CONSTRUCTION SAND30% ORGANIC COMPOSTSEE GRADING PLAN FOR DEPTHPLANT MATERIAL, SEE LANDSCAPE PLANSIDE SLOPE TREATMENTS, SEE GRADING OR LANDSCAPE PLANSMUST OVER EXCAVATE DOWNTO SUITABLE SOILS. FIELDVERIFY WITH SOILS ENGINEER7SANITARY MANHOLER-1642ADOWNSPOUT TO PIPE CONNECTIONN T SVARIES BUILDING DOWNSPOUTREFER TO ARCH'LCAP WITH HOLE CUT OUTFOR DOWNSPOUTCOMPACTED SOIL6" PVC SEWER RISER PIPE(LENGTH AS REQUIRED)6 PVC LONG RADIUS 14BEND SEWER ELBOW6" PVC SEWER PIPECRUSHED ANDCOMPACTED STONE8 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.2CIVIL DETAILS............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE1 - SHL1 - SHL1 - SHL1 - SHL3 - CBS3 - CBS1 - GSL1 - SHL45 - MJ4 - SWO4 - SWO2 - CBS3 - BHS3 - RB2 - GSL3 - NRM1 - ABS1 - ABS9 - SSD5 - CS5 - KFG3 - BES3 - LQFH3 - LQFH10 - SSD5 - CS3 - BES5 - KFG16 - KFG12 - PMD1 - SSC3 - PFC3 - PFC1 - PFC1 - SSC1 - SSCEDGING, TYP.SEED TYPE 1SEED TYPE 2SEED TYPE 218" DECORATIVE ROCKMAINTENANCE STRIP, TYP.18" DECORATIVEROCK MAINTENANCESTRIP, TYP.EDGING, TYP.LAWNLAWNLAWNLAWNLAWN10 - NRM1 - SSCDECORATIVE BOULDERS, TYP.DECOARTIVE BOULDERS, TYP.LAWN43 - NCB8 - CBS6 - BHS1.ALL SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED WITH 4" DEPTH OF DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH OVER WEED BARRIER.OWNER'S REP SHALL APPROVE MULCH SAMPLE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. EDGING SHALL BE METAL EDGING OR APPROVEDEQUAL.2.ALL TREES SHALL BE MULCHED WITH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OF PLANTINGBED, IF APPLICABLE. ALL MULCH SHALL BE KEPT WITHIN A MINIMUM OF 2" FROM TREE TRUNK.3.PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN STANDARDS AND SHALL BE OFHARDY STOCK, FREE FROM DISEASE, DAMAGE AND DISFIGURATION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAININGPLUMPNESS OF PLANT MATERIAL FOR DURING OF ACCEPTANCE PERIOD.4.UPON DISCOVERY OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE SCHEDULE AND THE QUANTITYSHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE PLAN SHALL GOVERN.5.CONDITION OF VEGETATION SHALL BE MONITORED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THECONTRACT. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS PART OF THE CONTRACT SHALL BE WARRANTED FOR ONE (1) FULL GROWING SEASONSFROM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE.6.ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RECEIVE 4" LAYER LOAM AND SOD AS SPECIFIED UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.7.COORDINATE LOCATION OF VEGETATION WITH UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD UTILITIES, LIGHTING FIXTURES, DOORS ANDWINDOWS. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE IN THE FIELD FINAL LOCATION OF TREES AND SHRUBS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVALBY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.8.ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL ACCEPTANCE.9.REPAIR AT NO COST TO OWNER ALL DAMAGE RESULTING FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.10.SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVED SURFACES FREE OF DEBRIS GENERATED FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.LANDSCAPE NOTES:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.0LANDSCAPE PLAN............LEGENDPROPOSED CANOPY & EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEESCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESSODDECORATIVE BOULDERS, 18"-30" DIA.PROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBSYMBOLS - SEE SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES ANDPLANTING SIZESPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEESCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZES1" DIA. DECORATIVE ROCK MULCH OVER FILTER FABRIC,SAMPLES REQUIREDSHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH OVER FILTER FABRIC,SAMPLES REQUIREDGOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCAL4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 24904Patrick J. SarverLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.07/13/17LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS:TREE REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS:SEED TYPE 2 - MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 DRY PRAIRIEGENERAL, SEE MNDOT AT RECOMMENDED RATESEED TYPE 1 - MNDOT SEED MIX 34-262 WET PRAIRIE, SEEMNDOT AT RECOMMENDED RATEPLANT SCHEDULE - ENTIRE SITESYMQUANT.COMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMESIZEROOTCOMMENTSDECIDUOUS TREESNRM13NORTHWOOD RED MAPLEAcer rubrum 'Northwood'2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSHL5SKYLINE HONEYLOCUSTGleditsia triacanthos 'Skycole'2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMRB3RIVER BIRCH TREEBetula nigra2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSWO8SWAMP WHITE OAKQuercus bicolor2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMGSL3GREENSPIRE LINDENTilia americana 'Greenspire'2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMORNAMENTAL TREESPFC7PRAIRIEFIRE FLOWERING CRABMalus 'Prairiefire'1.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMABS2AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRYAmelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance (tree form)'1.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSSC4SPRING SNOW FLOWERING CRABMalus 'Spring Snow'1.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMEVERGREEN TREESBHS9BLACK HILLS SPRUCEPicea glauca 'Densata'6' ht.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMCBS16COLORADO SPRUCEPicea pungens6' ht.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSHRUBS - CONIFEROUS & EVERGREENMJ45MEDORA JUNIPERJuniperus scopulorum 'Medora'36" HT.CONT.NCB43NORTHERN CHARM BOXWOODBuxus 'Wilson'24" HT.CONT.LQHF6LITTLE QUICK FIRE HYDRANGEAHydrangea paniculata 'SMHPLQF'24" HT.CONT.PERENNIALS & GRASSESKFG26KARL FOERSTER GRASSCalamagrostis x acutiflora "Karl Foerster"#1CONT.PMD12PARDON ME DAYLILLYHemerocallis 'Pardon Me'#1CONT.SSD19STELLA SUPREME DAYLILYHemerocallis 'Stella Supreme'#1CONT.BES6GOLDSTURM RUDBECKIARudbeckia fulgida 'Goldsturm'#1CONT.CS10CARADONNA SALVIASalvia x sylvestris 'Caradonna'#1CONT.TOTAL DECIDUOUSTREES: 32TOTAL ORNAMENTALTREES: 13TOTAL EVERGREENTREES: 25TOTAL SHRUBS: 94 1.ENTIRE SITE SHALL BE FULLY IRRIGATED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT IRRIGATION SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEWAND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.2.SEE MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IRRIGATION WATER, METER, AND POWERCONNECTIONS.3.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION/INSTALLATION. ANY DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES SHALL BE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CORRECTING DAMAGES SHALL BE BORNEENTIRELY BY THE CONTRACTOR.4.SERVICE EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE PER LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY STANDARDS AND SHALL BE PERNATIONAL AND LOCAL CODES. EXACT LOCATION OF SERVICE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUIVALENT AT THE JOB SITE.