Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017.04.17 CC Packet
AGENDA HUGO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 17, 2017 - 7:00 PM HUGO CITY HALL A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. April 3, 2017 City Council Meeting 2. April 8, 2017 Good Neighbors Food Shelf Pasta Dinner E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Introduction of New Washington County Sergeant and Investigator 2. Recognition of Retirement of Sheriff Hutton 3. G. CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion and a roll call vote. If a member of the City Council or the public wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately. 1. 2. 3 4 5 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Approval of Claims Approve Temporary Liquor License for the Hugo Lions Club for Good Neighbor Days Event June 8-11, 2017 Approve Resignation of Hugo Firefighter Matt Richardson Approve Renewal of 2 a.m. Liquor License Sal's Angus Grill Approve Hiring of Marty Schwartz, Scott Marschke, James Magill, Hunter Natterstad, Kraig Pettee as Public Works Seasonal Summer Employees Approve Tobacco License for Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine and Spirits of Hugo Approve Special Event Permit for MGM Grand Opening Event H. AWARD OF BID 1. Approve Award of Bid for the North Sunset Lake Area Street Project I. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application for On -Sale Wine and Beer Liquor License R & G Services, LTD dba Red's Savoy Pizza 2. Application for Off Sale Liquor License for Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine and Spirits of Hugo J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. 2. K. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approve issuance of Negative Declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement for Adelaide Landing 2. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for Adelaide Landing 3. Approve Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Adelaide Landing L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS 1. M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Update on the Yellow Ribbon Network 2. N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. Severe Weather Awareness Week April 17-21 and Tornado Drill on April 20, 2017 2. Comprehensive Plan Open House Workshop on Wednesday, April 19, 2017 3. Spring Cleanup Day on Saturday, April 22, 2017 4. Habitat for Humanity Home Dedication Saturday, April 22, 2017 5. Community Blood Drive Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6. Kidz `n Biz Saturday, April 29, 2017 7. NYFS Leadership Lunch on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 8. O. ADJOURNMENT BACKGROUND MEMO FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 17, 2017 D.1 Minutes for the April 3, 2017 City Council Meeting D.2 Minutes for the April 8, 2017 Good Neighbors Food Shelf Pasta Dinner Staff recommends Council approve the minutes as presented. F.1 Introduction of new Washington County Sergeant and Investigator At its April 3, 2017 meeting, the Council recognized Sergeant Wayne Johnson's retirement after six years as the sergeant in Hugo. Taking his place is Sergeant Joseph Stoehr who has been with the Washington County Sheriff's Office for the past 12 years, working his first six years as a deputy in Hugo. Also, included in the 2017 budget, Council approved the position of a Washington County investigator in Hugo. Selected to fill this position is Deputy Joe Zerwas. Joe and Joe will be in attendance to introduce themselves to the Council. F.2 Recognition of Retirement of Sheriff Hutton Sheriff William Hutton was sworn in as the new Sheriff of the Washington County Sheriff's Office in January of 2007. Since then, the City of Hugo has had a close working relationship with his department. Sheriff Hutton is retiring effective April 30, 2017. Council will recognize his over ten years of service to the City of Hugo. G.1 Approval of Claims Staff recommends Council approve the Claims Roster as presented. G.2 Approve Temporary Liquor License for the Hugo Lions Club for Good Neighbor Days Event June 8-11, 2017 The Hugo Lions Club has applied for a Temporary On -Sale Liquor License to serve beer and Bloody Marys at the Hugo Good Neighbors Day event on June 8-11, 2017. Staff has received the application fee and a Certificate of Liability Insurance for Liquor naming the City as additionally insured. Staff recommends Council approve the Temporary On -Sale Liquor License for the Lions Club for the Hugo Good Neighbors Days event. G.3 Approve Resignation of Hugo Firefighter Matt Richardson Hugo Firefighter Matt Richardson has submitted his resignation from the Hugo Fire Department. Staff recommends Council approve the resignation of Matt effective April 30, 2017. GA Approve Renewal of 2 a.m. Liquor License Sal's Angus Grill Sal's Angus Grill, 12010 Keystone Avenue North, has submitted their renewal of a 2 a.m. Liquor License, which allows them to serve alcohol until 2 a.m. by State Statue. Hugo City Code has adopted state law regarding the hours of sale but still must approve the 2 a.m. closing time. Staff recommends Council approve the 2 a.m. Liquor License for Sal's Angus Grill. G.5 Approve Hiring of Marty Schwartz, Scott Marschke, James Magill, Hunter Natterstad, Krai! Pettee as Public Works Seasonal Summer Employees At its January 3, 2017 meeting, Council approved the advertisement for seasonal employees in the Hugo Public Works Department. Employees in this positon would assist in maintaining the City's park system, building grounds, road patching, and other work as needed. Staff had received applications, conducted interviews, and recommends Council approve the hiring Marty Schwartz, Scott Marschke, James Magill, Hunter Natterstad, and Kraig Pettee as Public Works Seasonal Summer Employees for 2017. G.6 Approve Tobacco License for Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine and Spirits of Hugo Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine & Spirits of Hugo, has applied for a Tobacco License for their proposed liquor at 5441 140th Street North. Ksiall Company has successfully completed the background check. Staff recommends Council approve the Tobacco License for MGM Wine and Spirits subject to payment of the license fee and approval of the On -Sale Liquor License to be considered later this meeting. G.7 Approve Special Event Permit for MGM Grand Opening Event Victor Shevchunk, owner of MGM Wine & Spirits of Hugo, has applied for a special event permit to hold a grand opening at his liquor store on Friday, May 12, 2017. This requires a Special Event Permit because there will be over 200 people and amplified music in the parking lot. The applicant has submitted the completed application, application fee, and hold harmless agreement. Staff has worked with Victor on the details of the event and recommends Council approve the Special Event Permit for MGM for a grand opening celebration subject to approval of the On -Sale Liquor License to be considered later this meeting. H.1 Approve Award of Bid for the North Sunset Lake Area Street Proiect At its March 6, 2017 meeting, the Council approve a resolution approving the plans and specification and ordering the advertisement for bids for the north Sunset Lake area street improvement project. Streets included in this project are: Homestead Avenue, 132" d Street, Homestead Drive, and 126th Street. Bids were received and opened on April 6, 2017. City Engineer Mark Erichson will provide Council a summary of bids received and request Council award the project. I.1 Public Hearing on Application for On -Sale Wine and Beer Liquor License R & G Services, LTD dba Red's Savoy Pizza A public hearing has been scheduled for this evening to consider the application of R&G Services, LTD, dba Red's Savoy Pizza, for a Wine License and a 3.2% Malt Liquor License with a provision for strong beer. According to City Code, the Council can approve strong beer to be served under this license as long as 60% of sales is from food. Savoy Pizza is located at 14755 Victor Hugo Boulevard, and they are currently adding a 2,000 square foot expansion to include a small bar and approximately eight tables and four booths in the restaurant area. The applicant has paid the $500 application fee and successfully completed the background check for the liquor license. Staff recommends Council open the public hearing to take all comments and approve the application for Red's Savoy Pizza subject to receipt of the prorated license fee and certificate of liquor liability insurance. I.2 Public Hearing on Application for Off Sale Liquor License for Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine and Spirits of Hugo A public hearing has been scheduled for this evening to consider the application of Ksiall Company, dba MGM Wine & Spirits of Hugo, for an Off -Sale Liquor License to operate a liquor store in the former Rick's Liquor building at 5441 140th Street North. The applicant has submitted the appropriate Certificate of Liquor Liability, paid the $500 application fee, and successfully completed the background check. Included in the Council packet are written comments from Terry Sager, owner of Sager Liquor, which will become a part of the public hearing record. Staff recommends Council open the public hearing to take all comments and approve the application for MGM Wine & Spirits of Hugo subject to receipt of the prorated license fee. K.1 Approve Resolution for Issuance of Negative Declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement for Adelaide Landing The Excelsior Group, LLC, is proposing 319 new homes on property located at the northeast corner of 130th Street and Highway 61. The minimum threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) per MN State Statute is 250 units, therefore, an EAW is required. The developer has been working with City staff to prepare an EAW for the development. An EAW is a document that analyzes, at a preliminary level, the effects a development has on the environment in regards to land use, geology, water resources, wildlife, air, noise, and transportation. An EAW has been prepared, is complete, and has been sent out for public comment. There was a 30-day comment period, which ended on March 29, 2017. The Planning Commission held of public hearing on the EAW at it March 23, 2017, meeting. Staff has drafted responses to all comments on the EAW that will be sent out to all the agencies and others who have commented. The EAW has identified areas where potential environmental effect exists and has incorporated the appropriate mitigation measure into the project plan. Staff analyzed the EAW and plan as it relates to State Rules and finds the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. Staff recommends the City Council approve the findings of fact and conclusions and the resolution approving the issuance of a negative declaration for the need of an environmental impact statement (EIS). K.2 Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for Adelaide Landing The Adelaide Landing proposed development project includes a proposal to fill 1.32 acres of wetlands associated with the construction of a single family development. The applicant is proposing to purchase wetland bank credits at a 2:1 mitigation ratio in -advance of the proposed wetland impacts. The wetland delineation was approved by City staff in 2014 and 2016. The wetland replacement plan application was deemed complete on March 8, 2017, and public noticed on March 25, 2017, with an April 10, 2017, deadline to receive comments. The applicant's response to the public comment received was compared to the proposed plans/application and found satisfactory by City staff in fulfilling the replacement standards under MN Rules 8420. Staff recommends the City Council approve the wetland replacement plan for Adelaide Landing. K.3 Approve Resolution for Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Adelaide Landing The Excelsior Group, LLC, is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a residential development. The property totals 216.6 acres and is comprised of seven parcels. The preliminary plat includes 319 single family residential lots and 10 outlots to be known as "Adelaide Landing". The PUD General Plan proposed to be rezoned from Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The property includes wetlands and floodplain for a total buildable acreage of 146.2 acres. At its March 23, 2017, meeting the Planning Commission considered and held a public hearing on the request. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and PUD. The Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the resolution for the preliminary plat and PUD, including two additional conditions. K.1 Update on the Yellow Ribbon Network Council Members Chuck Haas and Phil Klein will update the Council on the activities of the Yellow Ribbon Network to date. N.1 Severe Weather Awareness Week April 17-21 and Tornado Drill on April 20, 2017 Each year, Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM) in collaboration with the National Weather Service sponsor Severe Weather Awareness Week in Minnesota. The week is designed to refresh, remind and educate everyone about the seasonal threats from severe weather and how to avoid them. The most important events during Severe Weather Awareness Week are the two annual statewide tornado drills. These drills are scheduled for Thursday, April 20 2017 at 1:45 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. Outdoor warning sirens and NOAA Weather Radios will sound in a simulated tornado warning. The first drill is intended for institutions and businesses. The evening drill is intended for second shift workers and families. N.2 Comprehensive Plan Open House Workshop on Wednesday, April 19, 2017 An open house/workshop has been scheduled for Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 7 p.m. in the Oneka Room at Hugo City Hall to talk about visioning for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update. This has been scheduled as a meeting of the Council. N.3 Spring Cleanup Day on Saturday, April 22, 2017 The City of Hugo will hold its annual Spring Cleanup event on Saturday, April 22, 2017 at the Hugo Public Works Department from 8 a.m. to noon. A list of accepted items and pricing can be found on the City's website. NA Habitat for Humanity Home Dedication Saturday, April 22, 2017 Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity will hold a dedication for four new homes on Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 10 a.m. at 14932 Generation Avenue North. The Council has scheduled this as a meeting. N.5 Community Blood Drive Tuesday, April 25, 2017 The American Red Cross will hold a Community Blood Drive at the Hugo Fire Station on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 from 2:30-7:30 p.m. This is the seconded Blood Drive held at the station, and the Fire Department is encouraging everyone to attend and give blood. N.6 Kidz `n Biz Saturday, April 29, 2017 The Annual Kidz n'Biz Fest will take place on Saturday, April 29, 2017 at the Oneka Elementary School from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Council has scheduled this as a meeting to attend. N.7 NYFS Leadership Lunch on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 The Council has been invited to attend the Northeast Youth & Family Services 2017 Leadership Luncheon on Wednesday, May 3 at the Midland Hills Country Club, 2001 Fulham Street in Roseville, from 11:30 — 1 p.m. Council should schedule this as a meeting if they choose to attend. O. Adjournment MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2017 Call to Order Mayor Weidt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Haas, Klein, Miron, Petryk, Weidt ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: City Administrator Bryan Bear, City Attorney Dave Snyder, City Engineer Mark Erichson, and City Clerk Michele Lindau Minutes for the March 20, 2017 City Council Meeting Klein made motion, Miron seconded, to approve the minutes for the March 20, 2017 City Council meeting as presented. All Ayes. Motion carried. Approval of the Agenda Weidt made motion, Klein seconded, to approve the agenda as presented. Northeast Youth & Family Services Annual Report -President and CEO Jerry Hromatka The City of Hugo is in partnership with NYFS for mental health and social services serving people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds. NYFS President and CEO Jerry Hromatka was present to provide Council the annual report for 2016. Jerry informed Council that the NYFS is celebrating their 40th anniversary. During their first year, NYFS served 100 people, and they are now serving 4,000 youth, adults, and families. Jerry stated that partnerships and innovation has been the key to their success. He provided a breakdown of their 3.2 million budget, which showed the majority of it is spent on programing. The majority of their revenue now comes in fees and less from contracts. All Hugo residents are assured services, though they are asked to pay something. In 2016, there were 46 Hugo families served. The City's contract is for $ 6,000, and they were able to provide $26,000 of contracted services to those families. He invited the Council to attend their leadership lunch on May 3 and Mayor's challenge Golf Tournament June 12, 2017. Update on Lake Links Trail — Mike Brooks Mike Brooks and Steve Wolgamot provided an update from the Lake Links Association. It was explained that the Lake Links Association is a new coalition of Washington and Ramsey County residents and decision makers who are coming together to complete a route for safe walking and biking around White Bear Lake. Steve explained they are looking for right-of-way and working with other communities in gaining resolutions of support for preliminary engineering funding. There are bills in both the Senate and in the House and they believe they can get funding to complete the trail. Mike talked about the packet of information presented to the Council, which reflected comments from other meetings that showed support for the trail. They requested the Council approve the resolution supporting the Lake Links Trail Network. Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for April 3, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Weidt made motion, Petryk seconded, to approve RESOLUTION 2017-4 SUPPORTING THE PLANNING, FUNDING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAKE LINKS TRAIL NETWORK AROUND WHITE BEAR LAKE. All Ayes. Motion carried. Approval of the Consent Agenda Klein made motion, Miron seconded, to approve the following Consent Agenda items. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Approve Letter of Intent to RCWD for Met Council Stormwater Grant 3. Approve Property Line Adjustment at 7416 132nd Street North - Stedt 4. Approve Minor Subdivision and CUP at 13561 Homestead Avenue North - Carlson 5. Approve Special Event Permit for Blacksmith Lounge 2017 Events 6. Approve Special Event Permit for Oneka Elementary Color Run on May 6, 2017 7. Approve Replacement of Public Works Parks Mower All Ayes. Motion carried. Approval of Claims Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved the Claims Roster as presented. Approve Letter of Intent to RCWD for Met Council Stormwater Grant The City is working with the Rice Creek Watershed District in applying for a stormwater grant for the CSAH8 water reuse project. The Metropolitan Council Stormwater Grant will provide partial funding for the project, however the Rice Creek Watershed District must be the applicant and apply for the funds. The Met Council will provide 75% of the cost and the City will provide the remaining 25%, except the RCWD may provide cost -share. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved a letter of intent from the City as a precondition of the RCWD's application to the Met Council for the Stormwater Grant. Approve Property Line Adiustment at 7416 132°d Street North — Stedt Dean and Rosalie Stedt had requested approval of a property line adjustment for properties located west of Homestead Avenue and north of 132nd Street. Parcel A is 13.10 acres and Parcel B is 29.89 acres in size, containing a single family home with outbuildings. The applicants requested to adjust the common property line between the properties. This action would result in Parcel A totaling 31.02 acres and Parcel B totaling 11.93 acres in size. Staff found that both properties conformed to all applicable regulations in the City Code with the adjustment of the property line. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved RESOLUTION 2017- 5 APPROVING A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR DEAN AND ROSALIE STEDT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED WEST OF HOMESTEAD AVENUE AND NORTH OF 132ND STREET. Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for April 3, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Approve Minor Subdivision and CUP at 13561 Homestead Avenue North — Carlson Joe and Chelsea Carlson had requested approval of a minor subdivision of a 20-acre parcel located at 13561 Homestead Avenue. The applicant proposed to subdivide the 20-acre parcel into two 10-acre parcels. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) was necessary for a shared driveway to allow an existing driveway to provide access to both parcels. At its March 23, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request, and there were no public comments. The Planning Commission agreed that the application met the requirements necessary to approve the minor subdivision and CUP and recommended Council approve it. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved RESOLUTION 2017-6 APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF 132nd STREET NORTH AND EAST OF HOMESTEAD AVENUE NORTH and RESOLUTION 2017-7 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A SHARED DRIVEWAY FOR THE PROPERTIES GENERALY LOCATED SOUTH OF 132nd STREET NORTH AND EAST OF HOMESTEAD AVENUE NORTH. Approve Special Event Permit for Blacksmith Lounge 2017 Events The Blacksmith Lounge had applied for a Special Event Permit for events to be held during 2017. There would be a total of 14 events hosted on their property between April and October. Events included seven auctions, five car shows, one swap meet, and one corn feed for the White Bear Lake Hockey Association. These events had been occurring for several years including the largest event, the Northern Lights Car Show, for 29 years. All of the events would be held outdoors. City Council approval was required because they would be serving alcohol, over 250 people were expected during some events, and an amplified speaker system would be used. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved the Special Event Permit for the Blacksmith Lounge. Approve Special Event Permit for Oneka Elementary Color Run on May 6, 2017 Oneka Elementary had applied for a Special Event Permit to hold a 5K Color Run on Saturday, May 6, 2017. This event required a permit approved by Council because the event was expected to draw between 500-700 participants and would include the use of City trail/sidewalks/streets. Oneka Parkway would be closed for the duration of the event, and the applicant had worked with the City and Washington County Sheriff's Department on the details. This same event had been held the past two years and was very successful. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved the Special Event Permit for the Oneka Elementary 5K Color Run on May 6, 2017. Approve Replacement of Public Works Parks Mower The Hugo Public Works had requested approval for the purchase of a Toro 72" Z Master parks mower to replace the aging John Deere 72" mower. Staff had received a quote from Hugo Equipment Company, which was under state contract, to provide the Toro mower for $9,821.24. Adoption of the Consent Agenda approved the quote and authorized the purchase of the Toro 72" Z Master mower. Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for April 3, 2017 Page 4 of 5 Approve Award of Bid for 2016 Dust Control Proiect At its February 6, 2017 meeting, the Hugo City Council authorized City staff to advertise and receive bids for the 2017 dust control project. Two bids were received and opened on March 22, 2017 with the low bidder being Envirotech at $0.837/gallon. Public Works Director Scott Anderson explained the City applies Calcium Chloride to 25 miles of gravel roads. The City cost shares with May Township for Keystone Avenue and with the City of Grant for 120th Street and also bids the project with them. Haas made motion, Klein seconded, to approve the 2017 Dust Control Contract with Envirotech Services to apply Calcium Chloride at $0.837/gallon. All Ayes. Motion carried. Approve Award of Bid for 2017 Seal Coating Proiect At its February 6, 2017 meeting, the Hugo City Council authorized City staff to advertise and receive bids for the 2017 seal coat project. Three bids were received and opened on March 22, 2017 with the low bidder being Allied Blacktop Co. at $209,781.94. Public Works Director Scott Anderson explained the roads that would be included in the project and acknowledged the Department needed to increase the frequency of sweeping after the seal coat application. Funding for the seal coating project, which includes patching, comes from state aid maintenance dollars and general tax levy dollars. Petryk made motion, Miron seconded, to approve the 2017 Seal Coat contract with Allied Blacktop co for $209,781.94. All Ayes. Motion carried. Update on the Yellow Ribbon Network Council Members Chuck Haas and Phil Klein updated the Council on the activities of the Yellow Ribbon Network to date. A book had been created showing activities of the YRN over the past three years. The YRN sent 1000 packages to Korea and Fort Campbell, Kentucky. A Girl Scout Cookie packing event was scheduled for April 15. Responses had been received from recipients of the last packages sent to Afghanistan and Egypt. A check for $490 was received from Xcel Energy from their employee volunteering program. The YRN also received a check from Bayport Legion for $2,500 from the YRN meat raffles at Sal's Angus Grill. Haas thanked City Attorney Dave Snyder who helped a renter who was having problems with his landlord. There were 213 burgers sold at March's Hamburger Night. The next Hamburger Night sponsor will be Attorney Dan Gallitan on April 26, 2017. Board of Review and Equalization on Thursday, April 13, 2017 City Administrator Bryan Bear reminded Council they will meet as the Board of Appeal and Equalization on Thursday, April 13, 2017 from 5:30 p.m. — 7:00 p.m. The meeting will take place in the Oneka Room at Hugo City Hall. Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for April 3, 2017 Page 5 of 5 Habitat Home Dedication on Saturday, April 22, 2017 City Administrator Bryan Bear informed Council they had been invited to the Habitat Home Dedication in Hugo for four families new to the community. The dedication will take place on Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 10 a.m. at 14932 Generation Avenue North. Weidt made motion, Klein seconded, to schedule the Habitat for Home Dedication on April 22, 2017 as a meeting of the Council. All Ayes. Motion carried. Expiration of Term on Carnelian -Marine -St. Croix Watershed District Board of Managers City Administrator Bryan Bear informed council the City had been notified that the term for Eric Lindberg on the Carnelian -Marine -St. Croix Watershed District Board of Managers was expiring on June 21, 2017. Washington County Board had requested the City submit a list of nominees for consideration, including the support for the incumbent, if they wish. Bear noted incumbent Lindberg was seeking reappointment. Haas made motion, Weidt seconded, to invite Eric Lindberg to a future Council meeting. All Ayes. Motion carried. Adjournment Miron made motion, Klein seconded, to adjourn at 7:54 p.m. All Ayes. Motion carried. Respectfully Submitted, Michele Lindau City Clerk MINUTES FOR THE HUGO CITY COUNCIL HUGO GOOD NEIGHBORS FOOD SHELF PASTA DINNER SATURDAY, APRIL 8, 2017 HUGO AMERICAN LEGION PRESENT: Haas, Klein, Weidt ABSENT: Miron, Petryk The Hugo City Council attended the Hugo Good Neighbors Food Shelf Pasta Dinner. The event was held at the Hugo American Legion from 6-9 p.m. This was the 61h event held to raise money for the food shelf building. Respectfully Submitted, Michele City Clej IV City of Hugo Claims April 17, 2017 Vendor Invoice Amount Description Department Alex Air Apparatus Inc 32169 $ 1,606.25 SCBA Equipment Maintenance & Repairs Fire Dept Alex Air Apparatus Inc 32043 $ 447.00 Lite Force Plus Helmets Fire Dept Al's Coffee Company i 151596 $ 148.40 Breakroom Supplies Gen Gov't Bldgs Al's Coffee Company 151597 $ 78.45 Breakroom Supplies Public Works American Pump Company 19710 $ 107.09 Camlock Hose Set Assembly Water Utility Aquatec Irrigation Service Inc 16020 $ 1,690.00 Irrigation Backflow Testing Auto Value 128087452 $ 4.99 Parts - Unit #4203 _Various Fire Dept Bailer, Scott CLAIM $ 189.71 SSTS Workshop Expenses & Mileage Building Inspections Batteries Plus Bulbs 030-667711 $ 60.50 Batteries - LED Speed Signs Street Dept Batteries Plus Bulbs 029-610228 $ 363.00 Batteries - LED Speed Signs Street Dept Batteries Plus Bulbs 031-820297 $ 60.50 Batteries - LED Speed Signs Street Dept Bound Tree Medical LLC 82449476 $ 1,171.29 Medical Supplies Dept Gemstone 3/3112017 $ 1,170.00 Concrete Barrier Blocks _Fire Public Works Cemstone 4/11/2017 $ 330.00 Concrete Barrier Blocks Public Works Century Link 651 653-1154 $ 57.28 SCADA Lines Water & Sewer Century Link 651 429-3212 $ 68,74 Fire Station Phone Lines Fire Dept City of Roseville 222774 $ 1,706.76 2017 Laserfiche Maintenance Administration City of Roseville 222699 $ 406.96 March Phone Service Various City of Roseville 222676 $ 3,914.17 March Computer Service Various Comcast 3/26/2017 $ 120.92 Business Internet tthru May 5) Public Works Comcast 3/18/2017 $ 148.77 Business Internet (thru April 27) Fire Dept Dan's Towing 67869 $ 166.00 Towing - Unit #4216 Fire Dept De Lage Landen Financial Services Inc 53786105 $ 311.37 March Copier Lease Payment Administration Eagle Engraving Inc 2017-1060 $ 22,70 Medals Fire Dept Finance and Commerce 743210465 $ 266.02 Advertisement for Bids - Sunset Lake Street Imps Street Reconstruction Fire Safety USA Inc 98809 $ 654.60 Safety Vests & Extrication Gloves Fire Dept Fire Safety USA Inc 98919 $ 64.00 CMC Tubular Webbing Fire Dept Forest Lake Naha March $ 1,161.96 Auto Parts and Shop Su,plies Various Frattallone's Hardware Store 110436 $ 12.72 Hardware Public Works G & K Services March $ 299.92 Cleaning Supplies Various G & K Services March $ 1,161.52 Uniform & Floor Mat Services Various G & K Services March $ 665.85 Supplies & Floor Mat Services Fire Dept Gene's Disposal Service Inc 302914 $ 680.66 March Waste Hauling - PW Facility Public Works Gene's Disposal Service Inc 302914 $ 148.60 March Waste Hauling - Fire Station Fire Dept Gene's Disposal Service Inc 302914 $ 66.34 March Waste Hauling - City Hall Gen Gov't Bldgs Gopher State One Call 7030454 $ 109.35 March Service Charges Water & Sewer Grainger 9399631739 $ 60.30 Lever Style Door Holders Various Grainger 9396356314 $ 190.26 Stacking Bins Public Works Grand View Lodge R706A4 $ 248.34 MCMA Conference Lodging - Bryan Bear Administration Graphic Resources 58034 $ 81.94 Business Cards - Steve Duff Engineering Dept Hawkins Inc 4048820 RI $ 945.00 Water Chemicals Water Utility Home Depot Credit Services 2561885 $ 130.16 Irrigation Hardware - CSAH 8 Street Dept Hugo Equipment Company 112325 $ 131.98 Parts - Unit #445 Parks Dept Hugo Equipment Company 109709 $ 45.90 Parts - Unit #464 Parks Dept Hugo Equipment Company 109709 $ 22.49 Parts - Unit #309 Parks Dept Hugo Equipment Company 112509 $ 16.95 Parts - Unit #459 Parks Dept Hugo Equipment Company 112575 $ 8.77 Parts - Unit #459 Parks Dept Hugo Feed Mill 18892-1 $ 10.98 Hardware Public Works Hugo Feed Mill 30763-1 $ 25.69 Hardware Public Works Hugo Feed Mill 31265-1 $ 3.99 Hardware Public Works Hydraulic Plus & Consulting LLC 8792 $ 1,776.75 Parts - Unit #4215 Fire Dept InnoGraphics Design_ Group 3510 $ 520.00 Spring Newsletter Design Misc Unallocated Innovative Office Solutions LLC IN1553974 $ 54.69 Cardstock Administration Innovative Office Solutions LLC IN1553974 $ 43.64 Name Tag Refills Administration Innovative Office Solutions LLC IN1563873 $ 41.97 Cardstock Administration Innovative Office Solutions LLC IN1563873 $ 24.46 Paperclips & Correction Ta,e Admm.istration Instrumental Research Inc 48 $ 100.00 Water Bacteria Testing Water Utility Integra Telecom 14530099 $ 91.43 Fax Lines Administration Jefferson Fire & Safety Inc 235668 $ 734.57 TFT Adapters Fire Dept John Deere Financial P28973 $ 6.52 Parts - Unit #305 Public Works Kati i Fite Oil Service Co. 585009 $ 350.00 Bulk Antifreeze Public Works Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. 584840 $ 25.00 DEF Dispensing Nozzle Public Works Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. 584845 $ 1,294.06 DEF Pump, Motor, Reel, Hose & Hardware Public Works Kith Fuel Oil Service Co. 12320094 $ 3,234.05 March Unleaded Gas & Diesel Purchases Various Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. 12320094 $ 2,000.00 Fuel Pump & Installation Public Works Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. 583578 $ 612.50 Diesel Exhaust Fluid Public Works Landform 25589 $ 3,165.35 2040 Comp Plan Planning & Zoning Laughlin's Pest Control 9336 $ 85.00 March Pest Control Service i CH) Gen Gov't Bldgs Lawson Products 9304822335 $ 623.24 Bulk Hardware Supplies Public Works Page 1 City of Hugo Claims April 17, 2017 Vendor Invoice Amount Lawson Products 9304804662 Leffler Printing Company Inc 19870 Leffler Companies Inc 2488048 M&G Trailer Sales, Service and Rental 60492 McCullough, Ryan CLAIM Menards 48916 Metering & Technology Solutions 8593 Minnesota Cleaning Services Inc 1 417004 Minnesota Cleaning Services Inc 417006 Minnesota Cleaning Services Inc 417006 Minnesota Cleaning Services Inc 417005 Minnesota Department of Health 13600 _ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency r Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency i g Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency I Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency __j Registration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Registration North Star Wiper & Industrial Supply Inc 77610 North Star Wiper & Industrial Supply Inc 77759 North Star Wiper & Industrial Supply Inc 77708 North Star Wiper & Industrial Supply Inc 77708 Office Max 60491 Oxygen Service Com©any 3369700 Palmquist, Jason CLAIM Performance Plus LLC 4644 LF Polar Chevrolet 98325 Press Publications 546763 Press Publications 547010 Press Publications 548694 Press Publications 548680 Press Publications 548687 Quality Seamless Gutter Inc 2016 Ricoh USA, Inc 98548404 Ricoh USA, Inc 98548404 Sam's Club 3411 268610151 SiteOne Landscape Su,rply LLC 79558856 Smith, Schafer & Associates 45815 Smith, Schafer & Associates 45815 Smith, Tom CLAIM Stabner Electric Inc 468 Sun Life Financial April Trade Press Inc T26192 Tri-State Bobcat A31395 Tri-State Bobcat A31396 Twin Cities Bicycling Club Tour de Hugo Universal Hospital Services Inc 103427 US Bank 4585899 Verizon Wireless 9782375890 Washington County 115355 Washington County 2017-U-56 Washington County 115127 White Bear Locksmith 27879 Winnick Supply 337446 WSB & Associates February Total Claims for April 17, 2017 Description $ 358.61 Bulk Hardware Supplies $ 1,989.00 Newsletter Printing $ 253.80 April Copier Service Payment $ 6,490.00 2017 Enclosed Trailer - Unit #337-17 $ 133.20 Fuel - Unit #205 $ 132.37 Hooks & Track (Tool Storage) $ 5,194.93 Water Meters & Hardware $ 605.00 March Cleaning Service $ 500.00 March Cleaning Service $ 225.00 March Cleaning Service $ 100.00 March Cleaning Service - Hanifl $ 23.00 Water Operator Renewal -Matt Klein $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop - Paul Christianson $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop - Adam Greeder $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop - Dave Greeder $ 75.00 Wastewater Trainina Workshop - Jeff Maas $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop -Ryan McCullough $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop - Neal Nelson $ 75.00 Wastewater Training Workshop -Tom Smith $ 61.00 Shop Towel Dispensers $ 142.16 Oil Spill Kit $ 58.20 Spill Absorbent $ 175.00 Shop Towels $ 359.97 Office Chairs $ 21.08 Welding Supplies $ 93.79 Radio Holder & Sway Straps (Amazon) $ 95.00 Hepatitis Prevention - Esch $ 202.30 Parts - Unit #112 $ 115.94 Advertisement for Bids -Sunset Lake Street Imps $ 21.08 City Council Special Meeting Notice $ 21.08 City Council Public Hearing Notice $ 21.08 City Council Public Hearing Notice $ 21.08 City Council Special Meetings Notice $ 400.00 Gutter Replacement & Repairs t Hanift $ 123.18 Copier Lease Payment $ 14.42 Overage Charges $ 135.00 2017 Business Membership Dues $ 60.45 Raingarden Supplies $ 10,750.00 2016 Audit Interim Billing $ 1,900.00 Accounting Assistance $ 113.07 Work Boot Reimbursement $ 1,381.25 Electrical Repairs (Fuel Pumos) $ 696.45 Disability Premium $ 629.00 Comp Plan Open House Postcards $ 618.94 Parts - Unit #304 $ 65.89 Parts - Unit #304 $ 405.00 Tour de Hugo Advertisement $ 230.00 AED Annual Testing $ 425.00 Paying Agent Fees $ 40.02 Cellular Phone Charges $ 200.00 Liquor License Background Check $ 100.00 Right of Way Permit Application Fee $ 4,100.82 801 Radio User Fees - January thru March $ 159.00 Rekey Locks & Keys - 14715 Forest Blvd $ 196.15 Angle Steel $ 70.005.53 Engineering Fees - See Attached Breakdown Public Works Misc Unallocated Administration Stormwater Fund Street Deot Public Works Water Utility Gen Gov't Bldgs Public Works Fire Dept Parks Dept Water Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Sewer Utility Public Works Public Works Public Works Public Works_ Gen Gov't 131dgs Public Works Fire Dept Fire Dept Street Dept Street Reconstruction Ordinances/Proceedings Ordinances/Proceedings Ordinances/Proceedings Ordinances/Proceedings Gen Gov't Bldgs Public Works Public Works Dues/Memberships Gen Gov't Bldgs Finance Dept Finance Dept Water & Sewer Public Works Finance Dept Planning & Zoning Street Dept Street Dept Parks Dept Fire Dept Sinking Fund Fire Dept City Clerk Street Reconstruction Fire Dept Rental Properties Public Works Various Page 2 K� c ■ O Z N N � IC � O d V 1 a i d r tC'1 OLf) I,,:N LO to o Cn O N 0 N 0 t(l In N O 0 M O LO m l0 no. r ti f1 � N n CA P, N tl') r c - 000 C` � M N CA o co co" ACD om" �r r. N M liI I co 691 6% V � 6191, c V co O� O a O O O o S O �. 10 n LO N O O 0 o 0 L n co i -O M N Co C� v M W 0 O M to O O O 0) O fD O >> v O W cD N r r h M .N-- N N N p LO v. N CA O :i c d9 6% 64 EN% dO4 fR ER M 6% C6 sN- fA co NN j O Qk 0 o a a or OO O' popa-00OOOUOmd0O aO vCD a01 aa0) aaO aa) aO aO 3 aaO ao 0) -0 a 3 a OOO a a O CyopOOO O a) o E co N Z Z U) Z Z Z Z y Z Z Z Z Zp �LO� ¢ a W < < < < a a ¢a ' q ¢ 0 f ` w c O E O CL C`6 ca O m I � � I a d E 3 m - a 0 3 O G C II a $ cn N N It L fCS N O c' -7 •N Z CL am d o Co m 3 o N N O a W W C > Q' 01 •- Z O ep CD a l6 o O o, cn rn O > c p O CO d� to L N a a °? a t m 3 01 m ii U v� E m` L c (A-reO W R 012 c J o E O C a. 05 65 N .� O O. o J M Q C L L n y O p N c o co o v v o o d o` m 2 c m m= 0N V' J 0r r NI N. 1— LL a- V N' J a. O O r N O L N M rNN M O r O pO ti T O 0 O O O r O N O O CO ,0 i Y i CQ '7 w 000 O 4 i i i i O r i r r r r b f0 ob 00 O O C0 CA. CA O a) O' CAI O 0 O 0 O O O. O co00 0 O O CA N N co N 00 N p N co N O Cn a.Z r r k r Minnesota Department of Public Safety -� pa y Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division 445 Minnesota Street, Suite 222, St. Paul, MN 55101 651-201-7500 Fax 651-297-5259 TTY 651-282-6555 Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A 1 DAY TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE Name of organization Date organized Tax exempt number H uc\o Li ovts C U6 1 G7s .5 F0(4S-013 Address City State Zip Code Pb Qwr ,--1 u' v Minnesota Name of person making application Business phone Home phone A k- ei o 6�1- q 2Q Date(s) of event Type of organization J.r,,e_ SPf'` [] Club ErCharitable ❑ Religious Othernon-profit Organization officer's name City State Zip Code L/AA l9^% ,hzrvt iL Minnesota I I�Sc3�4 Organization officer's name City State Zip Code Il 11-1110uvv-s H nr C, Minnesota s, 63& Organization officer's name City State Zip Code C_t Q-Zpe {jt-1t13, �k� Minnesota Organization officer's name City State Zip Code Minnesota Location where permit will be used. If an outdoor area, describe. Lcb^S RA t`2�_-_ ; l40%a vPPIpR 1 4I60c`' S _ If the applicant will contract for intoxicating liquor service give the name and address of the liquor license providing the service. If the applicant will carry liquor liability insurance please provide the carrier's name and amount of coverage. I 16A s C I LF 'as L +� � c �'�'t-t'� c��-� 1 1 '� oo 0� o a0 uj eST iQ$ nck 1- L", s C° e,, i j 000" 000 APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT City or County ap oving the license Date Approved Fee Amount Permit Date 4`.3--1? Date Fee Paid City or County E-mail Address City or County Phone Number Signature City Clerk or County Official Approved Director Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement CLERKS NOTICE: Submit this form to Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division 30 days prior to event. ONE SUBMISSION PER EMAIL, APPLICATION ONLY. PLEASE PROVIDE A VALID E-MAIL ADDRESS FOR THE CITY/COUNTY AS ALL TEMPORARY PERMIT APPROVALS WILL BE SENT BACK VIA EMAIL. E-MAIL THE APPLICATION SIGNED BY CITY/COUNTY TO AGE.TEMPORARYAPPLICATION@STATE.MN.US 7DATE (MWDDNYYY) A� o® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 1/22/2016 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the pol)cy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT Customer Care Center NAME: West Bend Mutual Insurance Company PHONE (866) 926-4244 FAX (asa)ass-zzoo (p C N-Q,Extl: WC, Not: 1900 South 18th Avenue E-MAIL customercare@wbmi.com ADDRESS: West Bend WI 53095 INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC# INSURED Hugo Lions Club PO Box 321 INSURER A :West Bend Mutual Ina INSURER C : INSURER D : Hugo MN 55038 I INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:17/18 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. EFF POM/DD,YYYYi EXP ILTR TYPE OF INSURANCE NS13AbDW b POLICY NUMBER MM 0ICY LTR LIMITS X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1, 000, 000 A CLAIMS -MADE X❑ OCCUR DAMA TO RENTED 100,000 PREMISES, Ea occurrence, � $ A108567 1/1/2017 1/1/2018 MEDEXP(Anyoneperson) $ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 11000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 X POLICY PRO ❑ LOC JECT PRODUCTS - COMP/OPAGG . $ 2,000,000 OTHER: $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY _. BIN IN LE LIMIT [Ea accident) $ BODILY INJURY (Per person) ANY AUTO $ ALL OWNED SCHEDULED $ BODILY INJURY (Per accident) AUTOS AUTOS NON -OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ HIRED AUTOS AUTOS @ Per accZ $ UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS -MADE $ DED RETENTION <: WORKERS COMPENSATION R TH- AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N STATUTE - ER ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N / A (Mandatory in NH) E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE $ If yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT 1 $ A Liquor Liability A108575 1/1/2017 1/1/2018 Common Cause Limit 1,000,000 Aggregate 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) Certificate holder is listed as additional insured for general liability per form WB1890. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Hugo THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN 14669 Fitzgerald Ave N ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Hugo, MN 55038 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Sam Gruber/TANYA 01988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2014/01) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD INS025 (201401) &t3 Hugo fire Chiefs April 4 2017 This letter is to inform you of my resignation from the Hugo fire department as of Friday April 30 2017.1 want to thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this fire department. I want to thank you for the ---- -----opportunity-,to-grow-my-skills-that have -put -me -in -a -career -of fire-servicei-it wouldn't have -been -possible -- without your leadership and trust you have put in me. Thank You Matt Richardson �sIEOJ Renewal Application for Optional Liquor 2AM License (2 'A Alcohol & Gambling Enforcemeot License Type: 2AM-100K-5001 Expires On: May 6, 2017 ID Number: 14397 DBA Saint Anaus Grill Inc. Sal's Angus Grill 12010 Keystone Ave N Hugo MN 55082 Business Phone: 6514396625 If any of the above licensee information is not correct, please make corrections as necessary. Licensee must report previous 12 month on sale alcoholic beverage gross receipts by checking one ofthe boxes below. Next to the box you check is your 2 AM license fee. Make check payable to: Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED). Mail this application and check to: AGED, 445 Minnesota St., Suite 222, St. Paul, MN 55101-5133. $300 2 AM license fee - Up to $100,000 in on sale gross receipts for alcoholic beverages it $750 2 AM license fee - Over $100,000, but not over $500,000 in on sale gross receipts for alcoholic beverages _ $1000 2 AM license fee - Over $500,000 in on sale gross receipts for alcoholic beverages _ $200 2 AM license fee - 3.2% On Sale Malt Liquor licensees or Set Up license holders, _ $200 2 AM license fee - Did not sell alcoholic beverages for a full 12 months prior to this application Yes No Does the city or county that issues your liquor license allow the sale of alcoholic beverages until 2 AM? City Clerk/County Auditor Signature Date (I certify that the city or county of approves the sale of alcoholic beverages until 2AM) Licensee Signature Date (I certify that I have answered the above questions truthfully and correctly) Licensee Minnesota Tax ID Number (Required): Licensee: Prior to submitting this application to the Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Division you must have this form signed by your local city or county licensing official Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED) 445 MinnesotaStreet, Suite 222, St Paul,, MN 55101-5133 Telephone 651-201-7500 Fax 651-297-5259 TTY 651-282-6555 dps.mn.gov MINNESOTA• REVENUE CT102 License Application to !Make Retail Sales of Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products To be completed by applicant when applying for a license with a city or county. Applicant's Minnesota tax ID number FOR MUNICIPAL USE ONLY The Minnesota tax !D must be Issued in the same 37 Z 96 legal name of the licensee below. License number Period covered Cigarettes/tobacco products will be sold (a separate license is required for each location or vending machine). Date or issuer ce Over counter t Through vending machine (J Both Lirensee's legat name Business trade name (do ng business ) f Complete addrese of business br it�nn 1permR location) tit} /-c uo M N Mailing aO4:s if difrererrt than business adr"i•eas) city Type of legal organization (check one); L' Sole proprietor Partnership 0 Other (describe) Federal empMyer iD number tFEINI L_./0 > 3 Daytime piw e yy?-Z&G-tJd6� outer phone number —c��-nde -- State 6-5-03 8 raxnumber A6o --z -- �StateT Zip rode ' Emad address Minnesota corporation: Enter date of incorporation Z Out-of-state corporation- State of incorporation /�, Are you registered to do business in Minnesota? ! Yes No Corporate officers or partners (attach a list if necessary;) Name L Titlesrl 1 Ulu rG' !Z 1, e, c A q �rr2 s i e ,-1 1 Address T r_qy State Zip code _ 6 1 g I F�}� ,, j ,)r H u Mti S-i::' 3 Name Title Address r State 7in, As a licensed tobacco products or cigarette retailer, l understand that: 1. 1 can purchase cigarettes only from a Minnesota distributor or subjobber who holds a license with the Minnesota Department of Revenue. 0 2. 1 must obtain a tobacco products distributor license if I purchase untaxed tobacco products from an out-of-state company. n 3. 1 may not sell cigarettes affixed with Minnesota Native American stamps unless my retail business is located on a reservation that s has a tax agreement with the State of Minnesota. 1 4. 1 may not purchase from or exchange cigarettes or tobacco products with another retailer. 0 5. 1 must keep complete and legible cigarette and tobacco products invoices on the licensed premises. or make invoices available Y within one hour of request. for at least one year after the date of the purchase. 6. 1 know that the Minnesota Department of Revenue and/or law enforcement may conduct cigarette and tobacco inspections of the premises, including inspections of inventory, invoices and licenses, and I understand that a refusal to allow an inspection is °) grounds for revocation of my license. 7. 1 know that tailwe to t romply with all requirements can result in criminal penalties, including the loss of cigarettes and tobacco products. ag Licensee signature Title Print name Date Daytime phone 0 IA?V1 f iC jer )V-v;kc,t1—_ /3 -17 Y S-2 - 206- -OS6 5 F Licensingawrs si aturc Title Print name Date -- Daytime ohoec nl r License applicant: Submit this form to the licensing authority along with the license application. Licensing autthorfty: Mail or fax a copy of approved form to: Minnesota Revenue. Mail Station 3331. St. Paul, MN 55146-3331. G '1 z- v CITY OF EST. 1906 �--^ Special Event Permit - Memorandum To: Hugo City Council From: City Clerk Michele Lindau Date: April 13, 2017 for the Council Meeting on April 17, 2017 Re: MGM Wine & Spirits Hugo Grand Open Event on Friday, May 12, 2017 1. BACKGROUND: This event will be held to celebrate their Grand Opening of MGM in the old Rick's Liquor building located at 5441 140'b Street North. A Special Event permit must be approved by the Council because there may be over 200 people in attendance and there will be live amplified music outdoors. 2. DESCRIPTION OF EVENT: This event will be held free of charge to the public. The majority of the event will be held in the front parking lot of the MGM store. There will be a band playing a variety of rock music from 4-8 p.m., and food will be sold at a discount from a food truck. Depending on forecasted weather, there may be a 20' X 30' tent erected in the parking lot. Inside the store, alcohol vendors will provide samples in an amount no larger than what is permitted by State Statute 140A.510 SAMPLES. There should be ample parking in the lot behind the store and on the street. 3. CONDITIONS: The applicant has provided the City the completed permit and permit fee. In accordance with this permit, the applicant shall conduct the event as described herein and meet the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall conduct the event in accordance with the approved plans submitted with the application. 2. The applicant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances. Band will play from the east side of the parking lot, projecting the sound towards the west. 4. Signage will be in place to notify attendees that no alcohol maybe consumed in the parking lot. Parking area will be monitored to ensure no alcohol beverages are consumed outside. 6. All activities associated with the outdoor stage and amplified sound shall end by 8 p.m. 7. All litter, signage, balloons, etc., will be removed immediately following the event. 8. Garbage receptacles will be available in the parking lot for debris. 9. One ADA porta-potty will be rented and available for the event as well as the bathroom inside the store. 10. Food will be served from a licensed food truck. Minor changes to this permit may be approved by City staff. Changes staff deems to be significant will require Council review and approval. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION: The City has worked with the owner of MGM to address potential impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Hugo and participants of this event. The City will contact the Washington County Sheriff's Department and inform them of the event if this permit is approved by Council. Staff recommends Council approve the Special Event Permit for the grand opening event at MGM subject to the above conditions. N i inch = 47 feet A CHUGO March 27, 2017 Map Powered by DataLink A WSB ■ VB �M April 12, 2017 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Hugo 24669 Fitzgerald Avenue North Hugo, MN 55038 Re: North Sunset Lake Area Street Improvement Project S.A.P. 224-123-001 / 224-109-001 City of Hugo, MN WSB Project No. 1904-930 Dear Mayor and Council Members: 477 Temperance Street I St. Paul, MN 55101 1 (651) 286-8450M Bids were received for the above -referenced project on Thursday, April 6, 2017, and were opened and read aloud. Five bids were received. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and tabulated. It should be noted that the project was bid with a Base Bid and two Bid Alternates for the types of oil used on the bituminous surfacing. The recommended basis of award is the Base Bid plus Bid Alternate 1. Please find enclosed the bid tabulation indicating the low bidder as T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc., North St. Paul, Minnesota, with a total bid in the amount of $1,273,990.06 (Base Bid plus Bid Alternate 1). The Engineer's Estimate for the project was $1,430,849.75. We recommend that the City Council consider these bids and award a contract for the Base Bid plus Bid Alternate 1 in the amount of $1,273,990.06 to T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. based on the results of the bids received. If you have any questions, please contact me at (651) 286-8463. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Mark A. Erichson, PE City Engineer Enclosures cc: Scott Anderson, City of Hugo Steve Duff, City of Hugo Rob Stangler, T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. jrs/srb 0 Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.comm K:101904-93014dminlConstruction AdmW 1904-930 CST LTR RECMMDTN-hmcc-04121 Tdocx BID TABULATION SUMMARY PROJECT: North Sunset Lake Area Street Improvement Project S.A.P. 224-123-001 / 224-109-001 OWNER: City of Hugo, MN WSB PROJECT NO.: 1904-930 BIDS OPENED: Thursday, April 6, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. Local Time Contractor Bid Bond (5%) Add. No. 1 Received Total Base Bid (Sched. A + B) Total Base Bid + Bid Alternate 1 Total Base Bid + Bid Alternate 2 1 T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. X X $686,627.88 $1,273,990.06 $1,342,536.71 2 Park Construction Company X X $735,323.96 $1,318,730.46 $1,380,801.16 3 North Valley, Inc. X X $729,267.54 $1,317,774.46 $1,382,875.97 4 Valley Paving, Inc. X X $767,675.94 $1,346,258.19 $1,416,406.32 5 ASTECH Corp. X X $781,063.22 $1,376,986.03 $1,448,619.21 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on April 6, 2017. Mark A. Erichson, PE, City Engineer Denotes corrected figure K:101904-93014dminlConstruction Admin11904-930 CST Bid Tab Summary-040617 WSB WSB Project Bid Abstract Project Name: HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Contract No.: Improvement Project Client: City of Hugo Project No.: 01904-93 Bid Opening: 04/06/2017 10:00 AM Owner: Minneapolis 4/12/2017 = DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Project: 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Improvement Project Engineers Estimate T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Park Construction Company - Mpls North Valley, Inc. Line No. Item Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price JTotal Price SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $46,500.00 $46,500.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $39,510.16 $39,510.16 2 2101.502 CLEARING TREE 20 $300.00 $6,000.00 $300.00 $6,000.00 $253.00 $5,060.00 $324.17 $6,483.40 3 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE 20 $200.00 $4,000.00 $185.00 $3,700.00 $101.00 $2,020.00 $129.67 $2,593.40 4 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 239 $7.00 $1,673.00 $5.00 $1,195.00 $6.65 $1,589.35 $5.06 $1,209.34 5 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 1643 $5.00 $8,215.00 $3.00 $4,929.00 $4.50 $7,393.50 $3.29 $5,405.47 6 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN EACH 1 29 $50.00 $1,450.001 $25.00 $725.00 $25.30 $733.70 $26.70 $774.30 7 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F 117 $5.00 $585.00 $2.00 $234.00 $2.65 $310.051 $2.67 $312.39 8 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN EACH 9 $50.00 $450.00 $25.00 $225.00 $25.30 $227.70 $26.70 $240.30 9 2104.601 ISALVAGE AND REINSTALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,020.00 $2,020.00 $1,601.77 $1,601.77 10 2104.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOX EACH 12 $100.00 $1,200.00 $125.00 $1,500.00 $50.50 $606.00 $85.43 $1,025.16 11 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (P) CU YD 937 $15.00 $14,055.00 $17.00 $15,929.00 $50.00 $46,850.00 $17.48 $16,378.76 12 2105.507 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) C Y 1 1407 $15.00 $21,105.001 $10.00 $14,070.00 $14.10 $19,838.70 $12.88 $18,122.16 13 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) C Y 1407 $18.00 $25,326.00 $10.00 $14,070.00 $13.701 $19,275.90 $21.21 $29,842.47 14 2105.601 DEWATERING LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $100.00 $100.00 $4,740.00 $4,740.00 $2,669.61 $2,669.61 15 2105.604 SOIL STABILIZATION GEOGRID S Y 1000 $6.00 $6,000.00 $3.85 $3,850.00 $4.55 $4,550.00 $6.49 $6,490.00 16 2105.604 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 2000 $2.50 $5,000.00 $2.00 $4,000.00 $0.94 $1,880.00 $2.57 $5,140.00 17 2112.501 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 160 $175.00 $28,000.00 $240.00 $38,400.00 $150.00 $24,000.00 $172.06 $27,529.60 18 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 40 $150.00 $6,000.00 $100.00 $4,000.00 $121.00 $4,840.001 $122.80 $4,912.00 19 2130.501 WATER (DUST CONTROL) M GALLONS 120 $50.00 $6,000.00 $30.00 $3,600.00 $16.20 $1,944.00 $26.70 $3,204.00 20 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 C Y 990 $24.00 $23,760.00 $5.00 $4,950.00 $28.40 $28,116.00 $32.55 $32,224.50 21 12211.607 IRECLAIMED AGGREGATE BASE PLACED ICU YD 1 21701 $10.00 $21,700.00 $8.00 $17,360.00 $10.80 $23,436.00 $10.07 $21,851.90 22 2215.501 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION S Y 45480 $2.25 $102,330.00 $1.95 $88,686.00 $0.54 $24,559.20 $1.00 $45,480.00 23 2221.604 SHOULDER BASE AGGREGATE S Y 4249 $4.001 $16,996.001 $3.85 $16,358.651 $2.251 $9,560.25 $4.37 $18,568.13 24 2231.501 JBITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE TON 100 $100.001 $10,000.001 $60.00 $6,000.001 $67.101 $6,710.001 $154.84 $15,484.00 Page 1 Project: 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Improvement Project Engineers Estimate T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Park Construction Company - Mpls North Valley, Inc. Line No. Item Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price 25 2504.602 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR EACH 10 $500.00 $5,000.00 $325.00 $3,250.00 $328.00 $3,280.00 $320.35 $3,203.50 26 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $0.96 $0.96 $2,669.61 $2,669.61 27 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN SPECIAL L F 4250 $12.00 $51,000.00 $11.00 $46,750.00 $12.20 $51,850.00 $11.21 $47,642.50 28 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 239 $55.00 $13,145.00 $48.45 $11,579.55 $54.30 $12,977.70 $52.86 $12,633.54 29 2540.602 MAIL BOX (TEMPORARY) EACH 12 $40.00 $480.00 $100.00 $1,200.00 $101.00 $1,212.00 $48.05 $576.60 30 2563.601 ITRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $28,500.00 $28,500.00 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $4,057.80 $4,057.80 31 2563.610 FLAG PERSON HOUR 80 $50.00 $4,000.00 $65.00 $5,200.00 $66.30 $5,304.00 $74.75 $5,980.00 32 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 174 $30.00 $5,220.00 $35.00 $6,090.00 $29.80 $5,185.201 $31.50 $5,481.00 33 2564.602 F&I SIGN PANEL TYPE SPECIAL EACH 4 $300.00 $1,200.00 $325.00 $1,300.00 $75.80 $303.20 $80.09 $320.36 34 2564.602 REINSTALL SIGN EACH 9 $125.00 $1,125.00 $135.00 $1,215.00 $101.00 $909.00 $106.78 $961.02 35 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 5368 $3.00 $16,104.00 $1.95 $10,467.60 $2.00 $10,736.00 $2.26 $12,131.68 36 2573.505 FLOTATION SILT CURTAIN TYPE STILL WATER L F 360 $10.00 $3,600.00 $5.00 $1,800.00 $6.05 $2,178.00 $20.70 $7,452.00 37 2573.530 STORM INLET PROTECTION (CULVERT) EACH 109 $50.00 $5,450.001 $40.00 $4,360.00 $50.60 $5,515.40 $90.77 $9,893.93 38 2573.535 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $939.00 $939.00 $533.93 $533.93 39 12573.540 FILTER LOG TYPE ROCK LOG LIN FT 200 $5.00 $1,000.00 $4.00 $800.00 $7.05 $1,410.00 $5.641 $1,128.00 40 2573.540 FILTER LOG TYPE STRAW BIOROLL LIN FT 10101 $2.00 $20,202.00 $1.00 $10,101.00 $3.05 $30,808.05 $3.38 $34,141.38 41 2574.525 LOAM TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) CU YD 1116 $25.00 $27,900.00 $10.00 $11,160.00 $28.30 $31,582.80 $20.29 $22,643.64 42 2575.501 SEEDING ACRE 0.3 $4,000.00 $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $300.00 $3,370.00 $1,011.00 $1,128.20 $338.46 43 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN S Y 5876 $4.75 $27,911.00 $4.25 $24,973.00 $4.30 $25,266.80 $4.79 $28,146.04 44 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 48401 $2.50 $12,100.00 $2.001 $9,680.00 $2.00 $9,680.00 $2.26 $10,938.40 45 2575.535 WATER (TURF ESTABLISHMENT) MGAL 800 $10.00 $8,000.00 $5.00 $4,000.00 $5.05 $4,040.00 $5.64 $4,512.00 46 2575.563 HYDRAULIC MATRIX TYPE MULCH S Y 15021 $1.00 $15,021.00 $0.25 $3,755.25 $0.25 $3,755.25 $0.28 $4,205.88 47 2575.605 HYDROSEEDING SQ YD 7403 $2.25 $16,656.75 $2.00 $14,806.00 $2.00 $14,806.00 $2.26 $16,730.78 48 2582.502 4" DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT LIN FT 10067 $0.40 $4,026.80 $0.25 $2,516.75 $0.13 $1,308.71 $0.14 $1,409.38 49 2582.502 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 20134 $0.301 $6,040.20 $0.12 $2,416.08 $0.06 $1,208.041 $0.06 $1,208.04 50 2582.502 24" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 46 $8.00 $368.001 $5.501 $253.00 $9.60 $441.601 $10.141 $466.44 Total SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS: 1$622,594.751 1$505,354.88 $539,969.061 1$546,458.73 SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS 51 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) L F 1683 $7.00 $11,781.00 $10.00 $16,830.00 $6.60 $11,107.80 $16.87 $28,392.21 52 2105.607 1 1/2" CLEAR ROCK C Y 200 $55.00 $11,000.00 $55.00 $11,000.00 $77.10 $15,420.00 $81.73 $16,346.00 53 2501.515 15" CS PIPE APRON EACH 86 $350.00 $30,100.00 $275.00 $23,650.00 $407.00 $35,002.00 $292.97 $25,195.42 54 2501.515 18" CS PIPE APRON EACH 10 $450.00 $4,500.00 $300.00 $3,000.00 $476.00 $4,760.00 $343.58 $3,435.80 55 2501.515 24" CS PIPE APRON EACH 4 $550.00 $2,200.00 $350.00 $1,400.00 $782.00 $3,128.00 $533.59 $2,134.36 56 2501.603 15" PIPE CULVERT L F 13861 $40.001 $55,440.001 $48.001 $66,528.001 $35.901 $49,757.401 $32.041 $44,407.44 57 2501.603 18" PIPE CULVERT L F 215 $50.001 $10,750.001 $50.001 $10,750.001 $54.401 $11,696.001 $32.281 $6,940.20 Page 2 Project: 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Improvement Project Engineers Estimate T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Park Construction Company - Mpls North Valley, Inc. Line No. Item Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price JTotal Price Unit Price Total Price 58 2501.603 24" PIPE CULVERT L F 82 $60.00 $4,920.00 $60.00 $4,920.00 $62.60 $5,133.20 $57.15 $4,686.30 59 2502.541 6" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN L F 200 $20.00 $4,000.00 $25.00 $5,000.00 $18.20 $3,640.00 $17.35 $3,470.00 60 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 1 55 $60.00 $3,300.00 $70.00 $3,850.00 $58.70 $3,228.50 $75.44 $4,149.20 61 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $990.00 $990.00 $534.46 $534.46 62 2503.602 CHIMNEY SEALS EACH 6 $250.00 $1,500.00 $175.00 $1,050.00 $237.00 $1,422.00 $620.06 $3,720.36 63 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 48-4020 L F 5 $450.00 $2,250.00 $525.00 $2,625.001 $593.00 $2,965.00 $902.331 $4,511.65 64 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 L F 6 $650.00 $3,900.00 $600.00 $3,600.001 $908.00 $5,448.00 $1,284.081 $7,704.48 65 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 (2'X3') EACH 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $1,800.00 $5,400.00 $2,180.00 $6,540.00 $2,474.461 $7,423.38 66 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 2 EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,650.00 $1,650.00 $4,010.00 $4,010.00 $1,678.641 $1,678.64 67 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY (CATCH BASIN) EACH 1 $600.00 $600.00 $500.00 $500.00 $764.00 $764.00 $507.23 $507.23 68 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM) EACH 1 $600.00 $600.00 $500.00 $500.00 $547.00 $547.00 $400.44 $400.44 69 2511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 82 $120.00 $9,840.00 $110.001 $9,020.00 $303.00 $24,846.00 $131.27 $10,764.14 70 2563.610 UTILITY CREW HOUR 10 $700.00 $7,000.00 $600.001 $6,000.001 $495.00 $4,950.00 $640.71 $6,407.10 Total SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS: $172,181.00 1 $181,273.001 $195,354.90 $182,808.81 ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS 71 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON 4457 $52.00 $231,764.00 $48.69 $217,011.33 $48.70 $217,055.90 $51.70 $230,426.90 72 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B) TON 7429 $50.00 $371,450.00 $45.65 $339,133.85 $45.20 $335,790.80 $44.56 $331,036.24 73 2360.603 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) - 3" THICK SQ YD 1643 $20.00 $32,860.00 $19.00 $31,217.00 $18.60 $30,559.80 $16.46 $27,043.78 Total ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS: $636,074.00 $587,362.18 $583,406.50 $588,506.92 ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS 74 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) TON 4457 $56.00 $249,592.00 $53.50 $238,449.50 $53.1,666.70 $56.16 $250,305.12 75 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C) TON 7429 $54.00 $401,166.00 $51.77 $384,599.33;$49.5t0$367,735.50 $50.80 $377,393.20 76 2360.503 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) 3.0" THICK SQ YD 1643 $22.00 $36,146.00 $20.00 $32,860.00$25.0,075.00 $15.77 $25,910.11 Total ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS: $686,904.00 $655,908.83 ,477.20 $653,608.43 Total SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS: $622,594.75 $505,354.88 $539,969.06 $546,458.73 Total SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS: $172,181.00 $181,273.00 $195,354.90 $182,808.81 Total ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS: $636,074.00 $587,362.18 $583,406.50 $588,506.92 Total ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS: $686,904.00 $655,908.83 $645,477.20 $653,608.43 Page 3 Project: 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Improvement Project I I I Engineers Estimate Valley Paving - Shakopee lAstech Corp. Line No. I Item lUnits I Quantity I Unit Price Total Price lUnitPrice lTotalPrice lUnitPrice ITotal Price SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $12,330.00 $12,330.00 $39,820.00 $39,820.00 2 2101.502 CLEARING TREE 20 $300.00 $6,000.00 $256.88 $5,137.60 $275.00 $5,500.00 3 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE 20 $200.00 $4,000.00 $102.75 $2,055.00 $275.00 $5,500.00 4 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 239 $7.00 $1,673.00 $6.59 $1,575.01 $8.58 $2,050.62 5 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 1643 $5.00 $8,215.00 $5.31 $8,724.33 $3.85 $6,325.55 6 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN EACH 29 $50.00 $1,450.00 $25.69 $745.011 $27.50 $797.50 7 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F 117 $5.00 $585.00 $3.75 $438.75 $2.48 $290.16 8 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN EACH 9 $50.00 $450.00 $25.69 $231.21 $27.50 $247.50 9 2104.601 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $7,700.00 $7,700.00 10 2104.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOX EACH 12 $100.00 $1,200.00 $82.20 $986.40 $137.50 $1,650.00 11 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (P) CU YD 937 $15.001 $14,055.00 $22.30 $20,895.10 $20.90 $19,583.30 12 2105.507 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) C Y 1407 $15.00 $21,105.00 $23.24 $32,698.68 $20.35 $28,632.45 13 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) C Y 1407 $18.00 $25,326.00 $20.18 $28,393.26 $23.65 $33,275.55 14 2105.601 DEWATERING LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.01 $0.01 $8,800.00 $8,800.00 15 12105.604 SOIL STABILIZATION GEOGRID S Y 1000 $6.00 $6,000.00 $4.39 $4,390.00 $4.13 $4,130.00 16 2105.604 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 20001 $2.50 $5,000.00 $0.76 $1,520.00 $0.77 $1,540.00 17 2112.501 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 160 $175.00 $28,000.00 $27.77 $4,443.201 $214.50 $34,320.00 18 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 40 $150.00 $6,000.00 $114.37 $4,574.80 $148.50 $5,940.00 19 2130.501 WATER (DUST CONTROL) M GALLONS 120 $50.00 $6,000.00 $22.28 $2,673.60 $26.95 $3,234.00 20 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 C Y 990 $24.00 $23,760.00 $30.50 $30,195.00 $18.70 $18,513.00 21 2211.607 RECLAIMED AGGREGATE BASE PLACED CU YD 2170 $10.00 $21,700.00 $6.05 $13,128.50 $9.08 $19,703.60 22 2215.501 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION S Y 454801 $2.25 $102,330.00 $1.01 $45,934.80 $1.83 $83,228.40 23 2221.604 SHOULDER BASE AGGREGATE S Y 4249 $4.00 $16,996.00 $1.07 $4,546.431 $1.96 $8,328.04 24 12231.501 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE TON 100 $100.00 $10,000.00 $129.31 $12,931.00 $38.50 $3,850.00 25 2504.602 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR EACH 10 $500.00 $5,000.00 $300.00 $3,000.00 $154.00 $1,540.00 26 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $1,870.00 $1,870.00 27 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN SPECIAL L F 4250 $12.00 $51,000.00 $10.81 $45,942.50 $12.19 $51,807.50 28 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 239 $55.00 $13,145.00 $54.49 $13,023.11 $59.10 $14,124.90 29 2540.602 MAIL BOX (TEMPORARY) EACH 12 $40.00 $480.001 $46.24 $554.88 $38.50 $462.00 30 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $37,072.00 $37,072.00 $4,180.00 $4,180.00 31 2563.610 FLAG PERSON HOUR 80 $50.00 $4,000.00 $64.05 $5,124.00 $82.50 $6,600.00 32 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 174 $30.00 $5,220.00 $30.31 $5,273.94 $32.45 $5,646.30 33 2564.602 F&I SIGN PANEL TYPE SPECIAL EACH 4 $300.00 $1,200.00 $77.06 $308.24 $82.50 $330.00 34 2564.602 REINSTALL SIGN EACH 9 $125.001 $1,125.00 $102.751 $924.751 $110.00 $990.00 Page 4 Line No. Item 35 257i 36 257: 37 257i 38 257: 39 257; 40 257; 41 257 42 257E 43 257; 44 257E 45 257E 46 257E 47 257E 48 258: 49 258: 50 1258, 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and SILT FENCE, TYPE MS FLOTATION SILT CURTAIN TYPE STILL WATER STORM INLET PROTECTION (CULVERT) STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT FILTER LOG TYPE ROCK LOG FILTER LOG TYPE STRAW BIOROLL LOAM TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) SEEDING SODDING TYPE LAWN EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 WATER (TURF ESTABLISHMENT) HYDRAULIC MATRIX TYPE MULCH HYDROSEEDING 4" DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT 4" SOLID LINE PAINT 24" SOLID LINE PAINT Units lQuantity L F 5368 L F 360 EACH 109 LS 1 LIN FT 200 LIN FT 10101 CU YD 1116 ACRE 0.3 S Y 5876 S Y 4840 MGAL 800 S Y 15021 SQ YD 7403 LIN FT 10067 L F 1 20134 L F 1 46 Total SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Engineers Estimate Unit Price Total Price $3.00 $16,104.00 $10.00 $3,600.00 $1,000. $5. $2. $25. $4,000. $4. $2. $10. $1. $2. $0. $8. $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $20,202.00 $27,900.00 $1,200.00 $27,911.00 $12,100.00 $8,000.00 $15,021.00 $16,656.75 $6,040.20 $368.00 $622,594.75 Unit Price $2.06 $14.01 $119.81 $0.01 $5.35 $2.65 $36.00 $648.93 $4.22 $1.68 $19.47 $0.56 $0.1 $O.0 $9.7 otal Price $11,058.08 $5,043.60 $0.01 $1,070.00 $26,767.65 $40,176.00 $194.68 $24,796.72 $8,131.20 $15,576.00 $8,411.76 $3,109.26 $1,308.71 $1,208.04 $448.96 $511,631.07 Astech Corp Unit Price $2 Of $14.2E $192.5C $5,720.0C $5.4E $2.7C $35.7E $660.0C $4.2� $1.71 $19.8C $0.57 $0.4': $0.1 $0.07 $4.2£ otal Price $11,219.12 $5,130.00 $5,720.00 $1,090.00 $27,272.70 $39,897.00 $198.00 $25,208.04 $8,276.40 $15,840.00 $8,561.97 $3,183.29 $1,308.71 $1,409.38 $197.34 $606,004.82 SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS 51 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) L F 1683 $7.00 $11,781.00 $20.55 $34,585.65 $12.10 $20,364.30 52 2105.607 1 1/2" CLEAR ROCK C Y 200 $55.00 $11,000.00 $51.38 $10,276.00 $46.20 $9,240.00 53 2501.515 15" CS PIPE APRON EACH 86 $350.00 $30,100.00 $633.97 $54,521.42 $286.00 $24,596.00 54 2501.515 18" CS PIPE APRON EACH 10 $450.00 $4,500.00 $752.13 $7,521.30 $308.00 $3,080.00 55 2501.515 24" CS PIPE APRON EACH 4 $550.00 $2,200.00 $1,081.96 $4,327.84 $357.50 $1,430.00 56 2501.603 15" PIPE CULVERT L F 13861 $40.00 $55,440.00 $54.46 $75,481.561 $40.70 $56,410.20 57 2501.603 18" PIPE CULVERT L F 215 $50.00 $10,750.00 $56.51 $12,149.65 $45.10 $9,696.50 58 2501.603 24" PIPE CULVERT L F 82 $60.00 $4,920.00 $68.84 $5,644.88 $51.70 $4,239.40 59 2502.541 6" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN L F 200 $20.00 $4,000.00 $22.61 $4,522.00 $19.80 $3,960.00 60 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 55 $60.00 $3,300.00 $57.54 $3,164.70 $81.40 $4,477.00 61 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,620.13 $2,620.13 $825.00 $825.00 62 2503.6021 CHIMNEY SEALS EACH 6 $250.00 $1,500.00 $217.83 $1,306.981 $220.00 $1,320.00 63 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 48-4020 L F 5 $450.00 $2,250.00 $600.06 $3,000.30 $330.00 $1,650.00 64 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 72-4020 L F 6 $650.00 $3,900.00 $1,171.35 $7,028.10 $473.00 $2,838.00 65 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 (2'X3') EACH 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $2,702.33 $8,106.99 $2,310.00 $6,930.00 66 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 2 EACH 1 $1,500.001 $1,500.001 $2,106.38 $2,106.38 $3,630.001 $3,630.00 67 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY (CATCH BASIN) EACH 1 $600.001 $600.001 $451.07 $451.07 $742.501 $742.50 Page 5 Project: 01904-93 - HUGO - 2017 Street and Utility Improvement Project Engineers Estimate Valley Paving - Shakopee Astech Corp. Line No. Item Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price 68 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM) EACH 1 $600.00 $600.00 $333.94 $333.94 $632.50 $632.50 69 2511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 82 $120.00 $9,840.00 $148.99 $12,217.18 $121.00 $9,922.00 70 2563.610 UTILITY CREW HOUR 10 $700.00 $7,000.00 $667.88 $6,678.80 $907.50 $9,075.00 Total SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS: $172,181.001 $256,044.871 $175,058.40 ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS 71 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON 4457 $52.00 $231,764.00 $49.12 $218,927.84 $49.61 $221,111.77 72 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B) TON 7429 $50.00 $371,450.00 $44.71 $332,150.59 $46.56 $345,894.24 73 2360.603 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) - 3" THICK SQ YD 1643 $20.00 $32,860.00 $16.74 $27,503.82 $17.60 $28,916.80 Total ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS: $636,074.00 $578,582.25 $595,922.81 ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS 74 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) TON 4457 $56.00 $249,592.00 $53.65 $239,118.05 $54.24 $241,747.68 75 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C) TON 7429 $54.00 $401,166.00 $51.26 $380,810.54 $53.23 $395,445.67 76 2360.503 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) 3.0" THICK SQ YD 1643 $22.00 $36,146.00 $17.53 $28,801.79 $18.48 $30,362.64 Total ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS: $686,904.00 $648,730.38 $667,555.99 Total SCHEDULE A - STREET IMPROVEMENTS: $622,594.75 $511,631.07 $606,004.82 Total SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS: $172,181.00 $256,044.87 $175,058.40 Total ALTERNATE 1 - BITUMINOUS: $636,074.00 $578,582.25 $595,922.81 Total ALTERNATE 2 - BITUMINOUS: $686,904.00 $648,730.38 $667,555.99 I hereby certify that this is an exact reproduction of bids received. Certified By: Date: April 6, 2017 License No. 40886 Page 6 s� Michele Lindau From: shipping <shipping@tecweigh.com> Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 9:40 AM To: Chuck Haas Cc: Bryan Bear; Phil Klein; Michele Lindau Subject: PUBLIC HEARING 4-17-2017 Gentlemen and Michele, the public hearing is coming next Monday for the MGM liquor store and I really hope that the City Council does what is right for the City and not allow another liquor store in town. There is not one person that I have talked to in the last month that is in favor of having another liquor store in town including all of our sales people, because they all know how tough it was for Rick and I to try and survive when Ricks liquor was open. Citizens of Hugo would like to see a new restaurant or something different go into that building instead of another liquor store which we already have two of. I hope everything goes well with the meeting and I just want you to know that I am notjust speaking as a long time business owner in Hugo but also as a longtime resident of Hugo. I am passing on what I hear from the citizens that come through my store because a lot of people cannot speak in front of a large group without getting nervous and not everyone can drop everything to attend a Monday meeting at 7pm. Please listen to the community on what they want for that building because they are the voice of Hugo. Michele will you please add this to my emails for the meeting? Have a great day everyone) l l l l THANK YOU, TERRY SAGER CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e- mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Michele Lindau From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: shipping <shipping@tecweigh.com> Monday, March 27, 2017 7:14 AM Michele Lindau Chuck Haas; Bryan Bear; Phil Klein FW: ANOTHER LIQUOR STORE Michele, I received your letter about the public hearing on Monday April 17' for the off sale license for MGM, I would really like these emails put in as part of the meeting since I have to work my store that night. I mentioned this in one of the emails to Chuck because he said that he would expect the council to discuss my comments and reasons for not allowing another liquor store in town and why the City needs to get rid of all the rest of the off sale licenses except for the two that are current right now. Let me know if this something that you can do. Talk to you later. Have a great day!!! Thank You, Terry Sager From: shipping Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 10:04 AM To: 'charles haas' Cc: Bryan Bear; philklein7@msn.com Subject: RE: ANOTHER LIQUOR STORE Chuck, thank you for responding I really appreciate it. The other things I forgot to say in my email is what makes it more difficult is that majority of our community leaves Hugo to go to work so they pass by plenty of liquor stores every day before and after work so we also compete with that and not just the stores in our town and when you are talking a community with a population of 14000 people and 1 out of 5 households drink so that only leaves approximately 2800 households in our community to support our business which is not very many, that is why it is as tough as it is with the cut throat margins starting with the 3% for credit card fees and subtract that from the margins I am showing you with beer at 18 — 20%, liquor at 25 — 30% and wine at 40 — 45% and believe me it is not a wine community. I am also speaking this way because I have lived in the community for 17 years and I feel that Rick or myself should of have had the opportunity to open next to Festival before some corporate money was allowed to open and made life miserable for Rick's liquor and Sagers liquor when the town was doing just fine with the two small businesses that worked very hard when Hugo was just a dot between White Bear Lake and Forest Lake. Please really consider what I have shared with you and do not allow this store to open and just stick with what we have and get rid of all the other off sale licenses. Chuck, thanks again for responding and hearing me out. I would really hope that you share this at that public hearing because i believe this is information people need to hear so they understand how tough of industry this is. I would love to come and share it but like I told you I have to work my store just to compete with the corporate money at On the Rocks. Thank You, Terry Sager SAGERS LIQUOR From: charles hags[mailto:charles.haas27Cgmaii.