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY FOR THE PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE ANDMETERING FACILITIES.6.IRRIGATION WATER LINE CONNECTION SIZE IS 1-12" AT BUILDING. VERIFY WITH MECHANICAL PLANS.COVAGE.7.ALL MAIN LINES SHALL BE 18" BELOW FINISHED GRADE.8.ALL LATERAL LINES SHALL BE 12" BELLOW FINISHED GRADE.9.ALL EXPOSED PVC RISERS, IF ANY, SHALL BE GRAY IN COLOR.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT AT 2'-0" BELOW THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE TOP OF PAVEMENT.EXTEND SLEEVES TO 2'-0" BEYOND PAVEMENT.11.CONTRACTOR SHALL MARK THE LOCATION OF ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT WITH THE SLEEVING MATERIAL "ELLED" TO2'-0" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AND CAPPED.12.FABRICATE ALL PIPE TO MANUFACTURE'S SPECIFICATIONS WITH CLEAN AND SQUARE CUT JOINTS. USE QUALITY GRADEPRIMER AND SOLVENT CEMENT FORMULATED FOR INTENDED TYPE OF CONNECTION.13.BACKFILL ALL TRENCHES WITH SOIL FREE OF SHARP OBJECTS AND DEBRIS.14.ALL VALVE BOXES AND COVERS SHALL BE BLACK IN COLOR.15.GROUP VALVE BOXES TOGETHER FOR EASE WHEN SERVICE IS REQUIRED. LOCATE IN PLANT BED AREAS WHENEVERPOSSIBLE.16.IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LOCATION SHALL BE VERIFIED ON-SITE WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.17.CONTROL WIRES: 14 GAUGE DIRECT BURIAL, SOLID COPPER IRRIGATION WIRE. RUN UNDER MAIN LINE. USEMOISTURE-PROOF SPLICES AND SPLICE ONLY AT VALVES OR PULL BOXES. RUN SEPARATE HOT AND COMMON WIRE TOEACH VALVE AND ONE (1) SPARE WIRE AND GROUND TO FURTHEST VALVE FROM CONTROLLER. LABEL OR COLOR CODEALL WIRES.18.AVOID OVER SPRAY ON BUILDINGS, PAVEMENT, WALLS AND ROADWAYS BY INDIVIDUALLY ADJUSTING RADIUS OR ARCON SPRINKLER HEADS AND FLOW CONTROL ON AUTOMATIC VALVE.19.ADJUST PRESSURE REGULATING VALVES FOR OPTIMUM PRESSURE ON SITE.20.USE SCREENS ON ALL HEADS.21.A SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON-SITE AT ALL TIMES IN AN UPDATED CONDITION.22.ALL PIPE 3" AND OVER SHALL HAVE THRUST BLOCKING AT EACH TURN.23.ALL AUTOMATIC REMOTE CONTROL VALVES WILL HAVE 3" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4" WASHED GRAVEL UNDERNEATHVALVE AND VALVE BOX. GRAVEL SHALL EXTENT 3" BEYOND PERIMETER OF VALVE BOX.24.THERE SHALL BE 3" MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN BOTTOM OF VALVE BOX COVER AND TOP OF VALVE STRUCTURE.IRRIGATION NOTES:REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.1LANDSCAPE PLANNOTES & DETAILS............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCAL4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 24904Patrick J. SarverLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.07/13/17FACE OF BUILDING, WALL, OR STRUCTUREMIN. 3" LAYER OF ROCK MULCH AS SPECIFIED. PROVIDE SAMPLE TOLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONFINISHED GRADECOMPACTED SUBGRADEWATER PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AS SPECIFIED18" - VERIFY W/ PLANAGGREGATE MAINTANENCE STRIPN T SSTAKED LANDSCAPE EDGER AS SPECIFIED, SEE MANUFACTURER'SINSTRUCTIONS AND SPECS. FOR INSTALLATION AND PLACEMENTSLOPE - MIN. 2%, MAX. 5:1VERIFY W/ GRADING PLAN1PERENNIAL BED PLANTINGN T SPLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT STEMBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.SIZE VARIESSEE LANDSCAPE PLANMODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ON LOCATION OF PLANTMATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDS OR OVERALL PLANTPLACEMENT3DECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS SHRUB PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL SHAPE FOR SPECIES)PLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT TRUNKBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLRULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT4THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLDECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL TREE SHAPE)THREE 2"X4"X8' WOODEN STAKES, STAINED BROWNWITH TWO STRANDS OF WIRE TWISTED TOGETHER.STAKES SHALL BE PLACED AT 120° TO ONE ANOTHER.WIRE SHALL BE THREADED THROUGH BLACK RUBBERHOSE COLLARS. ALTERNATE STABILIZING METHODSMAY BE PROPOSED BY CONTRACTOR.TRUNK FLARE JUNCTION: PLANT TREE 1"-2" ABOVEEXISTING GRADEMULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OFPLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ROCK OR ORGANICMULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES AND PLANNOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEP MULCH MIN. 2" FROMPLANT TRUNKEXISTING GRADECUT AND REMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOTBALL. IF NON-BIODEGRADABLE, REMOVE COMPLETELYSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDBACKFILL AS SPECIFIEDCOMPACT BOTTOM OF PIT, TYP.RULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.INLET PROTECTION,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS............1. CONTRACTOR AND OWNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SWPPP DESIGN ANDOBTAINING ALL PERMITS PRIOR TO STARTING ANY WORK ON SITE.2. CONTRACTOR'S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG BOOK SHALL BE KEPTONSITE AND AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW BY CITY INSPECTION PERSONNEL.CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. AN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT IS ALSOREQUIRED FROM THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSEXISTING RAINGARDEN TOREMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.INLET PROTECTION,TYP.PERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.PLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)PLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)PLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYP.INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYP.INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYP.INSTALL ROW OF SILTFENCE AROUNDINFILTRATION BASIN,PROTECT AREA FROMTRAFFIC THROUGHOUTCONSTRUCTION, TYP.4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/1701" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS............GOPHER STATE ONE CALLWWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG(800) 252-1166 TOLL FREE(651) 454-0002 LOCALCITY OF MOUNDS VIEW EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. AN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT IS ALSOREQUIRED FROM THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION.1. CONTRACTOR AND OWNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SWPPP DESIGN ANDOBTAINING ALL PERMITS PRIOR TO STARTING ANY WORK ON SITE.2. CONTRACTOR'S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG BOOK SHALL BE KEPTONSITE AND AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW BY CITY INSPECTION PERSONNEL. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS............OVERFLOW AT TOP OFFILTER ASSEMBLYOVERFLOW IS 12 OF THE CURBBOX HEIGHTHIGH-FLOW FABRICFILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER, 6"ON-GRADE 10" AT LOW POINTEXISTING CURB, PLATE, BOX,AND GRATENOTES:1. REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEMAFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT.3. REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ERO-4C.CURB INLET FILTERN T S1PROFILE6" MIN CRUSHED STONE75' MINIMUMPLANFINISHEDGRADETO CONSTRUCTION AREA35' REXISTINGUNDISTURBEDROADWAYN T S30' FROM EDGE OF ROADTO FRONT OF SPEED BUMPGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC4" HIGH, 18" WIDESPEED BUMPSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ACCESS24' (MIN)NOTES:1.PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND UNDISTURBEDROADWAY.2.THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENTONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE OR ADDINGSTONE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE.3.REPAIR AND CLEANOUT MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT.4.ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY SHALL BE REMOVED ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.5.FINAL LOCATION AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6.CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIA. CLOSE GRADED, AND IN ACCORDANCE TO MNDOT SECTION 2118.EXISTING UNDISTURBED ROADWAY35' RTO CONSTRUCTIONAREA2TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S3FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.4FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24" 24" 24" MIN. 6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE............OWNER:9605 36TH AVE, LLC333 WASHINGTON AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 401MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING (PART III.A.2)PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMDESIGN ENGINEER: MATTHEW R. PAVEK P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 5/15/2011 - 5/16/2011TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12RE-CERTIFICATION: 1/13/14-1/13/14 (8 HOURS), EXP. 5/31/2017CONTACT:PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO MEET NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THEPROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES (PART III.A.4.B&C):SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS A CONSTRUCTION OF ONE MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING AND PARKING LOT. SITE AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WILL OCCUR.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE OF AND DISCHARGES TO SPRING LAKE. THESE WATERS ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS AN I MPAIRED WATER ON THEMPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.·SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIEDIN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)GENERAL PERMIT (DATED AUGUST 1, 2013 # MNR100001 PAGES 1-35) AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL.PART III STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPP (PART III.A)THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS ANDSWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALLTEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS.4. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL5. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (PART III.B)6. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE7. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL8. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE9. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES10. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES11. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S12. INSTALL STREET SECTION13. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER14. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS15. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH16. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND17. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.) (PART III.C)18. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING, REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BYTHE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION (PART III.E):THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THEPERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THE SITE. THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMALWORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN PART II.C.THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE PART IV.E. INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY, CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDINGREQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALLINSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BMPS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCT INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSIONPREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITEINSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OR AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVEBEEN DETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER PART III.F.1 OF THE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER IS EXPECTED TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION ANDMAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.PART IV. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FIELD REQUIREMENTS:1.ALL FIELD REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT AND STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP).2.THE CONTRACTOR MUST IMPLEMENT THE SWPPP AND PROVIDE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP IN AN APPROPRIATE AND FUNCTION MANNER.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESPOND TO CHANGING SITE CONDITIONS AND IMPLEMENT/SUPPLEMENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES UTILIZED TOPROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTION OF DISTURBED SOILS AND ADEQUATE PREVENTION OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT OFF-SITE. AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING STORMWATERPOLLUTION PREVENTION CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FIELD REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE FURNISHED BY THE CONTRACTOR.EROSION PREVENTION (PART IV.B):THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANING FOR AND IMPLEMENTING APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, ANDOTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES THAT MINIMIZE EROSION, SO THAT THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS OF PART IV.E. ARE COMPLIED WITH. THE LOCATION OFAREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE DELINEATED (E.G. WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE ETC.) ON THE DEVELOPMENT SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS.ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT NO LATER THAN THE END OF THE NEXT WORK DAY WHEN EARTH-DISTURBINGACTIVITIES WILL CEASE FOR AT LEAST 14 DAYS. TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES,DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) AND THE CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES ARE EXEMPT FROM THISREQUIREMENT BUT MUST COMPLY WITH PART IV.C.5.SOILS WITHIN 200 FEET OF A PUBLIC WATER (AS DESIGNATED BY THE MINNESOTA DNR) MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMES.THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE THAT DRAINS WATER FROM ANY PORTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, OR DIVERTSWATER AROUND THE SITE, MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE, OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE INTO ANY SURFACE WATER. STABILIZATIONOF THE LAST 200 LINEAL FEET MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER.STABILIZATION OF THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES MUST BE COMPLETE WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACEWATER AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES THAT ARE BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILTDIKES ETC.) DO NOT NEED TO BE STABILIZED. THESE AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER NO LONGER BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM.PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER.SEED NOTES (PART III.A.4.A):ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATS COVER CROP) FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEEDMIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT A SEEDING RATE OF 100 LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEED GERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90%COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS.SEDIMENT CONTROL (PART IV.C):SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST MINIMIZE SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS AND STORM SEWER INLETS.a.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS THAT ARE DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK CHECKDAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS.b.IF THE DOWN GRADIENT TREATMENT SYSTEM IS OVERLOADED, ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS MUST BE INSTALLED TOELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING, AND THE SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN PART III.A.4, A. THROUGH C.c.IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES, THERE SHALL BE NO UNBROKEN SLOPE LENGTH OF GREATER THAN 75 FEET FOR SLOPES WITH AGRADE OF 3:1 OR STEEPER.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE ESTABLISHED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN. THESE PRACTICESSHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART IV.G.THE TIMING OF THE INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MAY BE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGEOF VEHICLES. ANY SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY MUST BE COMPLETED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THEACTIVITY IS COMPLETED. HOWEVER, SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED BY APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL ALL SOURCES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET HAVE BEENSTABILIZED. INLET PROTECTION MAY BE REMOVED FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (STREET FLOODING/FREEZING) HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AND THEPERMITTEE(S) HAVE RECEIVED WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY (E.G. CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MNDOT ENGINEER) VERIFYING THE NEED FORREMOVAL. THE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP OR AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST. WHEN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE CAN NOT BEOBTAINED IN A TIMELY MANNER, THE SPECIFIC INLET PROTECTION CAN BE REMOVED TO ALLEVIATE THE IMMEDIATE SAFETY CONCERN. HOWEVER, EFFORTS TO OBTAIN WRITTENCORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP AND AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST. PERMISSION TO REMOVE INLET PROTECTION BASED ON A SPECIFICSAFETY CONCERN MUST STILL BE OBTAINED FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF REMOVAL.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS, ANDCANNOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, OR CONDUITS AND DITCHES UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS INPLACE FOR THE STORMWATER.VEHICLE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE (OR ONTO STREETS WITHIN THE SITE) MUST BE MINIMIZED BY BMPS SUCH AS STONE PADS, CONCRETE OR STEELWASH RACKS, OR EQUIVALENT SYSTEMS. STREET SWEEPING MUST BE USED IF SUCH BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM BEING TRACKED ONTO THE STREET (SEEPART IV.E.4.D.).THE PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND, UNLESS INFEASIBLE, PRESERVE TOPSOIL. MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF THESPECIFIC AREA OF THE SITE DICTATES THAT IT BE COMPACTED. METHODS FOR MINIMIZING COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT, AND STAYING OFF OF AREAS TO BELEFT UN-COMPACTED. METHODS TO PRESERVE TOPSOIL INCLUDE STRIPPING AND STOCKPILING TOPSOIL PRIOR TO GRADING OR EXCAVATION OPERATIONS.THE PERMITTEE MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS REQUIRED IN PART III.B. OF THIS PERMIT.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (PART IV.D):DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING (E.G., PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT MAY HAVE TURBID OR SEDIMENTLADEN DISCHARGE WATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE WHENEVER POSSIBLE. IF THE WATER CANNOT BEDISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING THE SURFACE WATER, IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMP'S SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOTADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER, DOWNSTREAM LANDOWNERS OR WETLANDS. THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE THAT DISCHARGE POINTS ARE ADEQUATELY PROTECTEDFROM EROSION AND SCOUR. THE DISCHARGE MUST BE DISPERSED OVER NATURAL ROCK RIPRAP, SAND BAGS, PLASTIC SHEATHING OR OTHER ACCEPTED ENERGY DISSIPATIONMEASURES. ADEQUATE SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES ARE REQUIRED FOR DISCHARGE WATER THAT CONTAINS SUSPENDED SOLIDS.FILTER BACKWASH WATERS MUST BE HAULED AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURNED TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, OR INCORPORATE INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THATDOES NOT CAUSE EROSION. DISCHARGE OF THE BACKWASH WATER TO SANITARY SEWER IS ALLOWED WITH PERMISSION OF THE SANITARY SEWER AUTHORITY.