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 8:58 AM To: shipping Cc: Bryan Bear; Subject: Re: ANOTHER LIQUOR STORE Terry, Thanks for your email and your comments about our city council limiting the issuance of liquor licenses. I understand there is an application pending from someone who desires to operate a liquor store at the site of the former Rick's Liquor. That application requires a public hearing and I expect our council to include your comments in the discussions to consider the applicant's request. Regards, Chuck On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:42 PM shipping <shipping(&,,tecwei .com> wrote: Chuck and Phil, it is tough enough to try and have a successful business when there is not another liquor store in sight let alone another one within a mile of the two in town. The reason Ricks liquor closed is because Rick was sick of not making any money because we had to split business 3 ways. When you try and compete with corporate money out at On the Rocks and I am the small guy that cannot afford to buy the big deals so this becomes an unfair advantage for us at Sagers Liquor which I know is part of how things work and now you guys are going to allow another one back in town to cause more headaches for everyone again! Maybe the focus should be on keeping the two stores open and get rid of all the rest of the off sale liquor licenses so our little town is not saturated with liquor stores, two is competition and 3 is saturation in our small community. If it is about the $100.00 for the license, charge me $200.00 and call it good. The market in Hugo cannot support 3 liquor stores!!! If it was such a lucrative business why do I get up at 4:30am and go work a full time job and go work the store at night. Please consider not passing the liquor license for the new store and getting rid of all the rest of the off sale licenses in Hugo. Our town does not need more than two off sale licenses and I would tell you this even if I did not own a store in town. I told this to Michele when Larry owned Hugo Liquor and I was not even in town as a business owner. Let me know your thoughts and we can talk anytime you want in between my 70 hours a week that I work. My number is 651-270-1209. Have a nice day and hopefully hear from someone soon. Thank you for your time! ! ! Thank You, Terry Sager CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Make everyday Veteran's Day ... thank a Veteran! CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Ic�r-: C1"1-Y C7F [iJt psn From: shipping [mailto:shipping@tecweigh.com] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 1:40 PM To: Michele Lindau <MLindau@ci.hugo.mn.us> Subject: LIQUOR LICENSES Michele, I never got an answer back last week when I asked about voting to eliminate liquor licenses except for the ones that are current. I am curious about the process of doing that. The city of Hugo cannot support more than two liquor stores. I really do not want to continuously worry about someone else coming in as a liquor store when we do not need it. It is tough enough trying to compete with ON THE ROCKS and their corporate money. Let try and keep Hugo to the small town living that I was told 15 years ago when I first applied for an off sale liquor license. I am all for advancement but saturation kills a local business like mine. The City has to realize that this change needs to be made. Please let me know what process I would need to take to get this started. Thanks for your time Michele. Have a great day!!! Thanks Terry Sager CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e- mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e- mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e- mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Michele Lindau From: shipping <shipping@tecweigh.com> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 9:45 AM To: Michele Lindau Subject: RE: LIQUOR LICENSES Michele, could you please add these emails to the ones you are going to give to the City Council for the public hearing. Thanks again, I really appreciate iW! Thanks Terry From: shipping Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 12:59 PM To: 'Michele Lindau' Subject: RE: LIQUOR LICENSES Michele, thank you for the information and keeping me updated. Thanks Terry From: Michele Lindau [mailto:MLindau n�ci.hugo.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 11:54 AM To: shipping Subject: RE: LIQUOR LICENSES Hello Terry, I have shared your email with them. Their contact information is on the website at http://www.ci.hugo.mn.us/council . Just so you know, you live in Council Member Klein's ward and your business is located in Council member Haas's ward. Feel free to reach out to them. Also, I have heard nothing about Rick's. I will let you know if I do. Michele Lindau Hugo City Clerk 651-762-6315 From: shipping [mailto:shipping@tecweigh.com] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 6:19 AM To: Michele Lindau <MLindau@ci.hueo.mn.us> Subject: FW: LIQUOR LICENSES Michele, I was wondering if you could forward this email to the City Council for me, it would not allow it to go through when I copied them. Did you hear anything about Ricks building selling? Thanks for the help. Have a great day! Thanks From: shipping Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 6:34 AM To: 'Michele Lindau' Subject: FW: LIQUOR LICENSES From: shipping Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 6:32 AM To: 'Michele Lindau' Cc: HugoCityCouncil; Bryan Bear Subject: RE: LIQUOR LICENSES Michele, thank you for getting back to me. I really hope that the City Council will consider this! It is not saturation if you have 4 or 5 different restaurants promoting different food items and drink specials, but when you have 2 or 3 different liquor stores selling the same thing in a small community and one of them happens to have corporate money to buy bigger and better deals it really becomes an unfair advantage for the small guy. Small business is what makes our City great. I believe that there is not one person sitting on the City Council that would like to go and work for free every day and wonder how you are going to pay your bills. That is what happened to Rick and myself when On The rocks opened and unfortunately Rick is the one that had to close after being opened for all of those years. If someone from the City Council would like to sit and talk in person about this and really understand from an owners perspective how the liquor industry runs and why it is such a tough industry to make a living in, please feel free to give me a call at 651-270-1209. This is something that needs to be done whether I am an owner or someone else is the owner of a local liquor store in our great City of Hugo. lust a note, I go work a regular job at 5:30am Monday— Friday and go work the store most nights and weekends. I do this because it is such a cut throat industry and we only have 2 liquor stores in town. It was really tough when there were 3 liquor stores within a mile of each other. Hope to hear from someone and have yourself a great day!!! Thank You, Terry Sager — Sagers Liquor 651-270-1209 From: Michele Lindau fmailto:MLindautatici.hugo.mn.us] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 4:32 PM To: shipping Cc: HugoCityCouncil; Bryan Bear Subject: FW: LIQUOR LICENSES Hello Terry, Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I totally understand your concerns. To restrict the number of licenses would require an ordinance amendment approved by the City Council. I am forwarding this to the them, but I can tell you that the Council has never been in favor of regulating competition among businesses in the past, and I do see saturation of business all over in other communities too. No liquor license has been applied for at the old Rick's Liquor location. I will let you know if one comes in. Michele Lindau Hugo City Clerk 651-762-6315 Agenda Number KA CITY OF HUGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT TO: Bryan Bear, City Administrator FROM: Rachel Juba, Planner SUBJECT: Adelaide Landing Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) DATE: April 13, 2017 for the City Council Meeting of April 17, 2017 ZONING: Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a concept plan for the proposed residential development, previously known as Terre De Leau, consisting of 324 housing units on approximately 217 acres of land. The concept plan included property north of 130th Street and east of Highway 61. Both the Planning Commission and City Council provided comments to the developer, which have been incorporated to the plan. The developer has submitted applications for preliminary plat and PUD approval and project is now known as Adelaide Landing. 2. EAW PROCESS: The developer is proposing 319 new homes on the property. The minimum threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) per MN State Statute is 250 units, therefore, an EAW is required. The developer has been working with City staff to prepare an EAW for the development. An EAW is a document that analyzes, at a preliminary level, the effects a development has on the environment in regards to land use, geology, water resources, wildlife, air, noise, and transportation. If it is deemed by the City, due to comments and concerns about the impacts to the environment, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) can be required by the City Council before the project can proceed. An EIS is a more in depth analysis of the property and the impacts to it. An EAW has been prepared, is complete, and has been sent out for public comment. There was 30-day comment period, which ended on March 29, 2017. The EAW was sent out to a number of Federal, State, and regional agencies as required by State Statute. Some agencies have Page 2 commented on specific items that should be considered when the property develops, or whether they recommend the preparation of an EIS. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the EAW at its March 23, 2017, meeting. Staff has prepared formal responses to all of the comments received throughout the process. 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The EAW has identified areas where potential environmental effect exists and has incorporated the appropriate mitigation measures into the project plan. Staff analyzed the EAW and project plan as it relates to State Rules and finds the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts, and therefore staff does not recommend an environmental impact statement (EIS). Staff recommends the City Council approve the findings of fact and conclusions and the resolution approving the issuance of a negative declaration for the need of an environmental impact statement (EIS). Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Findings of Fact and Conclusions 3. EAW and Traffic Analysis 2 RESOLUTION 2017- A RESOLUTION ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR ADELAIDE LANDING WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.1000 Subpart 2, the City of Hugo as the responsible governmental unit completed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Adelaide Landing project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subpart 191), the project meets the thresholds for an EAW for residential development; and WHEREAS, copies of the EAW were distributed to all persons and agencies on the official EQB mailing list prior to February 27, 2017; and WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the EAW for public review for a 30-day comment period was published in the EQB Monitor on February 27, 2017; and WHEREAS, a press release was published in The Citizen on March 2, 2017, to announce the availability of the EAW to interested parties; and WHEREAS, the 30-day comment period ended on March 29, 2017, and all comments received have been considered; and WHEREAS, the EAW, in conjunction with comments, responses, identified permitting, and mitigation will address environmental effects caused as a result of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Hugo hereby issues a negative declaration of need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Adelaide Landing EAW. Adopted this 17th day of April, 2017. Tom Weidt, Mayor ATTEST: Michele Lindau, City Clerk RECORD OF DECISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS Adelaide Landing Environmental Assessment Worksheet City of Hugo, Minnesota Washington County April 12, 2017 ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND Pursuant to Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, the City of Hugo has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed Adelaide Landing development project. This Findings of Fact addresses State of Minnesota environmental review requirements as established in Minnesota Rule 4410.1700. The Excelsior Group is the project proposer for this project. The City of Hugo is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). The EAW was filed with the Minnesota EQB and circulated for review and comments to the required EAW distribution list. A Notice of Availability for the initial EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on February 27, 2017. Notices of Availability and Press Releases were published in The Citizen on February 23 and March 2, 2017. The public comment period ended March 29, 2017. Comments were received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, State Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and one private resident. Verbal comments from the public meeting were also received. All comments were considered in determining the potential for significant environmental impacts. Summaries of the comments received, and the City of Hugo's responses to those comments, are attached. II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS As to the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this project and based on the record in this matter, including the EAW and comments received, the City of Hugo makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Excelsior Group proposes to construct 182 single-family homes, 51 detached townhomes, and 91 villa homes on 134.6 acres in the City of Hugo. The project is located east of TH 61 and north of 130t" Street North. B. PROJECT HISTORY A. The project was subject to a mandatory EAW per Minnesota Rule 4410.4300 Subp 19D — Residential Development. B. The EAW was distributed to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on February 21, 2017 and to the EQB mailing list on February 23, 2017. Adelaide Landing Record of Decision C. Public notices containing information about the availability of the EAW for public review was provided to the in The Citizen on February 23 and March 2, 2017. D. Hard copies of the EAW were provided for public review at Hugo City Hall, Minneapolis Public Library, and an electronic copy was provided on the City of Hugo's website. E. A notice was published for the EAW in the February 27, 2017 EQB Monitor. The public comment period ended March 29, 2017. Comments were received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, State Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and one private resident. Verbal comments from the public meeting were also received. Copies of these comment letters are hereby incorporated for reference and attached. C. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, subp. 1, states "An EIS shall be ordered for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects." In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City of Hugo must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7. With respect to each of these factors, the City of Hugo finds the following: 1. MINNESOTA RULE 4410.1700, SUBP. 7.A -TYPE, EXTENT, AND REVERSIBILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS a. The type of environmental impacts and mitigation efforts anticipated as part of this project include: Land Use - The site has historically been used for agriculture. Wetlands and a wooded area are also present on the site. Most of the development will occur within the existing agricultural areas. Wetland impacts are anticipated and will be reviewed through the state and federal wetland review process. Approximately 10 acres of wooded area will also be removed within the project area. Landscaping will be included with the project and will be reviewed as part of the city permitting process. Open space will also be incorporated into the development to provide mitigation for the land use change. Adelaide Landing Record of Decision Wastewater - It is estimated that the proposed project will generate an average of 88,776 gallons per day (GPD) of wastewater. Wastewater will be conveyed to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment plant in St. Paul via the sanitary sewer trunk system. The increase in wastewater resulting from the proposed project can be accommodated by the system. The proposed development as planned will require a change to the specific sewer districts in the City's Comprehensive Plan. This will require a modification to the existing forcemain discharge from the lift station on 130th Street. The final routing of the sanitary sewer, as well as the required improvements to the 130th Street System will be reviewed by the City Engineering staff prior to permitting and construction. Water/Wetland Resources —The project will impact approximately 1.32 acres of impact in seven areas, primarily to accommodate proposed road crossings. Wetland impacts will be reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies and mitigated prior to construction. The anticipated replacement ratio is 2:1. Erosion prevention and sediment control best management practices (e.g., silt fence, floating silt curtain, erosion control blanket, inlet protection, and stabilization of disturbed areas) will be used to minimize the risk of sedimentation offsite and into downstream water resources. These requirements will be documented in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which will be included in the final plans, as well as with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater General Permit, which will be obtained prior to beginning construction. All best management practices used will be reviewed by the appropriate state and local authorities prior to project construction and any additional requirements will be incorporated into the appropriate permits. By incorporating best management practices during construction, adverse impacts to water resources are expected to be minimized. Stormwater Management — The project will increase the rate and volume of stormwater runoff. Onsite stormwater treatment from ponds, filtration, and water reuse are anticipated to be used to mitigate water quality and quantity impacts. The proposed stormwater management system will reduce the rate and volume of the stormwater runoff and mitigate its impacts. The stormwater Adelaide Landing Record of Decision management system will be further reviewed by the City Engineering staff. Floodplain The project does contact floodplain. Impacts to the floodplain will be mitigated as part of the stormwater management system to provide compensatory storage for flood waters. Water Use —The County Well Index identified one well exists onsite. Any wells that are encountered during the project will be abandoned and sealed according to state and local regulations. The proposed project is anticipated to create a demand for 35.6 million gallons of water per year (97,654 gallons per day). Peak flow is estimated at 344,719 GPD during summer months. Water will be supplied by the City of Hugo municipal water system. The City's Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan has planned for development to occur in this area. Wildlife Blanding's turtles have been noted in the area. Surmountable curb will be used within the project area and some open space will remain as part of the development to address potential turtle impacts. One record of bald eagles and a trumpeter swan were noted within one mile of the project area. The developer completed an eagle nest survey and no nests were noted in the project area. This will be monitored during construction to make sure no new nests have been constructed in the area. Trumpeter swans are not anticipated to use the project site since it does not contain suitable habitat. Historic Properties No previously recorded historic properties were noted within or immediately adjacent to the project area. The US Corps of Engineers has indicated to the developer that no additional study is needed. If this changes, it will be addressed in the permitting process. Transportation A detailed traffic study was completed for the proposed project. This included evaluating traffic generation, timing, and routes. The study recommended number of mitigation measures that the city, developer, and MnDOT will review and address both in the short term and long term. Adelaide Landing Record of Decision b. The extent and reversibility of environmental impacts for the proposed project are consistent with those of residential development. Impacts will be minimized to the extent practical, with mitigation provided for those impacts which cannot be avoided to resources such as wetlands, water surface runoff, etc. 2. MINNESOTA RULE 4410.1700, SUBP. 7.13 -CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS The proposed project will result in the construction of a residential development. The City has planned for future development in the area as outlined in their Comprehensive Plan. No additional specific development plans are proposed in the area around the project area. Therefore, no cumulative potential effects are expected. 3. MINNESOTA RULE 4410.1700, SUBP. 7.0 -THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL AFFECTS ARE SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY a) The following permits or approvals will be required for the project: Permitting Entity Type of Application Status City of Hugo Concept Plan Approval Completed City of Hugo PUD Rezoning Application Submitted City of Hugo Preliminary Plat Application Submitted City of Hugo Final Plat Approval To be applied for City of Hugo EAW Negative Declaration In process City of Hugo Grading Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Building Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Electrical Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Electrical Utility Affidavit To be applied for City of Hugo Plumbing Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Mechanical Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Wetland Delineation Confirmation Completed for all but eastern 28 acres. City of Hugo Wetland Conservation Act Permit; Stormwater Management Permit (per RCWD rules) To be applied for Washington County (no County RW adjacent to project — this can be deleted) Right -of -Way Permit To be applied for Washington County Obstruction Permit To be applied for (if needed) Washington County Utility Permit To be applied for (if needed) Metropolitan Council Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit To be applied for Adelaide Landing Record of Decision MN Department of Health Well Sealing Permit To be applied for MN Department of Health Water Main Extension To be applied for Approval MN Department of Natural Water Appropriations Permit To be applied for, if needed Resources for irrigation purposes MN Department of Access Permit to TH 61 To be applied for Transportation MN Department of Drainage permit To be applied for Transportation MN Department of Work in right of way permit To be applied for Transportation MN DNR Division of Waters Appropriation/Dewatering To be applied for (if needed) Permit MN DNR Division of Waters Public Waters Work Permit To be applied for (if needed) MN DNR Division of Lands and License to Cross Public To be applied for (if needed) Minerals Waters MN Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension To be applied for Approval NPDES/SDS General Permit; Covered under general permit; MN Pollution Control Agency 30-day PCA review due to submit N01 prior to proximity to impaired waters. construction. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Clean Water Act To be applied for Permit Federal Emergency Letter of Map Revision To be applied for Management Agency (LOMR) Koch Pipeline Approval for crossing pipeline To be applied for with roads and utilities b) The City of Hugo finds that the potential impacts identified as part of the Adelaide Landings project are minimal and can be addressed through the regulatory agencies as part of the permitting process. As a result, additional analysis of these impacts is not required. 4. MINNESOTA RULE 4410.1700, SUBP. 7.D -THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER AVAILABLE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC AGENCIES OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, INCLUDING OTHER EISs. The proposed project is subject to the plans prepared by the City of Hugo as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. These plans have identified development in the area and infrastructure needs that can be accommodated within the confines of the Comprehensive Plan. Adelaide Landing Record of Decision The City of Hugo finds that the environmental effects of the project can be anticipated and controlled as a result of the environmental review, planning, and permitting processes. D. CONCLUSIONS The Adelaide Landing EAW and comments received have generated information adequate to determine that the proposed project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW has identified areas where the potential for environmental effects exist, but appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project plans and the required approvals and permits to mitigate these effects will be obtained. The project will comply with all county, city, and federal review agency requirements. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required for the Adelaide Landing project. Adelaide Landing Record of Decision A WVB — 701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 3001 Minneapolis, MN 55416 1 (763) 541-4800 Memorandum To: Review Agencies and Commenters From: Andi Moffatt Date: April 12, 2017 Re: Adelaide Landing EAW— Response to Comments WSB Project No. 3288-040 Outlined below, please find responses to comments received during the comment period for the Adelaide Landing Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). The comment period for the EAW ended March 29, 2017. During the comment period, comments were received from the Metropolitan Council (MC), the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Mr. Dan Sittler, and Jerome, Stella and Teo Bosc. Additional comments were received during the public hearing portion of the March 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 1. Metropolitan Council (MC) Comment 1: Item 9.a.ii — Plans (Raya Esrraaedi, 651-602-1616) The EAW indicates, in the Land Use section, that the net density of the proposed development is 2.4 units per acre. While the density is consistent with the land use guiding, the details of this calculation are unclear. The Council will confirm and adjust the calculation, when the approved plat is submitted as part of the Plat Monitoring Program. Response: The developer has provided a buildable calculation worksheet for the development. This will be provided to the Metropolitan Council as part of the Plat Monitoring Program. Comment 2: Item 9.a.ii — Plans (Raya Eswaeili, 651-602-16.16) The EAW indicates that the I Ingo Comprehensive Plan must address local issues and be consistent with the 2030 Regional Development Framework as a developing community. While the development and adoption of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan occurred in accordance with the 2030 Regional Development Frameimrk, any land use and plan changes need to also be consistent with the current regional development guide, Thrive MSP 2940 and I-lugo's designation as Diversified Dural and Emerging SubUrban Edge. Response: During the planning process staff will review the development in accordance with the current regional development guide, Thrive MSP 2040, and Hugo's designations as outlined within the documents. Building a legacy — your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com K:\03288-040\Admix\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 2 Comment 3: Item 13.d — Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) (Jim Larsen, 651-602-1159) A significant number of natural wetlands and constructed surface water basins will be present on the developed site.. The EAW indicates that Blanding's turtle (E,mydoidea blandingii), a state - listed threatened species has been sighted within the project boundaries. Council staff encourages specifying the utilization of sloping, surmountable curbs for all roadways to be constructed within the development. `1'he use of standard, near -vertical B424 or similar curbing can entrap turtles within roadways as they pass between wetland basins and potential nearby habitat areas, can lead to high mortality rates. This simple design change to use a more gently sloping curb will reduce the fauna mortality risk without impacts to storm water flow, driver and pedestrian safety, or maintenance activities and is consistent with recommended Minnesota Department of Natural Resources guidance presented in EAW Appendix; C. We suggest tine use of Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. S524 or similar design profile. Response: Aside from a 400-foot stretch of access road from 130th Street North, the project is currently designed with surmountable curb and gutter. The project proposer will use Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. 5524, or similar, where surmountable curb and gutter is specified. 2. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) Comment 1: A significant portion of this project area is within the mapped 100-year floodplain and development will need to meet local and state floodplain regulations. The EAW should provide a more detailed description of how elevations in the existing floodplain will be modified, what compensatory storage will be constructed and where it will be located, and how the project will alter flood flow (determined through hydraulic modeling). Response: The project will meet local and state floodplain regulations. The project proposer has prepared an engineering report to support a FEMA Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), and is currently in the process of coordinating with FEMA and Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) staff regarding floodplains on the site. To evaluate floodplain impacts, the developer obtained the RCWD XP-SWMM model for the relevant area. The existing condition 100-year high water level (HWL) was modeled in XP- SWMM. The proposed 100-year high water elevation was also modeled in XP-SWMM using LiDAR and the proposed grading plan. According to the models, the proposed condition high water level at the elevation tie-in location is 0.2 feet higher than the existing high water level. This area has no base flood elevation because it is a Zone A. The development has been modeled in XP-SWMM under existing and proposed conditions to establish a revised effective 1% annual chance floodplain and a proposed 1% annual chance floodplain. Using detailed topography and proposed grading plans, the floodplains are more accurate than the effective FEMA floodplain. In proposed conditions, fill will be placed within the existing floodplain. The proposed site will be graded to establish large ponds (located primarily on the western portion of the project area) so that, despite the fill, there will be more storage and a larger floodplain. The existing high water level will increase by 0.2 feet under K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 3 proposed conditions. Adjacent properties will not be affected. The City will review this as part of the development plan review process. Comment 2: The response provided for Item 11, related to Surface Waters (page 22) does not describe anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features, detailed impacts to the host watershed, or measures to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. This section should provide detailed information or these points. Response: At the time the EAW was prepared, specific details on the wetland replacement plan were not finalized. A wetland replacement plan application that meets the requirements of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is currently under review by the City of Hugo, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington Conservation District, the Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Rice Creek Watershed District, and Department of Natural Resources. Full sequencing to address avoidance and minimization is addressed in the wetland permitting application as required. The wetland application currently identifies 1.32 acres of impact in seven separate areas, primarily to accommodate proposed road crossings. Wetland replacement is proposed through the use of existing wetland credits and from wetland bank account #1542 in Stearns County at a 2:1 ratio. The wetland impact and mitigation will be addressed through the permitting process. Comment 3: Pertaining to Item 13, Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources, Section D, "mitigation measures" is missing this information is a required part of the EAW. As noted on page 26 of the EAW and in our NHIS review letter (Appendix C of the EAW), Blarding's turtles have been documented in the vicinity of the project and may be encountered within the project area. The DNR's NHIS review letter also noted that the project site is located within an area of statewide importance for Blarding's turtles. Our letter included several recommendations to avoid or minimize disturbance to this state -listed threatened species as well as a Fact Sheet (Appendix C) with guidance that the proposer follow both lists of recommendations to reduce the potential for incidental takings during construction activities and engineering considerations for roads, utilities, and landscaping. Examples of recommendations to reduce potential impacts include using wildlife friendly erosion control, curb design (if in use), avoiding impacts to wetlands, and vegetated buffers. The EAW did not identify how the Blandng's turtle may be affected by the project in section C and did not describe how impacts were considered in construction and planning activities and measures that would be taken to avoid or minimize disturbance (section D). Please provide this information. Response: The city and project proposer are sensitive to the fact that state -listed (Threatened) Blanding's turtles could potentially be found near the project area, and are therefore taking actions to avoid impacts to the species during and after project construction. The project proposer has largely designed the project with surmountable curb and gutter, and will use Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. S524, or similar, where surmountable curb and gutter is specified. Approximately 98% of the wetlands on the site are being completely avoided, with impacts minimized to areas needed primarily for road crossings. Larger and higher quality wetlands that would most likely be used by Blanding's turtles have been avoided. K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 4 Contractors, and homeowners, working or living within the project area will be provided the DNR's Blanding's turtle flyer so they are aware what the species looks like, and what to do should an animal be encountered. The project will also be required to adhere to the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and actively monitored during construction. Construction zones will be cordoned off with silt fence and monitored for turtles by SWPPP and construction staff. Open trenches will be inspected prior to backfilling, and the DNR will be immediately notified of any turtle sightings. Turtles will be moved by hand, out of harm's way, if they are in imminent danger. Turtles not in imminent danger will be left undisturbed. In addition, the project proposer will evaluate use of wildlife -friendly erosion control products to prevent animals from being entangled during construction. Comment 4: The EAW references an incorrect ERDB number for the NHIS review letter that is included in Appendix C. For future reference, the correct number is 20160443. Response: Noted for the record. Comment 5: Appendix C includes an "Eagle Nest Assessment Summary" dated July 2016. This summary indicated that bald eagles were observed in the project vicinity, however no eagle nests were observed within the project boundary at the time of the survey. It is unclear if all tree clearing activities related to this project will occur at one time, or during multiple phases of the project (extending out to 2021). As such, the DNR recommends that trees be surveyed for eagle nests each year, prior to any tree cutting activities. Response: Tree clearing will likely occur with grading in two separate phases. As recommended, the project proposer will review the previous nest survey prior to each tree removal event to ensure eagles have not moved into the project area since the previous survey. Should an eagle's nest be discovered on the project area, the project proposer will notify the DNR. Comment 6: Page 3 notes that the Comprehensive Plan calls for two future wells to be located outside of the project boundary. As a reminder, the City of Hugo will need to submit a "Well Construction — Preliminary Assessment" request to the DNR for the location and depth of each of the two proposed wells. Depending on results of our review, the locations and aquifers for each of the proposed wells may need to be changed and the City of Hugo may be required to conduct aquifer tests and construct observation wells for measuring the impacts of water use on the aquifers as a result of these wells. After the wells have been constructed, the DNR Water Appropriation Permit for the City of Hugo Water Supply System will need to be amended to reflect the existence of the new wells. Response: It is not anticipated that a new well will need to be constructed with this development. The City is currently updating its Comprehensive Plan and will evaluate whether the number or proposed locations of any wells will change from the last update. When a well is deemed necessary based on the City's maximum daily demand, the City will follow the appropriate procedures for assessing the location and constructing the well, including conducting aquifer tests and placing observation wells, as necessary. K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 5 The City of Hugo is committed to reducing its aquifer demand, and has implemented several water conservation efforts since the adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Of note, the City has implemented stormwater irrigation projects that directly reduce maximum day demands, thereby delaying the need for additional municipal wells. 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Comment 1: Permits and Approvals (Item S) This section indicates that a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for project related wetland impacts may be necessary. Please be aware that if a USACE Section 404 Individual Permit is required for any project activity, then an MPCA CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver must also be obtained as part of the permitting process. The Section 401 Water Quality Certification ensures that the activity will comply with the state water quality standards. Any conditions required within the MPCA 401 Certificate are then incorporated into the USACE 404 Permit. You can find additional information about the MPCA's 401 Certification process at www.pca.state.mn.us/waterl401.html. For further information about the 401 Water Quality Certification process, please contact Jim Brist at 651-757-2245 or Bill Wilde at 651-757-2825. Response: Noted for the record. All required permits regarding wetlands and water quality protection will be acquired prior to project construction. 4. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Comment 1: Due to tnC- nature and location of the proposed projeo, we rem mmend that a Phase I archaeological survey be completed The survey +nim meet the requirements of the Secietary of the Interior's Standards for ldenti ication and Evaluation, .and Should include an evaluatlan of National Register eligibility for any propc-rties that are identified. For a list of consuftanls who have expressed an interest in undeftaking such 5i.arwe , please visit the wabslte preservatiorKfirectory.rnnhsorg. and select °Archaeolcgjist In the '"Seaircch by Spetialties" box. We will reconsider the need for survey if the project .area can be dkKumented as previously survey Dr disturbed. Any previous survey work must meet contemporary standards. Note' plowed areas and right -ref= way are not automatically considered disturbed. Archaeological sites can remain intact b8neath the plow zone and in undisturbed portions of the right -of -Tway. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Pmservation Act of 1966 and �6CFRSW, pr(Kedurw of the Advisco Councli on H Istorie Preserwatiion far the protettlon of histok properties, If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal license or permit, it should be wbmitted to our afke by the responsible federal agency - Response: The project proposer has coordinated with the US Corps of Engineers regarding the need for additional cultural or archaeological survey as the lead federal agency. The US Corps has indicated that no additional work is needed. The City will take the SHPO comment under advisement. K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 6 5. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Comment 1: Troffer Thtrcc- are nn plans at thus lime to expand 1,%61 to a 4-lane tacility, + If safeiv concerris arise LLL or 137' S L dUV Lts penple avxiiding the signals at 130Lh S1 07- 14& Si, thurU is no c2rLL1_:a0. •heat additional traffic control would he Ole sr-lulioll. Any add}tl4artal traffic ciiillTtsl : l Ll} j have to [heel a°arranls .anc3 sp;n�in puidclines us well as tit info the larger plaui fbi the 'ootrid0r. f'OICULud solu[iorizi LU nxplura wnuld likcl y includc limiting mo}°Lwnnents al these inteiscxtiom, Any changes to speed limits would Tcqu ire a traffic study to be dune by MnDOT. AdditiOnal access with Lncreascd icit ssti-W. mffie rarely impacts traveled speeds sigmiGL azlly. If there is a xw i sh ttr lowcT 47acc&-; an 130� and 1411di in the future, enginceriing sLIluliaas f u Lr:: t is caln-mg would Iike1v k- nemisary. Response: The city and developer will work with MnDOT on possible mitigation solutions and requirements as traffic volumes warrant. Comment 2: Wafer iPe.murrrs, A drainage purnit i rewired. The proposed C-CVCloPtiIC111 Will LICCd 10 LLUILntain L11 -t LL, V existing drainage rates to and rnaintain drainage pat[crns w-_ihin M'nlX)T right Lit °.way. Perxeils In additinn to the drgi na{rc txrinit, any use of Or work wilhin or affecting N DOT ril_h1 o' 5x :Ly rectluires a lic.-mix. Pcrmit ibrnns arc avail. bie lha[tt ►a'1a DO T. ulilit, %N AV�iLr LLL clate.mn 1'.r!,l Response: The project proposer will be required to obtain necessary permits. These permits have been added to the record. 6. Mr. Dan Sittler Comment 1: My conceal is the traffic on 135t" St, whilcit will now link up to this new deve9opment. 135' St. will be a long straight road that will lead to more and faster traffic flow. Currently 1.35Lh is a dead ended, and the locals do speed up faster than, they should. One suggestion would be to put a stop sign at Freeland St. that tees into 135"' and adding some speed limit reminders (signs), this may help.. Response: During the initial stages of the review process, the City of Hugo made a point of including "cut - through" traffic as a specific topic of analysis. During the traffic study, the project proposer worked with the City's traffic consultant to determine the magnitude of trips cutting through the Adelaide Landing development to get to or from 130th Street, TH 61 or points to the north and east. The results showed relatively few trips cutting through the development, thus not appreciably adding traffic impacts to or from the main intersections into or out of the development. Regarding 135th Street linking up to the development and becoming a long straight road, the street will actually curve to the northwest once entering the Adelaide Landing development, and a stop condition will occur at 137th Street. This curvilinear design and intersection promotes traffic calming. The stop sign at 137th street and the curvilinear design of the road should K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 7 adequately improve conditions along 135th street as well; additional traffic controls do not appear warranted at this time. 7. Jerome, Stella, and Teo Bosc Comment 1: Due to having up to 4 town.hDmes in front of our house, we want to make sure there; is enough clearance with those townhomes, maybe by having them pushed as much as possible towards. the road, minimizing their front yard. Also, we would like to know exactly which tees of trees and how big they will be when pl an ted and their location to make sure they cover properly and enough the direct view_ In front of our dining roerm windows, we have some~ mature trees, that we would ideally welcome to be remaining. Part of it will need to he removed to open the road, however, the part can our property line might be able to stay. We would toasider purchasing this part if possible., extending ou r lot: by a few feet to increase the spaci q with the new townhomes. We would actua lly be very interested in looking into that option, even if a tree line or other type; of separation would stil l need to be applied_ A detailed "close-up'" of the landscape and installation next to our property line would be. nice to .get, itic ttiding knowing exactly where this p:ruperty Itne is. Also it s"rns that a pathway will he made cleric to oar property a n d this is not really a problem for Lis. If walkway needs to be made within our front yard, we would not lie against it, if we dry not have to plow it and if this allows us to get some side: yard as an exchange_ Response: The City has the landscaping plan for the proposed for the development. This can be provided to you at your request. Any desire to purchase property would be a discussion with the resident and owner of the property and/or developer. Comment 2: If possible, Some type of continuityin the design with the older homes on 137+h as ours and the new ones would be welcome to limit the demarcation_ This ,would avoid too much of depreciation of our houses. Response: This comment will be taken into consideration as part of the design process. Comment 3: OUr driveway is extra -large, as it was a request from HUGO lire depat nywrit when the: house was originally bulld, to be able to ttarn around with the fire trucks. We understand that this requi.rrment will not exist when. the road will be opened, but wed o not want to be forced to rework cur driveway_ We have made large invest.a't'ients, inclu.dinR 3 re'nta2 towrnhornes in Hugo, and do not have to invest in the driveway, while cur house needs major renovations. Response: The City of Hugo would consider a reduction in the width of the driveway. Comment 4: Is there an estimate of the amount of traffic through 1376, street? I tinderstknd that traffic will he a little above 300 trips/hour at rush hours, but is there an estimate of the , of this traffic which would go through? Our biggest concern is the speed of the cars and a roundabout or speed bumps might be useful to increase the safety of the lads. It is also tre0 that the new ,road lay -out proposed by Excelsior seems curvy enough to prevent any High speesding cars. K:\03288-040\Admin\Dots\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 8 Response: Peak hour traffic volumes will not be "...above 300 trips/hour at rush hours", as stated in the comment letter. The total traffic on 1371h Street will be 74 trips/hour during the a.m. peak hour. The total traffic on 1371h Street during the p.m. peak hour will be 84 trips/hour. The percentage of through trips on 137th Street from TH 61 to and from the Adelaide Landing development will be 73% in the a.m. peak hour and 65% in the p.m. peak hour. Regarding traffic calming, the city will take this comment into consideration as part of the design process for the development. The curvilinear design of the roadway in Adelaide Landing was intended to calm traffic. Comment 5: 0f caurse, we expect noise for the -con stmCtion which we Imagine will last 3 or years, But we would like to make sure that the hours are mas€rn,able- 7:00 AV to 6:00 PM weekdays oniy,.and na work du week-un or holidays. i do not think this is addressed in the } AW. Response: Construction activity, including equipment startup and fueling, can only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays; and at no time on Sundays and holidays. Comment 6: Finally, it seems that there has been a private meeting with Excelslor on 3/16. but we did not get the notification, maybe because we just Jnoved in. Please make sure we are now listed with there or that we can have a "catch-up" session and do not hesitate to communicate our details to them. Response: The letter was forwarded to the developer. Planning Commission Comments Additional comments were received from landowners during the public hearing portion of the March 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Those comments have been summarized in the table below according to the individual that made the comment, and where the response can be found within the above responses, or elsewhere. Commenter EAW Comment Topic(s) Response or location of response Lisa Berggren Project drainage, wildlife. Please see Metropolitan Council and MnDNR responses. Anne Brasse Increased traffic, wildlife. Please see Sittler, Bosc, and MnDNR responses. David Crosby Soil safety and testing. Soil testing has been completed on the site and there are no documented issues. Desiree Rotter FEMA floodplain changes Please see Metropolitan Council and MnDNR and flood insurance; responses. MnDOT has stated that no project drainage; traffic improvements to TH 61 are currently needed on TH 61 and or planned. The city will continue to work with improvements. the developer in evaluating and having conversations with MnDOT regarding timing of those future improvements in the corridor. K:\03288-040\Admen\Does\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx April 12, 2017 Page 9 Larry Paist TH 61 traffic; project Please see Metropolitan Council and MnDNR drainage; wildlife. responses. MnDOT has stated that no improvements to TH 61 are currently needed or planned. See traffic comments above. Kevin Peltier TH 61 traffic; water Please see MnDNR response. Stormwater quality, project drainage. management, including water quality, rate and volume control will be provided in accordance with Rice Creek Watershed District and city of Hugo requirements. See previous responses to traffic comments. Bill Donovan Water and drainage; Please see Sittler, Bosc, and MnDNR traffic evaluation. responses. This concludes the responses to comments on the EAW. If you have questions, please feel free to call me at 763-287-7196. K:\03288-040\Admin\Docs\EAW\EAW Responses to Comments 041217.docx March 28, 2017 Bryan Bear, Administrator City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N Hugo, MN 55038 RE: City of Hugo Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) — Adelaide Landing Metropolitan Council Review No. 21689-1 Metropolitan Council District No. 11 Dear Mr. Bear: The Metropolitan Council received the EAW for the Adelaide Landing project in Hugo on February 23, 2017. The proposed project is generally located east of TH 61 and north of 130th Street N. The proposed development consists of a total of 324 housing units (182 single family lots, 51 detached townhomes, 91 villa homes) on approximately 217.5 acres for a gross density of 1.5 units per acre. The staff review finds that the EAW is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and does not raise major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. In addition, we offer the following comments for your consideration. Item 9.a.ii — Plans (Raya Esmaeili, 651-602-1616) The EAW indicates, in the Land Use section, that the net density of the proposed development is 2.4 units per acre. While the density is consistent with the land use guiding, the details of this calculation are unclear. The Council will confirm and adjust the calculation, when the approved plat is submitted as part of the Plat Monitoring Program. Item 9.a.ii — Plans (Raya Esmaeili, 651-602-1616) The EAW indicates that the Hugo Comprehensive Plan must address local issues and be consistent with the 2030 Regional Development Framework as a developing community. While the development and adoption of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan occurred in accordance with the 2030 Regional Development Framework, any land use and plan changes need to also be consistent with the current regional development guide, Thrive MSP 2040 and Hugo's designation as Diversified Rural and Emerging Suburban Edge. Item 13A — Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) (Jim Larsen, 651-602-1159) A significant number of natural wetlands and constructed surface water basins will be present on the developed site. The EAW indicates that Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), a state - listed threatened species has been sighted within the project boundaries. Council staff encourages specifying the utilization of sloping, surmountable curbs for all roadways to be constructed within the development. The use of standard, near -vertical B424 or similar curbing can entrap turtles within roadways as they pass between wetland basins and potential nearby habitat areas, can lead to high mortality rates. This simple design change to use a more gently sloping curb will reduce the fauna mortality risk without impacts to storm water flow, driver and pedestrian safety, or METROPOLITAN C 0 U N C I L Bryan Bear, Administrator March 28, 2017 Page 2 maintenance activities and is consistent with recommended Minnesota Department of Natural Resources guidance presented in EAW Appendix C. We suggest the use of Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. S524 or similar design profile. This concludes the Council's review of the EAW. The Council will not take formal action on the EAW. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Raya Esmaeili, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1616. S Lisa -Beth BarajA, Manager Local Planning Assistance CC: Steve O'Brien, MHFA Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division Sandy Rummel, Metropolitan Council District 11 Corrin Hoegen-Wendell, Sector Representative Raya Esmaeili, Principal Reviewer/ Reviews Coordinator N: ICommDevILPAICommunitieslHugolLetterslHugo 2017 EAW 21689-1 Adelaide Landing.doex MDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resource 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 March 29, 2017 Brian Bear Administrator 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N Hugo, MN 55038 Re: Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW Dear Mr. Bear, Transmitted Electronically The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Adelaide Landing Residential Development. We offer the following comments for your consideration. A significant portion of this project area is within the mapped 100-year floodplain and development will need to meet local and state floodplain regulations. The EAW should provide a more detailed description of how elevations in the existing floodplain will be modified, what compensatory storage will be constructed and where it will be located, and how the project will alter flood flow (determined through hydraulic modeling). The response provided for Item 11, related to Surface Waters (page 22) does not describe anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features, detailed impacts to the host watershed, or measures to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. This section should provide detailed information on these points. Pertaining to Item 13, Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources, Section D, "mitigation measures" is missing; this information is a required part of the EAW. As noted on page 26 of the EAW and in our NHIS review letter (Appendix C of the EAW), Blanding's turtles have been documented in the vicinity of the project and may be encountered within the project area. The DNR's NHIS review letter also noted that the project site is located within an area of statewide importance for Blanding's turtles. Our letter included several recommendations to avoid or minimize disturbance to this state -listed threatened species as well as a Fact Sheet (Appendix C) with guidance that the proposer follow both lists of recommendations to reduce the potential for incidental takings during construction activities and engineering considerations for roads, utilities, and landscaping. Examples of recommendations to reduce potential impacts include using wildlife friendly erosion control, curb design (if in use), avoiding impacts to wetlands, and vegetated buffers. The EAW did not identify how the Blanding's turtle may be affected by the project in section C and did not describe how impacts were considered in construction and planning activities and measures that would be taken to avoid or minimize disturbance (section D). Please provide this information. The EAW references an incorrect ERDB number for the NHIS review letter that is included in Appendix C. For future reference, the correct number is 20160443. Appendix C includes an "Eagle Nest Assessment Summary" dated July 2016. This summary indicated that bald eagles were observed in the project vicinity, however no eagle nests were observed within the project boundary at the time of the survey. It is unclear if all tree clearing activities related to this project will occur at one time, or during multiple phases of the project (extending out to 2021). As such, the DNR recommends that trees be surveyed for eagle nests each year, prior to any tree cutting activities. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 Page 3 notes that the Comprehensive Plan calls for two future wells to be located outside of the project boundary. As a reminder, the City of Hugo will need to submit a "Well Construction — Preliminary Assessment" request to the DNR for the location and depth of each of the two proposed wells. Depending on results of our review, the locations and aquifers for each of the proposed wells may need to be changed and the City of Hugo may be required to conduct aquifer tests and construct observation wells for measuring the impacts of water use on the aquifers as a result of these wells. After the wells have been constructed, the DNR Water Appropriation Permit for the City of Hugo Water Supply System will need to be amended to reflect the existence of the new wells. On behalf of the DNR, thank you for the consideration of our comments. Sincerely, /s/ Rebecca Horton CC: Melissa Doperalski, Lisa Joyal, Joe Richter, Jen Sorenson Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 Minnesota Pofluflon Contro� Agency =' 520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 1 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 1 Use your preferred relay service I info.pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer March 29, 2017 Mr. Bryan Bear Administrator City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North Hugo, MN 55038 Re: Adelaide Landing Residential Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet Dear Mr. Bear: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Adelaide Landing Residential Development project (Project) located in the city of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota. The Project consists of a 217-acre residential development. Regarding matters for which the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has regulatory responsibility and other interests, the MPCA staff has the following comments for your consideration. Permits and Approvals (Item 8) This section indicates that a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for project related wetland impacts may be necessary. Please be aware that if a USACE Section 404 Individual Permit is required for any project activity, then an MPCA CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver must also be obtained as part of the permitting process. The Section 401 Water Quality Certification ensures that the activity will comply with the state water quality standards. Any conditions required within the MPCA 401 Certificate are then incorporated into the USACE 404 Permit. You can find additional information about the MPCA's 401 Certification process at www.pca.state.mn.us/water/401.html. For further information about the 401 Water Quality Certification process, please contact Jim Brist at 651-757-2245 or Bill Wilde at 651-757-2825. We appreciate the opportunity to review this Project. Please provide your specific responses to our comments and notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If you have any questions concerning our review of this EAW, please contact me at 651-757-2508. Sincerely, "Vvornar Karen Kromar Planner Principal Environmental Review Unit Resource Management and Assistance Division KK:bt cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul Bill Wilde, MPCA, St. Paul Teresa McDill, MPCA, St. Paul 1' Minnesota Using the Power of History to Transform Lives Historical Society PRESERVING SHARING CONNECTING MINNESOTA HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE March 23, 2017 Mr. Bryan Bear City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave N Hugo, MN 55038 RE: EAW - Adelaide Landing Residential Development T31 R21 S29 Hugo, Washington County MnHPO Number: 2017-1246 Dear Mr. Bear: Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the above -referenced project. Due to the nature and location of the proposed project, we recommend that a Phase I archaeological survey be completed. The survey must meet the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Evaluation, and should include an evaluation of National Register eligibility for any properties that are identified. For a list of consultants who have expressed an interest in undertaking such surveys, please visit the website preservationdirectory.mnhs.org, and select "Archaeologists" in the "Search by Specialties" box. We will reconsider the need for survey if the project area can be documented as previously surveyed or disturbed. Any previous survey work must meet contemporary standards. Note: plowed areas and right-of- way are not automatically considered disturbed. Archaeological sites can remain intact beneath the plow zone and in undisturbed portions of the right-of-way. Please note that this comment letter, does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Presentation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal license or permit, it should be submitted to our office by the responsible federal agency. If you have any questions regarding our review of this project, please contact David Mather, National Register Archaeologist, at (651) 259-3454, Sincerely, ogp_ ,vl)�f _ o,oiGwLfJ 4 Sarah J. Beimers, Manager Government Programs and Compliance Minnesota Historical Society, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 651-259-3000 • 888-727-8386 • www.mnhs.org Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District nr T� Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 March 9, 2019 Rachel Juba City Planner City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Avenue Hugo, MN 55038 SUBJECT: Adelaide Landing MnDOT Review # P 17-015 NE quad US 61 and 130th St. Hugo, Washington County Control Section 8206 Dear Ms. Juba: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has reviewed the above referenced plat for the proposed Adelaide Landing development in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subdivision 2, Plats. Before further development, please address the following issues: Traffic • There are no plans at this time to expand US61 to a 4-lane facility. • If safety concerns arise at 134 h St or 137h St due to people avoiding the signals at 130`h St or 140a' St, there is no certainty that additional traffic control would be the solution. Any additional traffic control would have to meet warrants and spacing guidelines as well as fit into the larger plan for the corridor. Potential solutions to explore would likely include limiting movements at these intersections. • Any changes to speed limits would require a traffic study to be done by MnDOT. Additional access with increased side street traffic rarely impacts traveled speeds significantly. If there is a wish to lower speeds on 130t' and 140t' in the future, engineering solutions for traffic calming would likely be necessary. For questions regarding these comments please contact Kaare Festvog at 651-234-7814 or kaare.festvo, --o state.mn.us. Design There appears to be grading identified on MnDOT right of way however on Sheet 8 there are notes that there is a difference between the existing and proposed right of way line. Please reconcile these differences. For questions regarding these comments please contact Nancy Jacobson at 651.234,7647 or Nanc .L.Jacobson, ., state.mn.us. Water Resources: A drainage permit is required. The proposed development will need to maintain or reduce existing drainage rates to and maintain drainage patterns within MnDOT right of way. In addition, the submitted plan shows ponding highwater elevations and grading that currently utilize MnDOT right of way for storage. All ponds and associated highwater elevations need to be situated outside of MnDOT right of way. Please adjust any design elements that are currently utilizing MnDOT property in this way. As part of a drainage permit submittal, the City or project developer will need to submit existing and proposed hydraulic computations for both 10 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage patterns, ponding, and systems affecting WDOT right of way will be perpetuated. For questions on these points or to submit additional information, please call Bryce Fossand, Mn/DOT Metro District Water Resources Engineering, at (651) 234-7529 or email b[ N ce.fossand Rr state.mmus . Permits In addition to the drainage permit, any use of or work within or affecting MnDOT right of way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at httii://www.dot.state.nm.us/metro/maintenance/J.ien-nits.ht,rnl Please include one set of plans formatted to 11X17 with each permit application. Please submit/send all permit applications and 11X17plan sets to: metropermitapps.dot, state.mn.us. Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig (651-234-7911) of MnDOT's Metro Permits Section. Review Submittal Options: Mn/DOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. Mn/DOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dot. , i state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: Mn/DOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disk. 4. Plans can also be submitted to Mn/DOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: ft J.)://I'tl)2.dot.state.mn.us/k ub/incoming'MetroWatersEd+2e/PlanninL Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dot.(t?state.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review please contact me at (651) 234-7784. Sincerely, iell rj i Karen Scheffing Principal Planner Copy sent via E-Mail: Buck Craig, Permits Nancy Jacobson, Design Bryce Fossand, Water Resources Mark Beatty, Surveys Tiffany Kautz, Right -of -Way Kaare Festevog, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Ryan Coddington, Area Engineer Russ Owen, Metropolitan Council To: Bryan Bear City administrator Hugo City Hall 14669 Fitzgerald Ave N Hugo, Mn 55038 Subject: EWA Assessment Adelaide Landing My concern is the traffic on 135th St, which will now link up to this new development. 135th St. will be a long straight road that will lead to more and faster traffic flow. Currently 135th is a dead ended, and the locals do speed up faster than they should. One suggestion would be to put a stop sign at Freeland St. that tees into 135m and adding some speed limit reminders (signs), this may help. If you need additional clarification please feel free to contact me: Dan Sittler (651) 429-8977 6110135th st n Hugo, Mn 55038 Jerome, Stella and Teo Bosc 5535, 137th Street N HUGO, MN 55038 3/23/2017 Mr. Bryan Bear City Administrator Hugo City Hall 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N. Hugo MN 55038 Subjet: Adelaide Landing EAW Comments Dear Mr. Bryan Bear: Following the EAW survey for the Adelaide landing and the public hearing from 3/23/2017, we have some comments that we would like to share. Our property will be adjacent to the single-family townhomes and we will have 4 of those townhomes along our property and very close to our house. Our main concern is the separation with those townhomes, but also the architectural continuity to avoid too much of a differentiation between the older and newer homes. Other annex subjects 1) Separation: Due to having up to 4 townhomes in front of our house, we want to make sure there is enough clearance with those townhomes, maybe by having them pushed as much as possible towards the road, minimizing their front yard. Also, we would like to know exactly which types of trees and how big they will be when planted and their location to make sure they cover properly and enough the direct view. In front of our dining room windows, we have some mature trees, that we would ideally welcome to be remaining. Part of it will need to be removed to open the road, however, the part on our property line might be able to stay. We would consider purchasing this part if possible, extending our lot by a few feet to increase the spacing with the new townhomes. We would actually be very interested in looking into that option, even if a tree line or other type of separation would still need to be applied. A detailed "close-up" of the landscape and installation next to our property line would be nice to get, including knowing exactly where this property line is. Also it seems that a pathway will be made close to our property and this is not really a problem for us. If a walkway needs to be made within our front yard, we would not be against it, if we do not have to plow it and if this allows us to get some side yard as an exchange. 2) Architecture: If possible, some type of continuity in the design with the older homes on 137th as ours and the new ones would be welcome to limit the demarcation. This would avoid too much of a depreciation of our houses. 3) Driveway: Our driveway is extra -large, as it was a request from HUGO fire department when the house was originally build, to be able to turn around with the fire trucks. We understand that this requirement will not exist when the road will be opened, but we do not want to be forced to rework our driveway. We have made large investments, including 3 rental townhomes in Hugo, and do not have to invest in the driveway, while our house needs major renovations. 4) Traffic: Is there an estimate of the amount of traffic through 137th street? I understand that traffic will be a little above 300 trips/hour at rush hours, but is there an estimate of the % of this traffic which would go through? Our biggest concern is the speed of the cars and a roundabout or speed bumps might be useful to increase the safety of the kids. It is also true that the new road lay -out proposed by Excelsior seems curvy enough to prevent any high speeding cars. 5) Construction hours: Of course, we expect noise for the construction which we imagine will last 3 or 4 years. But we would like to make sure that the hours are reasonable: 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM weekdays only, and no work during week -ends or holidays. I do not think this is addressed in the EAW. Finally, it seems that there has been a private meeting with Excelsior on 3/16, but we did not get the notification, maybe because we just moved in. Please make sure we are now listed with them or that we can have a "catch-up" session and do not hesitate to communicate our details to them. Sincerely, Jerome. Stell rtd'eo Bosc l Page 2 Westwood ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Adelaide Landing Hugo, Minnesota January 31, 2017 Prepared For: The Excelsior Group 1660 Highway 100 S., Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Version 8/08rev ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo CONTENTS Page Listof Tables............................................................................................................................... i Listof Exhibits............................................................................................................................ ii Listof Appendices...................................................................................................................... ii 1. Project Title........................................................................................................................1 2. Proposer.............................................................................................................................. 1 3. RGU....................................................................................................................................1 4. Reason for EAW Preparation............................................................................................. 1 5. Project Location..................................................................................................................1 6. Project Description............................................................................................................. 2 7. Cover Types........................................................................................................................4 8. Permits and Approvals Required........................................................................................ 5 9. Land Use............................................................................................................................. 6 10. Geology, soils and topography/land forms.......................................................................10 11. Water Resources............................................................................................................... 13 12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes....................................................................24 13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features) ..... 26 14. Historic properties............................................................................................................28 15. Visual................................................................................................................................29 16. Air.....................................................................................................................................29 17. Noise................................................................................................................................. 30 18. Transportation...................................................................................................................30 19. Cumulative potential effects.............................................................................................35 20. Other potential environmental effects.............................................................................. 37 TABLES 7.1 Estimated Before and After Cover Types....................................................................... 4 8.1 Permits and Approvals Required.................................................................................... 5 10.1 Soils Classification........................................................................................................11 11.1 Delineated Wetlands..................................................................................................... 13 11.2 MNDNR Water Appropriations Permit Numbers........................................................ 21 18.1 Trip Generation Summary............................................................................................ 31 I Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo January 31, 2017 EXHIBITS SiteLocation............................................................................................................................... 1 USGSTopography......................................................................................................................2 Post -Construction Site Plan........................................................................................................ 3 AdjacentLand Use......................................................................................................................4 ZoningMap................................................................................................................................. 5 WaterResources......................................................................................................................... 6 NRCSSoils............................................................................................................................7 Approved Delineated Wetland Boundaries................................................................................ 8 CoverTypes........................................................................................................................... 9 APPENDICES WetlandDecision Notices.......................................................................................................... A CountyWell Index Well Log..................................................................................................... B DNR Natural Heritage Database Search and Nest Survey Memo ............................................. C State Historic Preservation Office Correspondence.................................................................. D TrafficImpact Study...................................................................................................................E Version 7/13rev ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo This Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form and EAW Guidelines are available at the Environmental Quality Board's website at: http://www.egb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. The EAW form provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW Guidelines provide additional detail and resources for completing the EAW form. Cumulative potential effects can either be addressed under each applicable EAW Item, or can be addresses collectively under EAW Item 19. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project Title: Adelaide Landing Residential Development 2. Proposer: The Excelsior Group 3. RGU: City of Hugo Contact person: Deb Ridgeway Title: Asset Manager Address: 1660 Highway 100 S., Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Phone: (952) 525-3223 Fax: (952) 525-3298 E-mail deb.ridgeway@ExcelsiorLLC .corn 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one) Required: ❑ EIS Scoping Discretionary: ❑ Citizen Petition 0 Mandatory EAW Contact person: Bryan Bear Title: Administrator Address: 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N. Hugo MN 55038 Phone: (651) 762-6320 Fax: (651) 426-2859 E mail bbear@ci.hugo.mn.us ❑ RGU Discretion ❑ Proposer Volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s): Part 4410.4300 Subp. 19.D.- Residential Development 5. Project Location County: Washington County, Minnesota City/Township: Hugo PLS Location ('/4,'/4, Section, Township, Range): T31, R21, S29 Watershed (81 major watershed scale): #20 (Mississippi River - Metro) GPS Coordinates: 45.1400,-92.9949 (Project Center) Tax Parcel Numbers: 29.031.21.24.0001; 29.031.21.31.0001; 29.031.21.34.0001; 29.031.21.43.0001; 29.031.21.44.0003 (All tax parcels within overall project site are listed.) Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW: County map showing the general location of the project; See Exhibit 1. U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); and See Exhibit 2. Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Post -construction site plan (Exhibit 3) and Pre -construction site plans (Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8). 6. Project Description a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words). The Adelaide Landing residential development is proposed on approximately 217.5 acres of primarily agricultural land in the southern portion of Hugo. The project proposes 182 single-family lots, 51 detached townhomes and 91 villa homes. Approximately 56 acres of park and open space are also planned, which will include parks, trails, woodlands, and ponds. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility. Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes, 3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures, and 4) timing and duration of construction activities. The Excelsior Group is proposing construction of single-family homes, townhomes and villa homes on approximately 217 acres of land. The proposed project is located in Section 29 of T31, R21, City of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota (Exhibits 1 & 2), and is generally located east of TH 61 and north of 130t' Street N. Project development will convert approximately 134.6 acres of agricultural fields, woodlands, grassland, and wetland to streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, parkland, trails, and stormwater ponding as shown on the Post -Construction Site Plan (Exhibit 3). Land use within the site will include construction of up to 182 single-family lots, 51 detached townhomes and 91 villa homes. Public streets will service the development including the construction of a new north/south minor collector roadway connecting northwest to 137t' Street N as well as local residential streets to access planned residential housing. Each residential dwelling will be served by City of Hugo sanitary sewer and water systems. No on -site sewage systems and no private wells are proposed. Potential adverse effects on the environment will be mitigated by preserving and creating approximately 56 acres of open space in the form of parks, trails woodlands, and ponds. The project proposes landscaping and buffering along adjacent arterial and major collector roadways to offset possible visual and noise impacts. It is anticipated that the project will be constructed in five phases, with the first phase expected to begin in spring 2017. Full build -out is anticipated by 2021; however, construction timing will ultimately depend upon market conditions. It is anticipated that construction will entail moving approximately 1,100,000 cubic yards of soil. Approximately 154 acres of 217.5 acres will be graded for streets, house pads, and stormwater features. Construction dewatering may be required, and will be conducted on an as -needed and permitted basis to install sanitary sewer, municipal water, and storm sewer. Best Management Practices will be implemented during and after construction to protect water quality and reduce the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation. Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Public and private infrastructure improvements will need to be constructed in association with this development. These include but are not limited to: internal roadways, trails, stormwater systems, electrical lines, telephone lines, and continued improvements and upgrades to the sanitary sewer and water supply systems. The superintendents for White Bear Lake (ISD #624) and Mahtomedi (ISD #832) School Districts were contacted regarding the potential for additional students from the project. Mahtomedi School District provided a positive response, and the project proposers have no reason to believe that White Bear Lake has any capacity -related concerns. Regardless, the project proposer has reached out to the district superintendent, who has informed the applicant that the district will review the plans, and be actively involved in the review and response process. The Comprehensive Plan calls for municipal water facilities to be extended into the project area and its vicinity along with two future wells and a 1.5 million gallon water tower to be located outside the project boundary. A looped connection to the water stub in the southwest corner of the project area is also anticipated in future project phases. Two 12-inch water mains are planned within the Project area in the comprehensive plan. The Project area is planned for sanitary sewer service from two sewer districts and the city confirmed that sufficient capacity exists in the city system to support the additional connections of the residential development. Municipal sewer service will be achieved through required trunk sewer additions that will connect to existing infrastructure located near the intersection of 130' Street and Fenway Blvd., southwest of the site. Further review of the municipal utilities will be completed by the city as part of the plan review and approval process. The project will also include construction of a minor collector roadway oriented north to south through the center of the site connecting 137' Street N to the northwest of the site, as well as several local residential streets to access planned residential housing. Impacts related to public improvements directly associated with the proposed development project are discussed throughout this document. A 17.4-acre park is proposed in the central portion of the project area. The park is proposed as an active -use park for resident enjoyment. c. Project Magnitude Total Project Acreage 217.5 Linear project length N/A Number and type of residential units 182 single-family lots, 51 detached townhomes and 91 villa homes Commercial building area (in square feet) N/A Industrial building area (in square feet) N/A Institutional building area (in square feet) N/A Other uses — specify (in square feet) N/A Structure height(s) 25' d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The purpose of the Adelaide Landing residential development project is to meet the demand for additional residential housing units within the City of Hugo. The project will be carried out by a private entity, The Excelsior Group. Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? OYes ONo. If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to the present project, timeline, and plans for environmental review. There are currently no planned future stages of the Adelaide Landing residential development project. f. Is the project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? O Yes ONo. If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline, and any past environmental review. The Adelaide Landing residential development project is not a subsequent stage of an earlier development project. 7. Cover Types Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development. Table 7.1. Estimated Before and After Cover Types Land Cover Before (acres) After (acres) Wetland 57.7 55.5 Open Water 0.04 0.04 Woodland 10.4 0.0' Grassland 6.2 0.01 Shrub/Scrub 2.9 0.0' Cropland 113.4 0.0 Pasture 7.6 0.0 Landscaping/Developed Open Space 14.5 0.01 Impervious Surface/Developed Area 4.8 1065 Park/Other Open Space 0.0 56.02 Totals 217.5 217.5 'Some grassland and woodland area will be retained by the project within areas of greenway corridors and areas represented as Other Open Space. 2 Post -construction stormwater ponding acreage is included in the category of "Other Open Space 'Landscaping/Developed Open Space areas included in developed area numbers. 'Open water from ditch included in wetland numbers. 5 Gradedponding acreages are included in the Park/Open Space total. If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why: Totals are equal and estimated from available land cover mapping. Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 8. Permits and Approvals Required List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review ofplans, and all direct and indirect forms ofpublic financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing, and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410.3100. Table 8.1. Permits and Approvals Required Permitting Entity Type of Application Status City of Hugo Concept Plan Approval Completed City of Hugo PUD Rezoning Application Submitted City of Hugo Preliminary Plat Application Submitted City of Hugo Final Plat Approval To be applied for City of Hugo EAW Negative Declaration In process City of Hugo Grading Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Building Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Electrical Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Electrical Utility Affidavit To be applied for City of Hugo Plumbing Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Mechanical Permit To be applied for City of Hugo Wetland Delineation Completed for all but eastern Confirmation 28 acres. Wetland Conservation Act City of Hugo Permit; Stormwater To be applied for Management Permit (per RCWD rules) Washington County Obstruction Permit To be applied for (if needed) Washington County Utility Permit To be applied for (if needed) Metropolitan Council Sanitary Sewer Connection To be applied for Permit MN Department of Health Well Sealing Permit To be applied for MN Department of Health Water Main Extension Approval To be applied for MN Department of Natural Water Appropriations Permit To be applied for, if needed Resources for irrigation purposes MN Department of Transportation (may need work in RW permit to connect to Access Permit to TH 61 To be applied for, if needed utilities) MN DNR Division of Waters Permriation/Dewatering Permit Pit To be applied for (if needed) MN DNR Division of Waters Public Waters Work Permit To be applied for (if needed) MN DNR Division of Lands License to Cross Public To be applied for (if needed) and Minerals Waters MN Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Approval To be applied for NPDES/SDS General Permit; Covered under general permit; MN Pollution Control Agency 30-day PCA review due to submit NOI prior to proximity to impaired waters. construction. Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Clean Water Act Permit To be applied for Federal Emergency Letter of Map Revision To be applied for Management Agency (LOMR) Koch Pipeline Approval for crossing pipeline To be applied for with roads and utilities Note: The project proposer will apply for and receive applicable permits prior to project construction. Cumulative potential effects may be considered and addressed in response to individual EAW Item Nos. 9-18, or the RGU can address all cumulative potential effects in response to EAW Item No. 19. If addressing cumulative effect under individual items, make sure to include information requested in EAW Item No. 19 9. Land Use a. Describe: i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks, trails, prime or unique farmlands. Existing land use within, and adjacent to, the project site is depicted on Exhibit 4. The subject properties were historically used for agriculture, which remains the current use to date. A residential non -homestead property is located in the southwest portion of the site. A farmstead property is located in the southeast portion of the site, and dates back to 1890. Abutting land use consists of wetland, woodland, and rural residential uses north of the northeast section of the Project; residential development surrounding all sides of the north section of the Project; urban commercial and industrial development located on the west side of TH 61; residential development and wetland/rural/vacant land located south of the subject site; and farmstead and vacant land located east of the Project. There are currently no designated parks or recreation areas within the project boundary as shown on the City's Parks and Trails map. A city trail is proposed south of the project boundary along 130' Street North. A general search area for proposed community park is located north of the Project area adjacent to the boundary. Diamond Point Park, located approximately 0.9 miles northeast of the project area, contains a ball field and a park. Beaver Ponds Park, a neighborhood park, is located approximately 850 feet to the south. Oneka Ridge Golf Course is located 0.5 Miles south of the Project boundary. The Project area and its immediate vicinity to the east is designated in the City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan (March 15, 2010) as NP-6, an area in strong immediate need for park. Prime and Unique Farmlands According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS), none of the 6 soil types found on the site are prime farmlands (Table 10.1). Three of the six soil types found on the site are classified as farmland of statewide importance and comprise 124.6 acres, or approximately 57 percent of the site area. Prime farmlands consist of land that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, and oilseed crops. According to the NRCS, prime farmlands have "an adequate and dependable water supply from precipitation, a favorable Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 temperature and growing season, acceptable acidity or alkalinity, acceptable salt and sodium content and few or no rocks." No prime farmland is found on the site. Farmlands of statewide importance include those that are nearly prime farmland and that economically produce high yields of crops when treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods. Some may produce as high a yield as prime farmlands if conditions are favorable. In some states, additional farmlands of statewide importance may include tracts of land that have been designated for agriculture by state law. ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any other applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional, state, or federal agency. The City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan (March 15, 2010) maps the projected 2030 land use (zoning) of the proposed project area for low density residential (LDR) development. The LDR identifies residential land uses developed between 2 units per net acre to 3 units per net acre (up to 4 units per net acre with a PUD). The primary use planned for this area is single-family detached home and some two family homes. The Project area is within the proposed 2030 Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) and is expected to develop within the timeframe of the comprehensive plan. The Hugo Zoning Map (revised February 1, 2016; Exhibit 5) indicates that the project area falls within Single Family Detached Residential (R-3), and is intended to be the primary single family zoning district for future residential developments. The City zoning district regulation permits single-family residential housing at a density of one unit per 10,400 square feet (4.16 units/acre) and twin homes at a density of one unit per 15,000 square feet (2.9 units/acre) within the R-3 zoning district. The proposed project will have an overall net density of 2.4 units per acre. Therefore, the number of dwelling units proposed within the project is consistent with anticipated level of density guided for and contemplated in the City of Hugo Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2010). The Metropolitan Council has adopted the 2030 Regional Development Framework to ensure orderly, economic development of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area in relation to regional infrastructure for transportation, water resources, and regional parks and open space. In 1996, the Council established a Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, which serves as the framework for development for the Twin Cities seven -county area. Only land designated by the Metropolitan Council as being within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) can receive city sewer service. A full range of public utilities and facilities shall be available to the project area. The Hugo Comprehensive Plan must address not only local issues but also be consistent with regional benchmarks included as part of the 2030 Regional Development Framework for population, household and employment growth, transportation, housing and natural resources. The 2030 Regional Development Framework designated the City of Hugo as a Developing Community. This designation is based on the location of Hugo at the periphery of developed areas of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area with land available for new urban development through 2030. Designation as a Developing Community means that the growth that has occurred in Hugo starting around 1976 will continue through the year 2030 (2010 Comprehensive Land Use Plan). Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The project is subject to the City of Hugo Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Code of Ordinances. The Comprehensive Plan includes the 2030 Land Use Plan, which guides future land use on the subject parcels to include low density residential development. The Comprehensive Plan also includes a map indicating Proposed 2030 MUSA Boundary for the City of Hugo. A large area of the City has been added to the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and is expected to develop within the timeframe of this comprehensive plan. The potential 2030 service area was defined as areas that can be feasibly served by the City's water supply system in the future and was based on the current Land Use Plan prepared for the City's 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The subject properties are identified within sanitary sewer district E and where trunk sewer improvements are required in order to support future development. To develop the future sanitary sewer trunk system, the potential service area within the 2030 MUSA was divided into major service areas or districts and then divided into sub -districts. Sanitary sewer districts E and I consist of developable land divided into sub -districts. A portion of the Project area is in sub -district E4 that will require an extension of trunk sanitary sewer. The remaining portion of the Project area is in sub -district 15, and will require an extension of sanitary sewer service from district 14. As described in the Comprehensive Plan, the City anticipates significant growth with an estimated increase in the number of households from 5,051 in 2010, to a forecasted 15,600 households by 2030. The residential land use and housing goals for the City of Hugo are to provide a variety of high -quality housing types and choices, from single-family to townhome and multi -family alternatives to meet changing life cycle needs of Hugo residents for various income levels. Parallel land use goals with regard to residential development is to promote the sense of community and identity in the design of individual neighborhoods by creating a cohesive focal point or landmark such as parks or open space, as well as promoting connectedness among neighborhoods through compatible land use, convenient access to streets, trails, and greenways for transportation. The City of Hugo 2030 Land Use Plan has 11 land use classifications based on existing land use patterns, MUSA boundaries, and physical barriers such as adjacent streets and major roads. For the different residential, commercial and industrial classifications, there is more than one corresponding zoning district that may be applicable to a particular site depending on: 1) the type and density/intensity of uses; 2) compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities (e.g. transportation and sanitary sewer); and 3) the purposes of the individual zoning district. The project area is classified as Low Density Residential (LD) and falls within the Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) zoning district. The 80-mile Rush Line Corridor Transitway follows TH 61 along the western edge of the Project boundary. The Rush Line Corridor Task Force was established to begin advocating, promoting and planning for this transitway. The 2001 Rush Line Corridor Transit Study and 2009 Rush Line Corridor Alternatives Analysis concluded that commuter rail and /or bus rapid transit (BRT) were viable in the corridor from Union Depot to Forest Lake Transit Center and recommended that it advance into the project development phase. Downtown Hugo has been designated as key destinations for analysis in the Pre -Project Development Study (http://www.rushline.org/, July 2015). Future transit station locations will be identified when the mode and alignment have been determined. The project is consistent with the goals of the Hugo Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed housing units across the site correspond to the location and extent of housing densities in the future land use plan. Housing units are planned within the project boundary maintaining Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 sufficient buffering between residential land uses and adjacent commercial and industrial uses west of TH 61. The project also incorporates a passive park to the west of the site along TH 61, and a park at the center of the site that will serve the Hugo Parks, Trails & Open Space Plan designation NP-6 (an area in strong immediate need for park). A trail is also proposed north to south through the center of the site. iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc. The proposed project is generally consistent with Hugo's comprehensive zoning plans, which guide the area for development. The 2014 city zoning plan identifies the project area for single- family detached residential development (R-3). The Hugo Zoning Map is provided on Exhibit 5. The City of Hugo zoning district regulations allow twin homes in an R-3 district with a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in, and regulated by, section 90-37 of Code of Ordinances. An unnamed MnDNR Public Watercourse drains south from the southeast corner of the property outside the boundary, and an unnamed Public Wetland (PW-W 82026000) is located in the northeast corner of the site (Exhibit 6). An unnamed ditch drains north in the central portion of the Project area. The Applicant has been in close contact with the DNR Area Hydrologist regarding the extent of DNR jurisdiction on this unnamed wetland. According to the DNR Area Hydrologist, an estimate of the southern extent of the Ordinary High Water Line (OHWL) for this wetland was completed in 1993 using current and existing aerial photography. That estimate lined up with the extent of the 926 contour in the 2-LIDAR contour data. Consequently, the DNR believes it is reasonable to adjust the location of the south boundary of the wetland to line up with the southern extent of the 926 contour, and recommended using the following latitude/longitude coordinate as the southern extent of PW-W 82026000 (Latitude: 45.14832; Longitude: - 92.99045). In regards to the east/west extent of the wetland, the DNR has recommended using 926+ as the rough estimate of the OHWL where plants generally transition from aquatic emergent (like cattails) to wetland plants (like canary reed grass). At this time, the project proposer does not anticipate work within the public waters wetland. If work within this portion of the wetland becomes necessary, the project proposer will coordinate with the DNR for a more refined OHWL, and apply for any necessary public waters work permits or utility crossing licenses. According to FEMA Floodplain mapping (accessed April, 2014), the project is located within Flood Panels 27163C0138E; HUC 07010206. Portions of the north -central and southwestern areas of the project are within a 100-year flood zone (Exhibit 6). The site is also not in or adjacent to state or federally -designated wild or scenic river land use zones or near designated trout streams. There are no shoreland overlay districts, wild and scenic rivers, critical areas, or agricultural preserves within the project area. b. Discuss the project's compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 9a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects. The surrounding properties are zoned as R-3 and Low Density Multiple Family Residential (R-4) to the north, south, east and west of the site. Areas west of the site are zoned as general industrial (I-3). Areas further to the east are within rural residential district (RR), and long term agricultural district (LA) for agricultural preservation. Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The proposed project is compatible with existing land uses and planned land uses in the area because it offers single-family and detached townhomes and densities next to the potential Rush Line Transitway corridor, consistent with implementation of the 2010 Hugo Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Further, connections to this property have been made with existing adjacent development. Portions of the project are also planned as public open space to include active and passive park consistent with the 2030 Parks System Plan adopted as part of the 2010 Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan. c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential incompatibility as discussed in Item 9b above. Incompatibility of land uses is not anticipated as discussed in Section 9b. 10. Geology, soils and topography/land forms: a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the project could have on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features. Topographic mapping indicates that elevations on the site range from approximately 926 to 940 feet above mean sea level. The highest elevations occur along the western perimeter, northwest corner, and southern section of the site. The lowest elevations occur in the southeast corner and through the center of the site. According to the Washington County Atlas C-6, Plate 5, the groundwater table elevation within the site is around 925 feet. Groundwater elevations fluctuate from season to season and year to year. Groundwater elevations observed within the geotechnical boreholes during drilling operations at 20 different locations across the site ranged from 6 to 10 feet below grade. Piezometer readings collected at six locations on the site from March 24, 2016 to January 26, 2017 indicate that the average depth to water at these locations was approximately 3 feet below grade during that period (elevations of around 927 to 930). During dryer months, groundwater elevations were observed in the 6-7 foot depth range at a couple of the piezometer locations. Depth to bedrock was estimated from The Geologic Atlas of Washington County, Minnesota C-39, Plate 6, Depth to Bedrock map (2016). The Geologic Atlas indicates that the distance from the land surface to bedrock ranges between approximately 51 to 100 feet. The Geologic Atlas of Washington County, Minnesota Data -Base maps (C-5, Plate 1 (1990) and C- 39, Plate 1 (2016)) and associated GIS data indicate there are no known sinkholes, exposed bedrock, springs, or seeps on or near the site. In addition, no kart areas are mapped within or near the site based on Minnesota Karst Lands Mapping (Alexander 2002) and MN DNR Minnesota Regions Prone to Surface Karst Feature Development GIS data (2015). If such features are encountered on the site during planned subsurface investigations, actions will be taken to mitigate potential effects such as stormwater routing, soil stabilization, and groundwater protection practices. The Geologic Atlas of Washington County, Minnesota, C-5, Plate 6, Sensitivity of Groundwater Systems to Pollution map (1990) indicates that the sensitivity of groundwater to pollution in the project areas is generally high (H) to very high (VH). Mapping also indicated that sensitivity of the 10 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Aquifer is moderate (M). Sensitivity of groundwater systems to pollution is defined as the approximate time it takes from the moment a contaminant infiltrates the land surface until it reaches an aquifer. As stated above, the average depth to groundwater on the site is estimated at approximately 6 feet below ground surface on average. Shallow groundwater in fine to medium - grained sandy soils can be susceptible to contamination. As such, the site will be developed in accordance with the requirements of the MPCA General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity (Minnesota Stormwater Manual). The project will also adhere to the stormwater management and infiltration requirements identified in the City of Hugo Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan and requirements included in the and joint powers agreement with Rice Creek Watershed District, as required and warranted (City of Hugo 1996). Deep basins to be used for water reuse, aesthetics and earthwork balancing purposes will interact with groundwater. All surface drainage will be treated via water quality ponds prior to discharging to the deep basins. The residential development will also offer a higher level of groundwater protection and mitigation than exists under the current agricultural conditions. Because development will be typical of residential uses, no unusual wastes or chemicals are anticipated to be spread or spilled that would cause significant groundwater contamination. Chemical applications can be high in agriculturally - dominated landscapes and the conversion of the site to urban uses will ensure greater groundwater protection by: (1) covering exposed soils with turf and landscape plants; (2) reducing chemical usage on the site to include only household quantities; (3) providing vegetated infiltration area such as 56.0 acres of park, woodland, and open space and retaining upwards of 55 acres of wetland; (4) providing adequate stormwater treatment systems; (5) abandoning old septic systems and wells, and (6) not drilling new wells for the project. b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations ofsoils. Describe topography, any special site conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and after project construction to address soil limitations including stabilization, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 11. b. ii. The Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) digital database for Dakota County (USDA NRCS, Accessed 2014) indicates the soils that occur within the project area (Exhibit 8) are classified as summarized in Table 10.1. Soils on the site are predominantly fine sand and non-hydric loamy fine sands. An area through the north -central section of the Project, and along the southeast and northeast borders, are classified as all hydric and predominantly hydric muck and fine sand soil units. Table 10.1. Soils Classification Map Hydric1 Hydricl Prime Symbol Soil Classification Percent of Category Farmland' Map Unit 541 Rifle muck 100 All hydric Not Prime Farmland 1813B Lino variant loamy fine sand 2-6% 0 Non-hydric Farmland of Statewide slopes Importance 11 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Table 10.1. Soils Classification Map Hydric' Hydric' Prime Symbol Soil Classification Percent of Category Farmland Map Unit 161 Isanti loamy fine sand, 92 Predominantly Not Prime depressional hydric Farmland 158B Zimmerman fine sand, 1-6% 2 Predominantly Farmland of Statewide slopes non-hydric Importance Predominantly Farmland of 265 Soderville loamy fine sand 3 non-hydric Statewide Importance Predominantly Farmland of 162 Lino loamy fine sand 5 non-hydric Statewide Importance 'Based on the NRCS List of Hydric Soils of Minnesota (2010). 2 Based on the USDA/NRCS Prime Farmland of Washington County, Minnesota (USDA NRCS WebSoils, accessed 2016). The USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey (accessed August, 2016) indicates soils within the subject property are categorized into Wind Erodibility Groups 1 and 2; indicating soils within the Project are highly erodible by wind. Soil units identified within the site are rated as having K values between 0.02-0.32, meaning that susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water is moderate to low under ordinary climatic conditions. Soil classification slope percentages range from 0-6 percent. Due to erodibility ratings of soils within the Project, proper use and installation of soil stabilizing BMP's during and after construction activity will be important to reduce soil loss and erosion on site. It is anticipated that construction will entail moving approximately 1,100,000 yards of soil, and approximately 154 acres of 217.5 acres will be graded for streets, house pads, and stormwater features. Because the project will involve disturbance of more than one acre of land, application for coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) General Permit will be submitted to the MPCA prior to initiating earthwork on the site. This permit is required for discharge of stormwater during construction activity and requires that Best Management Practices (BMPs) be implemented. Erosion and sedimentation control BMPs related to stormwater runoff are discussed in greater detail within Item I I .b.ii. NOTE: For silica sand projects, the EAW must include a hydrogeologic investigation assessing the potential groundwater and surface water effects and geologic conditions that could create an increased risk of potentially significant effects on groundwater and surface water. Descriptions of water resources and potential effects from the project in EAW Item 11 must be consistent with the geology, soils and topography/land forms and potential effects described in EAW Item 10. 12 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 11. Water Resources a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below. i. Surface water - lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial ditches. Include any special designations such as public waters, trout stream/lake, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lake, and outstanding resource value water. Include water quality impairments or special designations listed on the current MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List that are within I mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any. Delineated Wetlands Based on Wetland delineation boundaries provided by Kjolhaug Environmental Services (Kjolhaug) and Westwood, nine wetlands have been identified within the Project boundary. Westwood Professional Services and Kjolhaug conducted delineations in May, August and September 2016 and October 2014, respectively on the subject property to identify jurisdictional lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and private ditches. Kjolhaug delineated wetland located in parcel numbers 903121240001, 2903121310001, 2903121340001, 290312140001, and 1703121140001 (wetland ID KES 1-4). Westwood delineated wetland boundaries found in parcel number 163-2903121320005 (wetland ID CP 1 and 2) and 163-2903121440003(wetland ID SP1- SP3). Prior to delineating the site, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Map, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) Public Water Inventory Map (PWI), the Washington County Soil Survey Map, the latest version of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map, and the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) were reviewed. In addition to mapping resources, historical aerial photos were reviewed in agricultural areas of the Project. These areas were reviewed and delineated by Kjolhaug. Kjolhaug reviewed historical photos from three sources covering 25 different years between 1980 and 2013. Wetland boundaries delineated by Kjolhaug were approved by the City of Hugo (WCA LGU) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as identified on Exhibit 7 in May 2015; Wetland KES 4 was determined incidental in 2016. Boundaries delineated by Westwood located in City of Hugo Parcel 163-2903121320005 were approved by the City of Hugo (WCA LGU) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in August 2016. Delineation approval for wetlands located on parcel 163-2903121440003 was received December 7, 2016. The agency decision notices approving the wetland delineations are included in Appendix A. Table 11.1 summarizes the water features delineated on the site. Table 11.1. Delineated Wetlands Wetland Size Type Mapped Vegetation Mapped ID (Acres) Soils NWI, PWI, Wetland Upland NHD Type 1/3/6 PEM 1 A/PEMI Cd/PSS 1 /EM 1 Cd Reed canary grass, sedges, KES 1 2.8 Rifle cattail, and hydrophytic Kentucky bluegrass and NWI Seasonally flooded basin, shrubs Canada thistle shallow marsh, shrub-carr wetland Type 1/3/6 Reed canary grass, sedges, Orchard grass, Kentucky NWI, PWI, KES 2 41.6 PEM1A/PEM1Cd/PSS1/EM1 Rifle cattail, and hydrophytic bluegrass, glossy NHD Cd shrubs buckthorn, and quacking 13 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Table 11.1. Delineated Wetlands Wetland Size Type Mapped Vegetation Mapped ID (Acres) Soils NWI, PWI, Wetland Upland NHD Seasonally flooded basin, aspen shallow marsh, shrub-carr wetland Type 1 KES 3 0.28 PEMAfd Lino Bare ground Bare ground No Seasonally flooded basin Type 1 KES 4* 0.78 PEMAfd Soderville Bare ground Bare ground No Seasonally flooded basin Black willow, sandbar Sandbar willow, black Type 3/4 (PEMC/Fx) willow, trembling aspen, willow, red osier CP 1 0.3 Shallow and deep marsh Soderville red osier dogwood, dogwood, Canada No Canada goldenrod, and goldenrod, and smooth reed canary grass brome Reed canary grass, red Red osier dogwood, reed CP 2 5.4 Type 2/6 (PEM1Bd/PSS1Bd) Soderville osier dogwood, and canary grass, dandelion, NWI sandbar willow and red clover Type 2/6 (PEMB/PSS1A) Reed canary grass and tall Kentucky bluegrass, SP 1 3.44 wet meadow and deciduous Zimmerman goldenrod Canada thistle, and NWI shrub -scrub marsh common ragweed Type 2/6 (PEMB/PSS I A/C) Sensitive fern, blunt Kentucky bluegrass and SP 2 3.34 wet meadow and deciduous Lino sedge, Kentucky bluegrass red clover NWI shrub -scrub marsh Reed canary grass, Eastern cottonwood, SP 3 0.03 Type 1 (PEM tearthumb, arrowleaftthumb, Kentucky bluegrass, reed No seasonally flooded basin slender slender rush, and eastern canary grass, red clover, cottonwood and common dandelion *KES 4 was determined to be incidental and therefore is not jurisdictional wetland. Mapped Water Resources The subject property lies within the Mississippi River — Twin Cities Major watershed. A small portion of the south and southeastern edge of the Project is located in the Bald Eagle Lake minor watershed. The remainder of the Project lies within the Clearwater Creek minor watershed. The MN DNR Public Water Inventory (PWI) indicates one unnamed watercourse adjacent to the southeastern border. An unnamed PWI (PW-W 82026000) is also mapped in the northeast corner of the Project. NHD mapping indicates one unnamed watercourse through the north -central section of the Project and another unnamed watercourse along the southeast border of the Project. NWI mapping showed three wetland complexes within the Project including a PSS1/EM1A/PEM1Cd/PEM1A wetland associated with the NHD flowline through the center of the Project area, A PSS1A/PSS1/EM1Ad wetland complex in the southeast corner of the Project, and a PEM1Af/PEM1Cd/PSS1/EM1Cd wetland complex in the east -central portion of the Project. All mapped NWIs continue off site. There are no known trout streams/lakes, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lakes, or outstanding resource value waters within the project area. A 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard is mapped Zone A within the north and central part of the Project according to FEMA's National Flood Hazard Layer and is associated with an NHD flow line and NWI wetland. Judicial Ditch 3 is approximately 0.5 miles west of the project area and has a lateral, which flows from PW-W 14 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 82026000. A second private ditch system is located within the site and generally flows north towards the DNR public waters wetland. Drainage will be maintained to this ditch through adjacent stormwater ponds, aesthetic ponds, and wetlands. Impaired Waters According to the Minnesota impaired waters inventory and the MPCA's impaired waters viewer (IWAV, accessed 2016), one impaired water Hardwood Creek is located within the Project or within half a mile of the Project. Two impaired waters are located within a mile of the Project and include Clearwater Creek and Bald Eagle Lake. Hardwood Creek is located east of the Project and is impaired for dissolved oxygen; however, it is not in a contributing watershed. Clearwater Creek is located west of the Project and is impaired for Aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessment and fishes bioassessment. Bald Eagle Lake is located southwest of the Project and is impaired for mercury in fish tissue and nutrient related eutrophication. These are all considered construction related parameters and require additional BMPs for construction activities within a mile of these impaired waters. ii. Groundwater — aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells, including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known on site or nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this. Groundwater elevations within the vicinity of the site are around 925 feet above sea level based on The Geologic Atlas of Washington County, Minnesota C-6, Plate 5. Topographic mapping indicates that elevations on the site range from approximately 926 to 940 feet above mean sea level. Consequently, the maximum depth to groundwater is estimated at about 15 feet. Because surficial groundwater is sometimes encountered in seasonally wet areas, the minimum depth to groundwater is estimated at 0 feet. The approximate average depth to groundwater across the site is estimated at about 6 feet. This estimate was calculated by averaging the topographic elevations on the site (931 feet) and subtracting the mapped water table elevation (925 feet). According to MN Department of Health Wellhead Protection Data, the project overlaps with two Wellhead Protection Areas: Hugo South ID # 7090 and Lino Lakes East ID #7100. In general, the project will be designed with wellhead protection in mind, by reducing overall risks to groundwater. The project will provide open spaces within the wellhead protection area. The project will also properly abandon existing wells and septic systems to further promote groundwater resource protection. No new water wells are planned for the project. The Minnesota Well Index indicates there is one registered well within the project site, Unique Well No. 674743 (Arcand, Howard domestic well). The CWI is accessed through the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Other Unique Well numbers identified nearby, but outside, the project area include: 413574 (Atkinson, Dean domestic well), 494957 (Peltier, Thedora domestic well), 196268 (Peltier, Kevin and Jean domestic well), 142050 (Charpentier, Bruce domestic well), 404269 (Metropolitan Steel domestic well), and 130802 (Total Packaging, Inc. domestic well). b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below. i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. 15 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal wastewater infrastructure. Only normal domestic wastewater production is expected from the project. The types of wastewater produced will be typical of new residential developments. No on -site municipal or industrial wastewater treatment is anticipated or planned. Because wastewater is from domestic sources, pre-treatment measures have not been contemplated. According to the City's approved Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan (Chapter 10) and Metropolitan Council's 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, the project is within an existing MUSA and categorized as "Emerging Suburban Edge". A comprehensive sanitary capacity analysis has been completed for the project. The Project area is planned for service from within two sewer districts and sufficient capacity exists in the City's overall system to support additional connections from the development. The proposed development as planned will require a change to the specific sewer districts in the Comprehensive Plan, which will require a modification to the existing forcemain discharge from the lift station on 130' Street. The final routing of sanitary sewer, as well as the required improvement to the 130' Street system, will be reviewed and approved by City Engineering staff prior to permitting and construction. The sanitary sewer needs of Adelaide Landing will be served with gravity sewer designed to Ten State Standards and MPCA requirements. The proposed sewer will connect to existing gravity sewer near the intersection of 130th Street N. and TH 61, at 130th Street N. east of Flay Road N., at the west end of 135th Street N. and at the east end of 137th Street N. A peak hour flow factor of 4 per MPCA design standards will be used for sanitary sewer pipe sizing. Sanitary Waste Estimates Estimated sanitary wastewater generation from the Adelaide Landing project is approximately 88,776 gallons/day or 32.4 million gallons/ year (MGY). Usage is based on the planned building uses and the Metropolitan Council 2015 Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) Procedure Manual. The above estimates are based on the following calculations: 324 residential units at 274 gallons per unit per day = 88,776 gal/day Both of the sewer districts described above are served by the MUSA treatment facility. The wastewater flows to the Metropolitan plant located in St. Paul. This facility handles the sewage from Minneapolis, St. Paul and several suburbs. 2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS), describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site conditions for such a system. Wastewater discharge will not be to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS). 16 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater from wastewater discharges. Wastewater discharge is not to surface water. No effects are anticipated to surface or groundwater as treatment will to a publicly owned treatment facility. ii. Stormwater - Describe the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at the site prior to and post construction. Include the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss any environmental effects from stormwater discharges. Describe stormwater pollution prevention plans including temporary and permanent runoff controls and potential BMP site locations to manage or treat stormwater runoff. Identify specific erosion control, sedimentation control or stabilization measures to address soil limitations during and after project construction. The development must comply with stormwater management, wetland conservation, floodplain, shoreland, erosion control, and public waters requirements administered by: the City of Hugo, the RCWD, the Board of Water and Soil Resources (Wetland Conservation Act), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the MPCA through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit. The City of Hugo Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP) is available on the City's website. The site is located in the Clearwater Creek Drainage Area (subwatershed 11.1 and 11.2) as shown in the City of Hugo's (CSMP) and is tributary to Rice Creek. Hugo is also a mandatory small MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) city, and is required by federal and state law to obtain and implement a NPDES Stormwater permit administered by the MPCA. MS4s are required to develop and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan program (SWPPP), and submit an annual report to the MPCA. Stormwater management, including water quality, rate and volume control will be provided in accordance with Rice Creek Watershed District and city of Hugo requirements. A stormwater management report detailing the modeling results will be provided with the preliminary plan submittal to the City of Hugo. Pre -Construction Site Runoff Existing site runoff from the project area likely contains pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer residues due to the presence of agricultural fields. There is also likely a minor amount of runoff that flows to the site from TH 61 and 130t1i Street North. However, because of existing drainages on the site, runoff primarily drains away from the site to the north. It is expected that a portion of the runoff infiltrates into the site's soils, but the majority of runoff likely leaves the site via overland flow through existing drainage swales and ditches. Post -Construction Site Runoff The change in land use will decrease the amount of agricultural chemicals and suspended solids, and increase other components typical of urban runoff. It is expected that the volume of runoff will increase during significant storm events as a result of the increase in impervious surface area. It is anticipated that only extreme conditions such as those occurring in connection with 17 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 50- or 100-year storm events will result in measurable increases in runoff volume and associated pollutant transport. The preservation and creation of open space in the form of buffers, parks, woodlands, wetlands and ponds will help to mitigate potential adverse effects from the increase in impervious surface. Runoff water quality will be typical of residential developments, and will likely be slightly degraded due to pollutants deposited on streets, roofs, private driveways and other impervious surfaces. Similar to current conditions, sediment, nutrient, and other pollutant removal will occur when much of the stormwater filters through upland buffers, vegetated drainage swales, stormwater ponds, and other best management practices. Preserved and newly seeded vegetation will provide filter strips to help remove sediment and nutrients before runoff discharges to area wetlands and surface waters, mitigating potential effects on water quality. Potential adverse effects of runoff volume and quality will be further mitigated by the construction of stormwater basins, which will be designed to reduce peak runoff rates and meet the requirements of the City of Hugo and the RCWD. The design of ponding areas and the quality of stormwater discharging from the development will meet the requirements of the MPCA General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity (Minnesota Stormwater Manual), and applicable local regulations. In a storm event, stormwater will be retained in the ponds and discharged at or below existing peak runoff rates. Shallow groundwater that provides hydrology to on -site wetland complex will remain in the post development setting. The site also contains draintile to provide drainage for the agricultural existing uses. The stormwater management system will route treated surface water to the wetlands to provide additional hydrology to support the long-term health of the wetlands. The project proposer has hired a geotechnical engineer to perform regular piezometer measurements across the site. Data gathered indicates shallow groundwater that fluctuates from approximately 925 to 930, and is typically within a couple feet of the surface. This shallow groundwater condition prevents achieving 3 feet vertical separation between infiltration practice and the groundwater level. Therefore, infiltration is not a viable volume control best management practice (BMP) on this site. Other BMPs will be employed such as water reuse, biofiltration, filtration and others. The project proposer is exploring the use of deep water pond facilities for irrigation purposes (described further below). The anticipated water reuse volume will likely exceed the thresholds for a water appropriations permit. DNR permits will be obtained prior to installation of a water reuse system. BMPs will be employed during construction to reduce erosion and sediment loading of stormwater runoff. Inspection and maintenance of BMPs during construction will be consistent with NPDES/SDS General Permit requirements, including site inspection after rainfall events, perimeter sediment control maintenance, and sediment removal. The goal of the project will be to maintain peak discharge rates at or below the existing condition. Post -construction drainage will follow similar pathways, with minor differences in drainage routes and increases in the volume of road ditches and swale flows. Post -development stormwater runoff will either travel overland, into stormwater ponds, or through storm sewers prior to discharging to receiving waters. Other BMPs, such as natural swales and infiltration technologies, will be considered as project designs advance. 18 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 For the following reasons, it is anticipated that site development will have minimal effects on receiving water quality: Preservation and creation of approximately 56.0 acres of open space (26 percent of the site), and Temporary sediment basins will be designed, and BMPs implemented, in accordance with the General NPDES/SDS Permit for Construction Activities to protect water quality and control erosion. Based on preliminary stormwater modeling, we anticipate the development will increase the stormwater rates and volumes. However, this will be addressed with the onsite stormwater management system. As demonstrated in the tables below, the project meets the intent of the stormwater management requirements of the City of Hugo, the Rice Creek Watershed District and the State of Minnesota. Through the proposed stormwater management system, rate control of site runoff will be maintained to near or less than existing during the 2-, 10- and 100-year 24- hour critical rain events. The preliminary stormwater modeling indicates the following for rate control: Max Discharge Based Proposed 100-year on 0.1 cfs/ac (cfs) Peak Discharge (cfs) North Drainage 13.71 8.91 East Drainage 6.29 6.01 Southeast Drainage 1.42 1.33 Existing North Existing East Existing Southeast Rain Event Drainage (cfs) Drainage (cfs) Drainage (cfs) 2-Year 0.94 4.76 9.08 10-Year 5.39 18.88 24.34 100-Year 37.69 69.26 68.62 Proposed North Proposed East Proposed Southeast Rain Event Drainage (cfs) Drainage (cfs) Drainage (cfs) 2-Year 1.14* 1.06 0.54 10-Year 4.83 1.86 100-Year 8.91 6.01 0.85 1.33 *Note that the 2-year discharge rate to the north exceeds the existing by 0.2 cfs. This is utilizing 4 " orifices to limit the proposed discharge rate. Orifices less than 4" are not recommended due to plugging potential. Therefore, this minor deviation from the desired 2-year rate is unavoidable. 19 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Volume Control Volume control will be provided via stormwater reuse for irrigation of the residential lots, the adjacent road boulevards and the playfield, a total irrigated area of 62.4 acres. Irrigation pumps will draw water from deep water Ponds 15, 16 & 17, the ponds with the largest dead storage. The Stormwater Reuse Calculator developed by Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District was used to estimate the volume reduction on an annual basis. As determined using the Reuse Calculator, an average year generates 84.4 ac-ft. of runoff from the developed area. Typical irrigation occurs for 16 weeks from mid -May to mid -September. Irrigation at an average of one inch per week over the proposed irrigation area yields a volume of 84.1 ac-ft., which is greater than 90% of the annual runoff volume. This is consistent with MIDS volume reduction guidance. Volume reduction numbers are currently unavailable for a per -storm basis. Stormwater and Erosion Control BMPs Because the project will involve disturbance of more than one acre of land, application for coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) General Permit will be submitted to the MPCA prior to initiating earthwork on the site. This permit is required for discharge of stormwater during construction activity and requires that Best Management Practices (BMPs) be used to control erosion, and that erosion controls be inspected after each rainfall exceeding 0.5 inches in 24 hours. Erosion control practices that will be implemented on the site include: 1. Construction of temporary sediment basins in the locations proposed for stormwater ponding, and development of these basins for permanent use following construction. 2. Silt fence and other erosion control features installed prior to initiation of earthwork and maintained until viable turf or ground cover is established on exposed areas. 3. Periodic street cleaning and installation of a rock construction entrance to reduce tracking of dirt onto public streets. 4. Stabilization of exposed soils within 7 days. 5. Energy dissipation, such as riprap, installed at storm sewer outfalls. 6. Use of cover crops, native seed mixes, sod, and landscaping to stabilize exposed surface soils after final grading. Erosion control plans must be reviewed and accepted by the City of Hugo and the RCWD prior to project construction. Because the above BMPs will be implemented during and after construction, potential adverse effects from construction -related sediment and erosion on water quality will be minimized. iii. Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to be used as a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal water infrastructure. Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water resources available for appropriation. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects from the water appropriation. 20 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Surface/Groundwater Appropriations and Dewatering The project is not proposing new water wells, and it is not anticipated that surface waters will be appropriated in quantities requiring a permit. According to the CWI record, one well exists on the site. Well No. 674743 is an 85-foot deep domestic well, which was completed in 2002 (Appendix B). This well will be abandoned in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) regulations, and with the necessary permits and approvals. If other active or inactive wells are discovered on the property, they will be field -located, abandoned, and sealed in accordance with MDH regulations prior to site development. Dewatering will become necessary if surficial groundwater is encountered during utility installation. According to data gathered from Unique Well No. 674743, upon installation in August of 2002, static groundwater levels in the southern part of the property are approximately 12 feet below grade. The quantity and duration of potential construction dewatering is not known at this time, but it is expected that necessary dewatering for construction will be temporary. If groundwater is encountered during utility installation, it will be discharged to temporary sediment basins located within the project site. If construction dewatering and pumping from the proposed development exceeds the 10,000- gallon per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year thresholds, a DNR Water Appropriation Permit will be obtained. If it becomes apparent that construction dewatering will not exceed 50 million gallons in total and duration of one year from the start of pumping, the contractor or project proposer will apply to the DNR Division of Waters for coverage under the amended DNR General Permit 97-0005 for temporary water appropriations. It is not anticipated that construction dewatering or pumping from the proposed development will be extensive or continue long enough to require a permit from the DNR, or impact nearby domestic or municipal wells. Connection to a public water supply system The City of Hugo currently has six wells for municipal use, which are permitted under the DNR Water Appropriations Permit Numbers listed in Table 11.2, of which 5 are active. The City of Hugo also has three additional Water Appropriations Permits (2010-0445, 2015-2706, 2016- 0392) for non -crop irrigation use within a mile of the property. Table 11.2. MNDNR Water Appropriations Permit Numbers Permit Well Number 1975-6218 208521-inactive 1975-6218 523948 1975-6218 654497 1975-6218 671642 1975-6218 686272 1975-6218 773400 *Wells in bold represent those within one mile of the Subject Property. 21 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The wells range in depth from 201 to 355 feet deep, and draw water from the Prairie Du Chien/Jordan aquifer and the Franconia -Ironton -Galesville formation (2008 LWRMP). The city's DNR water appropriations permit allows a total system pumping capacity of 650 million gallons per year (MGY). Three of the six wells (bolded table 11.2) are located within one mile of the property and combined allow for a pumping capacity of 1,300 MGY. According to DNR Water Appropriation records as of 2015, the city reported pumping 102 MGY (average 0.28 million gallons per day) from these three wells. The estimated average water demand for the proposed development is 35.6 MGY (97,654 GPD) based on the assumption that consumption is approximately 110 percent of wastewater generation (see Item 11). The summertime peak factor in the city of Hugo over the past 10 years has averaged 3.53. Consequently, the peak flow is estimated at (97,654 X 3.53 = 344,719 GPD). No water supply issues are anticipated as a result of adding the development to the city's water supply system. Water will be supplied to the development via the Hugo municipal water supply system. According to Hugo's Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan, future development in the area will be supplied by a 12-inch watermain. The project will join with the existing 12-inch watermain on 130t' Street N, which connects to a water tower on Falcon Avenue N. A 1.5 million gallon water tower is also noted in the comprehensive plan to the south of the project area. A fire flow analysis will be completed if deemed necessary by City Engineering staff and the watermain piping will be sized accordingly. iv. Surface Waters a) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed. Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed, and identify those probable locations. The project will involve minor physical alterations of wetlands within the subject property. Unavoidable wetland impacts are anticipated to be limited to approximately 1.50 to 2.20 acres of fill, and are primarily associated with 3 locations necessary to allow for safe ingress and egress on the project. Otherwise, housing, ponding, and open space have been placed in a manner that substantially avoids impacts to water resources. Water resources within the project area will be regulated under: The Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, as amended, administered in this area by the City of Hugo, and The RCWD Rules: Floodplain Alteration, Wetland Alteration, Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, Stormwater Management Plans, and Drainage Systems. 22 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 City of Hugo Rules: Stormwater Management Plans, Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, Wetland Alteration, and Floodplain Alterations. The City of Hugo is the local governing unit for these sections of the Rice Creek Watershed District Rules. Water resources within the project area may also be regulated under: Section 404 and 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and Minnesota Statute 103G.245, administered by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Impacts to wetlands to accommodate road crossings are anticipated to have only minor effects, if any, to the host watershed. Most of these impacts are proposed along somewhat linear drainage features that will be crossed with culverts. The project proposer evaluated alternatives as the site was designed to avoid and minimized impacts, and will further analyze opportunities for reductions as required through the Wetland Conservation Act sequencing process. Compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed, to the degree practicable. There are six Corps - approved wetland banks within the same major watershed, but only three of which fall within the pre -settlement zone (<50%). There are numerous additional banks and credits available within the same wetland Bank Service Area (BSA-7). The project proposer is also evaluating opportunities to potentially restore some of the on -site wetlands for replacement credits. b) Other surface waters- Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels, county/judicial ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging, diking, stream diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and riparian alteration. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of water features. Identify measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to surface water features, including in -water Best Management Practices that are proposed to avoid or minimize turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the water features. Discuss how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on any water body, including current and projected watercraft usage. Anticipated physical effects and alterations to surface water features are discussed in 11 iv. Direct effects to the project will include fill to accommodate the internal street network, ponds, and few residential lots; indirect effects are not anticipated. As discussed, unavoidable impacts, as determined through the wetland permitting process, will be compensated via purchase of offsite banking credits, or on -site replacement. The required wetland permitting process will fully evaluate opportunities to further avoid, minimize, and mitigate environmental effects to surface water features on the site. In - water Best Management Practices to avoid or minimize turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the drainages and wetlands (such as silt fence, bio rolls and silt booms) will be described in the project SWPPP, and deployed as needed. The project site does not encompass surface waters that are used by watercraft, and therefore will not change the number or type of watercraft on any waterbody. 23 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes a. Pre project site conditions - Describe existing contamination or potential environmental hazards on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water contamination, abandoned dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks, and hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from pre project site conditions that would be caused or exacerbated by project construction and operation. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental hazards. Include development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan. A Phase I ESA has not been completed for the project area to date. However, review of the Minnesota Pollution Control What's in My Neighborhood Database indicated no activities or permits within the Project; however, 82 activities were mapped within one mile of the Project. The closest mapped activities and permits included: an inactive construction stormwater permit for TH 61 and 130th St., an inactive hazardous waste permit for small to minimal quantity generator (QG) at Truex, Inc., an active hazardous waste permit for small to minimal QG Lake Area Painting, Inc., an inactive hazardous waste permit for small to minimal QG at Kotoski Bros. Boat Works, an inactive construction stormwater permit for Country Ponds CSW, and an active industrial stormwater permit for Schwieter's Companies, Inc. Also, Egg Lake Demolition Dump (no longer active) is located about 0.3 miles northeast of the Project, and a Leak site associated with Glacier International is located about 0.4 miles east of the Project. The project proposer will prepare a Construction Contingency Plan for the site prior to development to address any potential contaminated soils that could exist within the project area from on or off -site sources. One pipeline crosses the southwestern portion of the project area. The pipeline reportedly carries crude oil and is operated by the Koch Pipeline Company, L.P. b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes - Describe solid wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of solid waste including source reduction and recycling. Construction activities will generate wastes typical of residential development operations. No solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge, and ash, will be produced during construction and/or operation. The contractor will dispose of wastes generated at the site in an approved method by using commercial dumpsters and disposing construction wastes at an MPCA- permitted landfill. The contractor will minimize and mitigate adverse effects from the generation and storage of solid waste by recycling construction waste that can be recycled, when feasible. Following project construction, solid waste generation will be typical of occupied residential developments of this size. The majority of the solid waste generated will include materials such as paper, organics (food wastes, wood, and rubber products), yard waste, and inert solids. The remaining wastes will likely include plastics, metals, and glass. According to the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan 2010-2030 (MPCA, 2011), a Minnesota family of five generates approximately six tons of garbage per year, or 1.2 tons per occupant. The following residential solid waste generation rates were based on the conservative 24 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 figures that the average single-family dwelling consists of 2.74 persons based on 2010-2014 City of Hugo census data. The household occupant number was then multiplied by 1.2 tons per person per year, based on the MPCA estimate for Minnesota families. Using these conservative figures, the proposed development could generate as much as 1,065 tons per year (324 units X 2.74 people/unit X 1.2 tons/person/year) of residential municipal solid waste per year. Residents within the new development will contract individually with waste haulers for solid waste collection and recycling services under the city's open trash and recycling collection system. According to the cities web page, there are currently seven licensed residential and/or commercial waste haulers. Curbside recycling, including paper, plastics, glass, and metals, is available to Hugo residents through their solid waste collector. Participation in the recycling program by future residents of the project area is expected to reduce costs for solid waste trucking and disposal, and generally minimize and mitigate adverse effects from the generation and storage of solid waste. c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials - Describe chemicals/hazardous materials used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including method of storage. Indicate the number, location and size of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum or other materials. Discuss potential environmental effects from accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including source reduction and recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will generate, or require storage of, significant amounts of wastes that would be considered hazardous aside from typical household cleaners, paints, lubricants, and fuel storage for small power equipment. Toxic or hazardous material such as fuel for construction equipment and materials used during the normal construction process of residential units (paint, adhesives, stains, acids, bases, herbicides, and pesticides) will likely be used in typical quantities during site preparation and unit construction. These materials will be properly stored during on -site use and according to state and federal regulations to prevent accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Builders and contractors are responsible for proper management and disposal of wastes generated during construction, which is typically handled by using construction dumpsters and the appropriate certified landfills. The contractor will minimize and mitigate adverse effects from the generation and storage of hazardous wastes by recycling wastes that can be recycled, and by developing a spill prevention plan for the project. Use of toxic or hazardous materials, outside of vehicle fuels, standard household cleaners, and lawn care chemicals, is not anticipated within the project area in conjunction with the proposed residential development. d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling. Outside of the materials described above, the project is not anticipated to generate or require the storing, handling or disposal of hazardous wastes during or after construction or during operation. Consequently, potential environmental effects from hazardous waste, and measures to avoid 25 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling, have not been considered. 