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (PART IV.E):THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE AT ALL TIMES FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PROPER OPERATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AT AMINIMUM, INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REPAIR ALL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES AND SOIL STABILIZATION MEASURES ONCE EVERY SEVEN(7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A RAINFALL OF 0.5 INCHES OR GREATER AND WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER THAT. CONTINUE INSPECTION ACTIVITIESUNTIL LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. THEREAFTER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM THESE RESPONSIBILITIES AT LEAST WEEKLY UNTIL VEGETATIVE COVER ISESTABLISHED. INSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S AND INFILTRATION AREAS.BASED ON INSPECTION RESULTS THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY THE SWPPP IN ORDER TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM LEAVING THE SITE VIA STORM WATER RUNOFF. THISMODIFICATION MUST BE MADE WITHIN 7 CALENDAR DAYS OF THE INSPECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY THE TERMS OF THE PERMIT, LEGAL, REGULATORY, OR PHYSICALACCESS CONSTRAINTS.INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE RECORDED WITHIN 24 HOURS IN WRITING AND KEPT ON FILE BY THE CONTRACTOR AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SWPPP ON SITE AND THEN FOR ATLEAST 3 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT.ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THEDEVICE. THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY, OR THEREAFTER AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS.REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, AND RESTABILIZE THE AREASWHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED TOPSOIL. THIS REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN 7 DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL,REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS.SEE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) FOR SITE SPECIFIC INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (PART IV.F):THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT THE FOLLOWING POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES ON THE SITE;SOLID WASTE: COLLECTED SEDIMENT, ASPHALT AND CONCRETE MILLINGS, FLOATING DEBRIS, PAPER, PLASTIC, FABRIC, CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS AND OTHER WASTESMUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT AND ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED, INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OROTHER DISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST BE IN COMPLIANCEWITH MPCA REGULATIONS.EXTERNAL WASHING OF TRUCKS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. RUNOFF MUST BE CONTAINED AND WASTEWATER PROPERLYDISPOSED OF. NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.CONCRETE WASHOUT: ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS MUST BE CONTAINED IN A LEAK PROOF CONTAINMENT FACILITY ORIMPERMEABLE LINER. A COMPACTED CLAY LINER THAT DOES NOT ALLOW WASHOUT LIQUIDS TO ENTER THE GROUND IS CONSIDERED AN IMPERMEABLE LINER. THE LIQUID AND SOLIDWASTES MUST NOT CONTACT THE GROUND, AND THERE MUST NOT BE RUNOFF FROM THE CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSEDOF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS. A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TO INFORM CONCRETE EQUIPMENT OPERATORS TOUTILIZE THE PROPER FACILITIES. CONCRETE WASHOUT MAY ALSO OCCUR OFF SITE ACCORDING TO THE APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS.FUELING OPERATION PLAN: ALL FUELING SHALL TAKE PLACE AT THE DESIGNATED FUELING LOCATION AND ACCORDING TO BEST PRACTICES FOR SITE FUELING OPERATIONS AS TOMINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR SPILLS.SPILL PREVENTION PLAN: ALL SPILLS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY CLEANED UP AFTER DISCOVERY. THE SITE SUPERINTENDENT, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DAY-TO-DAY ONSITECONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS WILL BE THE SPILL PREVENTION COORDINATOR AND WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING CLEAN UP PROCEDURES, POSTING CLEAN UPRECOMMENDATIONS, AND ENSURING PROPER CLEAN UP TRAINING OF APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL.SANITARY AND SEPTIC WASTE: SANITARY/SEPTIC FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED IN A NEAT AND SANITARY CONDITION, FOR THE USE OF THE CONTRACTOR'SEMPLOYEES. A LICENSED SANITARY WASTE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR AS REQUIRED BY STATE REGULATIONS WILL COLLECT SANITARY WASTE FROM PORTABLE UNITS.FINAL STABILIZATION (PART IV.G):THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE ACCORDING THE DEFINITIONS IN THE NPDES GENERAL PERMIT PART IV SECTION G. THE CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMITA NOTICE OF TERMINATION (N.O.T.) WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL STABILIZATION IS COMPLETE OR WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER SELLING THE SITE OR PORTION OF THE SITE (THAT HAS NOTUNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION ) TO ANOTHER PARTY. A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF TERMINATION / PERMIT MODIFICATION FORM MUST GO TO THE NEW OWNER. THE ORIGINALCURRENT OWNER MUST PROVIDE A SWPPP TO THE NEW OWNER THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES THE REMAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPPNARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) AND SWPPP PLAN SHEETS FOR FINAL STABILIZATION MEASURESGENERAL SWPPP REQUIREMENTS AND NOTES: 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.4SWPPP -ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT A: SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENT 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.comMatt Pavek Pat Sarver763-213-3944 952-250-2003COPYRIGHT 2013 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION6/13/17CITY SUBMITTAL07/13/17CITY RESUBMITTAL......................BOULEVARD 2865-2901 MOUNDS VIEW BLVD / 7980 GROVELAND RD 7645 LYNDALE AVE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 MWF PROPERTIES PROJECT 44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.07/13/17REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.5SWPPP -ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT B: SWPPP INSPECTION FORMATTACHMENT C: MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM Item No: ___6A Meeting Date: August 2, 2017 Type of Business: Other Planning Activity City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Planner Item Title/Subject: Discussion of amending Zoning Code to decrease the front yard setback for covered porches Discussion Within the R-1 Single-Family Residential zoning district, the minimum front yard setback is 30’ for a house, including covered porches. An exception is if all of the homes on the same side of the block have a greater setback (e.g. 50’+), then the minimum setback shall be equal to the home with the least setback (e.g. 50’). The minimum front yard setback for a patio or deck is 2’. Recently, a resident has asked to build a covered porch onto the front of their house. The house is setback 30’, as are adjacent homes. The requested porch is not allowed. The resident has an option of applying for a Variance if there is a practical difficulty unique to this property. Another option is to consider amending the Zoning Code to decrease the setback for a covered (open) porch. In recent years, the City has granted two variances to allow a decreased setback for a front porch. One was less than 30’ and one greater than 30’ from the front property line. If there are frequently similar variance requests, this is an indication that an ordinance amendment should be considered. This was the case with amending the Zoning Code to allow a 6’ fence within the side/front yard of corner lots. It is Staff’s opinion that front porches are an amenity not only to the residents, but to the neighborhood because they invite interaction between porch sitters and neighbors walking by. Additionally, front porches serve as a shelter, and as a visual element of the home’s façade. However, consideration must be given as to the maximum size of a front porch, and the intention of the minimum front yard setback as a buffer between public space (sidewalk/street) and private space (porch/house). If an ordinance amendment is to be considered reducing the front yard setback, the question is by how much? Item 06A August 2, 2017 Recommendation The Planning Commission is requested to discuss, and provide direction to Staff if to pursue an ordinance amendment. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Jon Sevald, AICP Planner - DRAFT - PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 19, 2017 Mounds View City Hall 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for July 19 , 2017. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners French, Klander, Klebsch, Love, Rundle, and Stevenson. Absent and Excused: Commissioner Schiltgen (excused) Also Present: Planner Jon Sevald and Council Member Gary Meehlhause. ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page MU2017-001 MWF Properties-Preliminary Plat and Development Review 1 Approval of Minutes 8 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Special Order of Business None. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. MU2017-001: MWF Properties LLC: Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ • Resolution 1075-17, Recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat of “Boulevard”, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road • Resolution 1076-17, Recommending approval of a Development Review of “Boulevard”, a 60-unit apartment building, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road Planner Sevald stated MWF Properties, requests approval of (1) a Preliminary Plat of a Major Subdivision combing four lots into one lot, and (2) a Development Review of a 60-unit apartment, to be located at the northwest corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road. Planner Sevald explained a Major Subdivision is the division of land into more than one lot, or includes two acres of land or larger. In this case, four lots will be combined into one lot, 3.5 acres in size. The proposed Preliminary Plat was reviewed in detail with the Commission. Planner Sevald indicated MWF Properties held a neighborhood meeting on February 16, 2017 at Lakes Run Apartments in New Brighton, an MWF project. Eleven residents attended. Additional discussions were held at City Council Work Sessions on January 3rd, March 6th, and April 3rd, 2017, in addition to discussions by the Mounds View EDA on May 8th and May 22nd, 2017, concerning Tax Increment Financing. Planner Sevald stated during the City Council’s May 8th Public Hearing(s), several residents expressed concern about (1) additional traffic onto Groveland Road to be generated by the project, and (2) if additional apartments and affordable housing in Mounds View is in the City’s best interest. The project proposes a driveway access onto Groveland Road. It was noted driveway access onto Mounds View Boulevard (CSAH 10) has been denied by Ramsey County. Planner Sevald reported MWF Properties commissioned a Traffic Impact Study. In summary, the apartments are forecasted to add 31 trips during the morning peak hour and 37 trips during the afternoon peak hour. The study assumes that traffic generated by the apartments will go to Mounds View Boulevard (80%), north on Groveland Road (15% or 5-6 vehicles per AM/PM peak period), and south on Groveland Road (south of MV Blvd) (5%). The study states that the project will have minimal impact to the Mounds View Boulevard & Groveland Road intersection. The study indicates that a right turn lane from south-bound Groveland Rd onto west-bound Mounds View Boulevard would reduce delays, but have minimal impact. A right- turn lane is not proposed as part of the project. Commissioner Klebsch asked if any type of buffer was proposed between the playground structure and the parking lot. Planner Sevald stated no buffer was proposed. He described the trees that were proposed along the retention pond and along Mounds View Boulevard. Commissioner Love questioned how deep the retention basin was. Planner Sevald stated he was uncertain. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Klebsch recommended that the playground be enclosed for safety purposes or be moved to another location. Chris Stokka, MWF Properties, thanked the Commission for the input and stated he would support the playground being fenced. Chair Stevenson asked what type of fence would be placed around the playground. Mr. Stokka stated that the fence would be see through and would be four feet in height. Commissioner Love commented on the BioLife retention pond and suggested this site also have an open water retention pond. Mr. Stokka stated he was not a stormwater pond expert and anticipated this would require additional space. He explained he could investigate this matter further. Chair Stevenson indicated his biggest concern was the safety of this project and the movement of traffic from Groveland Road onto Mounds View Boulevard. He commented further on the number of accidents that have occurred at this intersection. Commissioner Klander requested further information from the applicant on the Traffic Study. Mr. Stokka reviewed the Traffic Study and vehicle counts in detail with the Commission. He apologized for not having his