13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features): a) Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or near the site. Fish and wildlife resources on and near the site are directly related to the composition, quality, size, and connectivity of natural communities including woodlands, wetlands, and grasslands. According to the MN DNR Ecological Classification System, the Project is located in the St. Paul -Baldwin Plains and Moraines subsection, of the Minnesota and Northeast Iowa Morainal section, within the Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province. Pre -settlement vegetation in the area consisted of a mosaic of oak and aspen savanna, tallgrass prairie, and maple -basswood forest. Land use today is predominantly urban development, row crop agriculture and pasture, and remaining woodland areas. Westwood Professional Services, Inc. used the USGS National Land Use/Land Cover Database to identify existing cover types and to conduct off -site analysis of potential habitats (Exhibit 9). Based on this analysis and field review of the site, several habitat types are available within the Project including approximately: 113.4 acres of cultivated crop, 7.6 acres of pasture, 6.2 acres of grassland, 2.9 acres of shrub/scrub, 10.4 acres of woodland, and 57.7 acres of wetland and open water. These habitats are used by a variety of animals common to the eastern broadleaf forest province of Minnesota. b) Describe rare features such as state -listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, native plant communities, Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement number (LA-L)LA) and/or correspondence number (ERDB- 20140333) from which the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage letter from the DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results. Wildlife that exists throughout the Project likely includes those species that have adapted to cropland, urban development, and fragmented woodland and grassland habitats and include animals such as ring-necked pheasant, western meadowlark, field sparrow, eastern cottontail, red fox, striped skunk, eastern -cottontail, white-tailed deer, and small mammals such as mice and shrews. Westwood reviewed The Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) database (ERDB-20160323) to determine if records of listed plants and animals; native plant communities; wildlife aggregations; geological features; or state rare features are mapped within or near the Project. The database identified one rare wildlife record within the project boundary associated with a 1997 record of a Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Two additional records of Blanding's turtles are mapped within one mile to the north and northeast of the Project. One record of a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and another of a trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator) are mapped within one mile of the Project to the northeast and east, respectively. The NHIS database also mapped several MCBS native plant communities within a mile to the north and northeast of the Project including: northern mixed cattail marsh, lake bed, and alder (maple - loosestrife) swamp plant communities. Based on MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance & DNR Native Plant Communities databases, two sites of "Below" Biodiversity Significance are mapped along the northeast edge and southeast border of the Project. Native plant communities associated with these MBS areas include willow -dogwood shrub swamp and northern rich fen. 26 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The DNR letter received on June 23, 2016, in response to the NHIS data request submitted by Westwood, identified several state listed and federally protected species, including the Blanding's turtle, trumpeter swan, and a caddisfly species (Ironoquia punctatissima) that have been reported in the vicinity of the proposed project. Given the abundance of wetland and sandy soils within the Project, Blanding's turtles could potentially utilize the Project area and surrounding wetlands. Trumpeter Swans typically require areas of open water with extensive cattail, sedges, or bulrushes beds. Few open water areas exist within the Project and more suitable habitat is located outside the Project in association with Bald Eagle Lake, Egg Lake, and Rice Lake. Although the wetland area within the Project provides habitat for caddisflies, it is unlikely the Ironoquia punctatissima will be found within the Project as the most recent record within a mile of the Project is from 1994. Also noted in this letter was the potential for bald eagle nests and northern long-eared bat (NLEB; Myotis septentrionalis) in the area. However, an eagle nest survey completed by Westwood Professional Services on July 6, 2016 did not find any eagle nests present within the Project area. There are no known NLEB roost trees or hibernacula located on or within one mile of the Project. The letter also identified portion of the Project as within a moderately ranked Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area (RESA). Furthermore, the letter identified two Sites of "Below" Biodiversity Significance along the northeast edge and southeast border of the Project. Native plant communities associated with these MBS areas include willow -dogwood shrub swamp and northern rich fen. The DNR letter also identified northern cattail marsh as a native community located within the Project area; however, due to Project boundary revisions, this area is no longer within the Project area. The DNR letter recommends avoidance and minimization of indirect impacts of these areas due to their local significance. The DNR Natural Heritage Review response letter is provided in Appendix C, along with Westwood's eagle nest survey summary memo. c) Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be affected by the project. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species. Project development is expected to convert approximately 134.6 acres of cultivated crop fields, grassland, woodland, shrub/scrub, and wetland area to single-family homes, roads and stormwater features. Conversion of agricultural fields, woodlands, wetlands, and grasslands to residential development may result in some local decline in wildlife abundance. Populations of species that depend primarily upon cropland and woodland remnants, such as ring-necked pheasants, wild turkey, and meadowlarks, will likely be displaced. Migratory birds are expected to respond to the development by looking for alternative nesting sites upon their return from wintering habitats. However, given the significant acreage of stormwater basins, wetlands, buffers, and parkland planned and preserved within the Project area, it is expected that migratory birds tolerant of urban areas will continue to utilize the area. Some songbirds that readily adapt to suburban habitats such as house finches, robins, and eastern bluebirds, may become more numerous. Non -migratory species with small home ranges such as small mammals may experience more adverse effects. These species will compete with other individuals of the same or other species to claim territories in neighboring habitats. However, it is anticipated that some of these non -migratory species will re- introduce into the park and open space portions of the project as those areas become established. Approximately 26 percent of the 217.5-acre project area will be open space (i.e. parkland, wetland buffer, stormwater basins, and woodland), which is expected to help mitigate adverse effects on wildlife. While cultivated croplands will be completely converted and removed as an available habitat type, it is anticipated that woodlands, wetlands, and stormwater basin areas will be increased 27 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 from existing conditions. Consequently, the project is not expected to result in a regionally significant decline in wildlife abundance or species diversity. Measures expected to provide additional habitat for wildlife and help mitigate adverse effects include the preservation of approximately 55 acres of wetland area, avoidance or native plant communities, and the creation of a 17.4-acre community park. In addition, Project development will maintain connections between existing wetlands and woodlands through buffers and landscaped areas. Such efforts will reduce habitat fragmentation and allow for wildlife movement on the property and from adjacent, off -site resource areas. The increased acreage of large ponds within the Project area may also increase habitat availability and suitability for trumpeter swans. The project proposer understands that the introduction and spread of invasive weed species from project construction and operation requires consideration. While there is the opportunity for invasive weed species to be introduced during project construction, it is unlikely that these species would persist in a meaningful way following construction. The Adelaide Landing project will be fully landscaped with turf grass and landscape trees and shrubs per a city -approved landscaping plan. Consequently, large areas of exposed soils where invasive weed species might appear is not anticipated, or expected. If present, large areas of invasive species will be controlled by the applicant in accordance with local and state invasive and noxious weed regulations. 14. Historic properties Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and 3) architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and operation. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties. A database search request was made to the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) who conducted a search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structure Inventory for the project area (Appendix D). Based on their review, no previously recorded archaeological sites, historic structures, or traditional cultural properties were identified in the database for the project area or immediately adjacent to the project area. Four archaeological sites and 64 inventoried architectural/historic resources were identified within the City of Hugo between 0.25 mile and one mile north and northwest of the project area. Two of the inventoried architectural/historic resources (Lake Superior and Mississippi Railroad Corridor: Lower St. Croix Segment and St. John the Baptist Church and Cemetery) have been evaluated as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, five archaeological "alpha" sites are located within one mile of the project area. Alpha sites are sites that have been reported by a landowner or identified through historic documentation, but have not been officially recorded by an archaeologist. None of the archaeological sites or architectural/historic resources will be impacted by the proposed project. Background research was also conducted at the MN SHPO and the MN Office of the State Archaeologist. No other previously recorded archaeological sites or historic properties were identified at, or immediately adjacent to, the project area. A farmstead property is located in the southeast portion of the site that dates back to 1890. This property was not identified in the Minnesota Historic Structure Inventory for the project area, and its listing eligibility is currently unknown. A request for the farmstead to be inventoried would need to be made, along with a preliminary assessment of its eligibility for the National Register of Historic 28 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 Places (NRHP). Currently, effects to historic properties during project construction and operation are not anticipated. 15. Visual Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects. There are no scenic views or vistas located on or near the property, and no non -routine impacts or visual nuisances are anticipated. The proposed residential land use is consistent with other established uses in the area, and therefore will not create a significant change in visual aesthetics. Measures to soften visual transitions include providing buffers between existing and proposed homes, preservation of tree and wetland cover where possible, developing a community park, and providing landscaping adjacent to proposed collector and arterial streets and adjacent higher intensity land uses. 16. Air a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air pollutants, criteria pollutants, and any greenhouse gases. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the project's effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary source emissions. Because development of heavy industrial facilities is not proposed, no stationary source air emissions are anticipated as a result of this project. b. Vehicle emissions -Describe the effect of the project's traffic generation on air emissions. Discuss the project's vehicle -related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures (e.g. traffic operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to minimize or mitigate vehicle -related emissions. Increased traffic will generate a relatively small corresponding increase in carbon monoxide levels and other vehicle -related air emissions. The project is expected to have a negligible impact on air quality as existing AADTs are below operational thresholds. Consequently, baseline air quality monitoring, or predictive air quality modeling, has not been scheduled at this time, and no measures to mitigate air quality impacts have been considered. c. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of dust and odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may be discussed under item 16a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the project including nearby sensitive receptors and quality of life. Ident� measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors. Project development will not generate odors or dust in excess of levels emitted during typical construction practices of suburban developments. Odors and dust produced during construction will meet the requirements of the MPCA and applicable local regulations. 29 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The project will not generate significant odors during construction or operation. Minor odors generated during construction will be typical of those associated with residential development processes, such as exhaust from diesel and gasoline powered construction equipment. The construction process is expected to generate some dust, but it is not anticipated that fugitive dust will be generated in objectionable quantities. The nearest receptors to the proposed project are several residential developments to the south of 130' Street N, west, north, northeast of the Project boundary and farmsteads located east of Project. Residential developments range in distances from immediately adjacent in the northern portion of the project boundary, to'/4-mile to the west. Farmstead buildings are located less than 0.1-mile from the eastern project boundary. Consideration will be given to suppression of airborne dust by application of water if significant fugitive dust generation occurs during site grading and equipment operation that is greater than routinely expected during normal construction practices. 17. Noise Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including 1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise. The project will be constructed in accordance with the city's established ordinance as outlined in City Code Chapter 46 - Nuisances. It is anticipated that noise levels will temporarily increase locally during project construction, but are expected to return to intensities consistent with existing levels and sources following project completion. Noise levels on and adjacent to the site will vary considerably during construction depending on the pieces of construction equipment being operated simultaneously, the percent of time in operation, and the distance from the equipment to the receptors. The nearest receptors to the proposed project are several residential developments to the south of 130' Street N, west, north, northeast of the Project boundary and farmsteads located east of Project. Residential developments range in distances from immediately adjacent in the northern portion of the project boundary, to 1/4-mile to the west. Farmstead buildings are located less than 0.1-mile from the eastern project boundary. Planned landscaping within and adjacent to project boundaries will help to minimize and mitigate the effects of the anticipated negligible noise generated from the project following construction. 18. Transportation a. Describe traffic -related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates, and S) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes. Excelsior Group is proposing to construct 324 residential units on a 217.5-acre site in Hugo, Minnesota. The development, called Adelaide Landing, is to be located north of 130th Street North and east of US Trunk Highway 61. 1) Existing and proposed additional parkin_ spaces -- There are no existing parking spaces on the site. Each residential unit will have at least one parking stall in its 30 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 garage. There will also be a small neighborhood park that will have approximately 30 parking stalls. 2) Estimated total average daily traffic ,generated — Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition, the estimated total average daily traffic generated by Adelaide Landing will be 3,098 trips/day. 3) Estimated maximum peak hour traffic ,generated and time of occurrence -- Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition, the estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated by Adelaide Landing will be 303 trips/hour, which will occur during the p.m. peak hour. 4) Indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates — The source of the estimates is Land Use Code 210 of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition. After reviewing several land use codes in the manual, it was felt the code for Single Family Housing most directly corresponds with the residential land use proposed in Adelaide Landing. (In the case of this residential development, ITE best practices recommend the use of equations over rates.) Table 18.1. Trip Generation Summary Type Land Use ITE Code Size Wee day AM peak PM Peak Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Residential Single FamilyHousing 210 324 units 1,549 1,549 59 177 191 112 1,549 1,549 59 177 191 112 3,098 236 303 5) Availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes — a. Metro Transit has no existing routes that travel within 0.5 miles of this site. b. The City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan (2010), there is a snowmobile trail and a proposed regional trail (as of 2010) located along US Trunk Highway 61 to the west of the Adelaide Landing development. c. There is also a proposed city trail (as of 2010) along 1301h Street North to the south of the development. b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project's impact on the regional transportation system. If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's Access Management Manual, Chapter 5 (available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html) or a similar local guidance. 31 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 The street system in the Adelaide Landing development is proposed to be curvilinear with one main neighborhood collector running north -south through the development with various local streets intersecting the north -south street and serving small pockets of housing. While the development will propose no new direct access intersections onto TH 61, the concept sketch plan for the site includes a connection to existing 137th Street North that proceeds through another residential development and intersects TH 61. Further, the development proposes three intersections with 130th Street North at the south end of the site, which in turn provides direct access to TH 61. As required, a traffic study has been prepared for this development (see Appendix). This analysis looked at the traffic operation of the study area during three time periods: • Existing condition (2016), • One year after full development (2022), and • Twenty-year timeframe (2035 to 2040). The following intersections were assessed in this analysis: • TH 61 & 130th Street N • TH 61 & 134th Street N • TH 61 & 137th Street N • TH 61 & 140th Street N • 130th Street N & West Site Access Street/Flay Road • 130th & Mid Site Access Street • 130th Street N & East Site Access Street • 140th Street N & Flay Avenue This analysis also addressed the potential for "cut -through" concerns, as well as pedestrian access and crossings. The completion of the Adelaide Landing development will prompt some residents of adjacent subdivisions to cut through the new development in order to get to TH 61 at either 130th Street or 137th Street. Traffic has been added to the trip generation of Adelaide Landing to account for this cut through traffic in the analysis. Findings from this study were compared with the results from previous studies in the area, including the TH 61 Corridor Access Management Plan, the TH 61 at 130th Street ICE Report and the City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan. Because the development is residential, the peak hour flow is directionally -oriented (e.g., primarily outbound during the a.m., and primarily inbound during the p.m. peak). Results of the traffic study show that a majority of the trips generated by the site will enter and exit the development at the south (i.e., TH 61 & 130th Street N) while the remainder of the trips will enter and exit the development at the north (i.e., TH 61 & 137th Street N, or other local streets to County Road 8). This is not only because the 32 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 intersection of 130th Street and TH 61 is signalized, but also because 130th Street is slated for future improvements to collector standards. As background traffic builds, signalization may be warranted in the future at TH 61 & 137th Street N. Further, signal timing modifications may be warranted at the existing signalized intersections of TH 61 at 130th Street N. and at 140th Street N. Both intersections are part of an actuated coordinated signal timing plan along TH 61, which cycle lengths of 160 seconds during the a.m. peak and 150 seconds in the p.m. peak. Short term demand (to year 2022) operating under existing signal timings will operate acceptably, but as traffic builds to year 2040, the increased traffic demand will cause side street approaches to operate unacceptably. Therefore, MnDOT may consider modifications to signal timings along TH 61. Widening to four lanes with turn lanes may become necessary at some point prior to 2040, as traffic volumes along TH 61will increase to unacceptable levels of operational performance. Although not programmed, that reconstruction, as well as revised signal timings at 130th and 140th Streets may be modifications MnDOT and others should consider. c. Identify measures that will betaken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects. The Adelaide Landing development has been designed to incorporate curvilinear alignment to streets. This will reduce traffic speeds and encourage driver safety. Further, no residential units abut TH 61 or 130' Street North, so as to segregate residential neighborhood traffic from arterial traffic. Existing signal timings operate acceptably at the signalized intersections for the year 2020 scenarios. As background traffic builds to year 2040, signalization may be warranted in the future at TH 61 & 137th Street N. Further, signal timing modifications will likely be warranted at the existing signalized intersection of TH 61 & 130th Street N and at 140th Street N by year 2040. A mitigation plan has been included in the traffic impact study that include strategies that will accommodate the proposed development plan now and in the future. MITIGATION STRATEGIES Existing Condition No intersection operates below LOS-D, therefore no mitigation is recommended. No traffic safety issues are apparent, therefore no safety mitigation is recommended. 2022 No -Build Condition No intersection operates below LOS-D; however, TH 61 & 140th Street experiences excessive delay in the eastbound direction and excessive queuing in the northbound direction and southbound left direction during the p.m. peak hour. These can be mitigated by geometric and signal timing improvements 33 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 No traffic safety issues are apparent, although increased delay and queuing may cause driver frustration; no safety mitigation is recommended. 2040 No -Build Condition TH 61 & 140th Street operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour, and TH 61 & 130th Street operates at LOS-D in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Both intersections are impacted by the lack of available through capacity along the two-lane section of TH 61. o Reconstruction of TH 61 to a four -lane section with turn lanes in this area will improve traffic operation to LOS-C or better at all study area intersections along TH 61. o The eastbound left turn movement of 140t Street at TH 61 operates at LOS-E. By creating a dedicated eastbound left turn lane and installing lead -lag left turn signal timing at that intersection, traffic operation will improve. o The westbound left turn movement at TH 61 & 134th Street operates at LOS-E in the p.m. peak hour. This is primarily due to the heavy northbound traffic flow and the inability for 134th Street traffic to find adequate gaps in the traffic to complete their left turns. This may be mitigated by restricting left turns in the p.m. peak hour as a safety and operation measure. The increased delay and operational issues identified will impact driver safety. Therefore, the need for widening of TH 61 to four lanes with turn lanes should be reviewed regularly from a safety standpoint. o MnDOT and Washington County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2008 related to the long-term future of TH 61. The improvements recommended above are not currently in MnDOT's 20-Year Plan. 2022 Build Condition No intersection operates below LOS-D; however, TH 61 & 140th Street experiences excessive delay in the eastbound direction and increased queuing in the southbound left direction during the p.m. peak hour. If no signal timings changes are made in 2020, the eastbound queue extends beyond 300 feet, while the southbound left turn queue extends beyond 500 feet. These may be mitigated by geometric and signal timing improvements (if deemed necessary by MnDOT). Increased delay is identified at the westbound left approaches to TH 61 at 137th Street and 134th Street. It is recommended that east legs of the intersections be restriped to create one inbound (eastbound) lane and two outbound (westbound) lanes (e.g., one left turn lane and one right turn lane). The westbound approach of 137t' Street is 33 feet wide, which is capable of being striped with three 11-foot lanes. The westbound approach of 134`' Street is approximately 32 feet wide, which can accommodate two 11- foot lanes and a 10-foot lane. No operational issues are identified along 130th Street in conjunction with the new development. o All intersections with 130th Street will operate acceptably with basic single lane street approach to 130th Street without turn lanes into or out of the development. o Nevertheless, capacity is not the only issue. Pedestrian access, safety and roadway width/condition area also factors. The roadway is in the City's Capital Improvement Plan for improvement to collector standards. Timing of the project would be based on development phasing. 34 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 From a safety perspective, an evaluation of the existing posted speed limit of 50 mph is recommended for both directions along 130th Street from TH 61 to Goodview Avenue following development. o The City of Hugo would require a speed study be completed by MnDOT before any speed reduction would take place. 2040 Build Condition TH 61 & 140th Street operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour, and TH 61 & 130th Street operates at LOS-E in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Both intersections are impacted by the lack of available through capacity along the two-lane section of TH 61. o The improvements recommended in the year 2020 conditions are assumed to be completed prior to 2040. o Reconstruction of TH 61 to a four -lane section with turn lanes in this area will improve traffic operation to LOS-C or better at all study area intersections along TH 61. o The eastbound left turn movement of 140th Street at TH 61 operates at LOS-F in the unmitigated scenario. By creating a dedicated eastbound left turn lane and installing lead -lag left turn signal timing at that intersection, traffic operation will improve. o Because so much signal timing must be allotted to the north -south movements on TH 61, the side street and turn movement timings fail at 130th Street. The four -lane improvements along TH 61 will improve signal operation and overall intersection performance along the corridor. o The westbound left turn movements at TH 61 & 134th and at 137th Streets operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour. This is primarily due to the heavy northbound traffic flow and the inability for side street traffic to find adequate gaps in the traffic to complete their left turns. This may be mitigated by restricting left turns in the p.m. peak hour as a safety and operation measure. The increased delay and operational issues identified will impact driver safety. Therefore, the need for widening of TH 61 to four lanes with turn lanes should be reviewed regularly from a safety standpoint. o MnDOT and Washington County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2008 related to the long-term future of TH 61. The improvements recommended above are not currently in MnDOT's 20-Year Plan. If not reviewed and modified following the 2020 Build Condition, an evaluation of the posted speed limit of 50 mph is recommended for both directions along 130th Street from TH 61 to Goodview Avenue following development. o The City of Hugo would require a speed study be completed by MnDOT before any speed reduction would take place. 19. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are addressed under the applicable EAW Items) a. Describe the geographic scales and timeframes of the project related environmental effects that could combine with other environmental effects resulting in cumulative potential effects. 35 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 It is anticipated that the project will be constructed in five phases, with the first phase expected to begin in spring 2017. Full build -out is anticipated by 2021; however, construction timing will ultimately depend upon market conditions. The changes in regional land use in the Hugo area from open space, rural and agricultural land uses to more urbanized uses is expected to have a cumulative impact on the area. Cumulative effects of this and future projects on natural resources and infrastructure are expected to be roughly proportional to the impacts discussed in this EAW, or somewhat greater if future projects are developed at a higher density. The City of Hugo has planned for future growth and development in this particular area as part of its Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2010), Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan, Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, Transportation Plan, Public Facilities Plan, and Parks/Trails/Open Space Plan. These efforts will ensure that the cumulative impacts of future growth and development to the environment, and to the City's service capacity, are anticipated and mitigated. b. Describe any reasonably foreseeable future projects (for which a basis of expectation has been laid) that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed project within the geographic scales and timeframes identified above. The project proposer does not currently own or have options on adjacent lands. The City of Hugo keeps a running list of available residential lots current as of June 2016. According to the table, a total of 130 single-family lots and 137 multi -family lots are available. Based on the 2015 Annual Building Report, a total of 32 planning applications were submitted in 2015; 59 single-family units and 8 multi -family homes were permitted in 2015; 9 active residential developments and 2 non-residential developments. For instance, Fox Meadows 1st and 2' Additions, located south of this project, were constructed in the past several years. Because many of the above projects and available lots develop based on market drivers and conditions, the timing of future development can, and likely will, fluctuate. However, land adjacent to the project site is eventually expected to develop, per the City of Hugo Land Use Plan, thereby converting existing open space and agricultural lands to low density residential uses. The City of Hugo's Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2010) anticipates and guides the intensity of development within the city and directs necessary infrastructure improvements to support the planned development. Abutting land use consists of wetland, woodland, and rural residential uses north of the northeast section, south and east of the Project and are guided for low density residential (LD). In keeping with the city's comprehensive plan, these parcels are expected to develop in the future to similar uses. Undeveloped parcels in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development site contain similar land uses and land features as the project site. Existing land cover on these properties is primarily agricultural, with wooded tree lines, drainages, and wetlands interspersed. c. Discuss the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects. The proposed project will result in minor conversion of jurisdictional wetland to upland, tree removal and conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. Consequently, cumulative impacts to natural resources are anticipated to be minimal, and have been purposefully concentrated 36 Adelaide Landing Residential Development EAW, Hugo January 31, 2017 in this portion of the city in order to set aside other areas as Long Term Agricultural (LA), Agricultural (AG), and Rural Residential (RR). Development of surrounding parcels will also result in cumulative impacts to city infrastructure such as roads, sewer, and water. These cumulative impacts have been thoughtfully contemplated and addressed in the city's Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan, Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, Transportation Plan, and Public Facilities Plan. Mitigation for anticipated minor cumulative impacts in the area will include providing approximately 56 acres of open space (26 percent of the site), providing buffers to surrounding developments, a 17.4-acre Park, protecting woodlands and wetlands to the extent practicable, pretreating stormwater and controlling stormwater rates, and providing adequate municipal facilities such as potable water and wastewater treatment. These provisions will help minimize potential cumulative effects of past developments and future developments within the region. Given the nature of cumulative potential effects, the evaluation of available and relevant information, and mitigation efforts proposed, the potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects appears minor. 20. Other potential environmental effects: If the project may cause any additional environmental effects not addressed by items I to 19, describe the effects here, discuss the how the environment will be affected, and identify measures that will be taken to minimize and mitigate these effects. No other additional environmental effects are anticipated as a result of this project. Potential environmental effects have been addressed in Items 1 through 19. RGU CERTIFICATION. (The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor) I hereby certify that: The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9c and 60, respectively. Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Title: Bryan Bear, Administrator, City of Hugo 37 Date Exhibits Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_Site Locatioo_EAW_Ex1_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 1:41:27 PM klblock —Len'ter V1 IIP Main St 14-- _ Q ro p ,Ah �� VIC ! Lli,,rWat` i K%Y�yl i I ArWe Park 84 rr Z' 7 \1'ar n n L) O C Ci I O YI! 4� m Oh-OA ORQ',� y Tary �-�µ ..,M a 2a �ir �yZ N 2 ( J b r1P I o%na 111 11,, k)` 964 fl j Anoka County _I j Ramsey County Z v r, )ata Source(s): Westwood (2016); ESRI WMS Vorld T0000raohic 8 National Geoarachic IBasemap Imagery (Accessed 2016). Westwood ,1,— (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. FA z 6; Bald Eagle Park y Legend Project Boundary County Boundary Dla—nd 1 42. Point 2 Park C3` Egg La Ao P'7 c 2 u�11r•n„3 e: rr° tq. 1 1371h St 'YUly d U Baavar Fonds Park 132nd St N 125th St N 'r e- Oneka Rdge c Golfcourse ,,County(,-. j oN r NO, y G m �t61� I LuAv °}d Pam, Powadr 17 D2 117111 St N I7i Park AN 6==K====J Feet 0 3,000 106: N ND MI MN Project iVi11111E3j!�'I� • WI SD j IA I— (Honey ta•n[Fr�,k_is --- - Line°^r M+ . Chisagoo ,_ Clhi:ago CiYunty'. Anoka r AiL'ounty Anoka Project Lmc _aker. I o,�R apAs J1 ainc 'Hugo �dt N�Nort}IDaks lu, Rha eviea. w h ngmn-r" CG Lj1PL ty .'� L ntY "IIw.iSdi Heigh. $*�bl�tvil m lFtolitl)s nt Paul Hapnpp .'n't Lous PyirkSds L-aul .� ood(wry z G S.—H 2 v La kc Q a — 01.1 �i o c ti22nd St � A.JAIA■�A I AN��N/V r%%A IU 1 G I %A IU `G11 1 %A 1 1 1 IJ Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Site Location EXHIBIT 1 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_USGSTopography_EAW_Ex2_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 2:10,40 PM klblock V v YVe„w s r V' QJe-ye"11yr ° 3 lastn St N id5tr; st N pjM 935 145th' St N ♦ Rice La k e o f 4r �. Phelps Rd r I -°f ""• " 4- 144th St N yr N so osP4 N'-'\ � o0u�.� �• _ i ``-� , � �s J - 1 • e. �I 6i rs Nlay, \ j ti�� -c • `� �dt .. p, tie 'r gt[l rr'9 3 Garden Wa N -('� - _ v I / 142n , z -Gene r � c /y O �/',�1 r�r 60` Y�^ i . 13 d.StN 142n'd St N' m .� �a t'Y �� ... ' � 0 G JAI O 1 1 � ,w C f �: ^ � �14'Ist S.t N' �@�.-.?� = f} "} "_ ¢ -•• .t..\�./� � _ -Y- 'i' { • � � rl�s -a � i� 141st St N D � �.z ... �.. Q - � > ..n` .,r " � � � .r � l -a. co E-Ceda, St z 1 Q{ t %� �_ -'• .�- °�' "�,~� -+► -y...+ .,. .. 'i•- `� _ _ !-J o _ 11N 140th c?. Arthur Ct _ I % z Ss„�® .-`Q�w _ ♦ a .� Off, _ y r_ i n 138th St N 73gr . • . T • - : \ 137th St N' 137th St N z 9 '< le Rd a �Q e Ba 93 � LacasseCt" � - -- '! •a ('ooP�da¢ RaN � LLL/// o / Go °' I `.� . A � y �dye' . "� [/ • � - c'r _ Q 1 v jor -• 2 \ m , t 135th St N v L,IQ p U- Ive�rso`n'Ct -ml ' \C - ■0 -------.------ - — - 32 134t1i-St N re 65th ab/e .► .; ,. m oo�O _.' N• _ �}�' k'Yt �, r "`. 4 - - 0013Id St N _ Ftp�la Ct �i yd�fo�q\idC^�I 1.3 ��C 132n gN y \ Os♦ ry o w �? _ 130th S[ N \ ib n ---- ° ri dr • _ z a C.._ O m 2 a � C�a Q ¢' 129th St N 129 -qWW,t z T t► is < e a 0c 9Y�• �JtoQ D� 4 •AO- ca0 a. ` +� _ m 0 so' ,^:e y ° V v Z u- 128th St N FlayR f �. "� ,W�+f r \ T. z m s W I > " 2 u am • if w o •°c — C' .:5. I c - • u ml - U r m �. • m I L Gallivan m �• _ O o o _ 36 w 125th Aye N 125th St N✓-- ,y�o • a I z _ 3: 7.25th St7N T L a" -�. eA T �• �fli> n • v 'v �.r. ` •� oq Gr I I " ' s ® '► o /O•g V� Woodchuckviet� � y. � ,_ _ � • I : 0 � . s O i m St A, L _ �F — .ff��C1 Data Source(s): Westwood (2016); ESRI WMS ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ IUSA logo Sasemap Imagery (Accessed 2016); Census Bureau (2015). Westwood TdlFree (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend Project Boundary Road -----� County Boundary AN 6mmmw=� Feet 0 2,000 A►aeiaiae Landing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota USGS Topography EXHIBIT 2 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_PostConstruction_EAW_Ex3_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 1:38,48 PM klblock USA Tope Basemap Imagery (Accessed 2016); Legend Census Bureau (2015). Project Boundary N 6� Feet Road Westwood A 0 700 Tall-m (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com 1' ' County Boundary Westwood Professional Services, Inc. `-----1 Haemae Lanaing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Post Construction Site Plan EXHIBIT 3 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_Adjacent_Landuse_EAW_Ex4_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 2:21:04 PM klblock Westwood Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Project Boundary N I A Feet Parcel Boundary 0 1,000 Adjacent Land Use EXHIBIT 4 r ■frlj{ T 41 ir< C. :: ■n:1 m1w 'lam i l ndwm� ISpIm- Map Document: N:\0008463.0MGIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_WaterResource_EAW_Ex6_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 1:33:29 PM klblock Imagery (Accessed 2016); Census Bureau (2015); NAIP/Minnesota (2015); Google Maps (2016);ESRI (2010); MNTOPO (2016); USGS NHD Dataset (2013); MnDNR (2008); FEMA (2010); Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Ducks Unlimited, and St. Mary's University of Minnesota (2015); U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2010); U.S. Geological survey (2011). Westwood Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend Project Boundary MN DNR Public Waterbody (PWI) NHD Flowline ■ ■ ■ MN DNR Public Watercourse (PWI) NHD Waterbody FEMA Floodplain Area = NWI Wetland Aaemae Lanaing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota N Feet A 0 800 Water Resources EXHIBIT 6 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_ApprovedWetlandDelineation_EAW_Ex7_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 1:36:03 PM klblock © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 3 ' 1371h'StN 44 Wetland KES 2 KT). -1etland CP 2 Wetland CP cr r r— '38t Note: KES - Kjolhaug CP - City Parcel (Westwood) •fF.. �, SP - Stochowiak Parcel (Westwood) 1'�M •?ad '�" _..;•, � r'r : # �°'�Q, "4 . � a Ave N f �V. 4 FI-0, RAW .r.YM l 1r♦ �.d"� •'135thStN ' ;•• ra&.}RK''�"?.,„• ;i Ilt Wetland KES 2 _ d Z Wetland KES 2 0 Wetland SP' R �� "' - 132nd St N Wetland t ES 2 "' Wetland SP 3 t- - Wetland KES 4 r NOW - ' 130th St N ►� •:129thtStN �^�~'►'� '� ld W'land,KES� LL Data Source(s): Westwood (2016); ESRI WMS Aerial Imagery (Accessed 2016); Census Bureau (2015); NAIP/Minnesota (2015); Google Maps (2016);ESRI (2010); MNTOPO (2016); USGS NHD Dataset (2013); A A Y1 Legend MnDNR (2008); FEMA (2010); MnDNR, Ducks Unlimited, �eii ei 1 1 and St. Mary's University of Minnesota (2015); U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Sea rvice (2010); U.S. Geological Survey Project Boundary (201 1); Kolhaug Environmental Services (2075). � Y Westwood F Delineated Wetland Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. r, Adelaide Landing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota N Approved Delineated A' !Feet o zoo Wetland Boundaries EXHIBIT 7 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_SoIISNRCS_EAW_Ex8_1611 t0.mxd 11/10/2016 1.34:20 PM klblock Imagery (Accessed 2016); Census Bureau (2015); NAIP/Minnesota (2015); Google Maps (2016);ESRI (2010); MNTOPO (2016); USGS NHD Dataset (2013); Mn DNR (2008); FEMA (2010); Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Ducks Unlimited, and St. Mary's University of Minnesota (2015); U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2010); U.S. Geological Survey (2011). Westwood Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend Aaeiaiae Lanaing Project Boundary NRCS Soil Unit N 6mmmm=====J Feet 0 800 Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota � All Hydric Soil NRCS Soils Note: There are no prime farmlands Predominantly Hydric within the project area. EXHIBIT 8 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\EAW_Exhibits\PP_CoverTypes_EAW_Ex9_161110.mxd 11/10/2016 2:18:16 PM klblock Road Herbaceous (11.20 acres; 5.1 %) I luyv, vv0011111yw11 wullty, Ivrllnlcavta N - Open Water (0.12 acres; 0.1 %) Shrub/Scrub (2.90 acres; 1.3%) I In Feet Westwood Developed, Open Space (14.50 acres; 6.7%) - Hay/Pasture (35.50 acres; 16.3%) 0 1,000 Cover Types TollIm (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Developed, Low Intensity (3.70 acres; 1.7%) - Cultivated Crops (113.40 acres; 52.1%) , Note: Cover type acreage and percentage Westwood Professional5ervices, Inc. - Developed, Medium Intensity (1.10 acres; 0.5%) - Emergent Herbaceuous Wetlands (24.70 acres; 11.4%) information are calculated for project area. EXHIBIT 9 Appendix A Wetland Decision Notices Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota This page is intentionally blank Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit (LGU) Address City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Michael Ruether- Project Name: Arcand South PID 2903121240001 Date of Application 12/19/14 Application Number Premier Banks 2903121310001 14.17 Ben Carlson- Kjolhaug 2903121340001 Environmental 290312140001 ® Attach site locator map. Type of Decision: ® Wetland Boundary or Type ❑ No -Loss ❑ Exemption ❑ Sequencing❑ Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan l ectimcal Evaluation Panel ® Approve Summary (or attach and Kecommenclation (it any) ❑ Approve with conditions ❑ Deny The BWSR TEP representative recommended approval based on the revised boundary map submitted on 6/18/15 which included revisions of wetland boundaries from the 5/14/15 field review. 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION Date of Decision: 6/30/15 ® Approved ❑ Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary): BwsR Forms 11-25-09 Pagel of 4 A joint application was received for a boundary and type approval on December 19, 2014. The wetland delineation for this parcel was completed on October 14, 2014. A previous delineation from 2005 identified additional wetland areas not found in the 2014 delineation. Due to the complexity of the site and the fact that the field review would have to be completed outside of the growing season, the application was deferred until spring, and was deemed complete on April 30, 2015. A field review was completed on May 14, 2015. Based on the field review the boundary for wetland 2 was expanded in multiple locations (Wetland 2, Figure 6, 06125115 Wetland Delineation Report) to include areas that exhibited vegetative, soils, and hydrologic indicators. Two additional wetlands (wetlands 3 and 4) were identified in an open field on the south/southwest portion of the parcel based on soils. Hydrology and vegetative indicators were no longer present in this area based on agricultural practices (plowing and planting). A total of four (4) wetlands were identified on the site. The boundaries and types identified for this parcel and discussed in the 06/25/15 Wetland Delineation Report submitted by Ben Carlson, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company, are approved. For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account # Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name: Title: Tony Havranek Senior Environmental Scientist (WSB & Associates, Inc.), on behalf of the City of Hugo Signature Date: Phone Number and E-mail: - 6/30/15 (612)246-9346, tavranek@wsbeng.com THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant maybe responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: ® Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send petition and $To Be Determined by City fee (if applicable) to: Mr. Steve Duff City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 ❑ Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and $500 filing fee to: Executive Director Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Jed Chesnut jchesnutkmnwcd.orj4 ® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer ben.meyerka,state.mn.us ® LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Rachel Juba, City of Hugo, rjuba(c.ci.hugo.mn.us Steve Duff, City of Hugo, sduff(c� ci.hugo.mn.us Katy Thompson kthompsonkwsbeng com ® DNR TEP member: Brooke Haworth brooke.haworthkstate.mn.us; Jenifer Sorensen j enifer. sorensen&state. mn. us ❑ DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member) ® WD or WMO (if applicable): Nick Tomczik ntomczik(c�r�,ricecreek.org ® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): Ben Carlson, benkkiolhaugenv.com, Mike Ruether, mruether(a�premierbanks.com ❑ Members of the public who requested notice: ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only): Thomas Hingsberger, thomas.j .hingsbergerkusace.army.mil U BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only) 5. MAILING INFORMATION ➢ For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA_areas.pdf ➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.nm.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP�contacts.pdf ➢ Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: hM2:Hfiles.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr_re ie•ons.pdf ➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regulator3/default.asp?Vageid=687 or send to: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 ➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 3 of 6. ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments: ® Revised Wetland Delineation Report BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 4 of DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS _ 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700 ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1678 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF AUG 2 4 2016 REGULATORY BRANCH Operations Regulatory (2016-02345-LMG) The Excelsior Group c/o Ms. Deb Ridgeway 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 Dear Ms. Ridgeway: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated July 1, 2016, requesting Corps of Engineers (Corps) concurrence with the delineation of aquatic resources completed on a 17 acre parcel in the City of Hugo. The project site is located in Section 29, Township 31 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota. We have reviewed the information provided in your report and determined that the limits of the aquatic resources have been accurately identified in accordance with current agency guidance including the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region. This determination is only valid for the review area outlined in red on the enclosed figures labeled MVP-2016-02345-LMG Page 1 of 2 through Page 2 of 2. This concurrence may generally be relied upon for five years from the date of this letter. However, we reserve the right to review and revise our concurrence in response to changing site conditions, information that was not considered during our initial review, or off -site activities that could indirectly alter the extent of wetlands and other resources on -site. Our concurrence may be renewed at the end of this period provided you submit a written request and our staff are able to verify that the determination is still valid. The preliminary jurisdictional determination (JD) included with the delineation concurrence presumes that all of the aquatic resources identified in the review area subject to Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. Since the determination is considered preliminary it is not appealable under our administrative appeal procedures (33 CFR 331). If you prefer an appealable approved jurisdictional determination that verifies the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources within the review area you may request one by contacting the Corps representative identified in the final paragraph of this letter. If this preliminary JD is acceptable, please sign and date both copies of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form and return one copy to the letterhead address within 15 days from the date of this letter. Regulatory Branch (File No. 2016-02345-LMG) If you have any questions, contact LeeAnn Glomski in our St. Paul office at (651) 290- 5324 or LeeAnn.M.Glomski@usace.army.mil. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory number shown above. Enclosures cc: Kristine Maurer, Westwood Tony Havranek, LGU Ben Meyer, BWSR Sincerely, Kristen Hafer Chief, Southwest Section Page 2 of 2 IVIVH-1U'IU-U2J45-LM(3 [-age 1 of L �'♦•' �,�,tLt\'���� T31R21S20 Hip d7= am ■IL Pi;�r"� NEPA«� �_ - �e �po0p`�A �w► • — �� % CA 1355 St N may. f�6i�y i 4 Zq, y glvdcClt N i c 932 ro 1G Al 4 LLJ-L9 0 JJ i 1.30tti St N — — -- -o -- -- -- �-,� i� � t �/ � �'!"D `'' � m � ��' r • / \` �' 128th-St_N ' � � � r. Ii v �•r�rl C; N Anokao S6j� % 125ih $t N 2 r — yin" Hugo Washington Project Location Ramsey — ` ,� N t t Feetj' Pdihtana<li `: ti 0 1,400 Data Imagwy Basem pource(accessed 2 16),i Westwood Legend V i vy of Huggo Proved (2016), MnDOT (2009),MNDNR (2010) g # T63-2903121320009 Delineation Parcels Survey Area Hugo, Minnesota ---� WestW00 ❑i Roads PLS Section . Site Location and USGS Topography Td Frc-e (888)837-5160 w twoodps.,° , Boundary �/ p .1 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT I t 11AX/n e)n^ia nnnAL" I Re^ r 1V, V 1 -w 1v—vLJ'tJ'LIVIV rayC L UI L (accessed 2016), Westwood (2016), KJohagen (2015) Legend C itM-29031213270009 f H U o Pro art # Delineation Survey Area Sample Type Hugo, Minnesota Westwood ® Delineated Wetlands 0 Upland Delineated Wetlands .ghee (966)937-5160 weshvocdp-cm 0 Wetland Westwood Professional S—Ice,, Inc. Adjacent Delineated Wetlands EXHIBIT 4 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: District Office St. Paul District File/ORM # 2016-02345-LMG PJD Date: Aug 17, 2016 State [MN—; City/County Hugo/Washington Name/ The Excelsior Grou Nearest Waterbody: Clearwater Creek Address of p Person c/o Ms. Deb Ridgeway Location: TRS, Requesting 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 LatLong or Ul M: T31N R21 W S29 Req g St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 45.14337,-92.99634 PJD Identify (Estimate) Amount of Waters in the Review Area: Name of Any Water Bodies Tidal: Non -Wetland Waters: Stream Flow: on the Site Identified as 260 linear ft F width �__ acres Section 10 Waters: Non -Tidal: Perennial Cowardin — r Office (Desk) Determination etl n s 5.7 acre(s) Class: Palustrine, emergent r Field Determination: Date of Field Trip: SUPPORTING DATA: Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply - checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): (T Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: lWestwood r, Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. r Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. r Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. r Data sheets prepared by the Corps r Corps navigable waters' study: r U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: f USGS NHD data. r, USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. r U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite quad name: 1:24K MN-HUGo r USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: lWashington County soil Survey_ rNational wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: JUSFWS NWI & MnDNR NWI I- State/Local wetland inventory map(s): r FEMA/FIRM maps: f 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: r Photographs: r Aerial (Name & Date): FSA 2013 V, Other (Name & Date): Google Earth r Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: r Other information (please specify): Washington county riDAR data IMPORTANT TE: he information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verifled by the Corps and should aid be relied upon for later 'urisdictional determinations. lw,�7 /Z_ dq�n� :) /b Signature and Date of Regulatory Project Manager Signature and Date of Person Requesting Preliminary JD (REQUIRED) (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is impracticable) EXPLANATION OF PRELIMINARY AND APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS: 1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site. Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in this instance and at this time. 2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "preconstmctiou notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved JD before accepting the terns and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general pennit authorization; (4) that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terns and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject pennit authorization without requesting an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331, and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33 C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site the Corps will provide an approved JD to accomplish that result as soon as is practicable, PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: Appendix A - Sites District Office St. Paul District File/ORM # 2016-02345-LMG PJD Date: Aug 17, 2016 State FCity/County Hugo/Washington Person Requestinq PJD FMs.Deb Ridgeway Est. Amount of Site Aquatic Resource Class of Number Latitude Longitude Cowardin Class in Review Area Aquatic Resource W1301 45.14314-92.99738 Palustrine, emergent 0.3 acre wetland WB02 45.14244-92.99538 Palustrine, emergent 5.4 acres wetland Ditch 45.14244-92.99454 Riverine 260 linear feet ditch Notes: Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit (LGU) Address City of Hugo (Steve Duff) 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Deb Ridgeway- Project Name: City Parcel# 163-2903 121320005 Date of Application Complete on 7/1/16 Application Number Excelsior Group (formerly Woods Edge) 16.06 Kristine Maurer- 3288-01 Westwood Professional Services ® Attach site locator map. Type of Decision: ® Wetland Boundary or Type ❑ No -Loss ❑ Exemption ❑ Sequencing❑ Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan 1'echnical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation (it any): ❑ Approve ❑ Approve with conditions ❑ Deny Summary (or attach): 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION Date of Decision: 8/8/16 ® Approved ❑ Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary): BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Pagel of4 A MN joint application was received for a wetland type and delineation concurrence was submitted on July 1, 2016. A subsequent Notice of Application was completed and submitted to the TEP for comment on July 7, 2016. The notice of application assigned a project name of Woods Edge to the project. After subsequent discussion the correct project name is City Parcel 163-2903121320005. Two wetlands were identified in the wetland delineation report submitted on July 1, 2016 and dated June 28, 2016. Afield review was completed on July 11, 2016 with the BWSR TEP member. During the field review, it was observed that a majority of the parcel contained hydrophytic vegetation. This is also reflected in the datasheets in the delineation report as hydrophytic vegetation was documented at both wetland and upland sampling points. Hydric soils were also present at upland sampling point WB_02 up. There is little relief across the parcel as elevation changes from 930' to less than 932'. Hydrology; specifically saturation (A3), was primarily used to delineate the wetland boundaries. Wetland WB_O 1 has a slight topographic break which made the boundary slightly more identifiable. Based on a review of the delineation report and the field review all wetland boundaries and types are approved as identified in the field and in the associated delineation report dated June 28, 2016. For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account # Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name: Title: Tony Havranek Senior Environmental Scientist (WSB & Associates, Inc.), on behalf of the City of Hugo Si-na�ture Date: Phone Number and E-mail: �— - August 8, 2016 (612)246-9346, thavranekkwsbeng.com 1 THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant may be responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: ® Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send petition and $To Be Determined by City fee (if applicable) to: Mr. Steve Duff City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 ❑ Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and $500 filing fee to: Executive Director Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Jay Riggs, Washington Conservation District, 455 Hayward Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 55128 jriggskmnwcd.org ® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer, Board of Water & Soil Resources, 520 Lafayette Road N., St. Paul, MN 55155 ben.meyergstate.mmus ® LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Rachel Juba, City of Hugo, rjubakci.hugo.mn.us Steve Duff, City of Hugo, sduff(c� ci.hugo.mn.us, Rachel Leitz, City of Hugo, rlietzkci.hugo.mn.us ® DNR TEP member: Jenifer Sorensen, MN DNR jenifer.sorensenkstate.mn.us; Becky Horton Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 becky.hortonkstate.mn.us ❑ DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member) ® WD or WMO (if applicable): Nick Tomczik Rice Creek Watershed District, 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive, Suite 611, Blaine, MN 55449-4539 ntomczikkricecreek.org ® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): Deb Ridgeway, The Excelsior Group, deb.ridgewaykexcelsiorllc.com Kristine Maurer, Westwood Professional Services kristine.maurerkwestwoodps.com ❑ Members of the public who requested notice: Katy Thompson kthompsonkwsbeng com ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only): Andrew Beaudet, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St Paul, MN, Andrew.d.beaudetkusace.army.mil Tom Hingsberger, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700, St. Paul, MN 55101-1678 thomas.j.hingsbergerkusace.army.mil ❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only) 5. MAILING INFORMATION ➢ For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA_areas.pdf ➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.nm.us/wetlands/wca/DNRaTEP contacts.pdf ➢ Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: hM2:Hfiles.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnrsrecions.pdf ➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see: www.n vp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/default.asp? 2aceid=687 or send to: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 3 of ➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 6. ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments: ® Site Locator Map BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 4 of © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. FRI 142 . d St N ( (1) _ �, �;? D_>�I 'I 0 Q'I ,14jStStNL _ -- �J - h St'` E� 1,4QthSt�N(I I • 1 7 \ V/ LL % I M.r2.1'4 ,r a Z • Q� I ��L _ e.,4 -, '--i�V Fable HIII -LL • •asp_ ❑� F \\ • ��0" P. 0' gam 1 — 4 '0 1 n1 � I I • -= - 01 -- Z— -- — -- ----130th St N -- CaI 1 f �o ----�\! m I@C6 M f +, _ Anoka l -125th St N 2 ll� N' (`T=� Washington 10 _ \d _ t Project Location _ a ' Ramsey Feet hlahtomedi ti A 0 1,400 Data p (rc(s): ESI Imagery Basemaaccessed 2016),Westwood Legend (2016), MnDOT (2009),MNDNR (2010) of H u o Pro art C it43-2903121320009 # Delineation Parcels Survey Area Hugo, Minnesota Westwood PLS Section Roads Site Location and USGS Topography Tdl Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Boundary Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT 1 Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit (LGUI Address City of Hugo (Steve Duff) 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Deb Ridgeway- The Project Name: Stachowiak Wetland Delineation Date of Application 11 / 1 / 16 Application Number Excelsior Group PID 163-2903121440003 16.13 Kelly Kunst- Westwood 3288-01 Professional Services ® Attach site locator map. Type of Decision: ® Wetland Boundary or Type ❑ No -Loss ❑ Exemption ❑ Sequencing❑ Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan l ectimcal Evaluation Panel ❑ Approve Summary (or attach and Kecommenclation (it any) ❑ Approve with conditions 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION ❑ Deny Date of Decision: 12/7/16 ® Approved ❑ Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary): BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Pagel of4 A MN Joint Application requesting confirmation of wetland type and delineation concurrence was received on November 1, 2016 ; a subsequent Notice of Application was issued on November 14, 2016. The site was field reviewed on September 27, 2016. The boundaries of all three wetlands (WB_0l, _02, and _03) were reviewed by the TEP. WB_01 was located south of and adjacent to 130th Street North. This boundary was very apparent and corresponds to an NWI feature (PSS1/EM1Ad) and mapped hydric soil (541-Rifle muck). This wetland was identified as a type 2/6, PEMB/PSS1A in the wetland delineation and was observed as such during the field review. The boundary for wetland WB_02 (type 2/6, PEMB/PSS 1 A/C) was irregularly shaped and appeared to follow undulations in an area used for pasturing livestock. Narrow fingers of wetland extended out from the NWI mapped feature and were dictated by topography between the 932' and the 934' contours and hydrology indicators. The northwestern terminus of the boundary was adjusted following the September 27, 2016 TEP field review. This area was adjusted to include an area dominated by sensitive fern with a yellow birch overstory and included hydric soils and secondary hydrology indicators (geomorphic position and FAC- neutral test). The October 14, 2016 Westwood delineation report reflects this amendment. WB_03 is a small type 1, PEM1A wetland located in the northeastern corner of the parcel. This wetland is described as a wallow as it exists within active pasture. Based on a review of the delineation report and the field review, all wetland boundaries and types are approved as identified in the Wetland Delineation Report submitted by Westwood Professional Services and dated October 14, 2016. For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account # Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name: Title: Tony Havranek Senior Environmental Scientist (WSB & Associates, Inc.), on behalf of the City of Hugo Si n� Date: Phone Number and E-mail: C- December 7, 2016 (612)246-9346, thavranekkwsbeng com BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant maybe responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: ® Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send petition and $To Be Determined by City fee (if applicable) to: Mr. Steve Duff City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 ❑ Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and $500 filing fee to: Executive Director Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Jay Riggs, Washington Conservation District, 455 Hayward Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 55128 jriggs&nmwcd.org ® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer, Board of Water & Soil Resources ben.meyergstate.mmus Jed Chesnut, Board of Water & Soil Resources, 520 Lafayette Road N., St. Paul, MN 55155 j ed.chesnutp.state.mn.us ® LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Rachel Juba, City of Hugo, rjuba(a ci.hugo.mn.us Steve Duff, City of Hugo, sduff2ci.hugo.mn.us, Rachel Leitz, City of Hugo, rlietzkci.hugo.mn.us ® DNR TEP member: Jenifer Sorensen, MN DNR jenifer.sorensengstate.mn.us; Becky Horton Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 becky.hortonkstate.mn.us ❑ DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member) ® WD or WMO (if applicable): Nick Tomczik Rice Creek Watershed District, 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive, Suite 611, Blaine, MN 55449-4539 ntomczik(aricecreek.org ® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): Deb Ridgeway, The Excelsior Group, deb.ridgewaygexcelsiorllc.com Kelly Kunst, Westwood Professional Services, Kelly.kunstkwestwoodps.com ❑ Members of the public who requested notice: Katy Thompson kthompsonkwsbeng com; Stephanie Hatten shattenkwsbeng com ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only):Tom Hingsberger, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700, St. Paul, MN 55101-1678 thomas.j.hingsbergerkusace.army.mil ❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only) 5. MAILING INFORMATION ➢ For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareasAVCA areas.pdf ➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP�contacts.pdf ➢ Dmarhnent of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. BWSRForms 11-25-09 Page 3 of Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 For a map ofDNR Administrative Regions, see: htgp:Hfiles.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr re i,gions.pdf ➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/reug latoE3/default.asp?pa2eid=687 or send to: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 ➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 6. ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments: ® Site Locator Map BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 4 of © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Y 1 i �� �14'1sts try e �_ . I 140th St Nrt`-�°L� Im �I i ' F tl m 1 M-21,4 f� 9I<id� co ai '�,°'e Ra Y - �I m ti --- LL > } i Q ' f ' -" - - - — 135th OIFT I I I I I , St.N Z tiI.'1,32nd w I I j 601 i ' , 130th St IN ; Washington- 130th St-N � Legend '_ 4. j �2sth-St N� Delineation Parcels Survey Area - - Roads - -. County ?6StN - z' .M PLS Section Q ,' Boundary (D t ✓ - - o 125th St N .I4• � 'W s_ t •� Anoka L IIlt) Ile 7 Washington 71 I Project Location - Ramsey - N hifhtctrneY t, _ A Feet 0 1,400 Data So(accessed ESRI Imagery Stachowiak Parcel Basemap (acccessed 2016), Westwood (2016), MnDOT (2009),MNDNR (2010) Hugo, Minnesota Westwood Site Location and USGS Topography T.111— (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT 1 Data So(accessed ESRI Imagery Stachowiak Parcel Basemap (acccessed 2016), Westwood (2016), Kjolhaugen (2015) Westwood Hugo, Minnesota Delineated Wetlands Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT 4 1 / l DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS �l 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700 ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1678 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF REGULATORY BRANCH Regulatory File No. MVP-2015-01386-TJH NOV ;z 3 2016 The Excelsior Group, LLC. C/o Ms. Deb Ridgeway 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 Dear Ms. Ridgeway: This letter is in response to your request for an approved jurisdictional determination for the 0.78-acre area identified as Wetland 4 on the 3.5 acre Arcand South property in the City of Hugo. The project site is located in Section 29, Township 31 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota. The review area for our jurisdictional determination is identified as Wetland 4 on the enclosed Figures labeled MVP-2015-01386-TJH Page 1 of 2 through 2 of 2. The area identified as Wetland 4 contains no waters of the United States subject to Corps of Engineers jurisdiction. Therefore, you are not required to obtain Department of the Army authorization to discharge dredged or fill material within this area. The rationale for this determination is provided in the enclosed Approved Jurisdictional Determination form. This determination is valid only for the review area identified as Wetland 4 in the enclosed Figures. If you object to this approved jurisdictional determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination, you must submit a completed RFA form to the Mississippi Valley Division Office at the address shown on the form. In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the enclosed NAP. It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the division office if you do not object to the determination in this letter This approved jurisdictional determination may be relied upon for five years from the date of this letter. However, the Corps reserves the right to review and revise the boundary in response to changing site conditions, information that was not considered during our initial review, or off - site activities that could indirectly alter the extent of wetlands and other resources on -site. This determination may be renewed at the end of the five year period provided you submit a written request and our staff are able to verify that the limits established during the original determination are still accurate. Regulatory Branch (File No. MVP-2015-01386-TJH) If you have any questions, please contact Tom Hingsberger in our St. Paul office by phone at (651) 290-5367 or thomas.j.hingsberger@usace.army.mil. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory file number shown above. Enclosures Re: Arcand South Parcel (KES 2014-170) cc: Rachel Juba: City of Hugo Steve Duff: City of Hugo Kelly Kunst: Westwood Becky Horton: MnDNR Nick Tomczik: RCWD Tony Havranek: WSB Ben Meyer: BWSR Jay Riggs: WCD Sincerely, Andrew Beaudet Chief, Northwest Section Page 2 of 2 Exhibit 1 MVP-2015-01386-TJH Page 2 of 2 Figure 6 - TEP Confirmed Boundary May 14, 2015 (2012 Photograph) Arcand South Parcel (KES 2014-170) ,r Hugo, Minnesota N ` 1 jOru�rT�y u LHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY +�1v APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): NOV 2 3 2016 B. ST PAUL, MN DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: MVP-2015-01386-TJH Premier Banks / Arcand South Parcel Wetland Delineation C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State: Minnesota County/parish/borough: Washington City: Hugo Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 45.14360 N, Long.-92.9916° W. Universal Transverse Mercator: 15 Name of nearest waterbody: Clearwater Creek Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 07010206 ® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. ❑ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: November 21, 2016 Field Determination. Date(s): SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review area. B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are no"waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs: N/A B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): N/A C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION: N/A D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): N/A E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): N/A F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Z If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers El Other: (explain, if not covered above): SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Westwood Delineation Memorandum Z Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. ® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ❑ Corps navigable waters' study: ❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ❑ USGS NHD data. ❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: ® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Washington County Soil Survey ® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI ® State/Local wetland inventory map(s): MnDNR NWI ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: N Aerial (Name & Date): FSA 2013 or N Other (Name & Date): Google Earth 2016 ❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: ❑ Applicable/supporting case law: ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: N Other information (please specify): Washington County LiDAR Data B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: The 0.78-acre review area identified as Wetland 4 on the enclosed figure is an upland area and does not contain any wetlands or waters of the U.S. The area is not designated on the NWI, and though the soil (Soderville loamy fine sand, 3% hydric soil, predominantly non-hydric) meets the Al 1 field indicator for hydric soils, no hydrologic or hydrophytic vegetation indicators were met within the review area labeled Wetland 4. Therefore, wetland criteria are not met for the review area. NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: The Excelsior Group File No.: 2015-01386-TJH Date: 11/23/2016 Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) A PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) B PERMIT DENIAL C x APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at hqp://usace.anny.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/reg or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant not the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION: If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may process you may contact: also contact the Division Engineer through: Tom Hingsberger Mr. Thomas McCabe Department of the Army Administrative Appeals Review Officer St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division 180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700 P.O. Box 80 (1400 Walnut Street) St. Paul, MN 55101-1678 Vicksburg, MS 39181-0080 651-290-5367 601-634-5820 FAX:601-634-5816 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit (LGUI Address City of Hugo (Steve Duff) 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Deb Ridgeway- The Project Name: PID 163-2903121340001 Date of Application Signed 9/26/16 Application Number Excelsior Group Fee Paid 10/26/16 16.11 Kelly Kunst- Westwood 3288-01 Professional Services ® Attach site locator map. Type of Decision: ❑ Wetland Boundary or Type ® No -Loss ❑ Exemption ❑ Sequencing❑ Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan I ectimcal Evaluation Panel ® Approve Summary (or attach and Kecommenclation (it any) ❑ Approve with conditions ❑ Deny BWSR TEP member concurred that the area in question is not subject to WCA (see attached email). 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION Date of Decision: 12/7/16 ® Approved ❑ Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary): BwsR Forms 11-25-09 Pagel of 4 A MN Joint application requesting a no -loss for an area located within parcel number 163-2903121340001 was received on September 26, 2016 and considered complete on October 26, 2016. A subsequent Notice of Application was issued on November 7, 2016. The application (submitted by Westwood Professional Services) dated September 26, 2016 requested a no - loss for an area on the above described parcel that was delineated as a wetland in a wetland delineation report submitted by Kjolhaug Environmental Services dated June 25, 2015. This area is identified as wetland 4 in the 2015 Kjolhaug report and referred to as such for the remainder of this document. Multiple sources were reviewed to make the determination provided in this document. These include Hugo LGU correspondence from 2012 that includes figures from two 2005 wetland delineations, the 2015 Kjolhaug wetland delineation report, and historical imagery review, antecedent precipitation data, and wetland determination field data forms submitted by Westwood Professional Services as part of the September 26, 2016 no -loss application. The first of two wetland boundary maps created by Westwood Professional Services, dated August 4, 2005 and titled exhibit 5 does not include wetland 4, but does show boundaries for other wetlands on site similar to the boundaries identified in the 2015 Kjolhaug report. The second wetland boundary map created by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, dated 1 /2006 and titled Figure 1 does include wetland 4. Based on Hugo LGU correspondence included with the first map, it appears as though this was the approved wetland boundary; although a copy of the decision was not located. The 2015 Kjolhaug wetland delineation report did not include wetland 4 initially but was added after a May 14, 2015 field review. The report describes the soils in the area of wetland 4 as hydric and the boundary for wetland 4 was identified by a slight change in topography and the absence of primary hydrology indicators (water marks). Antecedent precipitation data shows that April was a normal precipitation month, while May was wetter than normal with 2.14 inches of rain at the site between May 1, 2015 and May 14, 2015. No field sampling (hydrology, vegetation, or soils) data forms were completed for wetland 4 as part of the Kjolhaug report. As part of the no -loss application, Westwood Professional Services included a historical imagery review. The review included images from years between 1991 and 2016 with some years represented by more than one photograph. Of the 20 images reviewed, nine occurred within normal precipitation years. Of these nine, four or 44% of the images showed a wetland signature (soil wetness or crop stress). Overall 35% of the images contained wetland signatures. Since this area was not identified on the NWI or other wetland map, but did have hydric soils and between 30 and 50% of the images contained a wetland signature, field verification was required. Field sampling in wetland 4 confirmed primary hydric soils indicators (depleted matrix and depleted below dark surface) but showed the area lacked primary hydrology indicators and had only one secondary indicator (geomorphic position). Vegetation was significantly disturbed since wetland 4 occurs in a formerly plowed agricultural field. Furthermore, no water was found within 24 inches of the surface. BWSR guidance suggests that in situations where the area in question is not identified on an NWI or other wetland map, but has hydric soils and a wetland signature is present in 30-50% of the images used for review, the site must have other hydrology indicators present to be considered wetland. Field sampling by Westwood showed no primary and only one secondary hydrology indicator present during wetter than normal conditions. Based on a review of the supporting documents described above, the application for no -loss submitted by Westwood Professional Services on September 26, 2016, is approved. For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account # Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of ❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name: Title: Tony Havranek Senior Environmental Scientist (WSB & Associates, Inc.), on behalf of the City of Hugo Si n� Date: Phone Number and E-mail: December 7, 2016 (612)246-9346, thavranekkwsbeng com THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant maybe responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: M Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send petition U Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send and $To Be Determined by City fee (if applicable) petition and $500 filing fee to: to: Mr. Steve Duff City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 Executive Director Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, NIN 55155 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Jay Riggs, Washington Conservation District, 455 Hayward Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 55128 jriggskmnwcd.org ® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer, Board of Water & Soil Resources ben.meyergstate.mmus Jed Chesnut, Board of Water & Soil Resources, 520 Lafayette Road N., St. Paul, MN 55155 j ed. chesnut(a,state.mn.us BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 3 of 4 ® LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Rachel Juba, City of Hugo, riuba(c�r�,ci.hugo.mn.us Steve Duff, City of Hugo, sduff( ci.hugo.mn.us, Rachel Leitz, City of Hugo, rlietzkci.hugo.mn.us ® DNR TEP member: Jenifer Sorensen, MN DNR jenifer.sorensenkstate.mn.us; Becky Horton Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 becky.hortonkstate.mn.us ❑ DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member) ® WD or WMO (if applicable): Nick Tomczik Rice Creek Watershed District, 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive, Suite 611, Blaine, MN 55449-4539 ntomczik(c�ricecreek.org ® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): Deb Ridgeway, The Excelsior Group, deb.ridgeway(a�excelsiorllc.com Kelly Kunst, Westwood Professional Services, Kelly.kunstkwestwoodps.com ❑ Members of the public who requested notice: Katy Thompson kthompsonkwsbeng.com; Stephanie Hatten shattenkwsbeng.com ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only):Tom Hingsberger, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700, St. Paul, MN 55101-1678 thomas.j.hin sbg ergerkusace.army.mil ❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only) 5. MAILING INFORMATION ➢ For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCAsareas.pdf ➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP_contacts.pdf ➢ Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: hM:Hfiles.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr_regions.pdf ➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see: www.mvp.usace.qM.mil/regulatory/default.asp?pageid=687 or send to: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 ➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 6. ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments: ® Site Locator Map ® TEP Correspondence BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 4 of E M © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 3. OF ig � m - o a T I 130th St N A. Ilk OL i Fri 129th St N Fiona Rd 1&9th St 3 is 11, N Ai i Feet $it 0 300 r6r,�a Data Source(s): Westwood (2016); MnGeo W Aerial Photography Service (Accessed Terre De U e a u Wetland 4 201616 ); Google Earth Imagery (Various dates); Census Bureau (2014). Legend Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Project Boundary westwoo 0 Wetland 4 2016 Aerial Photograph -March 11 TOIIFree (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT A Appendix B County Well Index Well Log Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota This page is intentionally blank Minnesota Unique Well Number CountyWashington MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Entry Date 111/18/2002 674743 Quad Hugo Update Date 0/14/201111 Quad ID 118B Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031 Received Date Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ARCAND, 31 21 W 29 DCCDAC 85 ft. 85 ft. 08/08/2002 Elevation 933 ft. Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet) Drill Method Non -specified Rotary Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use domestic Status Active Well 5754 130TH ST HUGO MN 55038 Well Hydrofractured? Yes ❑ No ❑ From To Casing Type Single casing Joint Drive Shoe? Yes ❑ No ❑ Above/Below Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight Hole Diameter Geological Material From To (ft.) Color Hardness SAND/CLAY 0 25 BROWN MEDIUM 4 in. To 75 ft. lbs./ft. 8 in. To 35 ft. SAND 25 45 BROWN MEDIUM 6.2 in. To 85 ft. CLAY 45 70 GRAY MEDIUM SAND 70 85 BROWN SOFT Open Hole From ft. To ft. Screen? X❑ Type slotted pipe Make BIG FOOT (PVC) Diameter Slot/Gauze Length Set 4 in. 10 10 ft. 75 ft. 85 ft. Static Water Level 20 ft. land surface Measure 08/08/2002 Pumping Level (below land surface) 35 ft. 1 hrs. Pumping at 25 9-p.m. Wellhead Completion Pitless adapter manufacturer SNAPPY Model ❑ Casing Protection ❑X 12 in. above grade ❑ At -grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Grouting Information Well Grouted? X❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Specified Material Amount From To high solids bentonite 1.5 Sacks 5 ft. 35 ft. Nearest Known Source of Contamination 55 feet South Direction Other Type Well disinfected upon completion? Yes ❑ No Pump ❑ Not Installed Date Installed 08/08/2002 Manufacturer's name AERMOTOR Model Number T12-50 HP 0_5 Volt 230 Length of drop pipe 46 ft Capacity 12 g-p. TYP Submersible Abandoned Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? ❑ Yes ❑X No Variance Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well? ❑ Yes X❑ No Miscellaneous First Bedrock Aquifer Quart. buried Last Strat sand -brown Depth to Bedrock ft Located by Minnesota Geological Survey Locate Method Digitization (Screen) -Map (1:24,000) System UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters X 501023 1' 4998363 Remarks SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION: TYPE - VENT PIPE. Unique Number Verification Info/GPS from data Inpute Date 06/27/2007 Angled Drill Hole Well Contractor Schroepfer Well Drilling, Inc. 13119 SCHROEPFER, L Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No. Name of Driller Minnesota Well Index Report 674743 Printed on 08/31/2016 HE-01205-15 Appendix C DNR Natural Heritage Database Search and Nest Survey Memo Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota This page is intentionally blank Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Box 25 500 Lafayette Road It St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4025 MNDNR Phone: (651) 259-5091 E-mail: samantha.bump@state.mn.us June 23, 2016 Correspondence # ERDB 20160443 Mr. Troy Bushman Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed Premier Residential Development, T31N R21W Sections 29 & 32; Washington County Dear Mr. Bushman, As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been queried to determine if any rare species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one -mile radius of the proposed project. Based on this query, rare features have been documented within the search area (for details, please visit the Rare Species Guide at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/index.html for more information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation measures of these rare species). Please note that the following rare features may be adversely affected by the proposed project: Ecologically Significant Areas • The Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) has identified two Sites of Below Biodiversity Significance within the project boundary. Sites of Biodiversity Significance have varying levels of native biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative significance of this biodiversity at a statewide level. Sites ranked as Below do not meet the minimum biodiversity threshold for statewide significance. These sites, however, may have conservation value at the local level as habitat for native plants and animals, corridors for animal movements, buffers surrounding higher quality natural areas, or as areas with high potential for restoration of native habitat. These particular Sites contain Willow — Dogwood Shrub Swamp, Northern Rich Fen (Basin), and Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh native plant communities. These native plant communities are considered secure, apparently secure, and imperiled, respectively, in Minnesota. Given the local significance of these Sites (see next bullet), avoidance is recommended. Indirect impacts, such as the introduction or spread of invasive species, should also be considered and minimized. If the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is applicable to this project, please note that the Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh may qualify as a "rare natural community" under this Act. Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0515, subpart 3 states that a wetland replacement plan for www.mndnr.gov AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER activities that modify a rare natural community must be denied if the local government unit determines that the proposed activities will permanently adversely affect the natural community. If you have any questions regarding this provision of the WCA, please contact Doug Norris, DNR Wetlands Program Coordinator, at 651-259-5125 or Doug.Norris@state.mn.us. A portion of the project boundary, including the wetlands mentioned above, is within a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area (RSEA) that is ranked Moderate. The DNR Central Region (in partnership with the Metropolitan Council for the 7-county metro area), identified these ecologically significant terrestrial and wetland areas by conducting a landscape -scale assessment based on the size and shape of the ecological area, land cover within the ecological area, adjacent land cover/use, and connectivity to other ecological areas. The purpose of the data is to inform regional scale land use decisions, especially as it relates to balancing development and natural resource protection. A GIS shapefile of this data layer can be downloaded from the MN Geospatial Commons at https://gisdata.mn.gov/. Additional information, including pdf versions of the RSEA maps, is available at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsea/index.html. State -listed Species • Blanding's Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state -listed threatened species, have been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project and may be encountered on site. The project area is also within an area of statewide importance to the Blanding's turtle. These areas are relied upon to maintain the species' security within Minnesota, and the DNR considers them of the highest priority for Blanding's turtle research and management activities. Blanding's turtles use wetlands as well as upland areas up to and over a mile distant from wetlands. Uplands are used for nesting, basking, periods of dormancy, and traveling between wetlands. Because of the tendency to travel long distances over land, Blanding's turtles regularly travel across roads and are therefore susceptible to collisions with vehicles. Any added mortality can be detrimental to populations of Blanding's turtles, as these turtles have a low reproduction rate that depends upon a high survival rate to maintain population levels. Other factors believed to contribute to the decline of this species include wetland drainage and degradation, and the development of upland habitat. This project has the potential to impact this rare turtle through direct fatalities or habitat disturbance/destruction due to dewatering, excavation, fill, or other construction activities associated with the project. Actions to avoid or minimize disturbance to this state - protected turtle may include, but are not limited to, the following recommendations: ➢ Avoid Type 2 & 3 wetlands, ➢ To avoid any incidental takings, avoid filling or dewatering wetlands during the winter, ➢ Implement stringent sediment and erosion control methods, ➢ Use wildlife -friendly erosion control methods (see enclosed fact sheet), ➢ Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR, ➢ As the project boundary is within an area of statewide importance, please refer to both lists of recommendations in the enclosed Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet. The Page 2 of 5 fact sheet contains specific recommendations regarding roads, utilities, and landscaping that will pertain to this project. ➢ For further assistance regarding the Blanding's turtle, please contact Erica Hoaglund, DNR Regional Nongame Specialist, at 651-259-5772. The attached flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. If Blanding's turtles are encountered on site, please remember that state law and rules prohibit the destruction of threatened or endangered species, except under certain prescribed conditions. If turtles are in imminent danger they should be moved by hand out of harm's way, otherwise they should be left undisturbed. There are multiple observations of trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator), a state -listed species of special concern, nesting in the vicinity of the proposed project. During the breeding season, trumpeter swans select small ponds and lakes with extensive beds of cattails, bulrush, sedges, and/or horsetail. Ideal habitat includes about 100 m of open water for take -off, stable levels of unpolluted water, emergent vegetation, low levels of human disturbance, and the presence of muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) houses and American beaver (Castor canadensis) lodges for use as nesting platforms. If any of the wetlands on site provide suitable habitat, swans may choose to nest in these wetlands. Construction activities that occur during the breeding season could disrupt nesting swans, if present. Federally Protected Species • Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) may nest in the area. Bald eagles are federally protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Both acts prohibit killing, selling, or otherwise harming eagles, their nests, or eggs. If there will be any tree removal associated with the proposed project, the trees should be inspected for nests prior to being cut down. The USFWS does issue permits for unintentional disturbance and for the taking of a tree. Please visit the USFWS website at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/ for more information regarding conservation measures, management guidelines, and permitting. The northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), federally listed as threatened and state -listed as special concern, can be found throughout Minnesota. During the winter this species hibernates in caves and mines, and during the active season (approximately April - October) it roosts underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Pup rearing is during June and July. Activities that may impact this species include, but are not limited to, wind farm operation, any disturbance to hibernacula, and destruction/degradation of habitat (including tree removal). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has published a final 4(d) rule that identifies prohibited take. To determine whether you need to contact the USFWS, please refer to the USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule (see links below). Please note that the NHIS does not contain any known occurrences of northern long-eared bat roosts or hibernacula within an approximate one -mile radius of the proposed project. Page 3 of 5 Environmental Review and Permitting • The Environmental Assessment Worksheet should address whether the proposed project has the potential to adversely affect the above rare features and, if so, it should identify specific measures that will be taken to avoid or minimize disturbance. Sufficient information should be provided so the DNR can determine whether a takings permit will be needed for any of the above protected species. Please include a copy of this letter in any state or local license or permit application. Please note that measures to avoid or minimize disturbance to the above rare features may be included as restrictions or conditions in any required permits or licenses. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about Minnesota's rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Department of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and thus does not represent all of the occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area. If additional information becomes available regarding rare features in the vicinity of the project, further review may be necessary. The enclosed results include an Index Report of records in the Rare Features Database, the main database of the NHIS. To control the release of specific location data, the report is copyrighted and only provides rare features locations to the nearest section. The Index Report may be reprinted, unaltered, in any environmental review document (e.g., EAW or EIS), municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the Index Report for any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. For environmental review purposes, the results of this Natural Heritage Review are valid for one year; the results are only valid for the project location (noted above) and the project description provided on the NHIS Data Request Form. Please contact me if project details change or for an updated review if construction has not occurred within one year. The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential effects to these rare features. To determine whether there are other natural resource concerns associated with the proposed project, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist (contact information available at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/ereview/erp regioncontacts.html). Please be aware that additional site assessments or review may be required. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover. Sincerely, sw"FDWIII'Lf� Samantha Bump Natural Heritage Review Specialist Page 4 of 5 enc. Rare Features Database: Index Report Map Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet & Flyer Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control Links: USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule for Non -Federal Activities http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/KeYFinal4dNLEB.html USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule for Federal Actions http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/KeyFina]4dNLEBFedProiects.htmI USFWS Northern Long-eared Bat Website http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/index.html USFWS Northern Long-eared Bat Fact Sheet http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nlebFactSheet.html Cc: Becky Horton Leslie Parris Erica Hoaglund Doug Norris Page 5 of 5 Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Page 1 of 2 Printed June 2016 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: Data valid for one year ERDB# 20160443 - Premier Residential Devleopment T31N R21W Sections 29 & 32 Washington County Rare Features Database: Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Ohs EO ID # Element Name and Occurrence Number Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date Vertebrate Animal Cygnus buccinator (Trumpeter Swan) #90 SPC SGCN S3B,SNRN G4 2008 34447 T32N R21W S15, T30N R23W S9, T31N R21W S28, T30N R23W 510, T [...]; Ramsey, Anoka, Washington County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #464 THR SGCN T31N R21W 516, T31N R21W S8, T31N R21W 520, T31N R21W 517; Washington County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #639 THR SGCN T31N R21W S28, T31N R21W 521; Washington County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #862 THR SGCN T31N R21W 530, T31N R21W 529, T31N R21W S20, T31N R21W 519; Washington County Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald Eagle) #1771 Watchlist T31N R21W S21; Washington County Invertebrate Animal Ironoquia punctatissima (A Caddisfly) #4 THR SGCN T30N R21W S27, T30N R21W S29, T30N R21W 532, T30N R21W S33, T [...]; Ramsey, Washington County Native Plant Community (This may not represent a complete list. Also see MCBS Native Plant Communities at http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us.) Alder - (Maple - Loosestrife) Swamp Type #471 (NPC Code: FPn73a) N/A T31N R21W S28, T31N R21W S29, T31N R21W 520, T31N R21W 521; Washington County Lake bed #2 (NPC Code:) N/A T31N R21 W 520; Washington County Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh Class #813 (NPC Code: MRn83) N/A T31N R21W S29, T31N R21W 520; Washington County S2 G4 2006-05-14 10834 S2 G4 2015-06-17 15621 S2 G4 1997-06-15 24989 S3B,S3N G5 1999 25340 S2 G5 1994-09-17 38825 S5 GNR 1988-06-20 8537 SNR GNR 1988-06-20 8532 S2 GNR 1988-06-20 8535 Records Printed = 9 Minnesota's endangered species law (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the taking of threatened or endangered species without a permit. For plants, taking includes digging or destroying. For animals, taking includes pursuing, capturing, or killing. Copyright 2016, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Printed June 2016 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: Data valid for one year ERDB# 20160443 - Premier Residential Devleopment T31N R21W Sections 29 & 32 Washington County Page 2 of 2 An Explanation of Fields: Element Name and Occurrence Number: The Element is the name of the rare feature. For plant and animal species records, this field holds the scientific name followed by the common name in parentheses; for all other elements it is solely the element name. Native plant community names correspond to Minnesota's Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0). The Occurrence Number, in combination with the Element Name, uniquely identifies each record. Federal Status: The status of the species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act: LE = endangered; LT = threatened; LE,LT = listed endangered in part of its range, listed threatened in another part of its range; LT,PDL = listed threatened, proposed for delisting; C = candidate for listing. If null or'No Status,' the species has no federal status. MN Status: The legal status of the plant or animal species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END = endangered; THR = threatened; SPC = special concern; NON = tracked, but no legal status. Native plant communities, geological features, and colonial waterbird nesting sites do not have any legal status under the Endangered Species Law and are represented by a N/A. Draft Status: Proposed change to the legal status of the plant or animal species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END = endangered; THR = threatened; SPC = special concern; Watchlist = tracked, but no legal status. SGCN Status: SGCN = The species is a Species in Greatest Conservation Need as identified in Minnesota's State Wildlife Action Plan (http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/cwcs/index.htrnl). This designation applies to animals only. State Rank: Rank that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of the taxon or plant community in Minnesota. The ranks do not represent a legal status. They are used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research, inventory and conservation planning. The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available. S 1 = Critically imperiled in Minnesota because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S2 = Imperiled in Minnesota because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S3 = Vulnerable in Minnesota either because rare or uncommon, or found in a restricted range, or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation. S4 = Apparently secure in Minnesota, usually widespread. S5 = Demonstrably secure in Minnesota, essentially ineradicable under present conditions. SH = Of historical occurrence in the state, perhaps having not been verified in the past 20 years, but suspected to be still extant. An element would become SH without the 20-year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. SNR = Rank not yet assessed. SU = Unable to rank. SX = Presumed extinct in Minnesota. SNA = Rank not applicable. S#S# = Range Rank: a numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact status of the element. S#B, S#N = Used only for migratory animals, whereby B refers to the breeding population of the element in Minnesota and N refers to the non -breeding population of the element in Minnesota. Global Rank: The global (i.e., range -wide) assessment of the relative rarity or imperilment of the species or community. Ranges from G1 (critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world-wide basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks are determined by NatureServe, an international network of natural heritage programs and conservation data centers. Last Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was last observed to be extant at the site in format YYY-MM-DD. EO ID #: Unique identifier for each Element Occurrence record Element Occurrence: An area of land and/or water in which an Element (i.e., a rare species or community) is, or was, present, and which has practical conservation value for the Element as evidenced by potential continued (or historical) presence and/or regular recurrence at a given location. Specifications for each species determine whether multiple observations should be considered 1 Element Occurrence or 2, based on minimum separation distance and barriers to movement. Copyright 2016, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR ERDB# 20160443 - Premier Residential Devleopment T31 N R21 W Sections 29 & 32 Washington County Miles N 0 0.35 0.7 A GIS shapefiles of MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance & DNR Native Plant Communities can be downloaded from the MN Geospatial Commons at https://gisdata.mn.gov/ Legend PP_ProjectBou nda ry_l 60509 Native Plant Communities Low Shrub Poor Fen 0 Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh 0 Northern Rich Fen (Basin) Willow - Dogwood Shrub Swamp MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance ® Outstanding ® High Moderate ® Below Q PLS Section Copyright 2016, State of Minnesota, DNR Rare Feature, Prairie Railroad Survey, Native Plant Community, and Sites of Biodiversity Significance data are from the Natural Heritage Information System. The absence of rare features for a particular location should not be construed to mean that the DNR is confident rare features are absent from that location. Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species of Minnesota Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingia) Minnesota Status: Threatened State Rank': S2 Federal Status: none Global Rank': G4 HABITAT USE Blanding's turtles need both wetland and upland habitats to complete their life cycle. The types of wetlands used include ponds, marshes, shrub swamps, bogs, and ditches and streams with slow -moving water. In Minnesota, Blanding's turtles are primarily marsh and pond inhabitants. Calm, shallow water bodies (Type 1-3 wetlands) with mud bottoms and abundant aquatic vegetation (e.g., cattails, water lilies) are preferred, and extensive marshes bordering rivers provide excellent habitat. Small temporary wetlands (those that dry up in the late summer or fall) are frequently used in spring and summer -- these fishless pools are amphibian and invertebrate breeding habitat, which provides an important food source for Blanding's turtles. Also, the warmer water of these shallower areas probably aids in the development of eggs within the female turtle. Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy uplands, often some distance from water bodies. Frequently, nesting occurs in traditional nesting grounds on undeveloped land. Blanding's turtles have also been known to nest successfully on residential property (especially in low density housing situations), and to utilize disturbed areas such as farm fields, gardens, under power lines, and road shoulders (especially of dirt roads). Although Blanding's turtles may travel through woodlots during their seasonal movements, shady areas (including forests and lawns with shade trees) are not used for nesting. Wetlands with deeper water are needed in times of drought, and during the winter. Blanding's turtles overwinter in the muddy bottoms of deeper marshes and ponds, or other water bodies where they are protected from freezing. LIFE HISTORY Individuals emerge from overwintering and begin basking in late March or early April on warm, sunny days. The increase in body temperature which occurs during basking is necessary for egg development within the female turtle. Nesting in Minnesota typically occurs during June, and females are most active in late afternoon and at dusk. Nesting can occur as much as a mile from wetlands. The nest is dug by the female in an open sandy area and 6-15 eggs are laid. The female turtle returns to the marsh within 24 hours of laying eggs. After a development period of approximately two months, hatchlings leave the nest from mid -August through early -October. Nesting females and hatchlings are often at risk of being killed while crossing roads between wetlands and nesting areas. In addition to movements associated with nesting, all ages and both sexes move between wetlands from April through November. These movements peak in June and July and again in September and October as turtles move to and from overwintering sites. In late autumn (typically November), Blanding' s turtles bury themselves in the substrate (the mud at the bottom) of deeper wetlands to overwinter. IMPACTS / THREATS / CAUSES OF DECLINE • loss of wetland habitat through drainage or flooding (converting wetlands into ponds or lakes) • loss of upland habitat through development or conversion to agriculture • human disturbance, including collection for the pet trade* and road kills during seasonal movements • increase in predator populations (skunks, raccoons, etc.) which prey on nests and young *It is illegal to possess this threatened species. Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. 2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS These recommendations apply to typical construction projects and general land use within Blanding's turtle habitat, and are provided to help local governments, developers, contractors, and homeowners minimize or avoid detrimental impacts to Blanding's turtle populations. List 1 describes minimum measures which we recommend to prevent harm to Blanding's turtles during construction or other work within Blanding's turtle habitat. List 2 contains recommendations which offer even greater protection for Blanding's turtles populations; this list should be used in addition to the first list in areas which are known to be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles (contact the DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program if you wish to determine if your project or home is in one of these areas), or in any other area where greater protection for Blanding's turtles is desired. List 1. Recommendations for all areas inhabited by List 2. Additional recommendations for areas known to Blanding's turtles. be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles. GENERAL A flyer with an illustration of a Blanding's turtle should be Turtle crossing signs can be installed adjacent to road - given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners crossing areas used by Blanding's turtles to increase public should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's awareness and reduce road kills. turtles in the area. Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by Workers in the area should be aware that Blanding' s hand, out of harms way. Turtles which are not in turtles nest in June, generally after 4pm, and should be imminent danger should be left undisturbed. advised to minimize disturbance if turtles are seen. If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the If you would like to provide more protection for a nest. Blanding's turtle nest on your property, see "Protecting Blanding's Turtle Nests" on page 3 of this fact sheet. Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of Construction in potential nesting areas should be limited to construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be the period between September 15 and June 1 (this is the removed after the area has been revegetated. time when activity of adults and hatchlings in upland areas is at a minimum). WETLANDS Small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) should Shallow portions of wetlands should not be disturbed not be dredged, deepened, filled, or converted to storm during prime basking time (mid morning to mid- afternoon water retention basins (these wetlands provide important in May and June). A wide buffer should be left along the habitat during spring and summer). shore to minimize human activity near wetlands (basking Blanding's turtles are more easily disturbed than other turtle species). Wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of Wetlands should be protected from road, lawn, and other fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and run-off chemical run-off by a vegetated buffer strip at least 50' from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion wide. This area should be left unmowed and in a natural should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching condition. wetlands and lakes. ROADS Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and Tunnels should be considered in areas with concentrations lanes (this reduces road kills by slowing traffic and of turtle crossings (more than 10 turtles per year per 100 reducing the distance turtles need to cross). meters of road), and in areas of lower density if the level of road use would make a safe crossing impossible for turtles. Contact your DNR Regional Nongame Specialist for further information on wildlife tunnels. Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. curbs must be used, 4 inch high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred (Blanding's turtles have great difficulty climbing traditional curbs; curbs and below grade roads trap turtles on the road and can cause road kills). Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. ROADS cont. Culverts between wetland areas, or between wetland areas and nesting areas, should be 36 inches or greater in diameter, and elliptical or flat-bottomed. Wetland crossings should be bridged, or include raised roadways with culverts which are 36 in or greater in diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical (raised roadways discourage turtles from leaving the wetland to bask on roads). Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. Road placement should avoid separating wetlands from adjacent upland nesting sites, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details). Road placement should avoid bisecting wetlands, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details). This is especially important for roads with more than 2 lanes. Roads crossing streams should be bridged. UTILITIES Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum (this reduces road -kill potential). Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be checked for turtles prior to being backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade. LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible. Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and forbs (some non -natives form dense patches through which it is difficult for turtles to travel). Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October 1" and before June 1't ) As much natural landscape as possible should be preserved (installation of sod or wood chips, paving, and planting of trees within nesting habitat can make that habitat unusable to nesting Blanding's turtles). Open space should include some areas at higher elevations for nesting. These areas should be retained in native vegetation, and should be connected to wetlands by a wide corridor of native vegetation. Ditches and utility access roads should not be mowed or managed through use of chemicals. If vegetation management is required, it should be done mechanically, as infrequently as possible, and fall through spring (mowing can kill turtles present during mowing, and makes it easier for predators to locate turtles crossing roads). Protecting Blanding's Turtle Nests: Most predation on turtle nests occurs within 48 hours after the eggs are laid. After this time, the scent is gone from the nest and it is more difficult for predators to locate the nest. Nests more than a week old probably do not need additional protection, unless they are in a particularly vulnerable spot, such as a yard where pets may disturb the nest. Turtle nests can be protected from predators and other disturbance by covering them with a piece of wire fencing (such as chicken wire), secured to the ground with stakes or rocks. The piece of fencing should measure at least 2 ft. x 2 ft., and should be of medium sized mesh (openings should be about 2 in. x 2 in.). It is very important that the fencing be removed before August lst so the young turtles can escape from the nest when they hatch! REFERENCES 'Association for Biodiversity Information. "Heritage Status: Global, National, and Subnational Conservation Status Ranks." NatureServe. Version 1.3 (9 April 2001). http://www.natureserve.or /rg anking htm (15 April 2001). Coffin, B., and L. Pfannmuller. 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 473 pp. Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. 4 REFERENCES (cont.) Moriarty, J. J., and M. Linck. 1994. Suggested guidelines for projects occurring in Blanding's turtle habitat. Unpublished report to the Minnesota DNR. 8 pp. Oldfield, B., and J. J. Moriarty. 1994. Amphibians and Reptiles Native to Minnesota. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 237 pp. Sajwaj, T. D., and J. W. Lang. 2000. Thermal ecology of Blanding' s turtle in central Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4):626-636. Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological Resources, Updated March 2008 Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109 CAUTION BLANDING'S TURTLES MAY BE ENCOUNTERED IN THIS AREA The unique and rare Blanding's turtle has been found in this area. Blanding's turtles are state -listed as Threatened and are protected under Minnesota Statute 84.095, Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species. Please be careful of turtles on roads and in construction sites. For additional information on turtles, or to report a Blanding's turtle sighting, contact the DNR Nongame Specialist nearest you: Bemidji (218-308-2641); Grand Rapids (218-327-4518); New Ulm (507-359-6033); Rochester (507-206-2820); or St. Paul (651-259-5772). DESCRIPTION: The Blanding's turtle is a medium to large turtle (5 to 10 inches) with a black or dark blue, dome -shaped shell with muted yellow spots and bars. The bottom of the shell is hinged across the front third, enabling the turtle to pull the front edge of the lower shell firmly against the top shell to provide additional protection when threatened. The head, legs, and tail are dark brown or blue -gray with small dots of light brown or yellow. A distinctive field mark is the bright yellow chin and neck. BLANDING'S TURTLES DO NOT MAKE GOOD PETS IT IS ILLEGAL TO KEEP THIS THREATENED SPECIES IN CAPTIVITY SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS TO BLANDING'S TURTLE POPULATIONS (see Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet for full recommendations) • This flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's turtles in the area. • Turtles that are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harm's way. Turtles that are not in imminent danger should be left undisturbed to continue their travel among wetlands and/or nest sites. • If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest and do not allow pets near the nest. • Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be removed after the area has been revegetated. • Small, vegetated temporary wetlands should not be dredged, deepened, or filled. • All wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and run-off from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching wetlands and lakes. • Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and lanes. • Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4" high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred. • Culverts under roads crossing wetland areas, between wetland areas, or between wetland and nesting areas should be at least 36 in. diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical. • Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. • Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum. • Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be checked for turtles prior to being backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade. • Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible. • Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and forbs. • Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October 1st and before June 1s) Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Updated August 2012 Endangered Species Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109 Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control Wildlife entanglement in, and death from, plastic netting and other man-made plastic materials has been documented in birds (Johnson, 1990; Fuller-Perrine and Tobin, 1993), fish (Johnson, 1990), mammals (Derraik, 2002), and reptiles (Barton and Kinkead, 2005; Kapfer and Paloski, 2011). Yet the use of these materials continues in many cases, without consideration for wildlife impacts. Plastic netting is frequently used for erosion control during construction and landscape projects and can negatively impact terrestrial and aquatic wildlife populations as well as snag in maintenance machinery resulting in costly repairs and delays. However, wildlife friendly erosion control materials do exist, and are sold by several large erosion control material companies. Below are a few key considerations before starting a project. Know Your Options Remember to consult with local natural resource authorities (DNR, USFWS, etc.) before starting a project. They can help you identify sensitive areas and rare species. When erosion control is necessary, select products with biodegradable netting (natural fiber, biodegradable polyesters, etc.). DO NOT use products that require UV -light to biodegrade (also called, "photodegradable"). These do not biodegrade properly when shaded by vegetation. Use netting with rectangular shaped mesh (not square mesh). Use netting with flexible (non -welded) mesh. Know the Landscape It is especially important to use wildlife friendly erosion control around: o Areas with threatened or endangered species. o Wetlands, rivers, lakes, and other watercourses. o Habitat transition zones (prairie — woodland edges, rocky outcrop — woodland edges, steep rocky slopes, etc.). o Areas with threatened or endangered species. Use erosion mesh wisely, not all areas with disturbed ground necessitate its use. Do not use plastic mesh unless it is specifically required. Other erosion control options exist (open weave textile (OWT), rolled erosion control products (RECPs) with woven natural fiber netting). WFEC Fact -sheet — MN DNR 2013 (acc. Protect Wildlife Avoid photodegradable erosion control materials where possible. Use only biodegradable materials (typically made from natural fibers), preferably those that will biodegrade under a variety of conditions. Wildlife friendly erosion control material costs are often similar to conventional plastic netting. Minnesota DEPARTMENT OF NATURALRESOURCES Literature Referenced Barton, C. and K. Kinkead. 2005. Do erosion control and snakes mesh? Soil and Water Conservation Society 60:33A-35A. Derraik, J.G.B. 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a aeview. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44:842-852. Fuller-Perrine, L.D., and M.E. Tobin. 1993. A method for applying and removing bird -exclusion netting in commercial vineyards. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21:47-51. Johnson, S.W. 1990. Distribution, abundance, and source of entanglement debris and other plastics on Alaskan beaches, 1982-1988. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Marine Debris 331-348. Kapfer, J. M., and R. A. Paloski. 2011. On the threat to snakes of mesh deployed for erosion control and wildlife exclusion. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 6:1-9. WFEC Fact -sheet — MN DNR 2013 (acc. 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Westwood Main (952) 937-5150 Fax (952) 937-5822 westwoodps.com (888) 937-5150 MEMORANDUM Date: July 8, 2016 Re: Terre De L'Eau, Eagle Nest Assessment Summary, Hugo, Minnesota File 0008463.00 To: Deb Ridgeway, The Excelsior Group From: David Kuhlmann, Westwood Professional Services On behalf of The Excelsior Group, Westwood Professional Services completed a survey for eagle nests on the roughly 200-acre Terre De L'Eau project area on July 6, 2016 (Figure 1). The nest survey was completed in response to a request made by DNR staff in their Natural Heritage Review letter (Correspondence # ERDB 20160443), that "if there will be any tree removal associated with the proposed project, the trees should be inspected for nests prior to being cut down. " Trees on the site were surveyed for nests by a Westwood biologist using a meander survey technique. Weather was 85 degrees and sunny. No eagle nests were observed within the proposed project boundary, but one adult bald eagle was seen flying west through the project area, and another bald eagle was seen flying north approximately 0.5 mile northwest of the project boundary. Dominant trees onsite included pine trees, cottonwood, and box -elder. The cottonwoods were primarily located along the edge of the project area, bordering the adjacent residential houses to the northwest and northeast. Due to the time of year that the survey was completed, visibility was limited by leaf -on conditions; however, most of these trees were deemed too small to be ideal nesting locations. Isolated stands of pine trees surveyed for eagle nests were located within the southern portion of the project area currently used as hayfield. No eagle nests were observed within the project boundary (Figure 1). An additional parcel approximately 20 acres in size immediately east of the site was observed from the eastern project boundary and from adjacent roadways. The parcel contains a rural residence with predominantly evergreen trees for wind breaks, and an assortment of other trees. No eagle nests were apparent, and the trees did not appear of suitable size to be utilized by eagles for nesting. Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering TBPLS Finn No. 10074302 westwoodps.com July 8, 2016 Page 2 One additional parcel south of 130th St. N, and southeast of the proposed Terre De L'Eau project boundary, was included in the DNR's review and was therefore observed from the roadway for possible eagle nests. This area contains a wetland complex with medium-sized deciduous trees, and is not currently proposed for development or tree removal. No eagle nests were observed on the parcel from this location. Figure 1: Surveyed Project Area Appendix D State Historic Preservation Office Correspondence Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota This page is intentionally blank David Weetman From: Thomas Cinadr <thomas.cinadr@mnhs.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 8:13 AM To: Ryan Grohnke Subject: Re: Database Search - PP Hugo Attachments: Archaeology.rtf; Historic.rtf THIS EMAIL IS NOT A PROJECT CLEARANCE. This message simply reports the results of the cultural resources database search you requested. The database search produced results for only previously known archaeological sites and historic properties. Please read the note below carefully. Archaeological sites and historic properties were identified in a search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Inventory for the search area requested. Reports containing the results of the searches are attached. The result of this database search provides a listing of recorded archaeological sites and historic architectural properties that are included in the current SHPO databases. Because the majority of archaeological sites in the state and many historic architectural properties have not been recorded, important sites or structures may exist within the search area and may be affected by development or construction projects within that area. Additional research, including field survey, may be necessary to adequately assess the area's potential to contain historic properties. Properties that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or have been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP are indicated on the reports you have received. The following codes on the reports you received are: NR — National Register listed. The properties may be individually listed or may be within the boundaries of a National Register District. CEF — Certified Eligible to the National Register findings are usually made during the federal review process, these properties have been evaluated as being eligible for listing in the National Register. SEF — Staff eligible findings to the National Register are properties that have been determined eligible by SHPO staff. DOE — Determination of Eligibility is made by the National Park Service and typically refers to properties deemed eligible but the owner objects to the listing. CNEF — Certified Not Eligible to the National Register. SHPO has begun to record properties that have been evaluated as not eligible for listing in the National Register. If the box on the form has a check the property has been determined to be not eligible. Properties without NR, CEF, SEF, DOE, or CNEF designations in the reports you received may not have been evaluated and therefore no assumption to their eligibility can be made. If you require a comprehensive assessment of a project's potential to impact archaeological sites or historic architectural properties, you may need to hire a qualified archaeologist and/or historian. If you need assistance with a project review, please contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson in Review and Compliance @ 651-259-3455 or by email at kelly.graggiohnson(d)mnhs.org. The Minnesota SHPO Survey Manuals and Database Metadata can be found at http://www.mnhs.or2/shpo/survey/inventories.htm SHPO research hours are 8:30 AM — 4:00 PM Tuesday -Friday. The Office is closed on Mondays. Tom Cinadr Survey and Information Management Coordinator Minnesota Historic Preservation Office Minnesota Historical Society 345 Kellogg Blvd. West St. Paul, MN 55102 651-259-3453 On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Ryan Grohnke <Ryan.Grohnkegwestwoodps.com> wrote: Tom, Please conduct a database search for the following location in Washington County. Township 31, Range 21, Sections: 19, 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 Thank you, Ryan Ryan P. Grohnke CULTURAL RESOURCES FIELD DIRECTOR/PROJECT MANAGER ryan.grohnke@westwoodps.com Direct (952) 906-7403 Main (952) 937-5150 Cell (612) 209-3352 Westwood Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering 7699 Anagram Drive I Eden Prairie, MN 55344 westwoodps.com (888) 937-5150 Archaeological Site Locations Site Number Site Name County: Washington 21 WA0086 21 WA0094 5389 145th Street North 5389 145th Street North 21 WA0095 5504 145th Street North 5504 145th Street North 21 WA0097 21 WA0098 21 WAah 21 WAk 21 WAI 21 WAm 21 WAn Centerville Station Iverson 5 Iverson 6 Iverson 7 Iverson 8 Twp. Range Sec. Quarter Sections Acres Phase Site Description Tradition Context Reports 31 21 21 NE -SE -NE 31 21 20 NE -NW -NW -SW 31 21 20 NE -NW -NW -SW 31 21 20 SE -SE -SW -NW 31 21 20 SE -SE -SW -NW 31 21 20 SW -NW 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW 31 21 20 31 21 30 E-W 31 21 30 SW -NW 31 21 30 W-SW 31 21 31 NW -NW 0.1 1 SA 1 1,2 AS 1 1,2 AS 1 1,2 AS 1 1,2 AS 0.5 1 AS 0.5 1 AS 0 HD 0 AS 0 LS 0 AS 0 AS W-1 PL-2, A- 2, W-1 W-1 RA-1 WA-02-04 RA-1 MULT-02-05 RA-1 WA-02-04 RA-1 MULT-02-05 RA-1 RA-1 NR CEF DOE Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Page I of 1 History/Architecture Inventory PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS Twp Range Sec Quarters USGS COUNTY: Washington CITY/TOWNSHIP: Hugo commercial building house schoolhouse houses commercial buildings Lake Superior and Mississippi Railroad Corridor: Lower St. Croix Segment house farmstead house house house house house house house house house house house house commercial building Report NRHP CEF DOE Inventory Number 5554 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-002 NW corner Egg Lake Rd. & Fondant Ave. 31 21 20 SE -SE -SW Hugo WA-HGC-003 xxx School Place 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo WA-HGC-004 31 21 20 WA-HGC-006 31 21 20 WA-HGC-007 off U.S. Hwy. 61 31 21 20 NW Hugo Y WA-HGC-008 14620 Finley Ave. N 31 21 30 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-013 5297 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NE -SE Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-014 5318 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-015 5340 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-016 5360 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-017 5380 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-018 5392 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-019 5398 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-020 5426 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-021 5444 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-022 5452 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-023 5490 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-024 5518 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-025 5526 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-026 5546 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-027 Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Page 1 of 4 PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS Twp Range See Quarters USGS Report NRHP CEP DOE Inventory Number COUNTY: Washington CITY/TOWNSHIP: Hugo house 5546 145th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo xx-2002-2H WA-HGC-028 house 5566 145th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2000-2H WA-HGC-029 house 5501 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-030 house 5485 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-031 house 5477 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-032 house 5455 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-033 house 5433 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-034 house 5421 145th St. N 31 21 20 NE -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-035 house 5399 145th St. N 31 21 20 NW -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-036 house 5389 145th St. N 31 21 20 NW -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-037 house 5377 145th St. N 31 21 20 NW -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-038 house 5361 145th St. N 31 21 20 NW -NW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-039 house 5455 146th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX 2002-2H WA-HGC-040 house 5511 146th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-041 house 5543 146th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-042 house 5557 146th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2202-2H WA-HGC-043 grain elevator 5582 146th St. N 31 21 20 SW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-044 Duplex 14588-15490 Fitzgerald Ave. N. 31 21 20 SW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-045 house 5500 146th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-046 house 5470 146th St. N. 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-047 house 5452 146th St. N. 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-048 house 5430 46th St. N. 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-049 house 5445 147th St. N 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2X WA-HGC-050 house 5519 147th St. N. 31 21 20 SE -SW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-051 Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Page 2 of 4 PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS Twp Range See Quarters USGS Report NRHP CEP DOE Inventory Number COUNTY: Washington CITY/TOWNSHIP: Hugo house St. John the Baptist Cemetery St. John the Baptist Cemetery house house judicial ditch judicial ditch judicial ditch farmstead house house house house house house house house commercial building house house house Church of St. John the Baptist Office St. John the Baptist Church and Cemetery 14609 Fitzgerald Ave. N 147th St. N. 14739 Fitzgerald Ave. S. 5616 147th St. N. north of CSAH 8 and east of Everton Ave. N 13676 Fenway Blvd. 14715 Highway 61 14701 Highway 61 14687 Highway 61 14663 Highway 61 14655 Highway 61 14635 Highway 61 14625 Highway 61 14593 Highway 61 14529 Highway 61 14491 Forest Blvd. 14497 Forest Blvd. 14409 Highway 61 14383 Forest Blvd. Forest Blvd. 31 21 20 SW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-052 31 21 20 SE -NW -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H Y WA-HGC-053 31 21 20 SE -NW -NW Hugo WA-2002-1H Y WA-HGC-053 31 21 20 SW -NE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-054 31 21 20 SW -NE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-055 31 21 19 NW -SE -NE Centerville XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-056 31 21 19 SE -NE -NE Centerville XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-056 31 21 20 NW -NW- Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-056 31 21 20 NE -SE -NE Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-057 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-058 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-059 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-060 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX 2002-2H WA-HGC-061 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-062 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-063 31 21 20 NW -SE -NW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-064 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2202-2H WA-HGC-065 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-066 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-067 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-068 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-069 31 21 20 NW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-070 31 21 20 SW -NE -SW Hugo WA-20024H Y WA-HGC-071 Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Page 3 of 4 PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS Twp Range See Quarters USGS Report NRHP CEP DOE Inventory Number COUNTY: Washington CITY/TOWNSHIP: Hugo St. John the Baptist Church and Forest Blvd. 31 21 20 SW -NE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H Y WA-HGC-071 Cemetery house 14187 Highway 61 31 21 20 NW -SE -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-072 judicial ditch 14029 Highway 61 31 21 20 SE -SW -SW Hugo XX-2002-2H WA-HGC-073 Tuesday, May 17, 2016 Page 4 of 4 Appendix E Traffic Impact Study Adelaide Landing Residential Development, Hugo Washington County, Minnesota This page is intentionally blank EAW APPENDIX Traffic Impact Analysis for Adelaide Landing A Premier Residential Development Located North of 1301" Street North And East of US 61 Hugo, Minnesota Prepared for: The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South Suite 400 Saint Louis Park, MN 55416 (612) 353-3307 Prepared by: Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150 Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering westwoodps.com Adelaide Landing Residential Development 1/31/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis Traffic Impact Analysis for Adelaide Landing Hugo, MN January 31, 2017 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Print Name: Stephen J. Manhart Signature: Date: 01/31/2017 License # 22428 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Project Number: R0008463.00 Date: 1/31/2017 CONTENTS Certification Page List of Figures ... List of Tables ... List of Appendices 1/31/2017 INTRODUCITON............................................................................................................................... 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS.................................................................................................................... 3 FUTUREYEAR FORECASTS............................................................................................................. 19 DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS.............................................................................................................. 28 MITIGATIONPLAN......................................................................................................................... 39 APPENDIX...................................................................................................................................45 FIGURES Figure1: Site Location.................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure2: Existing Traffic Volumes.............................................................................................................. 13 Figure 3: 2022 No Build Traffic................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 4: 2040 No Build Traffic Volumes.................................................................................................... 22 Figure5: Trip Distribution.......................................................................................................................... 30 Figure6: Trip Assignment.......................................................................................................................... 31 Figure 7: 2022 Build Traffic Volumes......................................................................................................... 32 Figure 8: 2040 Build Traffic Volumes......................................................................................................... 35 Figure9: Proposed Geometry....................................................................................................................42 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis TABLES 1/31/2017 Table 1: Comparison of Turning Movement Counts along TH 61 at 130t" Street North ................ Table 2: Level of Service vs. Control Delay — Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections ............... Table 3: Existing Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths........................................................... Table 4: 2022 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths ................................................ Table 5: 2040 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths ................................................. Table 6: 2040 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths — 4 Lanes on TH 61.................. Table 7: Adelaide Landing Development Phasing........................................................................... Table 8: Adelaide Landing Trip Generation Potential.................................................................... Table 9: 2022 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths....................................................... Table 10: 2040 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths ..................................................... Table 11: 2040 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths — 4 Lanes on TH 61 ..................... TECHNICAL APPENDICES Technical Appendix I: Crash Analysis Technical Appendix II: MnDOT LRRB Turn Lane Design Checklist Technical Appendix III: Synch ro/SimTraffic Performance and Queuing Output iv Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis INTRODUCITON 1/31/2017 The following is a traffic impact analysis for a 217.5-acre premier residential development called Adelaide Landing, proposed north of 130th Street North and east of US Trunk Highway 61 (TH 61) in the city of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota (see Figure 1). The Excelsior Group (Client) is proposing to construct 324 residential units on the site. Of that number, 91 lots are proposed to comprise villa homes, 51 lots are proposed to comprise detached townhomes and the remainder (182 lots) are proposed to comprise single-family homes. A small neighborhood park is proposed at a midpoint of the housing. The street system is proposed to be curvilinear with one main neighborhood collector running north -south through the development with various local streets intersecting the north -south street and serving small pockets of housing. While the development will propose no new direct access intersections onto TH 61, the concept sketch plan for the site includes a connection to existing 137th Street North that proceeds through another residential development and intersects TH 61. Further, the Adelaide Landing Development proposes three intersections with 130th Street North at the south end of the site, which in turn provide direct access to TH 61. Other development streets will connect with the existing residential street system to the north and northeast of Adelaide Landing. This analysis looked at the traffic operation of the study area during three time periods: ➢ Existing condition (2016), ➢ One year after full development (2025), and ➢ Twenty-year timeframe (to 2040). The following intersections will be assessed in this analysis: TH 61 & 130th Street N TH 61 & 134th Street N TH 61 & 137th Street N TH 61 & 1401h Street N 130th Street N & West Site Access Street/Flay Road 130th Street N & 129th Drive N (Mid Site Access Street) 130' Street N & East Site Access Street 140th Street N & Flay Avenue This analysis will address the potential for "cut -through" concerns, as well as pedestrian access and crossings. Findings from this study will be compared with the results from previous studies in the area, including the TH 61 Corridor Access Management Plan, the TH 61 at 130th Street ICE Report and the City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan. A mitigation plan will be prepared that will address the proposed development plan now and in the future. Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 137th 140th St L OMMIM,. 134th St LF 130th St v -n Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com D— TAP Westwood ProfesslonM 5ery Re—d Dmwtu bv7deW SITE LOCATION X 0" 1400 28( Adelaide Landing Traffic Study Hugo, MN Date: 12/2/2016 I Site Location Figure 1 137th 140th St L OMMIM,. 134th St LF 130th St v -n Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com D— TAP Westwood ProfesslonM 5ery Re—d Dmwtu bv7deW SITE LOCATION X 0" 1400 28( Adelaide Landing Traffic Study Hugo, MN Date: 12/2/2016 I Site Location Figure 1 Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis EXISTING CONDITIONS 1/31/2017 Westwood analyzed year 2016 roadway geometrics, traffic control and traffic operations for the existing roadways and intersections in the study area. Observations The following discussion provides descriptions of existing conditions at each study intersection. (NOTE: Crash data by type appears in the Appendix): 1. TH 61 & 13011 Street N a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Eastbound left turn lane — 230 ft. Eastbound right turn lane —130 ft. 3 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Westbound left turn lane — 250 ft. Westbound right turn lane —145 ft. Northbound left turn lane — 235 ft. Northbound right turn lane — 250 ft. Southbound left turn lane — 260 ft. Southbound right turn lane — 300 ft. c. Sight Lines: 1/31/2017 Eastbound limited sight lines to the south as vehicles approach intersection due to railroad crossing and parked vehicles; clear sight line beyond tracks Eastbound limited sight lines to the north as vehicles approach intersection due to railroad crossing and vegetation; clear sight line beyond tracks Westbound limited sight lines to the south as vehicles approach intersection due to pine trees along property lines, but sight but sight exceeds AASHTO standards at crosswalk Westbound sight lines to the north are unlimited Northbound limited sight lines to the east as vehicles approach intersection due to pine trees along property lines, but sight exceeds AASHTO standards at stop bar Northbound limited sight lines to the west as vehicles approach intersection due to railroad crossing and parked vehicles but sight but sight exceeds AASHTO standards at stop bar Southbound limited sight lines to the west as vehicles approach intersection due to railroad crossing and parked vehicles but sight but sight exceeds AASHTO standards at crosswalk Southbound sight lines to the east are unlimited d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded fourteen (14) crashes in the last five years, per MnMCAT. (Collision Diagram appears in the Appendix.) e. Traffic Control: Intersection is signalized with protected -permissive phasing for left turns. MnDOT's current cycle lengths are 160 seconds in the a.m. peak hour and 150 seconds in the p.m. peak hour. Pedestrian signals and Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 crosswalks appear across the north and east legs of the intersection. There is signalized railroad crossing on the west leg of the intersection approximately 50 feet to the west of the southbound lanes of TH 61. Speed limit along TH 61 is 55 mph. Speed limit along 130th Street west of TH 61 is statutory 30 mph. The posted speed limit on 130th Street east of TH 61 is 50 mph. 2. TH 61 & 134th Street N a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bav Len Westbound — no designated turn lanes; street width of 32' could accommodate one WB left, one WB right and one EB through lane Northbound right turn lane — 250 ft. Southbound left turn/bypass lane — 250 ft. c. Sight Lines: Westbound limited sight lines to the north as vehicles approach the intersection due to pine trees along property lines, but sight exceed AASHTO standards at stop sign 5 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 Westbound limited sight lines to the south as vehicles approach the intersection due to pine trees and fence along property lines, but sight exceed AASHTO standards at stop sign Northbound limited sight lines to the east as vehicles approach the intersection due to pine trees and fence but sight exceed AASHTO standards at approach to intersection Southbound limited sight lines to the east as vehicles approach the intersection due to pine trees but sight exceed AASHTO standards at approach to intersection d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded three (3) crashes in the last five years, per MnMCAT. (Collision Diagram appears in the Appendix.) e. Traffic Control: Intersection is side street stop controlled. Speed limit along TH 61 is 55 mph. Speed limit along 134th Street is statutory 30 mph. 3. TH 61 & 137th Street N a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Westbound — no designated turn lanes; street width of 33' could accommodate one WB left, one WB right and one EB through lane Northbound right turn lane — 210 ft. 6 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development 1/31/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis Southbound left turn/bypass lane —165 ft. c. Sight Lines: Westbound limited sight lines to the north as vehicles approach the intersection due to trees along property lines, but sight exceed AASHTO standards at stop sign Westbound generally unlimited sight lines to the south Northbound generally unlimited sight lines to the east Southbound limited sight lines to the east as vehicles approach the intersection due to railroad crossing and parked vehicles but sight exceed AASHTO standards at approach to intersection d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded no (0) crashes in the last five years, per M n M CAT. e. Traffic Control: Intersection is side street stop controlled. Speed limit along TH 61 is 55 mph. Speed limit along 137t" Street is statutory 30 mph. 4. TH 61 & 140th Street N f„ 7 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Eastbound right turn lane —175 ft. Westbound right turn lane — 225 ft. Northbound left turn lane — 180 ft.; right turn lane — 260 ft. Southbound left turn lane — 250 ft.; right turn lane — 240 ft. c. Sight Lines: 1/31/2017 Eastbound generally unlimited sight lines to the north and south Westbound generally unlimited sight lines to the north and south Northbound generally unlimited sight lines to the east and west Southbound generally unlimited sight lines to the east and west d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded twenty (20) crashes in the last five years, per MnMCAT. (Collision Diagram appears in the Appendix.) e. Traffic Control: Intersection is signal controlled with protected/permitted phasing in the northbound and southbound directions. MnDOT's current cycle lengths are 160 seconds in the a.m. peak hour and 150 seconds in the p.m. peak hour. Speed limit along 130t" Street is posted at 50 mph. Speed limit along Flay Road is statutory 30 mph. Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis S. 130th Street N & Flay Road (proposed West Site Access Street) a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Eastbound right turn lane —100 ft. Westbound turn lane — none Northbound turn lane — none 1/31/2017 a c. Sight Lines: Eastbound sight lines limited to the south by pine trees Westbound sight lines limited to the south by pine trees Northbound sight lines limited to the east and west by pine trees d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded no (0) crashes in the last five years, per M n M CAT. e. Traffic Control: Intersection is stop sign controlled for northbound traffic. Speed limit along 130t" Street is posted 50 mph east of TH 61. Flay Avenue is statutory 30 mph. 9 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 6. 130th Street N & 1291" Drive N (Mid Site Access Street) a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Eastbound right turn lane — 70 ft. Westbound turn lane — none Northbound turn lane — none c. Sight Lines: 1/31/2017 Eastbound sight lines relatively unlimited, although the street approach to 130th is rather short and there is a tree to the south of 130th Westbound sight lines relatively unlimited, although the street approach to 130th is rather short and there is a tree to the south of 130th Northbound sight lines generally unlimited to the east, but limited to the west by low hanging tree branches beyond the eastbound right turn lane. d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded no (0) crashes in the last five years, per M n M CAT. 10 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 e. Traffic Control: Intersection is stop sign controlled for northbound traffic. Speed limit along 130t" Street is posted 50 mph east of TH 61. 29t" Drive N is statutory 30 mph. 7. 140th Street N & Flay Avenue a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane eastbound and northbound; two through lanes westbound b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bay Lengths: Eastbound right turn lane —160 ft. Westbound turn lane — none marked, although approach has two through lanes Northbound turn lane — none marked, although approach is 24 feet wide c. Sight Lines: Eastbound sight lines are generally unlimited Westbound sight lines limited to the south by trees Northbound sight lines limited to the east by trees d. Crash History: Intersection has recorded one (1) crash in the last five years, per MnMCAT. (Collision Diagram appears in the Appendix.) 11 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 e. Traffic Control: Intersection is stop sign controlled for northbound traffic. Speed limit along 1301" Street is posted 50 mph east of TH 61. Flay Avenue is statutory 30 mph. 8. 