traffic engineer in attendance. Commissioner Klander stated he lived in this neighborhood and used the Groveland Road/Mounds View Boulevard intersection on a daily basis. He believed the challenge at this intersection was people not following basic traffic regulations and the fact that cars stacked up in the median. Commissioner Love inquired if there was discussion of putting a light at this intersection. Mr. Stokka stated this was not considered. Commissioner Klebsch commented on the poor visibility for left hand turns at Groveland Road and Mound View Boulevard. She questioned if the median on Mounds View Boulevard could be removed so that left hand turns at Groveland Road were no longer allowed. Planner Sevald stated if this were to happen, a large number of residents would be upset. Commissioner Klebsch asked if the large trees on the site plan near the intersection of Groveland Road and Mounds View Boulevard should be removed for improved visibility. Planner Sevald anticipated this could be done. Commissioner Klander questioned if the County offered any comments as to why they denied access to Mounds View Boulevard. Mr. Stokka stated their initial feedback was brought to the City and no formal written opinion was provided. It was his understanding the County did not support a right-in/right-out onto Mounds View Boulevard and therefore recommended the development utilize Groveland Road. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Councilmember Klander inquired if the semi-trucks visiting Steve’s appliance have been considered by the developer. Planner Sevald stated this was an enforcement issue on the City’s part and explained parking was not allowed on Groveland Road. Commissioner Love asked if this was the proper location for concentrated affordable housing. Planner Sevald commented on the number of affordable units available in Mounds View and throughout the metro area. He explained there is a concentration of affordable housing units along the US Highway 10 corridor, outside of Mounds View. He reviewed a concentration of poverty map provided by Met Council with the Commission and noted Mounds View was not at risk. Mr. Stokka stated he understood that too much affordable housing in one area can become a concern. He explained the State had this same understanding and provided funding for projects based on proper economic integration. He reported the projects he has completed in the past that were similar in size had no negative impacts on the community. He reiterated that this development was at 60% AMI threshold. He provided further comment on the housing market and strong need for affordable housing in Mounds View. Commissioner Klebsch questioned why MWF was not pursuing a mixed income housing project. Mr. Stokka stated MWF specializes in affordable housing. He explained it was his experience that it was difficult for him to find renters that wanted to pay a premium for rent on some units while others were receiving the same unit at a subsidized price. Commissioner Klebsch commented she was a big proponent of affordable housing. She stated she worked in economic development and had only seen mixed income developments. She reported she had not seen an issue filling the market rate or affordable units. She anticipated that this development could receive more than market rate for some of the units. She explained she did have a concern with locating the development on this corner due to traffic/safety concerns. Commissioner Love asked if the proposed trail could meander. Planner Sevald stated he would have to speak with the County to see if they would allow the trail to go closer to the roadway and ditch. Chair Stevenson understood the developer would be installing a 10-foot bituminous trail. Mr. Stokka reported this was the case and noted he would be installing the trail as a part of the development. Planner Sevald commented the trail would end at the west property line. Chair Stevenson recommended the trail be extended to Spring Lake Park Road and that the expense be paid for with the park dedication fees. Planner Sevald encouraged the Commission to make this a recommendation to the City Council and noted this portion of trail would cost more than the proposed Park Dedication fees of $39,000. The Commission was in agreement to recommend the City Council use the Park Dedication fees to complete the trail to Spring Lake Park Road. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Klander requested a five-minute recess. Chair Stevenson recessed the Planning Commission meeting at 8:06 p.m. Chair Stevenson reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 8:10 p.m. Commissioner Klander asked if Park Dedication fees would be recalculated if the project was not completed until 2018. Planner Sevald reported the Park Dedication fees were based on 10% of the current land market value. He indicated if the Final Plat was not brought before the Council until 2018, the numbers would be updated, otherwise 2017 numbers would be used. Chair Stevenson did not anticipate the City Attorney or the City Council would have a problem with changing this language to 10% of the current land market value. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Klander. To approve Resolution 1075-17, a Resolution Recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat of “Boulevard”, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road, recommending the playground be fenced; Planning Case No. MU2017-001, as amended. Planner Sevald read the six conditions within Resolution 1075-17 aloud and in full for the record. Commissioner Klebsch noted under Condition #2 that the playground was to be fully fenced. Planner Sevald recommended this item be addressed under the Development Review. Commissioner Klander stated he remained unsatisfied based on the traffic concerns. He explained he wanted to hear from Ramsey County on this matter in order to problem solve this issue. He supported tabling this motion and the next motion until further information was available from the County. Chair Stevenson believed the Preliminary Plat and the Development Review were two separate items. Commissioner Love asked if either the Preliminary Plat or the Development Review required a Public Hearing. Planner Sevald reported the Preliminary Plat would require a Public Hearing by the City Council and this was scheduled to be held on Monday, July 24th. Commissioner Klebsch supported the Commission moving forward with the plat and asked if both Resolution’s had to move forward at the same time. Planner Sevald believed this would be the easiest course of action for the request. He commented further on the 60-day timeline for this Planning Case and reported a 60 day extension would be required if the matter were tabled. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klander/Commissioner French. To table action on the Preliminary Plat to the August 2, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Ayes – 2 (French, Klander) Nays – 3 (Love, Rundle & Stevenson) Abstain – 1 (Klebsch) Motion failed. Chair Stevenson called the question on the original motion. Ayes – 4 Nays – 2 (French, Klander) Motion carried. Planner Sevald reported a Development Review is required for construction activity in which a principal building is increased in size by more than 10%, or more than 10,000 square feet (excludes single-family and two-family dwellings). In this case, the proposed 60-unit apartment building will be 25,000 square feet in size. The building rendering and landscape plan was reviewed in detail with the Commission. Planner Sevald explained the proposed apartments will include 60-units of affordable workforce housing. Residents will have an income restriction of 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI), based on household size. During a previous Planning Commission meeting, there were questions about how many rental units there are in the City, and how many are affordable. Staff noted there are 5,280 housing units in Mounds View (2016). According to the City’s rental licensing records, there are 1,511 multi-family rental units and 240 single-family rental units (2017) (33% of total housing stock is rental). It was noted balconies were being recommended in order to enhance the pedestrian-like feel of the development. Staff provided further comment on the request, recommended the Planning Commission approve the Development Review. Commissioner Klander asked if the applicant supported City staff’s recommendations. Mr. Stokka stated it was his goal to keep the proposed building as far away from the adjacent residents as possible, which he has been able to do. He explained that if balconies were required, this would have to change. He requested the balconies not be required, but rather that bay windows be added, so as to eliminate the eyesore of items being stored on the balconies. He stated he supported the proposed play area. Commissioner Klander agreed that balconies could become an eyesore and for this reason, he could support the removal of the balconies so long as bay windows were added. Commissioner Love explained she was a fan of trees and stated she preferred the play area to be park-like that was planted with trees. She asked if the applicant supported the median at the entrance. Mr. Stokka stated he supported this recommendation. Commissioner Klebsch commented on the lighting plan and noted the applicant was proposing more lighting than required by the City. Planner Sevald reported adjustments could be made with different light fixtures, but noted more light would be required at the entrance points for safety purposes. Commissioner Klebsch stated she did not want the lighting from this site to impact the adjacent neighborhood or passing traffic. Planner Sevald recommended the light fixtures be changed in Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ order to stay within the City’s requirements. He noted he did support brighter lighting along the trail and at the entrance to the property. Commissioner Love asked if the trail lighting would match the existing lights along the trail. Planner Sevald stated this could be written into the Development Agreement. Commissioner Klebsch inquired if the developer was requesting TIF for this project. Planner Sevald reported the developer would be requesting TIF. Mr. Stokka stated he was requesting a 15 year pay as you go TIF note for $550,000. Commissioner Klebsch stated she supported the Preliminary Plat and understood that at some point this corner would develop and the properties would have to be combined. However, she had questions regarding traffic at this corner and she did not want to be responsible for increased accidents at this corner. She supported the City speaking further with Ramsey County regarding a potential right-in right-out. She asked if the Planning Commission could hold a special meeting in order to address this concern with the County. Planner Sevald reported the Planning Commission could hold a special meeting. Council Member Bill Bergeron, 7729 Woodlawn Drive, indicated the City Council would be holding a public hearing only for the Preliminary Plat on Monday, July 24th and noted the Planning Commission already recommended approval for this item. It was noted the City did not require a Public Hearing for the Development Review. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klebsch/Commissioner Klander. To Table Action on the Development Review of “Boulevard”, a 60-unit apartment building, generally located at the NW corner of Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road to the August 2, 2017 Planning Commission meeting to allow staff to gather more information from Ramsey County regarding the Traffic Study and a potential right-in right-out on Mounds View Boulevard. Ayes – 5 Nays – 1 (Rundle opposed) Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity Planner Sevald discussed upcoming planning cases. He anticipated the Commission would be addressing a City Code amendment that would allow for small cell towers in Mounds View. B. Staff Updates Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Planner Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff. C. Council Updates Council Member Meehlhause provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City Council and commented on the developers that had made presentations for the Crossroad Pointe redevelopment. He noted the Council approved the hire of a Housing and Code Enforcement Inspector at their last meeting. He explained Don Peterson has been appointed as the City’s Interim Public Works Director. He noted the City Council would be holding a Public Hearing on July 24th to discuss the language for a ballot question that would add one additional Police Officer to the Mounds View Police Department. He indicated the Charter Commission met with the Council and would be reviewing the City’s special election language. Further discussion ensued regarding the City’s proposed 2018 budget. Lastly, he reported City Administrator Jim Ericson would be resigning his position with the City after 21 years of service. D. Planning Commissioner Reports None. 8. Approval of Minutes July 5 , 2017. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klebsch/Commissioner Love. To approve the Minutes of the July 5, 2017 regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. Wednesday, August 2, 2017 B. Wednesday, August 16, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________________ 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 9:28 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ Respectfully submitted, Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Jon Sevald Planner Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.