130th Street N & East Site Access Street a. Number of Through Lanes: One through lane in each direction No intersection exists at this time b. Auxiliary Lanes and Effective Turn Bav Lengths: Westbound turn lane — none Northbound turn lane — none c. Sight Lines: Not applicable at this time in either direction d. Crash History: Location has recorded no (0) crashes in the last five years, per MnMCAT. e. Traffic Control: Speed limit along 130t" Street is posted 50 mph east of TH 61. 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Designed. Checked: Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: Legend * PER MNDOT AADT METRO MAPS (2015) Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: � The Excelsior Grou LLC Traffic Study Existing p� Traffic Volumes St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 2 j LANE DESIGNATION 7 AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY XXXX TRAFFIC VOLUME* * PER MNDOT AADT METRO MAPS (2015) Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: � The Excelsior Grou LLC Traffic Study Existing p� Traffic Volumes St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 2 Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Data Collection 1/31/2017 Westwood collected weekday a.m. and p.m. peak period turning movement counts at the existing intersections identified above. These peak period turning movement volumes appear on Figure 2. These counts were taken on August 2-3, 2016. It has been reported that 1-35E was under construction when these counts were taken. Thus, a check was made to determine whether traffic volumes on TH 61 are higher than typical volumes. A review of historical counts has shown a resulting change in patterns shows variations in a.m. and p.m. peak hour movements along north bound and southbound TH 61 (see Table 1). Table 1: Comparison of Turning Movement Counts along TH 61 at 130th Street North — 2011, 2012 and 2016 A.M. PEAK HOUR NB Left NB Thru NB Right SB Left SB Thru SB Right TOTAL 2/2/2011 69 178 25 11 796 58 1137 11/7/2012 70 206 20 10 816 69 1191 8/2-3/2016 14 287 21 78 735 78 1213 P.M. PEAK HOUR NB Left NB Thru NB Right SB Left SB Thru SB Right TOTAL 2/2/2011 111 823 96 15 381 18 1444 11/7/2012 79 717 95 29 410 26 1356 8/2-3/2016 37 759 69 235 568 74 1742 (Source: MnDOT Metro Intersection Count Website, and Westwood Professional Services) The 2016 counts appear greater than those recorded in previous years. The difference in volumes between 2011 and 2016 is a 1.3% annual growth rate for the a.m. peak hour. Conversely, during the p.m. peak hours, the annual growth rate is 3.8% over the same time period. This is despite the p.m. peak volume dropping in 2012. 14 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Intersection Capacity Analysis 1/31/2017 Traffic operations for the peak hour conditions within the study area were analyzed using the industry -standard Synchro/SirnTraffic Version 9 software package, which uses the data and methodology contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board. The software model was calibrated to replicate existing conditions as accurately as possible before being used to assess future conditions. The operating conditions of transportation facilities, such as traffic signals, stop -controlled intersections and roundabouts, are evaluated based on the relationship of the theoretical capacity of a facility to the actual traffic volumes on that facility. Various factors affect capacity, including travel speed, roadway geometry, grade, number and width of travel lanes, and intersection control. The current standards for evaluating capacity and operating conditions are contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The procedures describe operating conditions in terms of a Level of Service (LOS). Facilities are given letter designations from A, representing the best operating conditions, to F, representing the worst. Generally, Level of Service D (LOS-D) represents the threshold for acceptable overall intersection operating conditions during a peak hour. At intersections, Levels of Service are assigned differently for signalized or unsignalized intersections (which include Two -Way Stop Control [TWSC], All -way Stop Control [AWSC] and roundabouts). For signalized intersections, Level of Service is calculated by taking the total Intersection Delay and converting it to a letter grade as shown in the right side of Table 2. For an unsignalized intersection, Level of Service is calculated by taking the Intersection Delay and converting it to a letter grade, as shown in the left side of Table 2. While similar, the signalized control delay totals are higher than that of unsignalized intersections. In any condition, when the LOS by Volume to Capacity Ratio exceeds 1.0, the LOS is always F. Under the 2010 HCM, common movements are included into lane groups. Control Delay is then determined for each lane group and Levels of Service are based on this Control Delay. For each lane group, Control Delay is quantified by number of seconds. Control Delay is defined as the difference between the travel time that would have occurred in the absence of the intersection control, and the travel time that results because of the presence of the intersection control. Levels of Service are then based on the control delay per vehicle. 15 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 Table 2: Level of Service vs. Control Delay - Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections (TWSC, AWSC & Roundabouts) TWSC, AWSC & Roundabouts Control Delay per LOS by Volume to Vehicle Capacity Ratio (5 1)* (Seconds) A <_10 B >10 and <_15 C >15 and 525 D >25 and 535 E >35 and :550 F >50 Signalized Intersections Control Delay per LOS by Volume to Vehicle Capacity Ratio (<_ 1)* (Seconds) A <_10 B >10 and <_20 C >20 and <_35 D >35 and <_55 E >55 and <_80 F >80 Per the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board. * NOTE: When LOS by Volume to Capacity Ratio >1.00, LOS is F. The acceptable Level of Service threshold for a particular movement at an intersection depends on both the priority assigned to that movement and its traffic volume. In general, the higher the priority and the higher the traffic volume, the more stringent the acceptable threshold will be. For example, the acceptable threshold for a high-priority/high-volume rural movement might be C, while LOS F on a low-priority/low-volume urban movement might be appropriate. For two-way stop -controlled intersections, a key measure of operational effectiveness is the side street LOS. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of delay is attributed to the side-street/minor approaches. Long delays and poor LOS can sometimes result on the side street, even if the overall intersection is functioning well, making it a valuable design criterion. As the side-street/minor approach delay approaches and exceeds 60 seconds per vehicle, drivers may divert to another route or become impatient and accept gaps in the mainline traffic that are less than acceptable/safe gaps resulting in the potential for traffic safety concerns. Therefore, depending on priority and traffic volume, acceptable side -street LOS can range from D to F. Side streets can operate at LOS F without the intersection warranting a change in traffic control. A final fundamental component of operational analyses is a study of vehicular queuing, as defined the line of vehicles waiting to pass through an intersection. An intersection can operate with an acceptable Level of Service, but if queues from the intersection extend back to block entrances to turn lanes or accesses to adjacent land uses, unsafe operating conditions could result. In reporting Levels of Service, the information from the signalized intersection analysis comes directly from the Synchro 9 and SimTraffic 9 reports (found in the Appendix). 16 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 Intersection Levels of Service are reported based on the Control Delay calculated for the overall intersection and for each critical movement as determined by SimTraffic 9, and as adjusted for driver behavior. For queuing, SimTraffic reports found in the Appendix list the Mean Queue, the 95th Percentile and the Maximum Queue Lengths that are generated after five runs. In this report, the 95th Percentile Queue Length is used to discern adequate lengths of turn lanes. The 95th Percentile Queue Length refers to that length of queue that has only a five - percent probability of being exceeded during an analysis period. This is the standard factor used to determine optimal turn lane lengths. These 95th Percentile Queue Lengths are also found in the Appendix. Table 3 illustrates the existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour levels of service at the study intersections. Intersection levels of service are recorded on the left side of the table, while lane group levels of service for critical approaches are reported on the right site of the table. In addition, 951h percentile queue lengths for these critical approaches are also reported. Existing MnDOT signal timings were used in modeling traffic operation. None of the study area intersections presents unacceptable overall operational or performance issues in the existing condition. 17 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 3: Existincq Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths 1/31/2017 Intersection Intersection Control Delay (sec) Overall Intersection LOS Approach Lane Group Delay (sec) Lane Group LOS Available95th Stacking Distance Percetile Queue Length (ft) A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M.7 P.M. A.M. P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 17.7 30.9 B C EB Left 59.7 68.9 E E 455 111 236 EB Thru 64.9 88.6 E F 455 111 236 EB Right 18.0 8.1 B A 175 55 45 WB Left 71.1 46.2 E D 315 133 87 WBThru 13.4 41.5 B D 315 133 87 WB Right 6.7 31.9 A C 225 73 183 NB Left 11.2 20.0 B B 180 25 237 NB Thru 6.0 25.4 A C 1000 101 506 NB Right 1.0 8.0 A A 260 11 269 SB Left 14.8 75.1 B E 250 62 348 SB Thru 18.8 13.1 B B 675 383 308 SB Right 5.1 4.2 A A 240 183 29 140th Street N & Flay Ave 0.6 1.0 A A EB Thru 0.6 0.9 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.5 0.9 A A 160 n.a n.a. WB Left n.a. 8.1 n.a. A 220 n.a. 10 WBThru 0.2 0.2 A A 220 n.a 10 NB Left 6.1 7.5 A A 100 30 37 NB Right 2.1 2.7 n.a. A 100 11 17 TH 61 & 137th Street N 4.4 2.9 A A WB Left 18.4 9.5 C A 240 33 29 WB Right 3.4 7.5 A A 240 33 29 NB Thru 1.3 2.6 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. NB Right n.a. 0.4 n.a. A 210 n.a. n.a. SB Left 8.4 6.4 A B 165 13 25 SB Thru 4.4 3.1 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 134th Street N 2.0 3.4 A A WB Left 7.5 8.0 A A 150 23 11 WB Right 1.7 2.3 A A 150 23 11 NB Thru 2.1 4.6 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right 6.0 2.2 A A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left 1.9 7.6 A A 250 n.a. 13 SB Thru 2.0 1.4 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 21.5 14.0 C B EB Left 61.0 72.1 E E 230 44 96 EB Thru 53.5 173.3 D F 500 15 53 EB Right 18.8 11.8 B B 130 98 79 WB Left 57.5 81.8 E F 250 135 75 WBThru 58.5 229.5 E F 1215 73 38 WB Right 4.3 15.2 A B 145 44 36 NB Left 17.6 11.0 B B 235 56 54 NB Thru 6.3 8.4 A A 2600 75 210 NB Right 1.5 3.3 A A 250 13 14 SB Left 19.8 18.3 B B 260 35 98 SB Thru 22.7 8.9 C A 2000 460 165 SB Right 7.3 3.3 A A 300 212 5 130th Street N & Flay Rd. 2.3 1.9 A A EB Thru 0.3 1.9 A A 1215 n.a n.a EB Right 1.0 1.2 A A 100 n.a n.a WB Left 0.8 0.5 A A 760 n.a. n.a WBThru 0.5 0.4 A A 760 n.a n.a NB Left 4.9 4.7 A A 170 n.a 48 NB Right n.a. 2.5 n.a. A 170 49 48 130th Street N & 129TH Drive N 0.2 0.5 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.4 A A 760 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.0 0.2 A A 70 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.3 0.0 A A 3220 n.a. n.a. NB Left 3.5 3.5 A A 60 10 23 NB Right n.a. 3.2 n.a. A 60 10 23 130th Street N & Future East Access 0.1 0.6 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.3 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.0 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 18 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis FUTURE YEAR FORECASTS 1/31/2017 Westwood worked with the City's traffic engineer to identify future years for analysis. The Adelaide Landing development has a five-year phasing schedule. Therefore, assuming construction of the first phase would occur in 2017, build -out could occur in 2021. It was determined that the study years would be one year after full development (2022) and the twenty year timeframe (2040, as specified by the City's traffic engineer). Westwood also reviewed the findings from the TH 61 Corridor Access Management Plan, The TH 61 at 130th Street Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Report, and the City of Hugo's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. None of these utilized specific growth factors to determine background traffic. MnDOT State Aid, however, provides twenty-year traffic projection factors that provide a means to calculate annual growth rates.' For Washington County, the traffic projection factor is listed as 1.3. Based on annualizing the twenty-year growth projection, this results in a 1.3% annual growth rate. This factor (which matches the a.m. peak hour growth rate discussed earlier) will be used to calculate the background growth for both 2022 and 2040 No -Build traffic scenarios. There are no known intersection improvements planned in the study area outside of the Adelaide Landing development. 2022 No -Build Scenario Figure 3 illustrates the 2022 No -Build traffic projection for a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Using these volume projections, Westwood calculated levels of service for the 2022 No -Build scenario. These appear on Table 4. In this scenario, no geometric or lane arrangement changes were assumed. The existing MnDOT signal timings were not adjusted or optimized. Nevertheless, eastbound and northbound movements along TH 61 record levels of service below acceptable levels. In addition, queue lengths exceed available turn lane storage lengths at the southbound left turn lanes along TH 61 at 1401" Street. 2040 No -Build Scenario Figure 4 illustrates the 2040 No -Build traffic projection for a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Using these volume projections, Westwood calculated levels of service for the 2040 No -Build scenario. Again, existing MnDOT signal timings were used and not optimized for the future condition. These appear on Table 5. 'Traffic Protection Factors, Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid, Saint Paul, MN, Fall 2015 19 Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. th Ol J r O 15 10 10 O (A 3 3 (-> W W CID ro PO CA J T6 V 0) N J N \ ,t- 36 17oo o -I� -I� A � u�19 10 'C 198 188 EJ ,> \�- 115 46 J �� A 4 13 44 22 E1 T EJ 1 1383 44 [23 jjC 57 T r->1 98 121, J 2 u m o 32 O 0 N Ol J r O 15 10 10 O (A 3 3 (-> W W CID ro PO CA J T6 V 0) N J N RV ,t- 36 17oo �• A � u�19 10 4„ EJ ,> \�- 115 46 44 22 E1 T 17 1Nvw 98 121, J u m o 1 93 22 6 8 El'3 105 23--> 75 14-�, N � 1 Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. X252 212 3 <'l 1, 4 295 100 CA u N 54 9� w 00 r' jpj�v- 914 110, ►: i 3y w 1. JISt, i �� ,- „�. lir' u,• — � _ _ �"� RPM - AIL g 98 26 113 257 2 1y w N Designed Prepared for: Checked: The Excelsior Group, LLC Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: St. Louis Park, MN `4 Legend j LANE DESIGNATION 7� AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Adelaide Landing Traffic Study Hugo, MN i Date: 12/2/2016 2022 No Build Traffic Volumes Figure 3 Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 4: 2022 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lenqths 1/31/2017 Intersection Intersection Control Delay (sec) Overall Intersection LOS Approach Lane Group Delay (sec) Lane Group LOS Available Stacking Distance 95th Percetile Queue Length (ft) A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 17.3 33.7 B C EB Left EB Thru 61.1 76.4 E E 455 455 110 258 110 258 EB Right 11.7 10.2 B B 175 51 45 WB Left 67.4 64.8 E E 315 125 125 WBThru 25.6 68.6 C E 315 125 125 WB Right 8.2 34.8 A B 225 96 177 NB Left 8.0 25.4 A C 180 21 143 NB Thru 5.6 27.0 A C 1000 101 567 NB Right 2.0 11.9 A B 1 260 17 232 SB Left 13.2 B 250 56 342 SB Thru 19.3 13.8 B B 675 425 308 SB Right 5.0 4.8 A A 240 226 32 140th Street N & Flay Ave 0.9 1.1 A A EB Thru 0.6 0.9 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.6 0.9 A A 160 n.a n.a. WB Left n.a. 1.9 n.a. A 220 n.a n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.2 A A 220 n.a n.a. NB Left 6.6 7.7 A A 100 49 45 NB Right 1.6 4.1 A A 100 7 20 TH 61 & 137th Street N 4.2 3.5 A A WB Left 39.5 D 240 32 36 WB Right 4.3 7.7 A A 240 32 36 NB Thru 1.3 3.2 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. NB Right n.a. 1.0 n.a. A 210 n.a. n.a. SB Left 4.7 9.8 A A 165 8 20 SB Thru 5.3 3.6 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 134th Street N 2.1 3.8 A A WB Left 11.3 11.4 B B 150 28 13 WB Right 1.6 6.1 A A 150 28 13 NB Thru 1.9 5.4 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right 3.0 4.2 n.a. A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left 0.5 4.7 n.a. A 250 n.a. 15 SBThru 2.0 1.7 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 24.7 16.7 C B EB Left 55.3 65.2 E E 260 66 101 EB Thru 63.6 E 500 10 66 EB Right 29.6 15.0 c B 130 135 97 WB Left 59.1 67.6 E E 250 200 104 WBThru 42.0 D r 1215 52 110 WB Right 5.1 10.4 A B 145 44 39 NB Left 21.4 18.0 c B 235 74 81 NBThru 5.3 11.6 A B 2600 92 254 NB Right 2.2 4.9 A A 250 21 27 SB Left 18.2 18.4 B B 260 28 74 SB Thru 26.3 11.0 C B 2000 607 199 SB Right 11.3 3.9 A A 300 326 11 130th Street N & Flay Rd. 2.4 2.1 A A EB Thru 0.7 1.6 A A 1215 n.a n.a EB Right 0.5 0.9 A A 100 n.a n.a WB Left 0.6 0.6 A A 760 n.a. 9 WBThru 0.5 0.6 A A 760 n.a 9 NB Left 5.0 5.3 A A 170 n.a 48 NB Right 4.5 2.8 A A 170 54 48 130th Street N & 129TH Drive N 0.2 0.4 A A EB Thru 2.0 0.4 A A 760 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.0 0.0 A A 70 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.3 A A 3220 n.a. n.a. NB Left n.a. 3.6 n.a. A 60 n.a. 23 NB Right n.a. 2.3 n.a. A 60 n.a. 23 130th Street N & Future East Access 0.1 0.6 A A EBThru 0.2 0.5 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.1 0.2 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 21 Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend d o o LANE DESIGNATION 7� /L2 237 r 0 N 001 s 16 X318 267 AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX 01 EJ I l3 105 56 4 F:4 PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX 1sa 72_.�. T 1 w 2s 3 372 127 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION 29 41�, f 68 11--, o W (0 N o UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION { N pp E A 19 12FL 4L •�., I�4 4 1.llj� V14 MW Al; 117 p N 3 1 18 3 a1►� f:i �y 1 1� 4'r L +t aw •. �• p 'i v +f \ i + 2L ro \� {1i�{, r, r SITE •wl"y"' `ti _ i 4. i rn m 4 C 45 22 {^ Mcon ; <--25 12 EJ lj 145 59 56 27-� E) T I-> 22 1--> 14 aim 124 153-1, +� w - o 117 27 g 124 33 0 +0 8 10" El'3 = 132 29- '4 143 31- 94 187, 3 1 y a w Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Westwood Designed: Prepared for: Checked: 2040 No Build The Excelsior Grou , LLC Study Traffic Volumes Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Drawn: JAF Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Record Drawing by/date: Figure 4 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. St. Louis Park, MN Hugo, MN Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 5: 2040 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lenqths 1/31/2017 A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M.ry P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 32.4 C EB Left EB Thru EB Right 77.5 34.4 35.3 • • E c c 455 455 175 144 144 71 1282 1282 321 WB Left 62.3 44.1 E D 315 183 77 WBThru 21.7 24.4 c D 315 183 77 WB Right 10.2 50.3 B D 1 225 1 118 259 NB Left 37.2 52.2 D 180 35 275 NBThru 10.8 52.2 B 1000 187 1336 NB Right 1.7 34.0 A E 260 15 379 SB Left SB Thru 35.7 40.9 D D E 250 675 447 1018 396 1375 SB Right 23.2 118.6 c D 240 367 185 140th Street N & Flay Ave 0.9 1.4 A A EB Thru 0.6 0.8 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.6 0.9 n.a. A 160 n.a n.a. WB Left n.a. 5.1 n.a. A 220 n.a 10 WBThru 0.3 0.2 A A 220 n.a 10 NB Left 7.0 9.1 A A 100 40 49 NB Right 3.6 4.5 A A 100 13 21 TH 61 & 137th Street N 7.0 6.5 A A WB Left 43.2 35.0 E D 240 40 35 WB Right 8.0 36.9 A E 240 40 35 NBThru 1.8 6.3 A A 1645 n.a. 41 NB Right n.a. 2.2 n.a. A 210 n.a. n.a. SB Left 9.1 31.0 A D 165 8 30 SIB Thru 8.6 5.8 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 134th Street N 3.7 6.3 A A WB Left 25.7 3.2 D A 150 30 11 WB Right 1.7 3.7 n.a. A 150 30 11 NBThru 3.2 8.1 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right 2.1 7.2 A A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left n.a. 16.0 n.a. C 250 n.a. 23 SBThru 3.5 1.8 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 50.5 30.6 D C EB Left 53.6 0 D D 260 51 87 EB Thru EB Right 77.8 : I i5 E B 500 130 223 100 173 89 WB Left 67.2 65.6 E E 250 229 106 WBThru 51.6 D 1215 80 42 WB Right 6.1 38.5 A D 145 45 55 NB Left 33.0 C 235 130 225 NBThru 10.9 32.9 A C 2600 151 1111 NB Right 1.8 24.0 A c 250 11 237 SB Left 45.7 41.1 D D 260 258 93 SIB Thru 57.5 8.3 E A 2000 1030 125 SB Right 38.9 4.4 D A 300 215 7 130th Street N & Flay Rd. 2.3 2.2 A A EB Thru 0.2 1.7 A A 1215 n.a n.a EB Right 0.7 0.9 A A 100 n.a n.a WB Left 0.3 1.4 A A 760 n.a. 12 WBThru 0.5 0.3 A A 760 n.a 12 NB Left 5.3 5.1 A A 170 59 54 NB Right 4.6 2.6 1 A A 170 59 54 130th Street N & 129TH Drive N 0.1 0.5 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.5 A A 760 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.0 0.1 A A 70 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.0 A A 3220 n.a. n.a. NB Left n.a. 3.1 n.a. A 60 n.a. 23 NB Right n.a. 2.3 n.a. A 60 n.a. 23 130th Street N & Future East Access 1 0.1 0.5 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.6 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.1 0.0 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 23 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 In this scenario, no geometric or lane arrangement changes were assumed. As with the 2022 No -Build condition, eastbound and northbound movements along TH 61 record levels of service below acceptable levels. In addition, some side -street movements at TH 61 & 130th Street North begin to experience levels of service below acceptable limits. Conversely, there are improvements in levels of service at some locations. This is a situation that occurs in Synch ro/SimTraffic computer runs on occasion. Due to the variable seeding of the five runs, there are times that the level of service actually records improved operation. The traffic growth to year 2040 exceeds the carrying capacity of a single through lane in each direction along TH 61. Further, at the signalized intersections, the green time for TH 61 traffic must be so long to adequately handle through traffic that the side street queues build as they wait for their short green cycles. This is evidenced as queue lengths exceed available storage at certain locations (e.g., TH 61 at 130th Street, WB right turn, NB and SB left turns; TH 61 at 140th Street, WB left turn, NB left turn, NB right turn). To mitigate these issues, Westwood tested the impact of increasing TH 61 to four lanes (two lanes in each direction, plus reconstructing 130th Street to collector standards (see Table 6). The resulting levels of service fall to generally acceptable levels. This eventuality has been foreseen in the City of Hugo 2030 Comprehensive Plane, as well as the US 61 in Hugo — Corridor Access Management Plan Memorandum of Understanding MOU 3. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan stated, "...With the number of access locations, together with the traffic volume levels, this roadway is approaching the need for expansion to a four -lane facility. In addition to the mainline congestion, queuing at existing signalized and unsignalized intersections provides a source of localized congestion on the City street system." This side -street congestion is evident in the 2022 and 2040 No -Build scenarios. The TH 61 MOU stated that the Corridor Access Management Plan shall occur over time, and that several ongoing factors should be implemented in Hugo, including: Preserving right-of-way for the ultimate four -lane section as land is replatted for development trough dedication or outlots. MnDOT will continue to review the needs on US 61 as part of the agency's long range planning process. When funding and priority are met, the highway Z 2030 Comprehensive Plan, City of Hugo, Minnesota, Adopted March 15, 2010 3 Final MOU for US 61 in Hugo; Corridor Access Management Plan, Minnesota Department of Transportation, 05/19/20108. 24 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 6: 2040 No -Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths - 4 Lanes on TH 61 1/31/2017 Intersection Intersection Control Delay (sec) Overall Intersection LOS Approach Lane Group Delay (sec) Lane Group LOS Available95th Stacking Distance Percetile Queue Length (ft) A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 15.0 21.9 B C EB Left 35.0 76.7 D E 455 36 262 EB Thru 45.5 38.5 D D 455 36 39 EB Right 8.0 5.5 A A 175 1 36 40 WB Left 28.7 33.1 C C 315 79 76 WBThru 18.1 30.8 B C 315 79 42 WB Right 4.9 18.6 A B 225 48 170 NB Left 10.2 16.5 B B 180 13 134 NBThru 6.9 25.4 A C 1000 38 330 NB Right 1.0 10.4 A B 260 3 157 SB Left 9.2 26.4 A C 250 1 35 237 SB Thru 6.1 8.3 A A 675 1 67 120 SB Right 2.6 2.5 A D 240 7 18 140th Street N & Flay Ave 0.8 1.2 A A EBThru 0.9 1.0 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.9 1.2 A A 160 n.a n.a. WB Left 2.0 4.2 A B 220 n.a n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.4 A A 220 n.a n.a. NB Left 9.9 9.4 A A 100 1 35 44 NB Right 3.3 5.4 A A 100 n.a 16 TH 61 & 137th Street N 2.4 2.7 A A WB Left 21.2 30.5 n.a. D 240 32 43 WB Right 1.8 11.9 A B 240 32 43 NB Thru 1.1 2.2 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. NB Right n.a. 1.0 n.a. A 210 n.a. n.a. SB Left 2.2 11.4 A B 165 n.a. 28 SBThru 2.9 3.0 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 134th Street N 1.7 3.5 A A WB Left 0.0 46.1 A E 150 17 12 WB Right 1.9 7.2 A A 150 17 12 NB Thru 2.6 5.2 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right n.a. 4.2 n.a. A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left n.a. 5.8 n.a. A 250 n.a. 17 SBThru 1.3 1.1 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 11.4 12.6 B B EB Left 14.0 33.9 B C 260 38 77 EB Thru 53.6 31.6 D C 500 30 49 EB Right 18.0 8.5 B A 130 123 77 WB Left 13.5 41.1 B D 250 56 85 WBThru 23.7 41.0 C D 1215 38 26 WB Right 4.1 7.6 A A 145 51 40 NB Left 14.2 14.5 B B 235 63 78 NBThru 6.7 10.5 A B 2600 77 166 NB Right 2.7 3.5 A A 250 8 16 SB Left 9.4 18.0 A B 260 33 81 SB Thru 12.4 11.7 B B 2000 175 150 SB Right 3.3 3.0 A A 300 14 8 130th Street N & Flay Rd 2.3 2.5 A A EB Thru 1.4 2.4 A A 1215 n.a n.a EB Right 0.4 1.2 A A 100 n.a n.a WB Left 0.3 3.2 A A 760 n.a. is WBThru 1.3 0.4 A A 760 n.a 15 NB Left 5.2 5.5 A A 170 28 45 NB Right 4.5 2.8 A A 170 28 45 130th Street N & 129TH Drive N 0.2 0.5 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.5 A A 760 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.3 0.0 A A 70 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.3 0.0 A A 3220 n.a. n.a. N B Left n.a. 3.9 n.a. A 150 n.a. 14 NB Right n.a. 3.4 n.a. A 100 n.a. 14 130th Street N & Future East Access 0.2 0.2 A A EB Thru 0.0 0.3 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.3 0.0 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 25 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development 1/31/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis concept will be added to MnDOT Metro's fiscally constrained 20-year Transportation System Plan MnDOT's State Highway Investment Plan: 2014-20334 describes identified and prioritized projects versus the twenty-year funding outlook. No project along this segment of TH 61 is identified in the twenty-year plan. An appendix of this plan, however, includes a Project List of Unmet Needs, which_ identifies US 61 among several routes in the Twin Cities Metro Area that is a traffic congestion bottleneck. While not explicitly stating this portion of TH 61, the list states that these projects, if funded, offer a, "...High return on investment capacity enhancements and spot improvements (e.g., interchange reconstruction, auxiliary lanes and other improvements". Further, the 2016 Capital Improvement Program for the City of Hugo identifies reconstruction of 130th Street between TH 61 and Goodview to Collector Standards as being a Priority 2 project.' Pedestrian Access & Crossing Considerations The area surrounding the proposed Adelaide Landing has been identified in the City of Hugo Comprehensive Plan as having existing or proposed sidewalks and trails. There exist sidewalks along 140th Street east of TH 61 and along Fray Avenue south to the Adelaide Landing development. There is a planned City Trail along 130th Street from TH 61 westward to Goodview. This trail will connect with a proposed trail northward and southward along Goodview. There is a planned Regional Trail along the west side of TH 61 between 130th Street and 140th Street. This regional trail will provide regional pedestrian and bicycle access to areas north and south of the development. A snowmobile trail also existing on the west side of TH 61 through Hugo and beyond. A trail system is proposed in the Adelaide Landing development connecting lots on the north end of the development to those on the south end and connecting to the proposed park in the middle of the development. The trail system will meander between ponds and behind residential lots to provide pedestrian access and connectivity throughout the neighborhood. 4 20-Year State Highway Investment Plan: 2014-2033, Minnesota Department of Transportation, December 2013. ' 2016 Capital Improvement Program Proposed Street Improvement Locations Map, City of Hugo, MN, June 22, 2016. 26 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 Due to the heavy vehicular traffic volumes along TH 61, it is recommended that pedestrian crossings remain only at signalized intersections. Of the study area intersections, both TH 61 at 130th and 140th Streets are signalized. Both intersections have marked crosswalks and pedestrian indications that serve people walking or biking across TH 61. Without signalization at TH 61 and 134th Street or at 137th Street, pedestrians and bicyclists would have difficulty finding adequate gaps to cross TH 61 during a.m. or p.m. peak hours. Therefore, pedestrians and bicyclists from these streets would likely choose to cross TH 61 at 130th Street or 140th Street. 27 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS Trip Generation 1/31/2017 The Adelaide Landing development is proposed to include 324 lots of residential development, to be constructed in phases over five years. Table 7 lists the proposed breakout of the development during these phases. Table 7: Adelaide Landing Development Proposed Phasing Phase Villas 50' Lot Width 65' Lot Width 70' Lot Width 85' Lot Width TOTAL 1 20 16 19 55 II 17 16 17 25 75 III 22 21 25 68 IV 17 14 30 20 81 V 15 30 45 Total 91 51 33 60 89 324 (Source: Westwood Professional Services) Westwood divided the subdivision into travelsheds based on proximity to access points. Westwood then utilized the equations from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition, as opposed to rates to estimate the potential trips to and from the development travelsheds.6 (In the case of this residential development, ITE best practices recommends the use of equations over rates.) Table 8 shows the overall trip generation potential. Table 8: Adelaide Landing Trip Generation Potential Type Land Use ITE Code Size Weekday AM peak PM Peak Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Residential Single Family Housing 210 324 units 1,549 1,549 59 177 191 112 1,549 1,549 59 177 191 112 3,098 236 303 (Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition 2012) No trip reductions were taken for internal or pass -by trips. Rates and equations under ITE Code 230 for "Residential Condominium/Townhouse" were not used in to calculate trip generation for the villas because the ITE Trip Generation Manual stipulates that the units "have at least one other owned unit within the same building structure." The villas identified here are detached units. Therefore, to be conservative, all units were included in ITE Code 201 for "Single Family Residential". 6 Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2012 28 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Trip Distribution and Assignment 1/31/2017 Westwood determined the trip distribution based on the existing peak hour volumes gathered in August 2016 and presented in Figure 2. Percentages were calculated of trips entering and exiting the study area based. Figure 5 illustrates the trip distributions by peak period. Figure 6 illustrates the assignment of peak hour trips generated by this development onto the study area. 2022 Build Scenario To model the effect of the Adelaide Landing development on study area traffic, the trip assignment traffic was added to the no -build traffic — both for the 2022 and 2040 scenarios. In each scenario, existing MnDOT signal timing were utilized. Figure 7 shows the resulting traffic forecast for the 2022 Build condition. There are six main access locations into and out of the development: 130th Street North & Flay Road (west site access street) 130th Street North & 1291h Drive North (mid site access street) 130th Street North & the east site access street (yet unnamed) 134th Street North & TH 61 (via adjacent subdivision) 137th Street North & TH 61 (via adjacent subdivision) 140th Street North & Flay Avenue There are also two main intersections providing indirect access to the development included in the analysis: TH 61 & 1301h Street North TH 61 & 1401h Street North Table 9 lists the traffic operation and queuing that will result from the 2022 Build scenario. In the 2022 Build condition, all intersections performed at LOS-C or better in the a.m. peak hour. The intersection of TH 61 & 130th Street, however, did not operate acceptably during the p.m. peak hour due to heavy north/south demand and very limited east/west green time. On a movement -by -movement scale, several lane groups recorded LOS-E or -F, suggesting they were at or exceeding capacity: TH 61 & 140th Street North -- levels of service at this intersection may be improved with signal timing changes. The shared eastbound left/through lane group. The southbound left turn movement. 29 Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 6 (6) Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Designed Prepared for: Checked: The Excelsior Group, LLC Drown: JAR Record Drawing by/dote: gt. Louis Park, MN 2% 2 (2) Legend XX% PERCENTAGE OF NEW TRIPS AM (PM) Adelaide Landing Traffic Study Hugo, MN 0' 900' 1800' Date: 12/2/2016 Trip Distribution Figure 5 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Westwood Designed: Checked: Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: Legend LANE DESIGNATION AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION (10 11 ., 850' Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: Traffic Stud Trip Assignment The Excelsior Group, LLC Y St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 6 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Westwood Designed Checked: Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: Legend j LANE DESIGNATION 7� AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: 2022 Build p The Excelsior Group, LLC Traffic Study Traffic Volumes St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 7 Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 9: 2022 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths 1/31/2017 Intersection Intersection Control Delay (sec) Overall Intersection LOS Approach Lane Group Delay (sec) Lane Group LOS Avliable a Stacking Distance 95th Percetile Queue Length (ft) A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 1949 47.8 B D EB Left 61.9 E 455 126 362 EB Thru 63.7 E 455 126 362 EB Right 15.5 18.9 B B 175 56 184 WB Left 77.6 45.9 E D 315 176 119 WBThru 20.4 C 315 176 119 WB Right 9.4 33.5 A C 225 140 180 NB Left 29.0 23.3 C C 180 30 137 NB Thru 10.0 24.2 A C 1000 183 610 NB Right 1.5 10.7 A B 260 12 187 SB Left 17.6 B 250 68 429 SB Thru 20.0 45.3 B D 675 416 1137 SB Right 5.0 29.1 A C 240 131 262 14Dth Street N & Flay Ave 0.9 1.1 A A EB Thru 0.5 1.0 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.4 1.0 A A 160 n.a n.a. WB Left 2.0 2.4 A A 220 n.a 15 WBThru 0.3 0.3 A A 220 n.a 15 NB Left 6.3 7.3 A A 100 40 38 NB Right 3.1 4.7 A A 100 9 16 TH 61 & 137th Street N 5.7 5.3 A A W B Left 17.8 C 240 72 60 WB Right 8.5 16.9 A C 240 72 60 NB Thru 1.4 3.7 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. NB Right 0.9 1.3 A A 210 n.a. n.a. SB Left 7.8 12.3 A B 165 9 28 SB Thru 7.0 5.7 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 134th Street N 2.8 6.6 A A WB Left 26.5 : r r D 150 33 11 WB Right 3.9 4.9 A A 150 33 11 NB Thru 2.2 9.7 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right 3.6 9.3 A A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left 2.5 2.7 A A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Thru n.a. 1.7 n.a. A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 30.2 C EB Left EB Thru EB Right WB Left 60.0 35.3 68.5 E C E 260 500 130 250 55 67 121 307 250 1753 141 154 WBThru 51 E 1215 340 36 WB Right 81 335.4 A D 145 54 76 NB Left 29.4 31.1 C C 235 53 285 NB Thru 7.0 41.8 A D 2600 127 750 NB Right 1.1 19.8 A B 250 13 380 SB Left 11.2 58.0 B E 260 123 284 SB Thru 15.3 27.3 B C 2000 329 429 SB Right 5.6 7.6 A A 300 19 117 130th Street N & Flay Rd. 2.4 2.8 A A EB Left 1.7 3.0 A A 260 15 18 EB Thru 0.4 2.9 A A 400 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.2 1.5 A A 10D n.a n.a WB Left 0.5 1.3 A A 760 n.a. 8 WBThru 0.7 0.6 A A 760 n.a n.a. WB Right n.a. 0.1 n.a. A 250 n.a, NB Left 6.0 7.5 A A 170 50 55 NB Thru n.a. 14.1 A B 170 50 55 NB Right 4.1 4.1 A A 270 50 55 SB Left n.a. 5.5 n.a. A 320 52 SB Thru 5.0 7.6 A A Soo 44 52 SB Right 3.5 3.1 A A 100 44 52 130th Street N & 129TH Drive N 0.8 1.3 A A EB Left 0.5 1.6 A A 760 9 9 EB Thru 0.2 1 A A 760 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.0 n.a. A n.a. 70 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.3 0.3 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. WB Right 0.5 0.0 A A 250 n.a. NB Left 3.7 3.4 A A 150 10 14 NB Right n.a. 2.3 n.a. A 270 n.a. 14 SB Right 2.8 2.4 A A 150 47 53 130th Street N & Future East Access 0.6 0.6 A A EB Left 1.8 1.1 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. EB Thru 0.1 0.8 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.2 0.3 A A 800 n.a. n.a. WB Right 0.1 0.0 A A SOD n.a. n.a. 5B Left 4.8 n.a. A n.a. 826 Nn.a. SB Right 2.5 3.2 A A 100 39 31 (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 33 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 TH 61 & 137th Street North The low volume westbound left turn movement recorded LOS-E most likely due to minimal adequate gaps in TH 61 traffic to complete the turn, resulting in longer vehicular delay. TH 61 & 134th Street North Likewise, the westbound low volume left turn movement recorded LOS-E most likely due to minimal adequate gaps in TH 61 traffic to complete the turn. TH 61 & 130th Street North-- levels of service at this intersection may be improved with signal timing changes. 2040 Build Scenario Figure 8 shows the resulting traffic forecast for the 2040 Build condition. No other access points were presumed to be added between 2022 and 2040. Table 10 lists the traffic operation and queuing that will result from the 2040 Build scenario. In the 2040 Build condition, two intersections performed below LOS-D. TH 61 & 1301h Street North Recorded LOS-E during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. On a movement -by - movement basis, the westbound approach performed at LOS-F in the a.m. peak hour, while eastbound, westbound and northbound movements recorded LOS-E or lower during the p.m. peak hour. TH 61 & 140th Street North Recorded LOS-F for overall intersection performance in the p.m. peak hour. Recorded LOS-F in the eastbound and northbound approached during the p.m. peak hour. Recorded LOS-F in the southbound left turn approach. Recorded excessive queuing in the eastbound approach during the p.m. peak hour. TH 61 & 1371h Street North The westbound approach recorded LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour, most likely due to minimal adequate gaps in TH 61 traffic to complete the turn. Queuing along northbound TH 61 extends through several intersections in the p.m. peak hour 34 Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Westwood Designed Checked: Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: Legend j LANE DESIGNATION 7� AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: 2022 Build p The Excelsior Group, LLC Traffic Study Traffic Volumes St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 8 Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table 10: 2040 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths 1/31/2017 Intersection Intersection control Delay (sec) Overall Intersection LOS Approach Lane Group (sec) Delay Available Stacking Distance 95th Percetile Queue Length (ft) ----® ----� 100.7 a F �� 142.3 481.1 490.5 323.0 © F 0 F F F ----� ® 228.5 a F s ----� 83.3 a F 75.0 © F m� ----�� ®©©�� 109.2 263.3 0 © F F n �� ----� 92.1 © F ----�i -6.7 579.6 339.1 � 84.9 ® 101.1 F F F 0 F F ----�1 ----1 —_--®® ----� 100.3 F ----� 80.1 F®� 51.7 F ----� 132.8 F ----� 131.8 F ---- 85.6 F ---- 99.4 F ------------ (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 36 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 TH 61 & 134th Street North Likewise, the westbound approach recorded LOS-E/F in the p.m. peak hour, most likely due to minimal adequate gaps in TH 61 traffic to complete the turn. "Cut -Through" Traffic Based on relative distance of residential pockets to access points, Westwood used engineering judgment to estimate the effect of "cut -through" traffic. Due to the curvilinear design of the development, the likelihood of traffic "cutting through" Adelaide Landing to either TH 61, 140th Street North or 130th Street North has been diminished. Because the tendency of drivers to "cut -through" a neighborhood is based on perceived travel time savings, the curvilinear design of the neighborhood streets in the development slows driver speed and thus hinders perceived mobility. Drivers are more likely to maintain their existing travel patterns rather than "cut through" the Adelaide Landing neighborhood. Most drivers will likely seek the path of least resistance to get to get to their destinations. Therefore, if drivers can travel at higher speeds and more directly, they will use the adjacent arterial network to get to their destinations. If, however, the arterials (especially TH 61) are overwhelmed with peak hour traffic under current geometric conditions, drivers will seek alternate routes for through traffic. Therefore, the neighborhood arterial within Adelaide Landing may see "cut through" traffic. This condition will become more acute between the near -term development scenario of 2022 and the long-term scenario of 2040, as additional background traffic growth occurs along the TH 61 corridor. The condition will not abate until additional capacity is created along TH 61. Westwood does not recommend unrealistically low speed limits along neighborhood streets or unwarranted multi -way stop control at intersections in efforts to abate "cut through" traffic or excessive speeding. Some jurisdictions have installed "speed humps", or low and wide speed bumps, to slow traffic or to discourage "cut through" traffic. Nevertheless, to model the effect of cut -through traffic, Westwood and the City traffic engineering consultant agreed that an additional 10-15 trips per peak hour would be assumed to travel between the subdivision to the east of Adelaide Landing and 1301h Street in order to and from TH 61. These additional trips were distributed in each of the Build scenarios. Connections through Existing Neighborhoods Three development streets will intersect with 130th Street. Two of the connections at 130th Street will intersect with existing streets to the south — at Flay Road, and at 127th Drive. Other 37 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 development streets will connect with 139th Street, 138th Street (via Flay Avenue) and 135th Street. These neighborhoods will see increased traffic since many streets will have been dead - ends before the development — most notably, 139th Street as it exits to TH 61 to the west. 139th Street provides the most direct access to TH 61 from the north half of the development. While adjacent neighborhoods will experience additional traffic as a result of this development, it is also true that the new street network will allow traffic from adjacent neighborhoods to filter through to get to and from TH 61. So the new development may be a benefit as well as a hindrance. 38 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis MITIGATION PLAN 1/31/2017 The definition of the word "mitigation" is "the action of reducing the severity, seriousness, or painfulness of something." The purpose of the traffic impact analysis is to identify traffic operations and performance along roadway systems and immediate area impacts associated with a proposed development. In the Twin Cities metro area, that means bringing the roadway and intersection operations to LOS-D or better. In this case, background and development traffic changes from 2022 No -Build to 2022 Build conditions may not require significant changes to bring levels of service conditions to LOS-D or better. Therefore, the Mitigation Plan does not include recommendations that may merely improve conditions from LOS-B to LOS-A, or LOS-C to LOS-B. These would be "improvements" to a system that would be already operating acceptably. If the agency is recommending "improvements" to the system, the oneness should not be solely the responsibility of the development, as the facility may be operating acceptably even after the development is in place. Further, if there are safety issues that are discovered, it is the intent of the mitigation plan to identify those issues and to recommend strategies and measures to increase safety. The failing levels of service recorded during the peak hours are primarily due to the lack of available capacity along TH 61 and the use of the existing MnDOT signal timings, rather than the traffic generated by the Adelaide Landing development. The two-lane roadway facility along TH 61, while adequate in the near term (i.e., through 2022), is not adequate to handle projected traffic volumes in the long term (i.e., by year 2040 and beyond). To test this, Westwood modeled the performance of the 2040 study area when TH 61 is widened to four lanes (two lanes in each direction) and keeping the existing turn bay lengths. Levels of service improve markedly, with each intersection operating at LOS-D or better (see Table 11). It is noted, however, that the unsignalized intersections of 134t" and 1371" Streets at TH 61 still record unacceptable levels of service for the westbound left turns. This is due to the heavy peak hour traffic along TH 61 that would allow marginal gaps in the traffic stream. Nevertheless, the overall intersection operations of TH 61 at 1301" Street and at 140t" Street show acceptable levels of service in 2040 under a four -lane scenario and with existing MnDOT signal timings. These levels so service can be improved further by updating and optimizing the signal timings to keep up with the increased traffic demand along TH 61. The trip generation of the development itself is dispersed among six access points into and out of the site. Therefore, traffic impact is dissipated throughout these access points and 39 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 not congregated to one or two local street intersections. As a result, the development's traffic impacts are minimized, and can be accommodated by the existing street geometrics and traffic control. No additional turn lanes are required along 130th Street, 137th Street, 140th Street or along TH 61. Signalization does not appear to be warranted at either 134th & TH 61 or 137th Street & TH 61. Internally, there is one main north -south development street which will function as the neighborhood collector. Its curvilinear alignment will serve to passively control speed through the neighborhood. Three-way stop control at T-intersections with other local streets should be avoided. Because no operational issues were recorded, stop signs are recommended for southbound approaches of the development access streets at 1301h Street. The recommended street geometry is shown on Figure 9. However, the City is proposing to upgrade 130th Street to Collector Standards that will include turn lanes at development intersections. (Note: These geometrics are in concept design currently, and are being finalized by others.) While MnDOT forces monitor and adjust signal timings, it would seem likely that the increasing traffic volumes along TH 61 would prompt MnDOT to review the existing signal operation. It, of course, is MnDOT's prerogative whether or not to adjust these timings. If they do, it is likely that traffic operations will improve along this corridor. MITIGATION STRATEGIES Existing Condition ➢ No intersection operates below LOS-D, therefore no mitigation is recommended. ➢ No traffic safety issues are apparent, therefore no safety mitigation is recommended. 2022 No -Build Condition ➢ No intersection operates below LOS-D; however, both TH 61 & 130th Street and TH 61 & 1401h Street experience excessive delay in the eastbound direction and excessive queuing in the southbound left direction during the p.m. peak hour. These can be mitigated by geometric and signal timing improvements ➢ No traffic safety issues are apparent, although increased delay and queuing may cause driver frustration; no safety mitigation is recommended. 40 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 Table 11: 2040 Build Level of Service & Critical Queue Lengths - 4 lanes on TH 61 A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. (ft.) A.M. P.M. TH 61 & 140th Street N 14.7 32.6 A C EB Left 62.9 63.9 E E 455 130 229 EBThru 56.6 59.7 E E 455 130 229 EB Right 10.4 8.8 B A 175 55 57 WB Left 62.8 54.5 E D 315 215 134 WBThru 30.6 36.4 C D 315 215 134 WB Right 9.0 23.6 A C 225 119 176 NB Left 16.4 17.4 B B 180 28 60 NBThru 3.6 13.2 A B 1000 46 1 294 NB Right 1.6 4.7 A A 260 11 30 5B Left 15.0 B 250 88 450 513 Thru 13.5 23.5 B C 675 278 919 5B Right 3.2 4.8 A A 240 35 21 140th Street N&Flay Ave 1.2 1.4 A A EB Thru 0.7 1.1 A A 313 n.a n.a. EB Right 0.3 1.3 A A 160 n.a. 7 WB Left 3.5 2.9 A A 220 19 15 WBThru 0.4 0.3 A A 220 19 15 NB Left 7.0 8.5 A A 100 43 46 NB Right 4.8 7.4 A A 100 16 20 TH 61 & 137th Street N 4.4 3.8 A A WB Left 27.8 40.6 D E 240 77 57 WB Right 14.2 15.8 B C 240 77 57 NBThru 1.1 2.6 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. NB Right 0.6 1.4 A A 210 n.a. n.a. 5B Left 6.7 23.5 A C 165 20 64 SB Thru 4.7 3.9 A A 1475 n.a. n.a. TH 618, 134th Street N 1.9 5.3 A A WB Left 18.0 34.2 C D 150 31 11 WB Right 2.7 1.7 A A 150 31 11 NBThru 1.7 7.9 A A 2000 n.a. n.a. NB Right 2.8 7.8 A A 250 n.a. n.a. SB Left 0.4 9.9 A A 250 n.a. 16 SB Thru 1.8 1.3 A A 1645 n.a. n.a. TH 61 & 130th Street N 41.4 26.9 D C EB Left E E 260 71 145 EB Thru EB Right C B 500 130 115 153 215 106 WB Left WBThru WB Right ;23.9 418.8 E E B 250 1215 145 332 1119 64 200 87 79 NB Left C B 235 62 175 NBThru 4.4 21.6 A C 2600 76 318 NB Right 1.3 6.8 A A 250 7 117 56 Left 8.6 36.8 A C 260 41 225 SB Thru 10.2 23.0 B C 183 258 SB Right 3.9 4.7 A A 14 9 130th Street N & Flay Rd 2.5 3.1 A A EB Left 2.0 3.0 A A rn.a. 20 17 EB Thru 0.9 3.0 A A n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.2 1.9 A A n.a. n.a. WB Left 1.0 2.6 A A n.a. n.a. WBThru 1.0 0.6 A A 760 n.a. n.a. WB Right n.a. 0.1 n.a. A n.a. n.a. n.a. NB Left 6.4 6.7 A A 100 52 21 NBThru 5.3 6.9 A A 100 52 21 NB Right 2.2 4.2 A A n.a. 52 21 SBThru n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 250 50 43 SB Right 3.5 3.3 A A 70 50 43 130th Street N & 129FH Drive N 1.2 1.2 A A EB Left 0.7 1.4 A A n.a. 9 n.a. EB Thru 0.3 1 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. EB Right 0.0 0.4 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.4 0.4 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. WB Right Ma. 0.0 n.a. A n.a. n.a. n.a. NB Left 6.1 5.1 A A 150 17 n.a. NB Right n.a. 2.4 n.a. A n.a. 17 n.a. 56 Left 4.1 n.a. A n.a. 488 49 36 5B Right 2.7 2.4 A A 488 49 36 130th Street N & Future East Amess 0.5 0.8 A A EB Left 0.4 0.8 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. EB Thru 0.2 0.8 A A 1430 n.a. n.a. WBThru 0.1 0.3 A A 800 n.a. n.a. WB Right 0.0 0.1 A A n.a. n.a. n.a. 5B Left 4.3 n.a. n.a. A 100 39 42 SB Right 2.3 2.4 A A 100 39 42 (Source: Westwood Professional Services) 41 Westwood 02016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 1► Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Designed. Checked: Drawn: JAR Record Drawing by/date: Legend Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: Proposed p The Excelsior Group, LLC Traffic Study St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 9 Geometry j LANE DESIGNATION 7 AM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME XX SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION PROJECTED YEAR 2040 AADT XXXX VOLUME Date: 12/2/2016 Adelaide Landing Prepared for: Proposed p The Excelsior Group, LLC Traffic Study St. Louis Park, MN I Hugo, MN Figure 9 Geometry Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 2040 No -Build Condition ➢ TH 61 & 140th Street operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour, and TH 61 & 130th Street operates at LOS-D in both the a.m. peak hour. Both intersections are impacted by the lack of available through capacity along the two-lane section of TH 61. o Reconstruction of TH 61 to a four -lane section with turn lanes in this area will improve traffic operation to LOS-C or better at all study area intersections along TH 61. o The eastbound left turn movement of 140t Street at TH 61 operates at LOS-E. By creating a dedicated eastbound left turn lane and installing lead -lag left turn signal timing at that intersection, traffic operation will improve. ➢ The increased delay and operational issues identified will impact driver safety. Therefore, the widening of TH 61 to four lanes with turn lanes is recommended from a safety standpoint. 2022 Build Condition ➢ No intersection operates below LOS-D except TH 61 & 130th Street, which operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour. These can be mitigated by geometric and signal timing improvements (as MnDOT deems necessary). ➢ Increased delay is identified at the westbound left approaches to TH 61 at 137th Street and 134th Street. It is recommended that east legs of the intersections be restriped to create one inbound (eastbound) lane and two outbound (westbound) lanes (e.g., one left turn lane and one right turn lane). ➢ 130th Street east of TH 61 is assumed to be reconstructed to Urban Collector Standards, as identified by the City's CIP. This will include turn lanes at the development intersections. (Details of the design are being established by others.) Turn lane lengths and taper will need to meet City Standards. ➢ From a safety perspective, however, a reduction in speed limit to 40 mph is recommended for both directions along 130th Street from TH 61 to the east property line of the Adelaide Landing development. 2040 Build Condition ➢ TH 61 & 1401h Street operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour, and TH 61 & 13011 Street operates at LOS-E in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Both intersections are impacted by the lack of available through capacity along the two-lane section of TH 61. o Reconstruction of TH 61 to a four -lane section with turn lanes in this area will improve traffic operation to LOS-C or better at all study area intersections along TH 61. 43 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 o The eastbound left turn movement of 140th Street at TH 61 operates at LOS-F in the unmitigated scenario. By creating a dedicated eastbound left turn lane and installing lead -lag left turn signal timing at that intersection, traffic operation will improve. o Because so much signal timing must be allotted to the north -south movements on TH 61, the side street and turn movement timings fail at 130th Street. The four -lane improvements along TH 61 would improve signal operation and overall intersection performance along the corridor. o The westbound left turn movements at TH 61 & 134th and at 137th Streets operates at LOS-F in the p.m. peak hour. This is primarily due to the heavy northbound traffic flow and the inability for side street traffic to find adequate gaps in the traffic to complete their left turns. This may be mitigated by restricting left turns in the p.m. peak hour as a safety and operation measure. ➢ The increased delay and operational issues identified will impact driver safety. Therefore, the widening of TH 61 to four lanes with turn lanes is recommended from a safety standpoint. ➢ 1301h Street east of TH 61 is assumed to be reconstructed to Urban Collector Standards, as identified by the City's CIP. This will include turn lanes at the development intersections. (Details of the design are being established by others.) o Westwood has prepared a Turn Lane Design Checklists per MnDOT and the Minnesota Local Road Research Board for each arterial/collector intersection to define turn lane and transition length (See Appendix). ➢ From a safety perspective, however, a reduction in speed limit to 40 mph is recommended for both directions along 130th Street from TH 61 to the east property line of the Adelaide Landing development. There are no definitive plans found on the Mn/DOT website, the Washington County website or the Met Council's Strategic Transportation Plan other than that listed in the report. It is apparent that TH 61 will be widened at some point, but no project details or timing can be found. 44 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development 1/31/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis APPENDIX Crash Analysis Turn Lane Design Checklist III. Synch ro/SimTraffic Performance and Queuing Output 45 Westwood Terre de L'Eau Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Coilislon Mogrom killtM90°f] ii{i•v-^Y" JY if "+�4sik'f�v i-� LOCATION ID: T14 (at i 3ot— 5:&,4_Vr N—CE 1- d COUNTY: WAS 1d 1 l�I f'.i0 At CITY: 1+u C" O PERIOD 1 I— l TO 4 a.e t i PREPARED BY: 1 � U 1 I %VON . ti w z m � u 4' a 1L�1b�l`3L1`1 1.-�-S �y m U 1 U V q .�, V rJ OD goo!-' Sr. a to m Street Namebpi r COLLISION SYMBOLS CONDITION CODES 4IF— VEHICLE PATH e'04- REAR -END COLLISION PAVEMENT CONDITION; a-H BACKING VEHICLE J0114 HEAD-ON COLLISION D -DRY W.WET I -ICY NON-INVOLVED VEH. SIDE SWIPE WEATHER CONDITION: �— PEDESTRIAN PATH 4rV- OUT OF CONTROL C=CLEAR R=RAIN F=FOG S=SNOW G FIXED OBJECT is tr OVERTURNED VEHICLE LIGHT CONDITION: ® PARKED VEHICLE -*Ii LEFT TURN COLLISION L.DAYLIGHT N.NIGHT (DARK) Q PERSONAL INJURY RIGHT ANGLE COLLISION TIME OF DAY (MILITARY) FATALITY CRASH SUMMARY PROP, DMG ONLY INJURY FATAL TOTAL DAYTIME 4 NIGHTTIME 05 TOTAL HE_"CLEGPA'EH Terre de L'Eau Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis lolllslon Diagram Wtnrasoon fib. :�ra3ri" :' rrm�J m'ces !cr LOCATION ID: TM} e.1 -ST2EF7- -WI &-n' COUNTY: �JJ S }11 /S 4 TDB.) CITY: PERIOD 1-1 - i t _ TO q�?� PREPARED BY: i � Q d) u, ckn 61) -D IL E z isys-r. 0. -6 m Street Name CRASH SUMMARY PROP. DMG ONLY INJURY FATAL TOTAL DAYTIME NIGHTTIME NIGHTTIME TOTAL / Z 3 HE COLLISION SYMBOLS CONDITION CODES F VEHICLE PATH �� + REAR -END COLLISION PAVEMENT CONDITION: BACKING VEHICLE �' HEAD-ON COLLISION D -DRY W-WET LICY �- NON-INVOLVED VEH. e"-� SIDE SWIPE WEATHER CONDITION: � PEDESTRIAN PATH �- OUT OF CONTROL C=CLEAR R=RAIN F=FOG S=SNOW O FIXED OBJECT �� OVERTURNED VEHICLE LIGHT CONDITION: ® PARKED VEHICLE �� LEFT TURN COLLISION L=DAYLIGHT NeNIGHT (DARK) � PERSONAL INJURY RIGHT ANGLE COLLISION TIME OF DAY (MILITARY) FATALITY C�CLED PPPFA Terre de L'Eau Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis LOCATION ID: i H 61 ICA u tM STQfC'I W09, W COUNTY: �4�lA�HIn1".T CITY: A -)eyo PERIOD t' 1 ' I TO PREPARED BY: AA 61% 1 V u � u Ck a A N V 1 y li r !� .r N ' tilt' p—G,D l 14 -c 13+ro (n) M - V t+ u 1 IV V z I 1 N r zr 14 O+_`' ST. 0j . _ ? %J 16 .. m Street Name COLLISION SYMBOLS CONDITION CODES VEHICLE PATH '*K- REAR -END COLLISION PAVEMENT CONDITION: �H BACKING VEHICLE -a►G- HEAD-ON COLLISION D - DRY W-WET I -ICY S— NON-INVOLVED VEH. I SIDE SWIPE WEATHER CONDITION: PEDESTRIAN PATH QV% OUT OF CONTROL C=CLEAR R=RAIN F=FOG S=SNOW G FIXED OBJECT 16 Jr.- OVERTURNED VEHICLE LIGHT CONDITION: PARKED VEHICLE _*IC LEFT TURN COLLISION L�DAYLIGHT N-NIGHT (DARK) PERSONAL INJURY RIGHT ANGLE COLLISION TIME OF DAY (MILITARY) FATALITY CRASH SUMMARY - PROP. DMGONLY INJURY FATAL TOTAL DAYTIME 1 O NIGHTTIME % 1 3 TOTAL I?- e Z 1, REG�GLEG PAWER 19 R'%V Terre de L'Eau Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis V,n+aso�� OnP or +'.tnr it rRPor •ar lcn LOCATION ID: i� a 4�" Sr.Sal Ft -AY AVIE. N . COUNTY: OVA SW 1 N6TOw5 CITY. u'• ]i 4 PERIOD Oi l + it TO 9 i� 16 PREPARED BY: >I 'M "or Ih zm Z �Ufh Sm. r l 4 m Street Name u CRASH SUMMARY PROP. DMG ONLY INJURY FATAL TOTAL DAYTIME NIGHTTIME _ TOTAL I 1 COLLISION SYMBOLS CONDITION CODES � VEHICLE PATH �- REAR END COLLISION PAVEMENT CONDITION: �� BACKING VEHICLE P� HEAD-ON COLLISION D -DRY W�WET I»ICY '�- NON-INVOLVED VEH �� SIDE SWIPE WEATHER CONDITION: do PEDESTRIAN PATH �� OUT OF CONTROL C=CLEAR R=RAIN F=FOG S=SNOW O FIXED OBJECT �- OVERTURNED VEHICLE LIGHT CONDITION: ® PARKED VEHICLE �I� LEFT TURN COLLISION L=DAYLIGHT N=NIGHT (DARK) PERSONAL INJURY � RIGHT ANGLE COLLISION TIME OF DAY (MILITARY) � FAFATALITY'- f&CLEG P0.'Efl Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1/31/2017 ColliSira, n l!;ngram M lnn sa!a papnrtmnl at rr�spnrtae 1c LOCATION ID: COUNTY: CITY: PERIOD TO PREPARED BY; Math E Z m Street Name COLLISIONCOLLISIONSYSYMBOLSGt7NDITIUht CC7L�E PROP. DMG ONLY INJURY FATAL TOTAL DAYTIME NIGHTTIME TOTAL 5 �' VEHICLE PATH �� REAR END COLLISION PAVEMENT CONDITION �0 SACKING VEHICLE HEAD-ON COLLISIONCOLLISIONN D , bRY W-WET I -ICY '4 NON-INVOLVED VEH, �� SIDE SWIPE WEATHER CONDITION: � PEDESTRIAN PATH " OUT OF CONTROL C=CLE&R R=RAIN F=FQ� $=SNC]W 0 FIXEE7OB.lECT PARKED VEHICLE OVERTURNED VEHICLE LEFT TURN COLLISION LIGHT CONDITION' PERSONAL INJURY RIGHT ANGL£ COLLISION N-NIGHT [DARI{) � FATALITY TIME REGwCLEC PAPER 47 Westwood Adelaide Landing Residential Development Traffic Impact Analysis Technical Appendix II — MnDOT LRRB Turn Lane Design Checklist 1/31/2017 Westwood TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 - DATA GATHERING - Location State Roadway: r ` ?' Intersection: W,_5 F I �( Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S /(5/ W ❑ Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Vehicle Speed Choose one. Shown in order of preference. B-2 El Design Speed: 140 mph 5��1��, ti� -� !,A - Page ❑ 851" Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Forecast Traffic Choose one. Shown in order of preference. $ tw Volumes 1&Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central !,( F Page $_3 Office Planning Staff) 2Cr7- 'I Y� df ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to - estimate 20 year forecast volumes) E ❑ 20-Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found p at the followingwebsite under County Reference Data: tY http://wvvw.dot state mP,us/stateaid/sa_csah.html Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the f 4 number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes i Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: 5ooO vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: -7y3 vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: I % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page a-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑Downgrade Page s_5 Grade of approach: _ % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page a-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes NQ No Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve ). No Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page B-6 lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type Page 8-8 LkUrban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway `Conventional L Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length ',Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Pale ,) Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Deceleration Length Page 8-11 Storage Length Page 8-12 Turn Lane Demand Determine Taper Page 8-17 Full Turn Lane Length (before adjustments) TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. • Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway • Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Unsignalized Intersections Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Taper based on Facility Type ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) ,JiC Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length T ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Page B-21 Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the difference in deceleration to the right. Page 8-19 _ .W ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference + in length to the right. Page 8-20 k Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page 8-22 ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? + l - Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page 3-23 & B-24 Total Adjustinents Deceleration Distance 14 Q feet Storage Distance feet I _ __ Turn Lane Demand = E 0 feet Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) feet Adjusted Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (with adjustments) 4 ft I _. feet Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines f Location I I Vehicle Speed Page B-2 Forecast Traffic Volumes P Page B-> I Heavy Commercial Page B-5 Grade Page B-5 Seasonal Variations Page B-4 Roadway Geometry and Corridor Characteristics Page B-8 Determine Facility Type Page B-8 Intersection Control Page B-9 TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 — DATA GATHERING-v State Roadway: / �? Intersection: 14 S+ � fiiw Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S // W ❑ Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Choose one. Shown in order of preference. ❑ Design Speed: 3 mph A 5,5 & wt, ❑ 85th Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Choose one. Shown in order of preference. "'l Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central Office Planning Staff) �„� 4+- ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to I L estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20-Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: http://www dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/sa_csah,htm) '04 Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the ' number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: �S- 00 vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: c f -Z vehicles per day sir Percent Heavy Vehicle: / % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes ). No Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve `E-No Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) 0,. Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 - DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: btiW__rJ,�=ft'1f-u_`d.�_�i�l Urban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway AConventional ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length �KUnsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Deceleration Distance Length 0 Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Page B-11 a Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways feet Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Storage Length ! Unsignalized Intersections Storage Page B-12 Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial Distance %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. 14�> ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of feet Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Turn Lane Demand Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance 1 0� feet STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper Taper Length Page 8-1 7 ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) [Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) feet Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Full Width Turn Lane Length (before Length (no adjustments) adjustments) ^a feet ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Adjusted Taper Length Page B-21 feet Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the + Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the difference in deceleration to the right. Page 8-19 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference + in length to the right. Page B-20 Full Width Turn Lane Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. Length The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage (with adjustments) Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page B-22 _ ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? �� feet Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length. i Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page 8-23 d 8-241 orai Adjustments + ! - ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 — DATA GATHERING Location ��,rr ♦ . I State Roadway: _ -Ft Intersection: �. -. ,)N-Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N 1 S. E� W � ❑ Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Vehicle Speed Choose one. Shown in order of preference. r � le. -Page B-7 �• Design Speed: /�1 � mph �'���''�"�- /� '`'�� v P�'"¢ �° ❑ 85ffi Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Forecast Traffic Choose one. Shown in order of preference. Ar Volumes k Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central, Page B-3 Office Planning Staff)-2.2Z ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) I L ❑ 20-Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: http://wwvv,dot•state.mn.us/stateaid/sa_csah.htmi Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the j number of lanes for each movement. J Daily Volumes Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Paae B-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade El Downgrade Page B-5 Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page B-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes '�<No Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve )i0o Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page B-S lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) XYes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type, r� ,� s E� .,r� de Page B-s KUrban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway 'jLConventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle lengthUnsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Page B-9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Length . Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Page B-11 0 Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways — Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Storage Length Unsignalized Intersections Page 8-12 Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. 8I ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B 6 on Page B-14 using Sum of 0 Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) Page B r ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) 'Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Length (before adjustments) i ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Page 8-21 Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the 1 " Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the difference in deceleration to the right. page 9-19 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference in length to the right. Page 8-20 Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page B-22 ,... ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? + i Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page 3-23 & 8-24 1, ft Deceleration Distance p A i.) feet Storage Distance feet Turn Lane Demand j _ �/0 feet Taper Length N t.) feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) r) feet Adjusted Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (with adjustments) feet Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines a TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) �a STEP 1 — DATA GATHERING Location State Roadway: Intersection: ))Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / W 0 Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Vehicle Speed Choose one. Shown in order of preference. Page 8-2 )Q- Design Speed:_ mph k-.,;u#%e, ❑ 85th Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: _ mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Forecast Traffic Choose one. Shown in order of preference. Volumes Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central Page s-3 U ice Planning Staff) ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20-Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: httpJ1AAAmv dot. state, mn.us stateaidisa_csah.h[ml Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes Li J 11. r ,wZ Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: _ vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page 3-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Page B-5 Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page a-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes NO Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ElYes, on horizontal curve V No Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page a-s lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) XYes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type = I, ;;� Urban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway C� Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Page B-9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 - CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Deceleration Distance Length Table B-1 for low speed (20 - 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Page 3-1 f . Table B-2 for high speed (45 - 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways 4(oc3 feet Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Storage Length Unsignalized Intersections Storage Page 8-i2 Left Turn Lane - see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial Distance %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane - assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 - Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. L feet ❑ Method 2 - Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations fsee_Flage 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Turn Lane Demand Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance feet STEP 4 - CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper Taper Length ElUnconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) Page e-, ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) ❑ Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) ? feet Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Full Width Turn Lane Length (before Length (no adjustments) adjustments) r feet c ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Adjusted Taper Length Page B-2-f feet Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the + Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the difference in deceleration to the right. page 3• f9 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, , increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference in length to the right. page 3-20 — Full Width Turn Lane Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. Length The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage (with adjustments) Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page 3-22 ft 4 Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? + / feet Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane length and adjust accordingly. page 8-2 3 t s-24 I°atai Adjustments + l - ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Location Vehicle Speed Page 8-2 Forecast Traffic Volumes Page B-3 TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 — DATA GATHERING i _- State Roadway: Intersection: I_Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S � W + J Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Choose one. Shown in order of preference. i '1!5(Pesign Speed: q0 mph ❑ 85'h Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Choose one. Shown in order of preference. X Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central Office Planning Staff) 7,02Z ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20 -Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: http:/hwww dot state.mn us/stateaid/sa_csah,html Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes:D vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page $-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Page 8-5 Grade of approach: 9_% (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page B-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes X No Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve A No Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page B -o lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) fl' Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type _: J.� __��,� �' -- a `� , ,_= Page B -a LXUrban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Page 8-.9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines J 1 I. Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes:D vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page $-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Page 8-5 Grade of approach: 9_% (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page B-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes X No Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve A No Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page B -o lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) fl' Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type _: J.� __��,� �' -- a `� , ,_= Page B -a LXUrban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Page 8-.9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Deceleration Distance Length 0 Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways(. feet Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. i Storage Length Unsignalized Intersections Storage i Page 5-12 Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial Distance or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ElSynchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway= 100 feet (1:8 taper) ❑ Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Length (before adjustments) ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Page B-21 Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the + difference in deceleration to the right. Page 8-19 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, , increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference + in length to the right. Page a-20 ft Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page B-22 ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? * f - Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page B-23 <? 8-24 +J ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines c5 D feet Turn Lane Demand = '.i10 feet Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) I j feet i Adjusted Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (with adjustments) O feet TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE I OF 2) STEP 1 - DATA GATHERING — Location State Roadway: Intersection: Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W ❑ Right Turn Lane Design for Approach S d Choose one. Shown in order of preference. N / S / E / W Vehicle pee Page 3-2 lX Design Speed: !�O- mph 14 ❑ 85th Percentile Speed: mph Forecast Traffic Volumes Page 3-3 Heavy Commercial Page 8-5 Grade Page 3-5 Seasonal Variations Page 3-4 Roadway Geometry and Corridor Characteristics Page 3-6 Determine Facility Type Page 3-3 ❑ Statewide Average Speed: Choose one. Shown in order of preference. mnh (naae B-2. Fiaure B-1) ��,Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central ce Planning Staff) , 4 0 ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20 -Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: http'//wNvv dot.state,mn.usi'stateaid/sa_ sah.htmI Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes ff t Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: y a'' vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Percent Heavy Vehicle: 1 % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Grade of approach:. % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes XNo Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve X No Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) U Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 - DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: PS Urban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway *'< Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length 'A Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Paye 3-9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines I Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: y a'' vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Percent Heavy Vehicle: 1 % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Grade of approach:. % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes XNo Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve X No Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) U Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 - DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: PS Urban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway *'< Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length 'A Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Paye 3-9 Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Length a Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Page B- 11 0 Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Storage Length Unsignalized Intersections Page 3-1 a Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations (see Pne 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper Page 3-f , ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) ❑ Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Length (before adjustments) ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Pane 3-21 Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the + ` difference in deceleration to the right. Page 3- 79 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference " in length to the right. Page 3-20 ft Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page 3-22 ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? + / - Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page s-2,' t 3-24 Total Adjtistment-s + l - ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Deceleration Distance 146 feet Storage Distance feet Turn Lane Demand /Weet Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) / rb feet Adjusted Taper Length Full Width Turn Lane Length (with adjustments) feet TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 — DATA GATHERING Location State Roadway: 1411)+1 <�� Intersection: 4 i ❑ Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S W Vehicle Speed Choose one. Shown in order of preference. L Page B -z 11 Design Speed: ii) _ mph ��i5 �,w ilk 6� e- y � .� , • "t,d ❑ 85th Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed: mph (page B-2, Figure B-1) Forecast Traffic Choose one. Shown in order of preference. Volumes Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central e �r Page B-3 Office Planning Staff) ZO-2 ? ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20 -Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found at the following website under County Reference Data: http l/www.dot,state,m n. us/stateaid/sa_csah,htmI Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the 1 number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes I Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes. vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: 1 _ vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: _% (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page B-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑Downgrade Page B-5 Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an Page B-4 increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes �I_No Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve ❑ No Characteristics Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn Page B-6 lane design to better accommodate the constrained conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Typera_�vv+r qqt suite_mn�usd�c Page B -s �`9,Urban Cl Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway 'f,;KConventional Intersection Control El Signalized: sec cycle length Unsignalized Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Deceleration Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. Length 0 Table B-1 for low speed (20 — 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway Page 8-11 0 Table B-2 for high speed (45 — 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Storage Length Unsignalized Intersections Page B-12 Left Turn Lane — see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane — assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 — Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13. ❑ Method 2 — Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Turn Lane Demand Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 — CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Determine Taper based on Facility Type Taper Page B-17 ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) `�Gonstrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Full Turn Lane Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Length (before adjustments) ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Page B-21 Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the + difference in deceleration to the right. Page B-19 ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference + in length to the right. Page B-20 ft Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page 8-22 ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? + / Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page B-23 & B-24 +f - ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Deceleration Distance I � 5 feet Storage Distance a i I 0 feet Turn Lane Demand M I feet Taper Length feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) 4 , feet Adjusted Taper Length (Q Q feet Full Width Turn Lane Length (with adjustments) 4 e feet Location Vehicle Speed Page 8-2 Forecast Traffic Volumes TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 1 - DATA GATHERING State Roadway: J li Intersection: 1�e s4 / 4a., ❑ Left Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S / E / W Right Turn Lane Design for Approach: N / S 1 W Choose one. Shown in order of preference. kDesign Speed: ZfO mph r _�'� k �a ❑ 85th Percentile Speed: mph ❑ Statewide Average Speed_: Choose one. Shown in order of oreferenae. mph (Page B-2, Figure B-1) Design Year Volumes (provided by District/Central Office Planning Staff) 2fl I v ❑ Historic Volumes (existing volumes extrapolated to estimate 20 year forecast volumes) ❑ 20 -Year Multiplier (documented by State Aid and found i at the following website under County Reference Data: 9 http:!iwx,1v tdot.state.mn us/stateaid/sa_csah.html Turning Volumes: see graphic at right, also note the number of lanes for each movement. Daily Volumes I L Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: ("1-1;C--1*5 vehicles per day do 279 I I be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Page B-5 Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) 37�--. Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an 9r i3 I Major Street Daily Traffic Volumes: vehicles per day Minor Street Daily Traffic Volumes: ("1-1;C--1*5 vehicles per day Heavy Commercial Percent Heavy Vehicle: % (If percentage of heavy commercial is high special consideration should Page 8-5 be taken in Step 4 for deceleration and storage length of turn lane) Grade ❑ Upgrade ❑ Downgrade Page B-5 Grade of approach: % (If greater than 3%, apply deceleration adjustment in Step 4) Seasonal Is there a large seasonal variation within the corridor (recreational routes, primary farm to market routes, etc)? If Variations yes, consider the variation and potential increase in traffic volumes during peak periods. Is it enough of an increase to change the design? ❑ Yes, adjust traffic volumes Wo Roadway Is the intersection located on a horizontal curve? If yes, adjust taper in Step 4. (See Page B-17 and Table B-8) Geometry and Corridor ❑ Yes, on horizontal curve *c No Characteristics ?age 8-6 Are there adjacent intersections that may influence the turn lane design? If yes, consider adjustments to the turn the conditions. (See Pages B-23 and 24) lane design to better accommodate constrained 0 Yes, constrained location ❑ No STEP 2 — DETERMINE FACILITY TYPE Determine Rural vs. Urban (based on Access Management Category Assignments: Facility Type Page 8-3 Urban ❑ Rural Expressway vs. Conventional (determined by Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology) ❑ Expressway "Conventional Intersection ❑ Signalized: sec cycle length Unsignalized ❑ Future Signal? (see Figure B-3) Control Page B -y Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Deceleration Length Page B-1 I Storage Length Page 3-12 Turn Lane Demand i—. i Determine Taper Page 3-17 e 0 Full Turn Lane Length (before adjustments) TURN LANE DESIGN CHECKLIST (PAGE 1 OF 2) STEP 3 - CALCULATE TURN LANE DEMAND Based on speed and facility type determine deceleration length for turn lane. • Table B-1 for low speed (20 - 50 mph) Urban Conventional Roadway • Table B-2 for high speed (45 - 75 mph) Rural and Urban Roadways Interpolation between values in the tables may be necessary based on speed data. Unsignalized Intersections Left Turn Lane - see Table B-3, based on Left -Turning Volume and Heavy Commercial %, or equation on Page B-12. Right Turn Lane - assumed to be 0 feet since in virtually all cases these vehicles would have the right-of-way entering the intersection and would incur no delay Signalized Intersections ❑ Synchro Output Available: 95th percentile queue length. ❑ Method 1 - Basic Equation: equation on Page B-13_ ❑ Method 2 - Look Up Tables: Tables B-4 through B-6 on Page B-14 using Sum of Critical Movement Calculations (see Page 4 of checklist) Add the Deceleration Distance and the Storage Distance STEP 4 - CALCULATE TURN LANE DESIGN Determine Taper based on Facility Type ❑ Unconstrained Conventional/Expressway = 180 feet (1:15 taper) ❑ Constrained Expressway = 100 feet (1:8 taper) ❑ Constrained Conventional = 60 feet (1:5 taper) Take the Turn Lane Demand minus Taper Length Deceleration Distance r feet Storage Distance feet Turn Lane Demand feet Taper Length Full Width Turn Lane Length (no adjustments) Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines feet ADJUSTMENTS AND FINAL TURN LANE DESIGN Adjust Taper If the intersection is located on a horizontal curve, use a 1:8 taper (100 feet) Adjusted Taper Length Page 3-2' feet Adjust Full turn If grade is greater than 3% adjust based on Table B-9 (multiply the + / Lane Length Deceleration Distance by adjustment in table and document the difference in deceleration to the right. Pays .3-19, ft If heavy commercial is greater than averages shown in Table B-10, increase Deceleration Distance by 30% and document the difference + in length to the right. Page 3-20 ft Full Width Turn Lane Are there more than 300 vehicles per hour? May consider dual lefts. Length The storage length required would be half of the calculated Storage (with adjustments) Distance. Document the difference in distance to the right. Page 3-22 ft Are there constraints with the adjacent intersections or driveways? feet Does the through lane queue extend further than the turn lane length? + / - Document a review of the potential impact to the desired turn lane ft length and adjust accordingly. Page 3-23 &� .3-2¢ Torai Adjustments + / - ft Development of Turn Lane Design Guidelines Adelaide Landing Residential Development 1/31/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis Technical Appendix III — Synchro/SimTraffic Output 51 Westwood A WSB — 477 Temperance Street I St. Paul, MN 55101 1 (651) 286-8450 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor Weidt and Members of the Hugo City Council CC: Rachel Juba, City of Hugo From: Tony Havranek, WSB Date: April 13, 2017 Re: Adelaide Landing - Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision for Wetland Replacement City Project No. 17.2 WSB Project No. 03288-04 Westwood Professional Services submitted a wetland replacement application for wetland impacts associated with the development of the Adelaide Landing Housing Project, on behalf of OP5 Adelaide, LLC on February 17, 2017. The purpose of this memo is to provide information on the proposed impacts, the applicant's adherence to MN Wetland Conservation Act requirements, information on the proposed replacement, and recommendations. The applicant is proposing to impact two separate wetlands in seven separate sites throughout the project area, totaling 1.32 acres. The impacted wetlands are of relatively low quality as a functional assessment shows that they are composed of invasive reed canary grass and offer little wildlife habitat, minimal aesthetics, and low vegetative diversity. A review of the application and supporting documents show that the applicant has adhered to the MN Wetland Conservation Act requirements for avoiding, minimizing, and replacing wetland impacts. The applicant is proposing to replace wetland impacts within the Adelaide Landing Housing Development, with wetland credits from an approved bank in Stearns County at a ratio of 2:1, as there are no longer credits available for purchase in Washington County. The replacement credits will result in an overall gain in function and public value. Based on this review, we recommend approval of the proposed replacement of wetland impacts within the Adelaide Landing Housing Development as specified in the application submitted by Westwood Professional Services on February 17, 2017. Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com KA03288-150\Admin\Permits\17.2 Adelaide Landing\MEMO_HugoCityCouncil_AdelaideWetland Replacement_041317.docx Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit (LOU) Address City of Hugo Steve Duff) 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. N., Hugo, MN 55038 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Deb Ridgeway, OP5 Project Name: Adelaide Landing Date of Application February 17, 2017, Application Number Adelaide, LLC. PIN# 163-2903121240001,163- Complete on March 8, 17.2 Kelly Kunst, 2903121320005,163- 2017. NOA issued on 3288-150 Westwood 2903121310001,163- March 25, 2017. 3288-04 Professional Services 2903121340001, 163-2903121430001, and 163- 2903121440003 ® Attach site locator map. Type of Decision: ❑ Wetland Boundary or Type ® No -Loss ❑ Exemption ® Sequencing ® Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation (if any): ❑ Approve ❑ Approve with conditions ❑ Deny Summary (or attach): 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION Date of Decision: April 18, 2017 ❑ Approved ® Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary): BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 1 of 4 An application for wetland replacement, sequencing flexibility, and a no -loss was received from Kelly Kunst, Westwood Professional Services, on February 23, 2017. The LGU requested additional information to make the application complete, which was provided by the applicant on March 8, 2017. subsequent Notice of Application was issued on March 25, 2017. I_1 A pre -application TEP meeting was held on October 26, 2016 to discuss the site design, potential impacts, and impact mitigation. A wetland replacement plan application was submitted in December 2016, but was later rescinded due to changes in street layouts that altered impact quantities. The Adelaide Landing project is a 220 acre residential development which will result in the construction of 230 single family lots and 83 detached villas over the course of five (5) phases, which is proposed to begin this year. Previous wetland delineations show that five (5) wetlands occupy almost 57 acres or 25% of the site. The construction of residential roads, an ADA compliant trail, two (2) water crossings, and housing sites result in seven (7) separate impacts totaling 1.32 acres. Avoidance The applicant provided one alternative that would avoid all wetland impacts on the site. This alternative was the no build alternative. This alternative was rejected as it would not fulfill the basic purpose of the project nor fulfill the need defined in the City of Hugo's Comprehensive Plan to provide suitable housing options for an increasing City of Hugo population. Minimization The applicant has worked to minimize impacts to on-site wetlands through adjusting lot configuration, road locations, and increasing slopes. Through this process the applicant has minimized wetland impacts to 2% of the nearly 57 acres of wetland that occupies the site. Impact 1 was minimized by increasing side slopes from 3:1 to 2.5:1, and decreasing road and shoulder widths. Impact 2 is necessary to accommodate an ADA compliant trail, the road, sidewalk, and road shoulder. Earlier designs did not have the road in this location, but City Ordinance required the roadway be shifted south. This pushed the roadway south and west, resulting in impact 2. Impact 3 occurs across a thin, linear portion of wetland 2 that forms an east -west connection from wetland 2 to an adjacent parcel. 137th Street South crosses hereto provide access to the southern portion of the development. Without the crossing, a long cul de sac would exist north of this crossing, which may increase travel times for emergency personnel to access the southern portion of the site. Adjacent housing sites would be elevated 8-10 feet above the wetland on three sides, posing a potential safety issue and reducing the functionality of the wetland in this site. To maintain hydrology, a 15" culvert will be installed in this location. Impacts 4, 5, and 6 result from the extension of 137th Street South to provide safe egress and north to south through the development. The applicant minimized impacts by taking advantage of a existing field road crossing, minimizing road width, maximizing road slopes, and shifting the road alignment. This was done in response to TEP comments at the pre -application meeting. The changes resulted in a 8,000 sq. ft. reduction in wetland impacts. Additional minimization includes the elimination of 425 sq. ft. of impact to wetland 2 in the eastern portion of the site due to the installation of a stormsewer pipe. The pipe inlet was shifted to completely avoid wetland impacts. In addition, wetland buffers will be maintained throughout the site to protect remaining wetland acreage. See attached for Special Considerations, Sequencing Flexibility, Replacement, No -loss and Conditions BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account # Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal 1542 7 Stearns (sq. ft. or nearest .01 acre) behalf of the City of Hugo Signature 2.64 acres Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ® Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting ofwetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name: Title: Tony Havranek Senior Environmental Scientist (WSB & Associates, Inc.), on behalf of the City of Hugo Signature Date: Phone Number and E-mail: April 18, 2017 (612)246-9346, thavranek@wsbeng.com THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant may be responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: ❑ Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send petition and $ fee (if applicable) to: ® Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and $500 filing fee to: Executive Director Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 3 of 4 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Jay Riggs, Washington Conservation District, 455 Hayward Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 55128 jriggsgmnwcd.org ® BWSR TEP member: Jed Chesnut, Board of Water & Soil Resources, 520 Lafayette Road N., St. Paul, MN 55155, jed.chesnutgstate.mn.us ® LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Rachel Juba, City of Hugo, rJuba _,ci.hugo.mmus Steve Duff, City of Hugo, sduff(a ci.hu,go.mn.us; Rachel Leitz, City of Hugo, rleitz&ci.hugo.mn.us ® DNR TEP member: Becky Horton, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 becky.hortonkstate.mn.us Jenifer Sorensen, MN DNR, j enifer. sorensen(& state.mn.us ❑ DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member) ® WD or WMO (if applicable): Nick Tomczik, Rice Creek Watershed District, 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive, Suite 611, Blaine, MN 55449-4539 ntomczikgricecreek.org ® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): Deb Ridgeway, Excelsior Group, deb.ridgewa a,excelsiorllc.com Kelly Kunst, Westwood Professional Services, Kelly.kunst@westwoodps.com ❑ Members of the public who requested notice: Stephanie Hatten, WSB, shattenkwsbeng com Katy Thompson, WSB, kthompsongwsbeng com ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only): Thomas Hingsberger, thomas,j .hingsberger&usace.army.mil ® BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only): Tim Smith, Board of Water and Soil Resources. 520 Lafavette Road N.. St. Paul. MN 55155. tim.i.smithn.state.mn.us 5. MAILING INFORMATION )0- For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.nm.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf ➢ For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.nm.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP contacts.pdf ➢ Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources Div. Ecol. Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: http://files.dnr.state.nm.us/aboutdnr/dnr6regions.pdf ➢ For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see: www.myp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/default.asp?pageid=687 or send to: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO -R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 ➢ For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 6. ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments: ® Site Locator Map ® April 11, 2017 Addendum Memo ® Attachment for Special Considerations, Sequencing Flexibility, Replacement, No -loss and Conditions ® Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes (showing approval of replacement plan) BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 4 of 4 o z 0 © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. .N f Heritage Pkwy`N EmmitlD.r ' �a 'j. YEmpre` ssi�jt/ay Goodvievro Trl �\ will.152nd 15 'Al) °:I fr \.Cj1\ 4.150thStN r W., A 148St 5 t .0- _ t r F -re nc IR z g hrn8 r_7. r , t�> j, 147th.St N , ° 14Srn'St.N Slltif,:a Ll'�c 11'alr l ,.Z T }� ry �flus��rr}a iY I '.+r ,I�� -I �i{_11}}I6 <° CJ r. r 4th :. s+t ,.. i I r y't 137th1S$N St N 137th'_,St ' i d^' 'VV �FFable HIII Pkwy N F' ? 135th St•N+ "i rrs A I - ;p5 I 132ndStN Z �Y _ ry� o, o,130th SYN 130 }I s, > r� tL N o r- < a CU +) sd t'� 2 .+. i I 12 _a ca'l r th SYN 5a 128 - ',\'^ ` F '!r f UI a zr �, C„�, l •' r..'-'-.- r5- F iz , Q c d ;3 I o 25t z 3 m, i N }. 'o ;`�1r 7d " I+ if {+I ,� �o k1\';iit 01 s�r� R �'�e Ptr „ �vFllit uC P,BaldyEagl11 ;° r 3120th St N 1 1i j 1 _I'` > � `:', 1x i'" 6 ra°°fi F0aa f 117th St N Z �r—...'.< I t,'N a I, rr L 2 • CL f1 n I i c fl .. p 1 z .$e vH i j i .� 4 �I, .+}.sL21.'-AI,LB' :, 4Ar h r y I h 9. 1]1 7� \ ' kB T' _i T' d _ Data Source(s): USDA-NRCS (2002), MNDOT Route Segments (2014), Westwood (2016). Adelaide Landing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Westwood N I Site Location & USGS Topography Feet Toll Free (888)937-6150 westwoodps.com O A '000 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXHIBIT 1 Map Document: N:\0008463.00\GIS\PP_Approved WetlandDelineation_Permit Ex2.mxd 12/14/2016 9:34:32 AM KSKunst Imagery (Accessed 2016); Census Bureau (2015); NAI P/Minnesota (2015); Google Maps (2016);ESRI (2010); MNTOPO (2016); USGS NHD Dataset (2013); MnDNR (2008); FEMA (2010); MnDNR, Ducks Unlimited, and St. Mary's University of Minnesota (2015); U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2010); U.S. Geological Survey (2011); Kjolhaug Environmental Services (2015). Westwood Toll Free (888)937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Legend Project Boundary Delineated Wetland Haeiaiae Lanaing Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota N Approved Delineated � Feet A 0 700 Wetland Boundaries EXHIBIT 2 i ♦ `.. • • - -w.5 94/. a h © 2016 Westwood Professional Services Inc. 93 93 5 G f ,2 �2 \ ��� ` ! �V \4� 3S —! 'i'OND 11 90OUTLET EL=929.0 •h�HWL=932.1 I J I I ` WETLAND KES 2 I W AND KES 2 < �' 14 EXIS G FLOODPLAIN / ELE 9 .6(TYP) 4> �' /.. a;;�_ / / ` �P ( W N D KES 2 I o � f/I O / / � / � � 1 � _� / � /�� ` ` \ _�� ��' \ 1 O (� V G 0 / � 9365 � I (� /�✓J Q I � ` � V i 9p / ✓! / I � I \l POND 10 I I I IVNI— OUTLET EL=928.5 I / / // \ A SAN -0- i I I 8� �� i SA I I HWL=930.0 �Ma S / Ft 135TH S C) / ,� / ���, / it 11 \ I 934 9 93 32 r 34' I i —� `� � �� 1g / 3.5 9 I � d _ � O I OUTLET ESL--�9 8 0 \ r }} I h \ I I I I HWL=928.5 l a I l MM // 926 \/ \ I • ' °' I I I / / "" 914 I POND 19 \ OUTLET EL=929.5 HWL= 930.0 oi. ® o, 0 0 0, 11 I O c 3 IJ M Io / — a o 1 W �o.F. N D KES 2 i WE F POND 9 OUTLET EL=927.0 / / HWL=928.7 / / p - �.-^-_) I 0 � \ / � . / / / `' � d rl / gS�$ / g�A o .P. S Av-,^��V C ✓ / / / / / � _ `/ � 1 / / •°'i -®� / / O I � / � / \\ G � y°'M / / \\ .yah / / � �It � \ �pG /� 926 k, 6 \ f f 1 >r JJ 00o a 100, v rnrn POND 18 / / ell/ �� \ I IAkk I OUTLET EL=929.5 / / "C3, 1 � / �-.� / � � 1 - 3 I I I� HWL- 930.0 m MI m V 000, C/) � I / r' a \' POND/WETLAND 22 // Ij r / L HWL=928.5 / ^ i ii s I / WETLAND KES 2 / W TLAND KES 2 / \ / WETLAN KES � � a POND \ \ ` 1 C'L ,ia I d/ D � OU EL=928.5 v o _ �a � , o o � HWL=931.0 \\ ssb� �. l v `� �\ �°� rel �� POND 8 \ 1 OUTLET EL=930.0 / h — \ / a �` HWL=932.2 f/ \ F. \ / -- - 73L Y o � N � \ \ - ♦9 0 r — j` 924 s—--—\\----�92$—{�--� `. — --� �� --- ,Z _--- i �.%------------------------- �-------- �, \ s \ �' 9 \ -WETL ND E 2� ` / _ 92 Z— ,J_ i -� TL N� KES 2 \ \ e \ �Q v 916 �� _ FIL`L'=0.08 AC. r�� �__ A v vv OUCT� EL_928_ . 16 / / FILL=0.11 AC. 00 .%;� / / °'� /� Q / / ---------------I ray I Q�6 '51�01_,' -A Lk- _ I / / I / FII I- DENOTES Adelaide • . direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed sed PROFESSIONAL �' FM II Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under ALRevisiorm Prepared for: DENOTES HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE ENGINunder the laws of the State of Minnesota. 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation CITY COMMENTS AdelaideLLC02/05/17 QW -ked: FDH II O 5 EXISTING CONTOURS X980- - Landln Landing Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive E�-- Do—{- DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER OF— 0* DENOTES Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Tai Free (888) 937-5150 westwoocips.com Francis D. Hagen II, PE Drawn: DWR 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 DENOTES Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 17716 Record Drawing by/date: St. Louis Park, MN 55416 LIMITS x 856.3 Hugo, MN EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION Date License No. DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIO DENOTES Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD `n LD 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION n FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION N r7 N N DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. W0, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO = LOOKOUT R = RAMLER SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT NOTE: THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 11 of 27 0008463GDP03.dwa Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan DENOTES SOIL BORING DENOTES SILT FENCE DENOTES HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE -980— DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS X980- - DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS E�-- Do—{- DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER OF— 0* DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING TREE LINE DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIO DENOTES BIO -ROLL EROSION CHECK DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW E.O.F. ELEVATION ❑ WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PROPOSED WETLAND FILL LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD `n LD 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION n FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION N r7 N N DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. W0, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO = LOOKOUT R = RAMLER SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT NOTE: THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 11 of 27 0008463GDP03.dwa Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Westwood Main (952) 937-5150 Fax (952) 937-5822 westwoodps.com (888) 937-5150 MEMORANDUM Date: April 11, 2017 Re: Adelaide Landing Wetland Replacement Plan Application Response to Comments File 0008463.00 To: Tony Havranek, City of Hugo c/o WSB & Associates Cc: Deb Ridgeway, OP Adelaide, LLC Cory Meyer, Westwood Professional Services From: Kelly Kunst The following information is provided in response to the comments provided in an April 11, 2017 email from Tony Havranek, WSB & Associates; WCA LGU for the city of Hugo. 1. Boardwalk- Can you include language in Appendix B that requests a no -loss for 8420.0415 subp.H as well as A since the installation will more than likely have temporary impacts. Also provide more specifications on the boardwalk. Response: The Applicant is also requesting a no loss under 8420.0415 subp. H for temporary impacts associated with the boardwalk installation. High density construction mats will be utilized for all ingress and egress into wetlands associated with the boardwalk installation, as such, temporary impacts will be limited to the effects to vegetation resulting from the placement of construction mats over a period of time. These temporary impacts will be restored by the removal of the mats within 6 months of the start of the activity which is sufficient to restore pre -project functions as there will be no alteration to elevations, contours, substrate or plant communities associated with this activity. Final boardwalk specifications have yet to be determined; however, the proposed boardwalk is planned to be 8 -feet in width in accordance with City requirements for recreational trails. The Applicant is currently working with the City to potentially allow the width to be reduced to 5 feet for the boardwalk in the wetland. Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering TBPLS Finn No. 10074302 westwoodps.com April 11, 2017 Page 2 The proposed boardwalk will likely be a wood surface with either driven support piers or a system of steel footer plates that sit on the ground surface of the wetland. An example of this latter system is depicted in the photograph in Attachment A. Either support structure will not result in in a loss of wetland under the WCA as it would not alter the wetland's cross-section or hydrological characteristics, obstruct flow patterns, change the wetland boundary, or convert the wetland to non -wetland (MN Rule 8420.0111, Subps. 26 and 32and 8420.0415 A.). Further, the boardwalk supports would not constitute wetland fill under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as they do not have the effects of replacing any portion of a water of the U.S. with dry land or change the bottom elevation of any portion of a water of the U.S. There is a minor change to the language originally included in Attachment B of the application in that the boardwalk deck will not sit higher than 30 inches above the ground surface of the wetland as something higher would require handrails along the entire length of the boardwalk to meet building code safety requirements. The boardwalk deck will likely sit just under 30 inches from the ground surface of the wetland but when including the underlying cross beams and stringers, the separation distance will be less. 2. Please provide some discussion on how the proposed stormwater ponds will not result in drainage of the adjacent wetlands since they are quite deep. Please include a comparison of the NWL for the ponds and the elevation of the wetlands. Response: The normal water levels (NWL) of each pond are set by the outlet elevations, which are shown on the grading plan. The outlet elevations were derived from piezometer readings of the groundwater elevation gathered throughout 2016. See Attachment B which includes a summary of piezometer readings during 2016, a map depicting the piezometer locations, and existing conditions with the wetland boundary and topography. Ponds 12 and 13, adjacent to the north part of Wetland 2 have an outlet elevation of 927.0. The delineated wetland in this area lies between a 927.0 and 928.0 elevation. Ponds 16 and 17 have an outlet elevation of 928.0; the Wetland 2 boundary in proximity to Ponds 16 and 17 ranges between 928.0 and 929.5 elevation. Pond 10 has an outlet elevation of 928.5; Wetland 2 boundary in this location is around 928.0. Ponds 18 and 19 have an outlet elevation of 929.5; the Wetland 2 boundary in this location ranges between 928.0 and 929.0. April 11, 2017 Page 3 Pond 9 has an outlet elevation of 927.0; the Wetland 2 boundary in this location is about 928.0. Pond 8 has an outlet elevation of 930.0; adjacent Wetland 2 is generally at a 930.0 elevation in this location. Ponds 5, 6, and 7 have outlet elevations of 930.0 and 930.5, the adjacent Wetland 2 boundary ranges between 930.0 and 932.0 in this area. Pond 3 has an outlet elevation of 930.0; the Wetland 2 boundary nearest this pond is at a 930.0 elevation. 3. Please provide an updated purchase agreement that shows the correct amount of replacement credit and an extended expiration date. Response: Attachment C includes the revised purchase agreement. 4. Please provide a more specific narrative on what flexibility is being requested based on 8420.0520. In this narrative, please address 8420.0520 Subp. 3.A as well. Response: The applicant is requesting sequencing flexibility for 8420.0520 Subp. LA as a second alternative that avoids all wetland impacts is not feasible in the context of the Project because of the City requirement to extend 137th Street east, then south through the site. With this requirement there is no feasible alternative that entirely avoids wetland impacts. In addition, please consider the following language regarding the basis for sequencing flexibility as incorporated into Attachment C of the application: "The Applicant is requesting sequencing flexibility for the 1.32 acres of impact to Wetlands 2 and 3. Wetland 3, and the edges of Wetland 2 where impacts are proposed have been degraded to a point where the proposed replacement will result in an overall gain in function and public value. Wetland 3 is a Type 1/2, farmed wetland with marginal hydrology. Avoiding Wetland 3 with the Project would further reduce the hydrologic support to the wetland, resulting in further degradation in its ability to function and provide public value in the developed landscape. The impact locations on Wetland 2 occur along disturbed edges which are generally dominated by reed canary grass or on Type % farmed wetland portions of Wetland 2." The following text addresses 8420.0520 Subp.3.A Blanding's Turtle have been documented in the vicinity of the Project. The Project proposer is sensitive to the fact that state -listed (Threatened) Blanding's turtles could potentially be found in the vicinity of the Project area, and is therefore taking actions to avoid impacts to the species during and after Project construction. April 11, 2017 Page 4 The Project proposer has largely designed the project with surmountable curb and gutter, and will use Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. 5524, or similar, where surmountable curb and gutter is specified. Approximately 98% of the wetlands on the site are being completely avoided, with impacts minimized to areas needed primarily for road crossings. Larger and higher quality wetlands that would most likely be used by Blanding's turtles have been avoided. Contractors, and homeowners, working or living within the project area will be provided the DNR's Blanding's turtle flyer so they are aware what the species looks like, and what to do should an animal be encountered. The Project will also be required to adhere to a stringent Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and actively monitored during construction. Construction zones will be cordoned off with silt fence and monitored for turtles by SWPPP and construction staff. Open trenches will be inspected prior to backfilling, and the DNR will be immediately notified of any turtle sitings. Turtles will be moved by hand, out of harm's way, if they are in imminent danger. Turtles not in imminent danger will be left undisturbed. In addition, the project proposer will evaluate use of wildlife - friendly erosion control products to prevent animals from being entangled during construction. With respect to the potential for eagles in the vicinity of the Project, an Eagle Nest Assessment Summary was provided as Appendix C in the EAW prepared for the Project. This summary noted that while bald eagles were observed in the vicinity of the Project, no eagle nests were observed within the boundary of the Project at the time of the survey. In their comments on the EAW, the MN DNR recommended that the Project be surveyed for eagle nests prior to any tree cutting activities. In response the DNR comments, the Project proposer clarified that tree clearing will likely occur with grading in two separate phases. As recommended, the Project proposer will review the previous nest survey prior to each tree removal event to ensure eagles have not moved into the project area since the previous survey. Should an eagle's nest be discovered on the Project area, the Project proposer will notify the DNR as soon as reasonably feasible. Attachment A Boardwalk Support System Adelaide Landing City of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering westwoodps.com 46. Al 4b; lq Attachment B Groundwater Information Adelaide Landing City of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering westwoodps.com Hugo Piezometer Readings Location Surface Elevation Ground Water Measured on 3/24/2016 Ground Water Measured on 4/4/2016 Ground Water Measured on 4/22/2016 Ground Water Measured on 5/16/2016 Ground Water Measured on 6/16/2016 Ground Water Measured on 8/9/2016 Ground Water Measured on 10/11/2016 Ground Water Measured on 1/26/2017 ST -102 927.3 926.9 927.0 926.9 926.6 926.9 924.7 926.9 ** ST -105 930.3 930.1 930.2 292.4 928.0 930.2 926.4 929.8 ** ST -110 932.3 930.1 929.6 929.5 929.5 931.3 927.3 930.9 928.3 ST -114 934.2 929.6 929.4 929.3 929.3 929.8 927.4 929.9 928.7 ST -115 1 932.51 931.21 931.01 930.91 930.51 931.71 929.0 * ST -120 1 935.31 929.81 930.01 929.51 929.81 929.71 927.71 930.2 928.9 * Piezometer destroyed; piezometer is located on a snowmobile trail ** Piezometer frozen and water level not attained z.� ava 0 �w i o 1 Yq�. }• co i 71 0 N 4 N 71 y ®i N 71 0 � 0o w I e0 N, i ` - tip PA P, 91 i V FA N O w F1bNA AVENUE NO. m " m -i z p W OD cn 0 _- � 'o ` Oi m w —mi, �. ©•'� j W 0 0 co) O co 00 �O O� 1 O A N r ' IK cn - • s � _ —.. _ • -_. � i��=ate14 0 �O O � i 0 N z.� ava 0 �w i o 1 Yq�. }• co i 71 0 N 4 N 71 y ®i N 71 0 � 0o w I e0 N, i ` - tip PA P, 91 i V FA N O w F1bNA AVENUE NO. m " m -i z p W OD cn 0 _- � 'o ` Oi m w —mi, �. ©•'� j W 0 0 co) O co 00 �O O� 1 O A N r ' IK cn - • © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L jl I I ISO 1 F 4 I� Mlq 936 _ e QF I ,rn�;j`'d D d� // VV IVI VL_ V IL_ 0 V �v� CCCC���J 936I. _ I L t J \ (moo �� ' o - 8936)0 cv -�`� � C ) ����� / 1 936 934 1, rz ; ,r"' Property Description: °P DN P I�ITS-�\ �,%._/ /'�` p The Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington e d Mow PATH �\ ` County, Minnesota. I ' T 936 sB #1 Q 9 ��// . ;�� A r 1y 0 �T� Y O AND C -Aa 01 nn o Q 936 cam° 6 l ;.< ~.: 9� l ` 4 The Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington ( y�°� `: / \D ^ (• o County, Minnesota. �`-MOW INE g'�A 1934 AND All that part of the South one–half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, 932J \J .•;.: 1/' Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: 9 r M) 100 YEAR-� F// Jly I 34 FLOODPLAIIVL �,i Fy ��- v Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 29• thence East aloe the South line of said 9 � 9 C. j -) Section 29, 932.3 feet; thence North at right angles 33 feet to the point of beginning of the thence North 208.73 feet to an iron stake; thence East at sees description of the land hereby conveyed, I J 932 3I - .,� 1� / 4 right angles 208.73 feet; thence South at right angles 208.73 feet to a point 33 feet North of the 9 South line of said Section 29; thence West at right angles 208.73 feet to the point of beginning. v a 4 —930/ AND A 05 v. '� / ��� 930 The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington / - ° y Count Minnesota. L WETLAND KES 2 ✓ ., y/. 'ice- {I `^ Dt I I j ',KES \ \ AND The South one–half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota, EXCEPT that part thereof described as follows: s04 �f Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 29; thence East along the South line of said I Section 29, 932.3 feet; thence North at right angles 33 feet to the point of beginning of the I — description of the land hereby conveyed; thence North 208.73 feet to an iron stake; thence East at MOWLI I �,f F \\ right angles 208.73 feet; thence South at right angles 208.73 feet to a point 33 feet North of the I Irn.';'`:: �� South line of said Section 29; thence West at right angles 208.73 feet to the point of beginning, ell I i / I^� 0 containing approximately one (1) acre more or less; and EXCEPT that part thereof described as I 9341 o Q � 1 -BIRD HOUSE TOWERS f follows: All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 29, lying 1 ail,westerly of Highway No. 61. 4,345 SB`v� AND 8�� 93 The West Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range o r P 9 21, Washington County, Minnesota. Ce ' 0- / Y_ �' eQ �I • -.. .i i / 1� 1 *E7LAND KES .. I /SCP° I \r p O ) r` .:, rn se a� A l � ,� AI LD 1M J� 932 J O« Kali, � /932 � ` se0 15 r ✓ W D a � o s cg319C, 3 " ' �` l 932 U �� � Q � � /- n F �'^�� l r- \ 5� --GAS LINE-, A I r Q �2 v U1 g- ini �°' i l r 934 N �V 7 L-_ c,4 \se's \ / / t n �- F > O O\ °� 0� o �5 00 1p", 121 Z D 3� %` Q� � Q �lb C93 -FARMSTEAD S6 #20 _ -� aS� O m ° Q rn �\ 93 �' , '�.� I 70- 3"6 r' �� 93934 SB /17D0 0� \ \ \ �� AS TRAVELED CENTERLINE- - �� I \-_F SL D 0 93\ \ 11. 0�--- -GR DRIVE o 4� - 10 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance Lezend 0 BUSH/SHRUB ST STORM MANHOLE CONIFEROUS TREE Q TELEPHONE BOX DECIDUOUS TREE TELEPHONE MANHOLE WETLAND ® TRAFFIC CONTROL BOX ® STEEL/WOOD POST HH HAND HOLE -� SIGN-TRAFFIC/OTHER TRAFFIC LIGHT -o-o- SIGN- TRAFFIC/0 THER Da GA TE VAL VE FMAIL1 MAIL BOX HYDRANT HANDICAPPED STALL WATER METER O PERC TEST ❑s CURB STOP BOX Mw MONI TORING WELL WA TER MANHOLE Tv CABLE TV BOXw0 WELL GAS METER —CTV— CABLE TV STREET LITE —GAS— GAS LINE GUY WIRE POH POWER OVERHEAD I -0j POWER POLE —PUG— POWER UNDERGROUND ❑E ELECTRIC BOX —FOP— FIBER OPTIC ELECTRIC METER —SAN— SANITARY SEWER ELECTRIC MANHOLE —STO— STORM SEWER ® ELECTRIC TOWER —TOH— TELEPHONE OVERHEAD SANITARY MANHOLE —TUG— TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND co SEWER CLEANOUT —WA T— WATERMAIN ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN x FENCE LINE ® CATCH BASIN- DECIDUOUS TREE LINE ® FLARED END SECTION CURB & GUTTER ® CUL VERT BITUMINOUS SURFACE Q SOIL BORING CONCRETE SURFACE .� • Denotes Iron Monument Found 0 Denotes Cast Iron Monument Adelaide Landing NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date. 11/29/16 Existing Conditions sheet: 2 of 27 0008463EXPOI.dw Attachment C Revised Purchase Agreement Adelaide Landing City of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota Multi -Disciplined Surveying & Engineering westwoodps.com WETLAND II CREDIT AGENCY PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR WETLAND BANKING CRED[TS THIS AGREEMENT (Agreement) is made this 27th day of March, 2017 between the "Wetland Credit Agency, LLC/Stamer-lmdieke" (Seller) and "OP5 Adelaide, LLC" (Buyer). 1. If in -full payment for wetland banking credits (Credits) is received by Seller on or before April 30'11, 2017, both Buyer and Seller agree to the following terms: CREDITS TO BE SOLD ON'OR BEFORE APRIL 30, 2017 Credit Sub- Group' Acres Wetland Cire, 39 Type' Plant Community Type 3 Cost per Acre Account Number Total A. 1.32 1 seasonally flooded basin $47,916.00 1542 $63,249.12 B. 1.32 2 sedge meadow $47,916.00 1542 $63,249.12 C. -- - -- -- D. -- -- -- -- -- E. -- -- -- -- -- Totals 2.64 $126,498.24 If in -full payment for Credits is received on or after May 1", 2017, but prior to the Closing Date as agreed upon in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement, both Buyer and Seller agree to the following terms: Pagel of 3 Wetland Credit Agency, LLC • 12940 Overlook Road, Dayton, MN 55327 • 612-360-4700 v1.3 6-1-11 2. Seller represents and warrants as follows: a) The Credits are deposited in an account in the Minnesota Wetland Bank administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) pursuant to Minn. Rules Chapter 8420.0700-.0760. b) Seller owns the Credits and has the right to sell the Credits to Buyer. 3. Buyer will pay Seller the total of $0 as earnest money, to be paid when this Agreement is signed; and the balance of the purchase price subject to the terms of Paragraph 1 to be paid on or before the Closing Date listed in Paragraph 5 below. 4. In addition to the Credit fees in paragraph 3, Buyer agrees to pay to Seller a withdrawal fee of $3,331.68 for the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) based upon the 2015 BWSR Fee Schedule to be paid at closing. At closing, Seller will execute a check made out for this amount, payable to BWSR. 5. The closing of the purchase and sale shall occur on or before June 30, 2017 (Closing Date). The Closing Date may be changed by written consent of both parties. Upon payment of the balance of the purchase price, Seller will sign a fully executed Transaction Form for the Withdrawal of Credits (Transaction Form) in the form specified by BWSR, and forward the same to BWSR along with a check for the withdrawal fee. 6. Buyer shall apply to the Local Government Unit, the City of Hugo (LGU) and/or the US Army Corps of Engineers for approval of a replacement plan utilizing the Credits as the means of replacing impacted wetlands. If the Local Government Unit (LOU) and/or the US Army Corps of Engineers has not approved the Buyer's application for a replacement plan utilizing the Credits by the Closing Date, and no postponement of the Closing Date has been agreed to by Buyer and Seller in writing, then either Buyer or Seller may cancel this Agreement by giving written notice to the other. In this case, Seller shall return Buyer's earnest money, and neither Buyer nor Seller shall have any further obligations under this Agreement. If the LGU and/or the US Army Corps of Engineers has approved the replacement plan and the Seller is ready to proceed with the sale on the Closing Date, but Buyer fails to proceed, then the Seller may retain the earnest money as liquidated damages. Page 2 of 3 Wetland Credit Agency, LLC + 12940 Overlook Road, Dayton, MN 55327 + 612-360-4700 0.36-1-11 Buyer further agrees that Agreement is not valid until a signed copy is provided to Seller. If Buyer has not forwarded a signed copy to Seller within 7 days after date signed by Seller, Agreement is null and void and neither Buyer nor Seller shall have any further obligations under this Agreement. 03/29/2017 (Signature of Seller) (Date) Page 3 of 3 i 11� (Signature of Buyer) (Date) Wetland Credit Agency, LLC ; 12944 Overlook Road, Dayton, Mei 55327 * 612-360-4700 v1.36-1-11 Attachment for City of Hugo Notice of Decision for Adelaide Landing Special Considerations, Wetland Replacement, Sequencing Flexibility, and No -loss as well as Notice of Decision Conditions April 13, 2017 Special Considerations The applicant has addressed MN Rule 8420.0515 which requires the applicant to consider a variety of factors that may be negatively affected by wetland impacts. The applicant provides a discussion of these considerations in the attached memorandum titled "Adelaide Landing Wetland Replacement plan Application Response to Comments" dated April 11, 2017. Sequencing Flexibility The applicant is requesting sequencing flexibility for MN Rule 8420.0520 Subp 1.A., since a second alternative that avoids all wetland impacts is not feasible based on the city requirement to extend 137th Street east, then south through the entire site which results in impacts 1-6. Flexibility is necessary for impact 7 (based on MN Rule 8420.0520 Subp 1.A and B) since this impact has not been avoided or minimized. The basis for request for sequencing flexibility is found in MN Rule 8420.0520 Subp. 7a.A.(1) and (2). The applicant demonstrates that the impacted wetlands have been degraded to the point where replacement of the impacts by wetland bank credits would result in a gain and function and public value. This was demonstrated through MnRAM assessment that documents the low value for wetland 2, as well as the wetland delineation vegetation datasheet which documents no vegetation or high density reed canary grass (invasive). The applicant also demonstrates that avoidance of wetland 3 would result in severe degradation of the wetland's ability to function and provide public value due to the surrounding land use. Replacement After avoidance and minimization, the Adelaide Landing Development Project will result in 1.32 acres or 57,582 sq. ft. of impacts to type % wetlands. The applicant is proposing to replace wetland impacts via existing wetland bank credits. The credits are in kind and in the same bank service area, therefore reducing the replacement ratio from 2.5:1 o 2:1 or a total of 2.64 credits (acres). A purchase agreement has been signed by both the seller and the buyer for wetland bank credit purchase from wetland bank account # 1542 located in Stearns County, Bank Service Area 7. Nn -Inns The applicant is requesting a no -loss for the installation of a boardwalk trail that crosses wetland 2 as shown in Exhibit 4b of the application dated February 17, 2017. The applicant proposes that the boardwalk will not alter the cross section or hydrological characteristics, obstruct flow patterns, change the wetland boundary, or convert the wetland to upland since the boardwalk will be supported by piers that provide an elevated platform. Additionally the applicant is documenting that temporary impacts from the installation of high density construction mats, will be rectified within 6 months of beginning construction. Based on the above discussion and documentation in the application dated February 17, 2017 as well addendums dated March 8, 2017, and April 11, 2017, the applicant's request for sequencing flexibility, wetland impact replacement, and no -loss, is approved with the following conditions: Conditions 1. A negative declaration for Adelaide Landing Environmental Assessment Worksheet is approved by Hugo City Council, and 2. Wetland replacement must be the wetland amount and type specified in the purchase agreement dated March 29, 2017, and 3. Credit purchase must be completed and filed by the Hugo LGU and BWSR has withdrawn credits from the wetland bank before wetland can be impacted, and 4. Outlet elevations for the stormwater ponds must be set at and maintained at the elevations specified in the Addendum Memo titled "Adelaide Landing Wetland Replacement Plan Application Response to Comments" dated April 1, 2017, part 2, page 2 and 3, and 5. All temporary impacts must be rectified within 6 months from initial impact as required by MN Rule 8420.0415 Subp. H.(1)-(4), and 6. The boardwalk must be installed so as not to be in contradiction to MN Rule 8420.0111 Subp. 26 and 32. Agenda Number: K.3 CITY OF HUGO PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT TO: Hugo Planning Commission FROM: Rachel Juba, Planner SUBJECT: Excelsior Group, LLC —Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan for a residential development to be known as "Adelaide Landing" DATE: April 13, 2017, for the City Council meeting of April 17, 2017 ZONING: Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) LAND USE: Low Density Residential (LD) DEADLINE DATE: 60 -day review deadline date starts the day the EAW process is complete. 1. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE: At its March 23, 2017, meeting the Planning Commission considered and held a public on the requests. There were eight people who spoke during the public hearing on a variety of topics. The concerns were regarding the amount of lots, connections to the park areas, traffic, buffers, preservation of trees, wildlife, drainage, and flooding. Staff stated that the density of the development is less that was is allowed in the R-3 Zoning District. The developer stated that they would add a sidewalk along 137th Street to connect to the neighborhood to the west and will work with staff on additional connections to the park from the adjacent neighborhood. One resident asked for a tree line between her house, in the County Ponds neighborhood to the west, be preserved to create a buffer from the proposed pond and homes. There were a few residents concerned about the wildlife being lost when the development is constructed. The EAW prepared for the development proposes mitigation measures for the wildlife during construction. There were also a few residents concern about the drainage and flooding of their property because of the development. City Engineer, Mark Erichson, stated that the drainage will remain on the development property and is required to meet all stormwater management regulations determined by the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Page 2 The Planning Commission generally liked the plan and was pleased with the development layout, mix of housing products, park features, and the use of stormwater reuse for irrigation. One Commissioner had concerns with the traffic along Highway 61 and the additional traffic created by the development. Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat and PUD to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requests, subject to the conditions on the resolutions, and the addition of two new conditions: 1. The developer shall work with staff regarding the buffer between the Country Ponds rear lot lines and the pond. 2. The developer shall work with staff on trail a connection to the County Ponds neighborhood to the west. The vote was 5 approvals and 1 abstention. The abstention resulted from a concern on the traffic along Highway 61. The Planning Commission requested to have a discussion with staff regarding the future of Highway 61. 3. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a residential development. The property totals 216.6 acres and is comprised of seven parcels. The preliminary plat includes 319 single family residential lots and 10 outlots to be known as "Adelaide Landing". The PUD General Plan will be for all 216.6 acres of the property and is proposed to be rezoned from Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The property includes wetlands and floodplain for a total buildable acreage of 146.2 acres. The applicant is requesting PUD flexibility on the following: • Flexibility to allow various lot sized with a minimum lot size of 5,850 square feet, where 10,400 square feet is required. • Flexibility to allow various lot width with a minimum lot width of 45 feet, were 80 feet is required by ordinance. • Flexibility to allow a minimum front setback of 20 feet, where 30 feet is required. • Flexibility to allow a minimum rear setback of 25 feet, where 30 feet is required. • Flexibility to allow a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 feet, where 10 feet is required. • Flexibility to allow a maximum impervious coverage of a lot to be 55%, where 50% is required. • Flexibility to allow a minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet, where 60 feet is required. In exchange for this flexibility, the developer is: Page 3 • Designing a more sensitive proposal, with less density, than would have been the case with the use of the standard R-3 zoning district. • Providing a public park within the development, with improvements that exceed City standards. • Providing a public trail to connect to existing trails in the adjacent developments. Preserving and enhancing natural features with the trail system that meanders through the development. • Providing a landscaping plan that exceeds City standards. • Preserving existing significant trees on the property. • Creating a stormwater reuse irrigation project within the development. • Incorporating architectural design guidelines for the homes in the development 4. BACKGROUND: The properties are generally located north of 130th Street and east of Highway 61. The plan shows 319 proposed residential lots, stormwater ponding areas, a park, sidewalk and trail connections, and road connections. The applicant is proposing the project to be built in five phases. The developer has indicated that an HOA will be established for the development to maintain community areas, landscaping, and the water re -use system. In the summer of 2016, the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a sketch plan for the development, at that time known as Terre De L'eau. The Planning Commission and City Council were generally pleased with the project, liked the open space, trails, stormwater management and water use, and felt the housing type was in demand. The Planning Commission and City Council provided the following comments: • They felt that the use of the City owned outlot for stormwater ponding, a passive area of the park, and trails, was a positive amenity for the development and surrounding area. They were comfortable with the use of the outlot. In addition, they suggested a full size playground in the active park area, since there are so many homes that are proposed to be built within the development. • They recommended to update 130th Street to an urban collector roadway per the Comprehensive Plan with the proposed development. They encouraged the trail along the road to be constructed at that time. • They stated the developer should provide significant buffers, including landscaping, along Highway 61 and 130th Street. • They had a desire to preserve the significant stands of trees within the development. • They appreciated the proposal for a stormwater reuse system for irrigation. • They had concerns on the long road connecting the north and south ends of the development. • They also had concerns about the 45 foot wide lots proposed and wanted more information on the product type that would be built on the lots. Page 4 There were five residents that spoke during the sketch plan review meeting. One stated the sketch plan showed exactly the project needed for this lot and that it is better than past proposals for this lot. The other residents voiced concerns on the following: • The proposed density of the project. • The proposed lot size and lot width in relation to the allowance in the R-3 zoning district. • Traffic o Potential for cut -through traffic on 137th Street o Additional traffic along 130th Street • The location of stormwater ponds in relation to the existing homes in regards to flooding, bugs, and odors. • They wanted to ensure that the Commissions and City Council kept the neighboring properties in mind during the approval process. The Parks Commission also reviewed the sketch plan, at that time, and provided informal comments in regards to trails, park improvements, and park dedication. In general the Parks Commission liked the proposal, but realized there are several details to work out. The Parks Commission provided the following comments: • They liked the trails within the development and encouraged additional connections from the adjacent neighborhoods to the active park area. • They encouraged the trail along the north side of 130th Street to be constructed with the development. • They stated they were comfortable with the active park location but, encouraged a more contiguous park area. • They also stated they were comfortable with the use of the City owned outlot for the passive park area, stormwater pond, and trails. • They thought the developer was on track with the park dedication proposal. • They stated that more analysis and discussion will need to occur in regards to phasing of the trail and park improvements within the development. It is in staff's opinion that the applicant has done a good job addressing the comments and concerns from the proposed sketch plan of the City Council, Commissions, and residents. 3. CONTEXT: A. Surrounding land Use and Zoning The property to the north is zoned Low Density Multiple Family Residential (R-4) and occupied by the Pineview Meadows townhome development. The properties to the east, south, and west are zoned Single Family Detached Residential (R-3) and occupied by the Country Ponds, Beaver Ponds, and Birch Tree Ponds residential developments. The properties to the west, across Highway 61, are zoning General Industrial (I-3) and are occupied by industrial uses. There are also a few vacant parcels to the east that are also zoned Single Family Detached Residential (R- 3). Page 5 B. Natural Characteristics of Site The properties are currently vacant and do contain some challenges regarding an existing drainage ditch, floodplain, and high ground water. The properties are relatively flat with approximately 57 acres of wetlands. 4. ANALYSIS: A. Level of Discretion in Decision Making The City has discretion in approving or denying rezoning applications, based on whether or not the proposal meets the standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable standards are met, the rezoning application must be approved. However, if the City finds that any of the applicable standards are not met, the application may be denied. The City has relatively high level of discretion in approving a PUD. A PUD must be consistent with the City's comprehensive plan. The City may impose reasonable requirements in a PUD not otherwise required if the City deems it necessary to promote the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. The City's discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the subdivision regulations in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards Environmental Review The developer is proposing 319 new homes on the property. The minimum threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) per MN State Statute is 250 units, therefore, an EAW is required. The developer has been working with City staff to prepare an EAW for the development. An EAW is a document that analyzes, at a preliminary level, the effects a development has on the environment in regards to land use, geology, water resources, wildlife, air, noise, and transportation. If it is deemed by the City, due to comments and concerns about the impacts to the environment, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) can be required by the City Council before the project can proceed. An EIS is a more in depth analysis of the property and the impacts to it. An EAW has been prepared, is complete, and has been sent out for public comment. There was 30 -day comment period, which ended on March 29, 2017. The EAW was sent out to a number of Federal, State, and regional agencies as required by State Statute. Some agencies have commented on specific items that should be considered when the property develops, or whether Page 6 they recommend the preparation of an EIS. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the EAW at its March 23, 2017, meeting. Staff has prepared formal responses to all of the comments received throughout the process. The EAW has identified areas where potential environmental effect exists and has incorporated the appropriate mitigation measures into the project plan. Staff analyzed the EAW and project plan as it relates to State Rules and finds the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts, and therefore staff does not recommend an environmental impact statement (EIS). Rezoning/Planned Unit Development The use of the PUD zoning allows the developer zoning ordinance flexibility to create a master planned development. The PUD zoning is tied to a specific PUD general plan that is proposed with this application. Excelsior Group, is requesting an approval of a PUD for the Adelaide Landing development. PUD's offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. In exchange for the proposed PUD, the applicant is proposing a higher quality development with valued amenities. The Adelaide Landing PUD general plan offers a proposed trail system that meanders through the development and will connect to the existing trails in adjacent residential developments. Adelaide Landing will offer sidewalk connections within the development and a public park, generally located in the middle of the development, for easy access for all residents. In addition to the proposed amenities offered, the applicant has set up the development to allow for the building of quality homes, using quality materials and architectural guidelines. Many of the homes are also positioned for scenic overlooks over the stormwater ponds and wetlands. Staff believes that the layout of the proposed Adelaide Landing PUD general plan exceeds the City's standards for residential developments. The applicant has offered a more creative and efficient approach to the existing landscape and constraints of the property through the site design layout. Because the ground water is high, the development needs fill to build up the site. The stormwater ponds offer dirt for fill, but also creates a scenic overlook for homes and along the trail corridor. These ponds also offer an ability to use stormwater for irrigation of the development, which is promoting the City's "Reduce, Reuse, Replenish" initiative. This will be further discussed later in the report. In order to approve a PUD, the City must find that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the following criteria: Page 7 1. Provide for the establishment of PUD zoning districts in appropriate setting and situations, to create and maintain a development pattern that complies with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Allow for the mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not otherwise be accomplished. 3. Provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. 4. Promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability and general welfare of the City. 5. Preserve and enhance natural features and open spaces including but not limited to the width expansion of greenway corridors, conservation of wooded areas, development of buffer areas, reduction of impervious surface, and utilization of joint facilities and utilities. 6. Maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities. 7. Ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan shows the land use being Low Density Residential (LD). The rezoning/PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of land use and density. It is in staff's opinion that the Adelaide Landing PUD general plan has offered a creative and efficient method to planning the site, all which meets the intent of the PUD ordinance. Lot Sizes/Setbacks The applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing 216 -acre site to create 319 residential home sites. The applicant is proposing a combination of product types and lot sizes listed below: * Requested PUD flexibility highlighted in grey R-3 Zoning District 45' and 55' Wide Villa Lots 50' Wide Lots 65' Wide Lots 70' Wide Lots 85' Wide Lots Lot Size min 10,400 SF 5,850 SF 6,513 SF 8,450 SF 9,029 SF 11,050 SF Lot Size (avg) 8,601 SF 8,138 SF 11,823 SF 10,529 SF 13,017 SF Lot Width min 80 Ft 45 Ft 50 Ft 65 Ft 70 Ft 85 Ft Lot Depth min 100 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft * Requested PUD flexibility highlighted in grey Page 8 Setbacks The applicant is requesting flexibility in setbacks for the development. The applicant is proposing the following setbacks: * Requested PUD flexibility highlighted in grey Density The maximum development density for a PUD in the R-3 zoning district is 4 units per 1 acre. The applicant is proposing a residential net density of 2.2 units per 1 acre, which fits the requirements of a PUD. Although the applicant is requesting flexibility on lot sizes and setbacks, the density meets the ordinance standards. Development Phasing The applicant is proposing to construct the development in five phases. The phasing plan the applicant provided shows the phasing generally starting from the south along 130th Street and heading north. The first phase would be in 2017 and include the platting of 60 lots with a combination of single family homes and Villa homes with access off of 130th Street. As development continues northward on the site in later phases of the development, connections will be made to 135th Street, Flay Avenue, and 137th Street. The property is also proposed to be graded in two phases. The first phase would be generally the area south of the powerline easement and the City owned Outlot to 130th Street. The remaining would be graded with Phase 2 or earlier. Landscaping/ Signage The applicant has provided a full landscape plan. According to Section 90-181 Landscaping, each home site shall have two deciduous shade trees maintained in the front yard. The applicant is proposing to have one tree in the front yard of all lots, with the exception of the Villa lots having one tree in the rear yard. The landscape plan shows boulevard trees along the streets and significant landscape buffers along Highway 61 and 130th Street. The plan also shows nicely landscaped entrances along 130th Street, including a monument sign, and landscaping within the park area creating a good transition to the proposed single family homes. The trees and R-3 45' and 55' Wide 50', 65' and 85' Zoning Villa Lots 70'Wide Wide District Lots Lots Front Setback 30 Ft 20 Ft — Side Load Garage 25 Ft 25 Ft min 25 Ft — Front Load Garage Side Setback 10 Ft 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 10 Ft min Rear Setback 30 Ft 25 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft min Lot Impervious 50% 55% 50% 50% max * Requested PUD flexibility highlighted in grey Density The maximum development density for a PUD in the R-3 zoning district is 4 units per 1 acre. The applicant is proposing a residential net density of 2.2 units per 1 acre, which fits the requirements of a PUD. Although the applicant is requesting flexibility on lot sizes and setbacks, the density meets the ordinance standards. Development Phasing The applicant is proposing to construct the development in five phases. The phasing plan the applicant provided shows the phasing generally starting from the south along 130th Street and heading north. The first phase would be in 2017 and include the platting of 60 lots with a combination of single family homes and Villa homes with access off of 130th Street. As development continues northward on the site in later phases of the development, connections will be made to 135th Street, Flay Avenue, and 137th Street. The property is also proposed to be graded in two phases. The first phase would be generally the area south of the powerline easement and the City owned Outlot to 130th Street. The remaining would be graded with Phase 2 or earlier. Landscaping/ Signage The applicant has provided a full landscape plan. According to Section 90-181 Landscaping, each home site shall have two deciduous shade trees maintained in the front yard. The applicant is proposing to have one tree in the front yard of all lots, with the exception of the Villa lots having one tree in the rear yard. The landscape plan shows boulevard trees along the streets and significant landscape buffers along Highway 61 and 130th Street. The plan also shows nicely landscaped entrances along 130th Street, including a monument sign, and landscaping within the park area creating a good transition to the proposed single family homes. The trees and Page 9 landscaping proposed to be installed with the development is approximately 1,400 trees, which is more than double what the ordinance requires. In addition to exceeding the ordinance standard, the applicant is proposing to preserve some significant stands of trees that are currently on the property. The applicant intentionally planned the development layout and location of outlots in order to preserve these trees. It's in staffs opinion that the applicant has done a good job with the landscape plan and the preservation of the trees. Staff is comfortable with the landscaping proposed for the development. Lighting The applicant has provided a lighting plan. The applicant is proposing typical street lighting within the development, that meets the ordinance standard. The applicant has indicated that they will be installing the Veron decorative lamp style light throughout the development. Streets/Access The applicant is proposing three access locations onto 130th Street to the south and connections to 135th Street to the east, Flay Avenue to the north, and 137th Street to the west. The applicant has also provided access to the property to the east just north of 130th Street. A detailed traffic analysis was completed as part of the EAW. The results of the EAW indicate the development can be accommodated, provided a number of improvements to 130th Street are completed. The existing signal timing at TH 61 and 130th Street will also require monitoring, with potential changes made by MnDOT. The property is located within the northeast quadrant of the Highway 61 and 130th Street intersection. The intersection is signalized and the signal/intersection was designed assuming the development of this property. Staff does not expect improvements to the intersection itself as a result of the proposed development. A long-range plan was developed in 2008 for Highway 61 that includes the following for Highway 61: • Four -lane divided roadway • An additional 40 feet of right-of-way required within the development property. • Full access at 137th Street • Right-in/right-out access at 134th Street As the proposed development moves forward, nearly all of the roadway segment between Highway 61 and Goodview Avenue will be developed on the north and south sides. 130th Street is currently a two-lane, rural section roadway. Staff recommended, and the City Council and Commissions agreed, during the sketch plan that the upgrade of 130th Street to an urban -section road between Highway 61 and Goodview Avenue should be completed with the development as outlined in the City's long-range plans. Page 10 Staff has been working with the applicant on a number of items regarding the improvement/reconstruction of 130th Street. The design of the road is being discussed and the addition of a roundabout at Flay Avenue and 130th Street as the street connects to the development is being considered. The design will include 130th Street being upgraded to an urban -section road, with curb and gutter, and will have an 8 foot bituminous trial on the north side. Staff is discussing with the applicant the appropriate cost share and timing of the improvements. The developer cost responsibilities will be identified and included in the development agreement for the first phase of the project. The applicant is showing a road connecting the north and south areas of the development. The applicant has done a good job addressing the concerns that the Council and Commission had regarding the previous plan showing a long road connecting the north and south portions of the development. Staff is comfortable with the new road design as proposed in the plan. Sidewalks and Trails The applicant is showing sidewalks along one side of each street within the development. The plan shows a trail systems that will connect to the existing trail in Beaver Ponds, extends through the development bordering the proposed park, and will provide pedestrian access to 140th Street (CSAH 8). The applicant is showing a trail system that connects the residential areas to the park, as well as, to the adjacent neighborhoods and other nearby parks. The trail system will provide a recreational experience that takes advantage of the view sheds of the natural areas. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan shows trails along 130th Street and a trail is planned along the north side of the street to be installed during the reconstruction of the road. The trail will be required to be installed at the time the road is improved. The applicant has done a good job meeting the comprehensive plan in regards to trails. Drainage/Grading The City will review and issue a stormwater management permit for the development. The plans include managing stormwater through a combination of ponds and a stormwater reuse system. The design is consistent with stormwater rules as proposed, and staff will work with the applicant to finalize the plans and issue a stormwater permit as the project moves forward. There is floodplain located on the property and the boundary is proposed to be revised. The applicant has provided detailed documentation showing the existing and proposed floodplain. Staff will continue to work with the applicant to finalize the details. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will need to be prepared and submitted for FEMA approval so that the existing floodplain boundaries and elevations can be formally revised. Water Re -use The plans include the installation of a stormwater reuse system to be utilized to irrigate individual lots. The system is feasible from a water availability and equipment standpoint and Page 11 staff will finalize the technical details as the project moves forward. The system will be installed by the applicant and owned/operated/maintained by the homeowner's association. The system will be part of the overall stormwater management improvements to be included as part of the stormwater permit. A stormwater reuse agreement between the City and the applicant shall be recorded. The agreement will include provisions that will allow the City to operate the system in the event that it is necessary to maintain compliance with the stormwater permit. The provisions will include an ability to assess any City costs associated with operation and maintenance of the system. Staff is working with the applicant to determine whether or not the water reuse system will generate stormwater management credits beyond those required to meet their own permitting requirements. If that is the case, the City will include in its use agreement with the developer that excess credits generated are the property of the City. Wetlands The property includes some wetlands, which have been delineated and approved by the City as LGU. The applicant is proposing to impact 1.3 acres of the 57.7 acres of wetland for street construction. The applicant has submitted a wetland replacement plan to the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) for approval of the wetland impacts. The wetland replacement plan will need to be approved prior to final plat approval of any phase. There is a trail network that meanders through the park area shown on the plan. There are a few areas where a boardwalk will be installed for the crossing of the wetlands. The boardwalks will be designed to qualify for a no loss (no wetland impact) determination from the TEP. Staff will continue to work with the applicant on the design of the boardwalk. The boardwalk will maintain the 8 -foot width of the trails they will connect to throughout the development. Homeowners Association A homeowners association (HOA) is proposed for the development. There are three housing styles (single family detached homes, smaller single family detached homes, Villa homes) that are proposed within the development that would have their own homeowners association. All of the homes would be part of a Master HOA will be established for the development to own/operate/maintain community areas, landscaping, and the water re -use system. The HOA would also establish an Architectural Review Committee (ARC) to review and approve the home designs per architectural design guidelines. The HOA documents and the architectural design guidelines shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the recording of the final plat for the first phase. Preliminary Plat The preliminary plat consists of 319 residential lots and 10 outlots. The proposed use and ownership of each outlot are as follows: Page 12 Outlot Acres Ownership Use A 7.07 city Wetland/Ponding B 1.40 Private Future Ponding C 49.85 city Park/Wetland/Ponding D 40.45 city Wetland/Ponding E 0.65 HOA O ens ace/Trees F 0.31 HOA Op ens ace/Trees G 0.33 HOA O ens ace H 1.60 City Ponding/Buffer I 3.06 city Ponding/Buffer J 6.26 City Wetland Park Dedication The developer is proposing to dedicate, grade, and landscape a 7.8 acre park that is divided into two areas, an open field area and an active park area with a playground, multi -sport court, and park shelter. An extensive off-road trail system that includes 1.5 miles of trails and boardwalks that connects to adjacent neighborhoods will be constructed by the developer. The Master Park Plan indicates a public park in this area. The City owns 18 -acres of land (outlot), consisting of some wetlands, on the west side of the site, which is adjacent to the parkland proposed by the applicant. The outlot is not included in the parkland dedication calculation. The applicant has done a good job in locating the park in a central area for access not only for this proposed development, but existing adjacent neighborhoods. The developer is proposing to dedicate 7.8 acres of land for the purposes of a public park in combination with paying parkland dedication fees. Parkland dedication of 14.6 acres is required, therefore the proposed dedication of 7.8 acres of satisfies 53% of the requirement. The remaining 47% would be satisfied through fees. Currently, the park dedication fee is $2,400 per unit and would therefore be $1,128 per unit or $359,832 in total. The developers is proposing their park improvements to the park in phases. Staff is recommending the developer installed improvements to be completed with the first 2 phases of the development. Phase 1 will include: • grading and seeding the city -owned outlot and the areas south of the power line easement, which park area showing a soccer field. Phase 2 will include: • grading and seeding of the area north of the powerlines, which includes the north active park area. • installation of trails, boardwalks and landscaping in the city -owned outlot and all park areas. The Parks Commission will consider the applicants park dedication proposal at its March 22, 2017, meeting. Staff is recommending that the Parks Commission support the off-road trail Page 13 improvements and park landscaping and grading. Staff is also recommending that the Parks Commission have discussion on the City's option to construct the remaining park improvements (playground, parking areas, and park shelter, etc.) to be continued at a future meeting. Staff is recommending that the Parks Commission approve the park dedication proposal in the amount of 7.8 acres and $1,128 per unit ($359,832 for 319 units). Staff will provide an update to the Planning Commission on the discussion and recommendation from the Parks Commission on the park dedication proposal. Drainage and Utility Easements There are a number of Outlots included as part of the plat. Outlots that contain stormwater ponds and/or park are proposed to be deeded to the City; the remainder of the Outlots should include drainage and utility easements. Utilities Water service is available to the site via existing watermains adjacent to the development property. The water system will be looped through the development and will be extended to the plat boundaries for future development. A portion of the water system may qualify for oversize cost-sharing per City policy, which will be addressed as part of the Development Agreement as the project moves forward. The sanitary sewer will be connected to the existing system to provide sewer service to the development, which is generally consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The southwest portion of the development is proposed to be served by the sanitary sewer located in the southern half of Highway 61 and 130th Street. The northern portion of the development will be served by the existing sanitary sewer system located within the adjacent neighborhoods. The lots in the central, southern and eastern portion of the development will be served by the existing system located along 130th Street that consists of gravity sewer, lift station, and forcemain. Water and sewer trunk fees will apply to this project, and will be reviewed as the project moves forward. There are existing private utilities that extend through the site. Xcel Energy has an overhead transmission line extending through the site (east/west) and Koch pipeline has an underground pipeline extending through the site. The applicant will need to provide documentation of approval from Xcel Energy and Koch to cross the easements and any restrictions that may apply. 5. CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the layout of the proposed Adelaide Landing PUD general plan exceeds the City's standards for residential developments. Excelsior Group has offered a more creative and efficient approach to the existing constraints of the property through the site design layout. It is Page 14 in staff's opinion that the applicant meets all the requirements necessary to approve the PUD and preliminary plat. 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has revised the resolution to include the two additional conditions recommended by the Planning Commissions Staff recommends approval of the PUD and preliminary plat for Excelsior Group for the development to be known as "Adelaide Landing", subject to the conditions listed in the resolutions. 7. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission generally liked the plan and was pleased with the development layout, mix of housing products, park features, and the use of stormwater reuse for irrigation. One Commissioner had concerns with the traffic along Highway 61 and the additional traffic created by the development. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requests, subject to the conditions on the resolutions, and the addition of two new conditions: 1. The developer shall work with staff regarding the buffer between the Country Ponds rear lot lines and the pond. 2. The developer shall work with staff on trail a connection to the County Ponds neighborhood to the west. The vote was 5 approvals and 1 abstention. The abstention resulted from a concern on the traffic along Highway 61. The Planning Commission requested to have a discussion with staff regarding the future of Highway 61. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location map 2. Ordinance approving the rezoning to PUD 3. Resolution approving the PUD General Plan 4. Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat 5. Engineer's Memo dated March 15, 2017 6. MnDOT letter dated March 9, 2017 7. Resident Letter 8. Applicant's Narrative dated March 10, 2017 9. Draft Architectural Design Guidelines dated March 13, 2017 10. Preliminary Plat plans dated November 29, 2017, revised March 10, 2017 T Co H 1,37th 130th 129th ORDINANCE 2017 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUGO AMENDING CHAPTER 90 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CITY CODE TO CLASSIFY CERTAIN LAND LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 61 AND NORTH OF 130TH STREET THE CITY OF HUGO ORDAINS: Section 1. Amendment of the City Code. Chapter 90 of the City Code of the City of Hugo, Minnesota, is hereby amended by changing the classification on the City of Hugo Zoning Map to PUD (Planned Unit Development) with respect to the 216 -acre property legally described as follows: See Attached Section 2. Effective Date. This amendment shall take effect upon its passage. ADOPTED by the City Council this 17th day of April, 2017. Tom Weidt, Mayor ATTEST: Michele Lindau, City Clerk RESOLUTION 2017 - APPROVING PUD GENERAL PLAN FOR EXCELSIOR GROUP, LLC, FOR "ADELAIDE LANDING" ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 61 AND NORTH OF 130TH STREET WHEREAS, The Excelsior Group, LLC, has requested approval of a PUD general plan to allow approximately 319 single family residential lots and 10 outlots on the 216 acre property legally described as follows: (See Attached) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the PUD general plan at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUGO, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by The Excelsior Group. LLC, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD general plan is approved to allow the creation of approximately 319 single family residential lots and 10 outlots. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on February 6, 2017, March 10, 2017, March 11, 2017, March 13, 2017, and March 16, 2017, except as amended by this resolution. 2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of the requested rezoning of the 216 acre property and preliminary plat. 3. The PUD general plan is approved based on the finding that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 4. The developer shall comply with all conditions in the City Engineer's letter dated March 17, 2017. 5. PUD flexibility is granted to allow: a. Flexibility to allow various lot sizes with a minimum lot size of 5,850 square feet, where 10,400 square feet is required. b. Flexibility to allow various lot width with a minimum lot width of 45 feet, were 80 feet is required by ordinance. c. Flexibility to allow a minimum front setback of 20 feet, where 30 feet is required. d. Flexibility to allow a minimum rear setback of 25 feet, where 30 feet is required. e. Flexibility to allow a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 feet, where 10 feet is required. f. Flexibility to allow a maximum impervious coverage of a lot to be 55%, where 50% is required. Resolution 2017 - Page 2 g. Flexibility to allow a minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet, where 60 feet is required. 6. The preliminary phasing plan is generally approved per plans dated November 29, 2016, revised March 10, 2017. Any major revisions to the phasing plan shall require PUD amendment. Minor modifications shall be reviewed and approved by staff. a. Phase 1 shall include: i. The following items shall be reviewed and approved by staff in regards to 130th Street: 1. The preliminary design for 130th Street shall be reviewed and approved by the City staff. 2. The developer and the City shall enter into an agreement on a cost sharing formula for the reconstruction of 130th Street. 3. The developer and the City shall enter into an agreement on the timing of the reconstruction of 130th Street. 4. The developer shall provide escrow money or other payment method approved by the City for the improvements to 130th Street per the cost sharing agreement. ii. The developer shall work with the City on the final layout of the Villa homes on the western portion of the plat. iii. Park improvements: 1. Grading and seeding within the City owned outlot (Oulot A, County Ponds) and the area south of the powerline easement. This shall be completed by and paid for by the developer. b. Phase 2 shall include: i. The entire length of 1301h Street, from T.H. 61 to Goodview Avenue, shall be constructed as an urban section roadway to City standard, with a trail, with the first layer of bituminous prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the 1 st building. 1. This improvement shall include increase in the forcemain size that connects the development to the 130th Street lift station. ii. Park improvements: 1. Grading and seeding on Outlot C, within the area north of the powerline easement. This shall be completed by and paid for by the developer 2. An 8' bituminous trail, boardwalk, and landscaping shall be installed within all of Outlot C. Final location of the trail and boardwalk shall be reviewed and approved by staff Resolution 2017 - Page 3 prior to installation. This shall be constructed by and paid for by the developer. c. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any lot north of Lot 1, Block 15, the entire length of Street 1 to Street 2 shall be constructed with the first layer of bituminous. No lots shall be issued a building permit until they are provided access to 130th Street via Street 1 and 2. 7. The building setbacks and impervious surface coverage requirements for the PUD are as follows: 8. A stormwater re -use system, as shown in the plans, shall be constructed with the development. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by staff. The system will be installed by the applicant, and owned/operated/maintained by the homeowner's association. A stormwater reuse agreement shall be reviewed an approved by staff and recoded at Washington County. 9. The developer has indicated that an HOA will be established for the development to own/operate/maintain community areas, landscaping, and the water re -use system. The HOA documents shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the recording of the final plat for the Phase 1. 10. The developer must comply with the following, prior to Final Plat and Final PUD Plan application: Landscaping and Lighting a. The landscape plan shall be revised to include the number, size, and type of trees and shrubs in each proposed location. b. The final landscape plans must be submitted for review and approval by staff. 45' and 55' Wide 50', 65' and 85' Villa Lots 70'Wide Wide Lots Lots Front Setback 20 Ft — Side Load Garage 25 Ft 25 Ft min 25 Ft — Front Load Garage Side Setback 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 10 Ft (min) Rear Setback 25 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft min Lot Impervious 55% 50% 50% (max) 8. A stormwater re -use system, as shown in the plans, shall be constructed with the development. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by staff. The system will be installed by the applicant, and owned/operated/maintained by the homeowner's association. A stormwater reuse agreement shall be reviewed an approved by staff and recoded at Washington County. 9. The developer has indicated that an HOA will be established for the development to own/operate/maintain community areas, landscaping, and the water re -use system. The HOA documents shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the recording of the final plat for the Phase 1. 10. The developer must comply with the following, prior to Final Plat and Final PUD Plan application: Landscaping and Lighting a. The landscape plan shall be revised to include the number, size, and type of trees and shrubs in each proposed location. b. The final landscape plans must be submitted for review and approval by staff. Resolution 2017 - Page 4 c. The developer shall work with the City on providing a buffer from the pond from the County Ponds neighborhood to the west. The buffer shall be reviewed and approved by City staff. Signage d. Final design and location of the entrance monument signage for the development shall be reviewed and approved by staff. e. The developer shall enter into an easement agreement for access and maintenance of the landscaping and signage with in Outlots A, C, D, H, I, and J. Streets/Access f. The plans shall be revised to show 130th as an urban section road to street standards, including the 8 foot bituminous trail on the north side. The final plans must be submitted for review and approval by staff. Architecture g. The developer shall develop and implement architectural review and design guidelines for all residential buildings. These guidelines shall be consistent with the draft architectural and landscaping guidelines provided by the developer for the PUD General Plan dated March 13, 2017. Miscellaneous h. Architectural design guidelines shall be reviewed approved by City staff. i. The developer shall work with City staff to provide a trail connection to the Country Ponds neighborhood to the west. ADOPTED by the City Council this 17th day of April, 2017. Tom Weidt, Mayor Resolution 2017 - Page 5 ATTEST: Michele Lindau, City Clerk RESOLUTION 2017 - APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE EXCELSIOR GROUP, LLC, FOR "ADELAIDE LANDING" ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 61 AND NORTH OF 130TH STREET WHEREAS, Excelsior Group, LLC, has requested approval of a preliminary plat to allow construction of 319 single family lots and 10 outlots on the 216 acre property legally described as follows: (See Attached) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the preliminary plat at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUGO, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Excelsior Group, LLC, for a preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions: A preliminary plat is approved to allow the creation of 319 single family home lots and 10 outlots, in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on February 6, 2017, March 10, 2017, March 11, 2017, March 13, 2017, and March 16, 2017, except as amended by this resolution. 2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of a rezoning to PUD for the 216 acre site. 3. The developer must comply with Resolution 2017-_, for the PUD. 4. Park Dedication is proposed to be satisfied with a combination of land dedication and fee. The amount of land dedicated is 7.8 acres satisfying 53% of the requirement. The park dedication fee shall be paid for each lot platted at the amount of $1,128 per lot. 5. The preliminary phasing plan is generally approved per plans dated November 29, 2016, revised March 10, 2017. Any major revisions to the phasing plan shall require PUD amendment. Minor modifications shall be reviewed and approved by staff. a. Phase 1 shall include: i. The following items shall be reviewed and approved by staff in regards to 130th Street: 1. The preliminary design for 130th Street shall be reviewed and approved by the City staff. 2. The developer and the City shall enter into an agreement on a cost sharing formula for the reconstruction of 130th Street. 3. The developer and the City shall enter into an agreement on the timing of the reconstruction of 130th Street. Resolution 2015-39 Page 2 4. The developer shall provide escrow money or other payment method approved by the City for the improvements to 130th Street per the cost sharing agreement. ii. The developer shall work with the City on the final layout of the Villa homes on the western portion of the plat. iii. Park improvements: 1. Grading and seeding within the City owned outlot (Oulot A, County Ponds) and the area south of the powerline easement. This shall be completed by and paid for by the developer. b. Phase 2 shall include: i. The entire length of 130th Street, from T.H. 61 to Goodview Avenue, shall be constructed as an urban section roadway to City standard, with a trail, with the first layer of bituminous prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the 1 st building. 1. This improvement shall include increase in the forcemain size that connects the development to the 130th Street lift station. ii. Park improvements: 1. Grading and seeding on Outlot C, within the area north of the powerline easement. This shall be completed by and paid for by the developer. 2. An 8' bituminous trail, boardwalk, and landscaping shall be installed within all of Outlot C. Final location of the trail and boardwalk shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to installation. This shall be constructed by and paid for by the developer. c. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any lot north of Lot 1, Block 15, the entire length of Street 1 to Street 2 shall be constructed with the first layer of bituminous. No lots shall be issued a building permit until they are provided access to 130th Street via Street 1 and 2. 6. The building setbacks and impervious surface requirements for the development are as follows: 45' and 55' Wide 50', 65' and 85' Villa Lots 70'Wide Wide Lots Lots Front Setback 20 Ft — Side Load Garage 25 Ft 25 Ft min 25 Ft — Front Load Garage Side Setback 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 10 Ft (min) Rear Setback 25 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft min Resolution 2015-39 Page 3 Lot Impervious 55% 50% 50% max 7. Outlot Use and Ownership a. Outlots A, D, H, I, and J are proposed for stormwater ponding/wetlands and shall be deeded to the City. b. Outlot C is proposed for a public park and stormwater ponding and shall be deeded to the City. c. Outlots E, F, G, are proposed for openspace and tree preservation and will we owned by the HOA. d. Outlot B is proposed for a future pond/unplanned and the current owner (Stachowiak) will retain ownership. 8. The location and geometrics of the center island located on Street 13 is subject to further review and approval by City staff. 9. The landscaping planned for the development shall be installed all at the same time during each phase. The developers shall take proper precautions to protect the trees as the homes are being built. 10. Prior to the release of the final plat for recording, the developer must comply with the following conditions. a. The developer shall comply with the City standards for street lighting within the public right-of-way. b. The developer must comply with all conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memos dated March 17, 2017. c. The development shall comply with the Fire Chief's requirements regarding fire flow calculations, the location of fire hydrants, fire department connections, and fire lane signage. d. The developer must obtain all necessary stormwater management and WCA permits from the City. e. The developer shall address all comments in the MnDOT comment letter dated March 9, 2017. f. A stormwater reuse agreement shall be reviewed and approved by staff and recoded at Washington County. g. The developer shall obtain all necessary local, state, and federal permits. h. The developer shall obtain approval from Xcel Energy on the crossing of the powerline easement. Resolution 2015-39 Page 4 i. The developer shall obtain approval from Koch on the crossing of the gas line easement. j. The Homeowners Association (HOA) documents for review and approval by staff. k. Architectural design guidelines shall be reviewed and approved by staff. 1. Details and specification for the boardwalks shall be reviewed and approved by staff. m. The City's development fees will apply to this project. The fee amounts will be calculated and included as part of the Development Agreement. A development agreement shall be executed and all fees shall be paid. n. The developer shall provide survey shots of the neighboring properties to ensure all drainage is contained on the developer's property. o. The developer shall work with the City on providing a buffer from the pond from the County Ponds neighborhood to the west. The buffer shall be reviewed and approved by City staff. p. The developer shall work with City staff to provide a trail connection to the Country Ponds neighborhood to the west. q. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer must comply with the following conditions. a. The applicant shall record the final plat, development agreement and all other documentation at Washington County and provide the City with proof of recording. b. A Letter of Map Revision will need to be prepared and submitted for FEMA approval so that the existing floodplain boundaries and elevations can be revised per the plans. ADOPTED by the City Council this 17`h day of April, 2017 Tom Weidt, Mayor Resolution 2015-39 Page 5 ATTEST: Michele Lindau, City Clerk f /A WSB 477 Temperance Street I St. Paul, MN 55101 1 (651) 286-8450 March 17, 2017 Ms. Rachel Juba, City Planner City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North Hugo, MN 55038 Re: Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD Review Adelaide Landing WSB Project No. 3288-04 Dear Ms. Juba: We have reviewed the Preliminary Plat/PUD submittal and drainage analysis for the above -referenced project. In particular, we have reviewed the following plans related to this particular request: • Preliminary Plat, Grading, Streets, Utilities, and Landscaping Plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, dated February 5, 2017. • Preliminary Stormwater Runoff Narrative prepared by Westwood Professional Services, dated February 6, 2017. Based on the review of the application materials, we offer the following comments related to this application: Roadways and Access 1. The plan includes adequate roadway right of way and roadways and sidewalks/trails meet City standards for width and design within the extents of the residential development. 2. The development is bordered by 130th Street on the south where the proposed development will have three access locations. Internal roadway connections are also proposed at the existing 137th Street that extends west to Trunk Highway 61, 135th Street that extends easterly towards Egg Lake Road and Flay Avenue that extends northerly towards Egg Lake Road. 3. The proposed development consists of 319 lots, with seven (7) of these lots being developed by others in the future (southeast corner of development). The initial phase consists of approximately 54 lots that will access 130th Street. Subsequent phases continue in the southern portion of the sight that will also access 130th Street. As development continues northward on the site in later stages of the development, connection to 135th Street, Flay Avenue, and 137th Street will take place. 4. The plans include roadway extensions that will allow future roadway access to the property east of the plat area just north of 130th Street. 5. 130th Street will require improvements to accommodate this development and to address deteriorating roadway conditions. Staff is evaluating options for improving 130th Street that include the following: • addition of intersection improvements that could include a roundabout located at Flay Avenue and Street 5 • turn lanes located at street 12 • reconstruction of the roadway to an urban section from TH 61 to Goodview Avenue • 8 -ft pedestrian trail along the north side of 130th Street, as identified in the Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan. • Pedestrian crossings of 130th Street in select locations Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com K:\03288-040\Admin\Docs\LTR-rjuba-Adelaide Landing Prelim Plat -PUD 031717 kkp.docx Ms. Rachel Juba March 17, 2017 Page 2 6. 130th Street is identified as a potential project in a future year, and some level of City financial participation is reasonable. The specific timing for the improvements, along with the cost share, will be included in the Development Agreement. 7. Streets 1 & 2 will cross a private ditch. The specific design of the crossing is dependent upon the hydraulic needs related to the ditch itself. We are currently collaborating with the applicant to develop a preliminary design for the crossing/culvert, and ultimately develop a final design and secure a permit from the RCWD. 8. A detailed traffic analysis was completed as part of the EAW. The results of the EAW indicate the development can be accommodated, provided a number of improvements to 130th Street are completed. The existing signal timing at TH 61 and 130th Street will also require monitoring, with potential changes made by MnDOT. Grading, Drainage, and Wetlands 9. The property includes 57.7 acres of wetlands, which have been delineated and approved by the City as LGU. The proposed development does result in 1.34 acres of wetland impact that is proposed to be impacted through wetland bank replacement. A wetland replacement application has been submitted for review. A TEP meeting will be scheduled in the near future and the notice of decision will ultimately require City Council approval. 10. Within the development there is a network of trails that do include four wetland crossings. The crossings are proposed to be boardwalks designed to qualify for no wetland loss. Staff will continue to work with the applicant on the boardwalk design. The elevated boardwalk will maintain the 8 -foot width to be consistent with the trail widths throughout the development. 11. The City will review and issue a stormwater management permit for the development. The plans include managing stormwater through a combination of ponds and a stormwater reuse system. The design is consistent with stormwater rules as proposed, and we will work with the applicant to finalize the plans and issue a stormwater permit as the project moves forward. 12. Any fill placed in the floodplain requires compensatory storage to mitigate filling within the 100 -year floodplain. The applicants provided detailed documentation depicting the existing and proposed floodplain, and we will continue to work directly with the applicant to finalize the details. A Letter of Map Revision will need to be prepared and submitted for FEMA approval so that the existing floodplain boundaries and elevations can be revised. 13. There are a number of Outlots included as part of the plat. Outlots that contain stormwater ponds and/or park should be deeded to the City; the remainder of the Outlots should include drainage and utility easements. 14. The plans include the installation of a stormwater reuse system to be utilized to irrigate common areas, park areas and individual lots within the development. The system is feasible from a water availability and equipment standpoint. We will finalize the technical details as the project moves forward. Of note regarding the system are the following: • The system will be installed by the applicant and pumps and mainlines owned, operated, and maintained by the homeowner's association. • The system will be a part of the overall stormwater management improvements to be included as part of the stormwater permit. The HOA documents will include provisions that will allow the City to operate the system in the event that it is necessary to maintain compliance with the stormwater permit. The provisions will include an ability to assess any City costs associated with operation and maintenance of the system. Ms. Rachel Juba March 17, 2017 Page 3 • We are working with the applicant to determine whether or not the water reuse system will generate stormwater management credits beyond those required to meet their own permitting requirements. The City should include in its use agreement with the HOA that excess credits generated are the property of the City. Utilities 15. Water service is available to the property via existing watermain connection points adjacent to the property. The water system will be looped through the proposed development, and be extended to plat boundaries to allow for extension in the future. 16. The development will include some trunk watermain consistent with the City's Comprehensive Water Supply Plan. Any trunk watermain installed as part of the project will be eligible for oversizing credit, which will be addressed in the Development Agreement. 17. The sanitary sewer will be connected to the existing system to provide sewer service to the development, which is generally consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plan will require adjustments to the sewer service areas, which is reasonable with a minor modification to an existing forcemain, which extends from the lift station on 130th Street. The forcemain will be improved as part of the 130th Street improvements, with the Developer funding a portion of the cost. This will be outlined in the Development Agreement. 18. Water and Sewer trunk fees will apply to the project, and will be reviewed as the project moves forward. 19. Existing private utilities extend through the site. Xcel Energy has overhead transmission line extending through the site (east/west) and Koch pipeline has an underground pipeline extending through the site. The applicant will need to provide documentation from Xcel Energy and Koch indicated any restrictions there are within their easements. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 651-286-8463. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Mark Erichson, PE City Engineer cc: Steve Duff, Senior Engineering Technician (email only) Deb Ridgeway, The Excelsior Group (email only) Corey Meyer, Westwood Professional Services (email only) Ann Pung-Terwedo, Washington County Public Works (email only) Katy Thompson, Water Resource Engineer (email only) Stephanie Hatten, Water Resource Engineer (email only) Tony Havranek, LGU Coordinator (email only) Kris Keller, Plan Review Specialist (email only) kkp 'ONESOT��p Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building pF TSP 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 March 9, 2019 Rachel Juba City Planner City of Hugo 14669 Fitzgerald Avenue Hugo, MN 55038 SUBJECT: Adelaide Landing MnDOT Review # P 17-015 NE quad US 61 and 130th St. Hugo, Washington County Control Section 8206 Dear Ms. Juba: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has reviewed the above referenced plat for the proposed Adelaide Landing development in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subdivision 2, Plats. Before further development, please address the following issues: Traffic • There are no plans at this time to expand US61 to a 4 -lane facility. • If safety concerns arise at 134th St or 137th St due to people avoiding the signals at 130th St or 140th St, there is no certainty that additional traffic control would be the solution. Any additional traffic control would have to meet warrants and spacing guidelines as well as fit into the larger plan for the corridor. Potential solutions to explore would likely include limiting movements at these intersections. • Any changes to speed limits would require a traffic study to be done by MnDOT. Additional access with increased side street traffic rarely impacts traveled speeds significantly. If there is a wish to lower speeds on 130th and 140th in the future, engineering solutions for traffic calming would likely be necessary. For questions regarding these comments please contact Kaare Festvog at 651-234-7814 or kaare. festvog&state.mn.us. Design There appears to be grading identified on MnDOT right of way however on Sheet 8 there are notes that there is a difference between the existing and proposed right of way line. Please reconcile these differences. For questions regarding these comments please contact Nancy Jacobson at 651.234.7647 or Nancy.L.Jacobsongstate. mn.us. Water Resources: A drainage permit is required. The proposed development will need to maintain or reduce existing drainage rates to and maintain drainage patterns within MnDOT right of way. In addition, the submitted plan shows ponding highwater elevations and grading that currently utilize MnDOT right of way for storage. All ponds and associated highwater elevations need to be situated outside of MnDOT right of way. Please adjust any design elements that are currently utilizing MnDOT property in this way. As part of a drainage permit submittal, the City or project developer will need to submit existing and proposed hydraulic computations for both 10 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage patterns, ponding, and systems affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated. For questions on these points or to submit additional information, please call Bryce Fossand, Mn/DOT Metro District Water Resources Engineering, at (651) 234-7529 or email bryce.fossandkstate.mn.us . Permits In addition to the drainage permit, any use of or work within or affecting MnDOT right of way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/maintenance/Tennits.html Please include one set of plans formatted to 11X17 with each permit application. Please submit/send all permit applications and I IX17plan sets to: metropermitapps.dotkstate.mn.us. Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig (651-234-7911) of MnDOT's Metro Permits Section. Review Submittal Options: Mn/DOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. Mn/DOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dot&state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: Mn/DOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disk. 4. Plans can also be submitted to Mn/DOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: ftp://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/incoming/MetroWatersEdge/Planning Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dotgstate.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review please contact me at (651) 234-7784. Sincerely, f f Karen Scheffing Principal Planner Copy sent via E -Mail: Buck Craig, Permits Nancy Jacobson, Design Bryce Fossand, Water Resources Mark Beatty, Surveys Tiffany Kautz, Right -of -Way Kaare Festevog, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Ryan Coddington, Area Engineer Russ Owen, Metropolitan Council March 201h 2017 To: Hugo City Council I am requesting a formal and timely response to the new development known as Adelaide Landing. As a resident on Country Ponds in Hugo, MN. I am worried about 3 items. First. My property boarders the FEMA floodplain Area. The city acquired property from our developer in 1994 so that our development/homes would have proper drainage. All drainage for Country Ponds mainly goes East and Southeast (City of Hugo Property # 163-2903121320005). This land area has been given a Delineation survey and has been included in this new development. How will I be reassured that I /WE are safe from flooded basements? If and or when our home/s will need sump pumps. Who will pay for this? Will we need an Elevation Drainage Certificate required for flood insurance and Who will pay for these yearly extra expenses that I have never had to be concerned about in over 23 years? I was told by The Excelsior Group Rep. Deb Ridgeway last week that changes are coming in regards to drainage areas. But, that My development is not their concern. They are using our secured, by the city, drainage property for their development! Second. The safety concerns of Hwy 61. The Intersections of 134th and 1371". Connecting 137th street to this new development of Adelaide Landing. I know Our small neighborhood will feel this change. The traffic demand on us will be felt with people trying to short cut even more than they currently are. How will our City protect us during the peak times so we are safe? When will Hwy 61 be improved and what is the City of Hugo doing to insure funding is found to get the job done before we lose a life. Third. I have not seen any attempt to connect Country Ponds to the Trail and Park system of Adelaide Landing. We only get the traffic? Our families should at least get some Benefits and Safety measures so our families can get to the trail system that will be behind us. My potential new neighbor behind me will have adequate sidewalks to use the new park system. While I must walk in the street up and around or down Hwy 61 to get to it? I look forward to The Cities response to our community in insuring our concerns are addressed and considered as this moves forward. Sincerely, Desiree' and J. Scott Rotter 13653 Fiona, Ave. N. Reference: Discussion Regarding Application for Stormwater Funding for a Project to Convey Groundwater Away From Building Foundations in Victor Gardens. http://WWW.Ci.hUgo.mn.us/vertical/sites/%7BBED5C6AO-2687-460F-9C61- 6B7CCADA2CBA%7D/uploads/%7B9F5353DD-9BEC-41B5-8584-107773B46DDF%7D.PDF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Adelaide Landing Hugo, Minnesota January 31, 2017 http://www.ci. h ugo. mn. us/vertical/sites/%7 BBE D5C6AO-2687-46OF-9C61- 6B7CCADA2CBA%7D/uploads/170131_Adelaide_Landing_EAW_Final.pdf ADELAIDE LANDING Hugo, Minnesota PROJECT NARRATIVE March 10, 2017 Nestled among acres of wetlands, Adelaide Landing demonstrates an appreciation for the natural environment. Preservation of the wetland system enhances connections with nature. The extensive trail system meanders organically throughout the site allowing one to appreciate the open views and wildlife. Both street and trail connections are created to neighbors, to nature and to the surrounding community. Trails lead to the centrally located park which is a gathering space for families to picnic, kids to play or individuals to simply enjoy nature. Curved streets follow the edges of wetlands and ponds to create a design where a majority of home sites back to open space. A variety of lot sizes craft a community for those at different life stages and income levels. Home styles will attract first time homebuyers, families with children as well as empty nesters. LOCATION The site is located at the northeast intersection of CSAH 61 and 130`h Street North. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Preliminary Plat and PUD approval is being sought for the 217 -acre site. In all 319 units are proposed creating a gross density of 1.5 units per acre. The net developable area of 146 acres creates a net density of 2.2 units per acre, which is well below the maximum density of 4 units per acre in the R-3 Zoning District. Generally, a combination of lot sizes is proposed: 45', 50', 65', 70' and 85' widths. Below is a comparison of the R-3 Zoning requirements versus the proposed lot sizes: Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR i ♦ Tbt,vfa�D,c„ogp R-3 Zoning District Proposed Villa Lots Proposed 50' Wide Lots Proposed 65' Wide Lots Proposed 70' Wide Lots Proposed 85' Wide Lots Lot Size (min) 10,400 SF 5,850 SF 6,513 SF 8,450 SF 9,029 SF 11,050 SF Lot Size (avg) 8,601 SF 8,138 SF 11,823 SF 10,529 SF 13,017 SF Lot Width (min) 80 Ft 45 Ft 50 Ft 65 Ft 70 Ft 85 Ft Lot Depth (min) 100 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft 130 Ft Front Setback (min) 30 Ft 20 Ft - Side Load Garage 25 Ft —Front Load Garage 25 Ft 25 Ft 25 Ft 25 Ft Side Setback (min) 10 Ft 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 7.5 Ft 10 Ft Rear Setback (min) 30 Ft 25 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft 30 Ft Bldg Height (max) 35 Ft 35 Ft 35 Ft 35 Ft 35 Ft 35 Ft Lot Impervious (max) 50% 55% 50% 50% 50% 50% Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR i ♦ Tbt,vfa�D,c„ogp The PUD is a tool that will allow flexibility from the R-3 District standards to create a better overall design that preserves and enhances the natural features of the site while introducing a mix of product styles for first time homebuyers, families and empty nesters. Further, it will create much needed connections to open and play spaces for the surrounding community. It is understood that PUDs are reviewed under the expectation that the developer will deliver a higher quality product in exchange for relaxation of the standard Zoning Code. To summarize the above table, flexibility is being requested for minimum lot size, minimum lot width, front, side and rear setbacks as well as maximum lot impervious surface. In response to the evaluation criteria specified in the PUD Zoning Code, the site provides the following in exchange for flexibility: 1. Preservation of the Site's Natural Features — Of the nearly 60 acres of wetland, 1.34 acres are being impacted; leaving 98 percent untouched. Additionally, trees are being preserved to maintain a buffer in the northeast corner of the site. A couple other pockets of trees are planned to remain in the southern portion of the property, becoming a site amenity. 2. Creation of an Extensive Trail System — Approximately 8,000 lineal feet (1.5 miles) of trails is being created in Adelaide Landing. The pathways provide connections from the surrounding neighborhoods that scenically meander around the ponds and wetlands through the park. In addition to the trails, there will be 13,000 lineal feet (2.5 miles) of sidewalk providing even more pedestrian options. 3. Significant Landscaping — Under the standard zoning ordinance, 2 trees per lot are required or about 638 total trees. The plan contemplates a combination of over 1,400 boulevard, screening and front yard trees. Extensive landscaping is evident along Highway 61 and 130`h Street to buffer the rear yards from street traffic. Buffer areas are also planned for the park and in the rear yards of homes adjacent to the existing neighborhoods. 4. Storm Water Reuse System — A storm water reuse system will be implemented to use onsite ponding to irrigate common areas, park areas and all homes' yards. The system's pumps and mainline will be owned and maintained by the Master Homeowners Association. Not only does water reuse aid in meeting the site's infiltration requirements, but also conserves potable water for domestic use. 5. Decrease in the Allowed Density — Under the R-3 Zoning Ordinance, a maximum density of 4 units per acre is allowed. By creating a design that is sensitive to preserving the natural features (wetlands and wooded areas), less density is achieved. Adelaide Landing plans for nearly half the allowed density at 2.2 units per acre. 6. Architectural Design Guidelines — Architectural Guidelines will ensure aesthetically pleasing homes that will complement each other, yet celebrate a variety architectural styles. HOUSING & SETBACKS The variety of lot sizes allow for a variety of home styles to meet the needs of many different buyers. The 45' wide lots are planned for Villas which offer main level living with association maintained grounds mostly geared toward empty nesters. Single family lots with widths of 65, 70 and 85 feet are suitable for a variety of traditional single family home sizes to meet a variety of price points. The smaller 50 -foot wide lots are ideal for smaller homes geared toward first time homebuyers. In all, there will be about five different home series. The accompanying elevations (Attachment A) Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR generally depict the housing styles for the neighborhood. Additionally, Architectural Guidelines will provide a framework for builders to follow while allowing flexibility and variety. Setbacks for the 50-, 65- and 70 -foot lots are proposed to be consistent between product types. This includes setbacks of 25 -foot front, 7'/z -foot sides and 30 -foot rear. The larger 85 -foot lots will have similar front and rear setbacks with 10 -foot side setbacks. The Villas are proposed to have front setbacks of 25 feet for front loaded garages and 20 feet for side loaded garages. Side setbacks are shown at 71/z feet on either side. STREETS, SIDEWALKS & LANDSCAPING There are number of access points to the site, which also creates connections to the surrounding community. The curved tree -lined streets will help to calm traffic in this pedestrian friendly neighborhood. The street design allows for many of the homes to not directly back another home creating many premium lots with wetland, open space or park views. Sidewalks are evident throughout and located on one side of the street creating a truly walkable neighborhood. Trails provide the much needed connections from the surrounding area leading around the ponds and wetlands to the public park. While the site is generally open, there are a few stands of trees intended to be preserved. Most notably, the center entrance along 130`' Street. This centrally located entrance creates a front door effect to the neighborhood with a large monument and public trail leading directly to the park. Near the Villas, the trees create a private green which becomes the focal point of this sub -neighborhood. Other existing treed areas will be preserved to the extent possible. Extensive landscaping is planned along 130`' Street and Highway 61 creating rear yard buffers. The large monument at the main entrance will create identity for the neighborhood as will other features throughout, including the public park, enhanced trail system and pocket green spaces. STREETLIGHTS The streetlight style will be the Vernon Fixture offered by Xcel Energy (see below). Proposed locations are shown on the Preliminary Plat. EASEMENTS The site is intersected by 2 easements: gas line and overhead powerline. Both Koch and Xcel are in the process of reviewing plans to respond to site planning and permitting near the easement areas. Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR WETLANDS A wetland delineation has been completed and approved for the site. Of the 58 acres of existing wetlands, only 1.34 acres are impacted by development. The impacts are generally due to street alignments and connections. In all, 98 percent of the wetlands are preserved creating vista views and spaces for trails to meander through; a true amenity that will be further enhanced with site development. Impacted wetlands will be mitigated by purchasing credits from an approved wetland bank. The existing ditch through the site will be enhanced to become a site amenity, similar to a small creek or brook. It will be cleaned out and include a trail that runs parallel to it. Pockets of landscaping will be evident along the path. PONDING Due to the high groundwater levels, the site needs to be raised. As a result, deep ponds will be created to not only generate material to raise the building sites, but to also manage storm water. Additionally, the ponds will be used for irrigation to meet water reuse and infiltration requirements. Approval is being requested to use the adjacent city -owned Outlot A, Country Ponds for ponding. Ponding will enhance the outlot's existing condition as well as create a more seamless transition between the properties. In exchange, a trail will be constructed between the pond and wetland which will be part of the neighborhood's public trail system. As shown in the Typical Pond Cross Section of the Preliminary Plat, a 15' buffer is proposed off the adjacent property lines with a 10' bench from HWL. Overstory trees are disbursed along the pond to create a break from the existing homes without impeding water & wetland views. The floodplain boundary is depicted on the Preliminary Plat as agreed upon between the engineers for both City & Developer. Ultimately, the floodplain elevations will need FEMA approval by way of a LOMR. This will occur once grading activities are completed and elevations can be certified. PARKS & TRAILS In all, the site proposes a combined area in excess of 100 acres for park, open space, ponding, wetland buffer and wooded area. The extensive trail system not only leads to the centrally located park, but also meanders around wetlands and ponds, providing a greater connection with the natural environment. Boardwalks further serve to protect the existing wetlands. Approval is being requesting for the adjacent city -owned outlot to be incorporated into the engineered site design. The outlot will be used for ponding, which will also enhance the existing wetland. In exchange, a trail will meander through the outlot between the pond and wetland to offer greater connectivity to the adjacent public park. It is understood that park dedication for new development can be achieved in one of two ways: land dedication (10% of net developable area) or a fee in lieu of land ($2,400 per unit). With a net developable area of 146.2 acres, 14.6 acres of park land dedication is required. Per the attached Park Exhibit, the total outlot area dedicated for park or public use is 35 acres. This encompasses wetland, Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR ponding and trails which will offer a unique experience with not only opportunities for active play, but also connections to the natural environment. Of this larger parcel, 7.8 acres will be specifically dedicated for park land credit or approximately 53% of the City requirement. Therefore, the remaining requirement will be paid in cash: 47% of $2,400 or $1,128 per unit. With 312 units in the neighborhood, the total cash dedication would be $351,936. Under the PUD Zoning Code, flexibility is being requested for reduced road widths, setbacks and lot sizing to create a neighborhood with an enhanced overall design. In exchange for flexibility from the standard R-3 zoning ordinance, wetlands and wooded areas are preserved, a variety of housing styles are created and landscaping standards are exceeded. Most notably related to Parks is the extensive trail system; 8,000 lineal feet (1.5 miles) of trails and boardwalks are proposed to be constructed throughout the neighborhood. These will provide connections to the much-needed neighborhood park for Adelaide Landing and the surrounding community. Developer installed park improvements not only include the trails and boardwalks, but also the grading, seeding and trees within the park and along the trails. The neighborhood will be served by a water reuse system whereby the ponds will be used to irrigate lawns and common open space. The pumps will be appropriately sized and an irrigation service connection will be provided to accommodate the park area. The neighborhood master homeowners' association will be responsible for maintaining the pumps and winterization of the neighborhood's mainline system. To summarize, below is a chart of the anticipated park improvements showing the responsible party for installation. If it means completing the park sooner, the developer is willing to install City improvements for an in-kind reduction in park fees. Improvement Developer Installed City Installed Park Grading X Park Seeding X Park Irrigation X Parking Lots X Trails & Boardwalks X Buffer Landscaping X Shelter X Sports Court & Pickle Ball X Play Structure X Additional Park Furnishings X Phasing of the park improvements is anticipated as follows: 1. Grading and seeding a. Within City -owned Outlot — 2017 b. South of poweline easement — 2017 c. North of powerline easement — 2019 2. Trails, Boardwalks and Buffer Landscaping a. Within City -owned Outlot — 2018 Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR ♦ Grogp b. South of powerline — 2018 North of powerline to Street 2 — 2019 Given the site's history of ownership, it is requested that the park be named in memory of Arthur Arcand. SNOWMOBILE TRAIL It is understood that there is an existing snow mobile trail within the powerline easement that turns south over the proposed 85 -foot lots. In the future, the trail can continue to be used within the powerline easement, only. Due to future home locations, a north/south trail will not be permissible/possible. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION The overall site will be governed by a master homeowners' association with 3 individual sub - associations professionally managed by Master HOA. The Master Association will be responsible for a number of amenities that benefit the neighborhood as a whole, mainly the water reuse mainline system and pumps. Additionally, the Master will be responsible for maintaining the Neighborhood entrance monument and landscaping features, specifically the buffer plantings along 130`h St. Villas HOA. The Villas will be responsible for summer & winter grounds maintenance for each unit, including irrigation, mowing and snow removal. Additionally, they will own and maintain Oudots E and F as well as maintain the island plantings in Street 6 as shown on Preliminary Plat. Single Family HOA (65', 70', 85'). This Single Family HOA will mainly be responsible for architectural control of the homes located on their respective lots. The HOA will likely contract for a single trash hauler, as well. Single Family HOA (50'). This sub -neighborhood consists of the small single family lots located in the northwest corner of the site. Not only will they be responsible for architectural control of the homes, but also trash hauling and maintenance of the island located in Street 13 of the Preliminary Plat. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Upon EAW, Wetland Replacement, Preliminary Plat & PUD approvals, the south portion of the site is anticipated to be graded in May 2017 followed by street and utility construction for the 1" phase area. Lot delivery is planned for September 2017. Subsequent phasing will be dependent on market demand and conditions, but anticipated to occur over the next 5 years. Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR PROJECT CONTACTS Developer/Contract Buyer: The Excelsior Group Deb Ridgeway, Project Manager deb. ridgeway0excelsiorllc. corn 952.525.3223 Engineer/Wetlands/EAW: 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Westwood Professional Services Cory Meyer, Senior Project Manager corv.meverna westwoodns.com 952.906.7437 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/ PUD — Narrative EXCELSIOR 7 ♦ Tbt,xf&�O, ATTACHMENT A Elevations Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/PUD - Narrative ILI MIN "INIMIM1010, ............... tlNltliflldllVIYIIIBttliiiltVii.......... ILI ill INN ....... . .. L:n F ILI _ � ai � �� rf •� tow " '�� 9R. . . . I . . . .. .. AINIIIIIIIIIIi S'n Ei it 44: NMI ti•if G• j41 . . . . .. . . . . -,d~dMW dMIW IIIj r1111I hum ....... P"=r r AIR ild-ft-t-Alt Add-,. F,- ,Alat: 4dft : . *v i �_ � - �� ��� - - -- - _ _1 ___ __ �� ____ __ -___ -� fe0 ATTACHMENT B Park Plan Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/PUD - Narrative ® 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. \ \ _ I I N O co � I I �h ~ N / O . \ . \\�• \ �_ rrr. r%r. % . \ Op O O \ O �0 CQ p 0 8OO —f l 13 \ \\ N I O ^ O i O/� 00//� //iiii�/ix/�Nv / / / / O \ / . / rr /// /// // /// rr/ // //, /// / . rr /r/ rr /// /// // /// /r/ // /// /// /// .. \ \. . rr/ iri r/i �\\\\.. \\ •�����\x\����\\\\�����\\\ . �0 / f� / r.//r.//i.%/i%r/ir.%/i.//i%//i%//i.//iri/ri%%/i.%/i%//i%%/i.%ri%//i%%/i.//i%//ii//i.%/i%//ir. \\\\ r.//r.//r/xir. N \\\\�. \\\ •\�,\\\��\�\�\\\\����\\\\.. / / O r./r.//rr/%rr/yrrr/r/yrr/%rr//r/yrrryrr//r. rr. rr. r. r. r. ltd �l_ _ i//% .ir.. (p rrrr//rr///i//rr.//%//i/r/ r/ // /i Z) O 0 O O \\\ \\\ / 0.��\���\��\\\ N f\ 0 0 / \ v N � O 0 / I / I + + + + + + + i + + + + + + + i + + + + dry%y��//y�/%%/�/�%y'/�y�/�//%y�/��%y///�y' ��%i�/�ir'�i�%ir'%iri% g> �► � \ .rrr/rrr/rrrrr it/rrri//rr / N / / V— Q0 �� \ irr irrrrrrrri /irr /irr /�/fir %�yr�i! r. r: r/ I (8► 0�rr��rr%�rri irr/iri/iri/ L %rri��ir g► /,r /,/ ,rr ,rr r%/ r/i ri/ rrr ri I I 1 I I I g rrr.rr I r'/'rr/r'r'//r'r'/'r'r'/r'r'r�/r'r'r�r/'r'rr'r'rrrr'r'rr'r'rrr L III11 l n l 1 I I I I / \ �► %r//rrr//rr//r./irrr/// ` 000 � � rrr/r rrrrr rrrrr rrrrr rrrrr rrrrr //rr/ rrri rrri/ rrr. rr � cV I I I I /,� 0r/r/r/jrr/jr//rrr//rr/j////////rr///r/ jr L i I % ,rriirriir/rririrr%rrr/r//r/r/rr%rirr�r/rr/r�///r//r�rirrrr�r/ I J / / \ rrr. rrrirririrrrrirririrrrir/ilii/rrrrrrr ,� I .� N L %rrrrr/rrri///rrrir//rrrrri/rrri/rrrrri/rrrrri/r/r .� I � N / � �► I ` \ %�%//fij�rrr//irirrr/rr�/r//�/rrr�rr//�/rir'/irr1rr��/i�irrrr/rr�/ri/�rr/rfi/rr// /r/r O/� T—IJl—l— / L Ch i���rriri//rri�riri I I � N L � •i LEGEND . an L % %rrrrri/ryrrrrirr��ir/rrr/i/rrr. N I I 35.4 ac GROSS PARK AREA as defined %rrrrri/rirrr�r. (p � r�rirrr/irrr / / O \/rrr/r%/rr/jir L — less. 1\ � / \ 3.0 ac EXISTING EASEMENTS / , \ ; ; .� '� '' may,_ / _ J L 133b1S 9.6 ac WETLANDS/ o ML � I L \^ to 12.6 ac �����. STORM PONDS N , ^,� �1J - - - I � J 2.4 ac MISC UPLANDS _ 11- , - 0 00 F I / I I I I I N �� c 0' 100' 200' 300' _ ( coo r NET PARK AREA Date: 3/06/2017 sheet: 1 OF 1 = 7.8 ac E:1 , I I Adelaide0008463SKP01 PARK AREA3.dw WestwoodI hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under my Prepared for: direct Supervision and that i de a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL LandingLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of MinnesotaThe Excelsior GroupLLC PARK EXHIBIT �ed: � Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Drawn: NTM Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoocips.com Cory Meyer 11455 Viking Drive Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Dater 1/31/2017 License No. 26971 Record RM,,64 g by�da� Eden Prairie, MN, 55344 Hugo, MN L ATTACHMENT C Homeowners Association Docs Adelaide Landing Preliminary Plat/PUD - Narrative (Above Space Reserved for Recording Data) MASTER DECLARATION ADELAIDE LANDING This Master Declaration of Adelaide Landing (the "Master Declaration"), is made and executed this day of , 20179 by OP5 Adelaide, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the "Master Developer"), pursuant to Section 515B.2-121 of the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act ("MCIOA"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Master Developer, as the owner or with consent of the owner(s) attached hereto, desires to submit certain real property located in the County of Washington, State of Minnesota, and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") to this Master Declaration; WHEREAS, the Master Developer also owns, or may acquire, and has the authority add to the Property, all or part of the real property legally described in Exhibit C attached hereto (the "Additional Property"); WHEREAS, the Master Developer has established the Master Association, as defined in this Master Declaration, to act as a "master association" within the meaning of MCIOA, for the purposes described in this Master Declaration; WHEREAS, the Property and any Additional Property subjected to this Master Declaration shall not, collectively, constitute a separate common interest community as defined in MCIOA; and WHEREAS, the Master Developer desires to provide for the administration of certain services for the Property; the enforcement of the covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in this Master Declaration; and the preservation of the amenities and architectural character of the Property; and to this end wishes to subject the Property to this Master Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, the Master Developer, with the consents of the owners of those parts of the Property not owned by the Master Developer, subjects the Property to this Master Declaration pursuant to Section 515B.2-121 of MCIOA, declaring (i) that this Master 2190398.v1 Declaration shall constitute covenants to run with the Property, and (ii) that the Property, and any Additional Property added thereto, shall be owned, encumbered, used, operated, occupied and conveyed subject to the covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, charges and liens described in this Master Declaration, all of which shall be binding upon all Persons, as defined in this Master Declaration, having or acquiring any right, title or interest therein, and their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. SECTION 1 DEFINITIONS The following terms, as used in this Master Declaration, shall have the following meanings: 1.1 "Additional Property" means the real property described in Exhibit C attached hereto, and all Improvements located thereon, now or in the future, which Additional Property the Master Developer has the unilateral right to add to the Property. 1.2 "Builder" means a Person who acquires a Unit from the Master Developer or another Person for the construction and sale of a Dwelling located or to be located thereon. 1.3 "Building" means each structure which is or becomes a part of the Property and contains a Dwelling or Dwellings. 1.4 "City" means the City of Hugo, Minnesota. 1.5 "Design Guidelines" means the Design Guidelines for Adelaide Landing described in Section 8. 1.6 "Design Review Committee" means the committee of the Master Association that makes determinations concerning design and architectural standards for the Property as provided in Section 8.2.2. 1.7 "Dwelling" means all or part of a Building consisting of one or more floors, which is intended for separate ownership as a single-family residence, and constituting or located within a Unit. A Dwelling may be (i) a detached single-family residential structure, or (ii) one of multiple residences within a Building. 1.8 "Improvement" means any physical improvement of any kind, including without limitation any Building, wall, fence, retaining wall, sign, enclosure, screening, utilities system, communications system, irrigation or drainage system, pond, roadway, trail, planting, landscaping, or any other type of structure or physical improvement, and any additions or changes thereto, located on the Property. 1.9 "Master Assessments" means, collectively, all assessments levied (i) by operation of the Master Governing Documents, or (ii) by the Master Association pursuant to Section 6. 1.10 "Master Association" means Adelaide Landing Master Association, a nonprofit corporation created pursuant to, the Minnesota Nonprofit Corporation Act, Minnesota Statutes 2 2190398.v1 Chapter 317A, and Section 51513.2-121(a) of MCIOA. The Master Association is a "master association" as defined in MCIOA. 1.11 "Master Board" means the board of directors of the Master Association as provided for in the Master Bylaws. 1.12 "Master Bylaws" means the bylaws governing the operation of the Master Association, as amended from time to time. 1.13 "Master Common Elements" means all portions of the Property, or interests therein, now or hereafter owned by the Master Association and intended for the common use and enjoyment of the Owners and Occupants and their invitees. The Master Common Elements as of the date of recording of this Master Declaration are described in Exhibit B. Exhibit B may be amended to include additional Master Common Elements as authorized by Section 2.2, Section 2.3 and Section 13. 1.14 "Master Common Expenses" means all expenditures made or liabilities incurred by or on behalf of the Master Association and incident to its operation. 1.15 "Master Declaration" means this Master Declaration and all exhibits hereto, as amended from time to time. 1.16 "Master Developer" means OP5 Adelaide, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, and any Person who, under the terms of this Master Declaration or by law, succeeds to any Master Developer Rights. 1.17 "Master Developer Control Period" means the time period during which the Master Developer has the exclusive right to appoint the members of the Master Board, as described in Section 12.5. 1.18 "Master Developer Rights" means the exclusive rights reserved to the Master Developer as described in Section 12 and as otherwise established by this Master Declaration or MCIOA. 1.19 "Master Governing Documents" means this Master Declaration, and the Articles of Incorporation and Master Bylaws of the Master Association, as amended from time to time, all of which shall govern the use and operation of the Property. 1.20 "Master Rules" means rules of the Master Association, as approved from time to time by the Master Board, which relate to the Master Association's operations, or the use or operation of the Property. 1.21 "MCIOA" means the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 51513, as amended. 1.22 "Member" means each Neighborhood Association that is a member of the Master Association as described in Section 3.4. The term Neighborhood Association and Member may be used interchangeably herein. 3 2190398.v1 1.23 "Member Representative" is the person, and/or alternative person, registered pursuant to Section 2.2 of the Master Bylaws to cast a Member's vote in matters to be voted upon by Members of the Master Association. 1.24 "Mortgagee" means a Person that is the holder of a loan secured by a mortgage on any Unit, and its successors and assigns. 1.25 "Neighborhood" a part of the Property, containing one or more Units, that is designated as a Neighborhood in accordance with Section 3.3. 1.26 "Neighborhood Assessment" means a Master Assessment levied against a certain Neighborhood Association, but not all Neighborhood Associations, in accordance with Section 6.4. 1.27 "Neighborhood Association" means an owners' association governing a certain Neighborhood. 1.28 "Neighborhood Board" means the Board of Directors of a Neighborhood Association. 1.29 "Neighborhood Common Expenses" means all expenditures made or liabilities incurred by a Neighborhood Association for the benefit of that Neighborhood, and incident to the operation of that Neighborhood. 1.30 "Neighborhood Declaration" means a declaration or similar recorded instrument containing covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements establishing or governing a certain Neighborhood. 1.31 "Neighborhood Developer" means a Person (i) that acquires Property from the Master Developer for development of a Neighborhood, and (ii) that is named as the developer or declarant in a Neighborhood Declaration relating to the acquired Property. 1.32 "Neighborhood Governing Documents" means the articles of incorporation, bylaws, and Neighborhood Declaration, creating or governing a Neighborhood. 1.33 "Neighborhood Property" means real property which is subject to a Neighborhood Declaration. 1.34 "Neighborhood Rules" means rules approved from time to time by a Neighborhood Board, which only apply to a particular Neighborhood. 1.35 "Occupant" means any person other than an Owner occupying a Dwelling. 1.36 "Owner" means the owner of a Unit. The term "Owner" shall exclude Mortgagees, contract for deed vendors, holders of reversionary or remainder interests and other secured parties within the meaning of MCIOA. The term "Owner" includes contract for deed vendees and holders of a life estate. 1.37 "Person" means a natural person, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited liability partnership, trust or other legal entity. 4 2190398.v1 1.38 "Property" means all of the real property subjected to this Master Declaration, now or in the future, including the Units and all other structures and improvements located thereon. The Property is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 1.39 "Unit" means a portion of a Neighborhood the boundaries of which are described in the Neighborhood Declaration and which is intended for separate ownership, including (i) a part of a Neighborhood consisting of a platted lot upon which a single Dwelling is located or intended to be located, and (ii) a part of a Building within a Neighborhood containing one or more Dwellings, the boundaries of which are shown on a recorded plat complying with Section 515B.2 -1101(c) of MCIOA. Any capitalized terms used in the Master Governing Documents, and defined in MCIOA and not in this Section, shall have the meaning set forth in MCIOA. References to Sections refer to Sections of this Master Declaration unless otherwise indicated. References to the singular may refer to the plural, and conversely, depending upon context. SECTION 2 PROPERTY 2.1 Property. The Property subject to this Master Declaration is described in Exhibit A attached hereto, as amended from time to time. Those parts of the Property constituting Master Common Elements are described in Exhibit B attached hereto, as amended from time to time. The Master Common Elements are or will be owned by the Master Association. The designation of any part of the Property as Master Common Elements does not mean or imply a dedication of such Property to the public or that the public acquires any ownership, easement, right of use or enjoyment, or right of access therein; except as expressly provided in this Master Declaration or another recorded instrument granting such rights. 2.2 Annexation of Additional Property. The Master Developer may, but is not obligated to, subject all or any part of the Additional Property described in Exhibit C to this Master Declaration as part of the Property; provided, that such additions shall be coordinated with the recording of the Neighborhood Governing Documents relating to any Neighborhood to be located on the Additional Property being added. This right shall be exercised by the Master Developer in accordance with the provisions of Section 13 of this Master Declaration. Any property so annexed may be designated as Master Common Elements, or Units or other Neighborhood Property. 2.3 Annexation of Other Property. In addition to the Additional Property, other real property may be annexed to the Property and subjected to this Master Declaration subject to the following requirements: (i) the parcel shall be owned by the Master Developer; (ii) the annexation shall be approved by the Master Board; and (iii) an amendment to this Master Declaration describing the annexation and the parcel being annexed, subjecting said parcel to this Master Declaration, and reallocating Master Common Expense obligations, voting rights and memberships, shall be executed by the Master Developer and the Master Association, consented to by any Mortgagee of the annexed parcel, and recorded. Any property so annexed may be designated as Master Common Elements, Units or other Neighborhood Property. 5 2190398.v1 2.4 Deannexation of Property. Portions of the Property may be deannexed and withdrawn from this Master Declaration subject to the following requirements: (i) the Property shall be owned by the Master Developer; (ii) the deannexation shall be approved by the Master Developer and Master Board; and (iii) an amendment to this Master Declaration describing the deannexation and the parcel being deannexed shall be executed by the Master Developer and the Master Association, consented to by any Mortgagee of the deannexed parcel, and recorded. Upon recording of the amendment, the deannexed parcel shall no longer be subject to this Master Declaration. 2.5 Interests Subject to Plan of Development. Every Person holding or acquiring an interest in any portion of the Property, shall take title or hold such interest subject to the Master Developer's rights pursuant to this Master Declaration. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Master Declaration, the Master Developer's rights or obligations under the Master Governing Documents may not be changed in whole or in part without the prior written consent of the Master Developer, which consent may be granted or denied in the Master Developer's sole and absolute discretion. SECTION 3 ASSOCIATION STRUCTURE, AUTHORITY AND MEMBERSHIP 3.1 Formation/Purposes. The Master Association is formed as a Minnesota non-profit corporation pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 317A and Section 515B.2 -121(a) of MCIOA. The Master Association shall have the obligation and the power to perform the following functions: 3. 1.1 To maintain, repair and replace the Master Common Elements, and all Improvements thereon, and to provide such other maintenance, repair and replacement as the Master Association is obligated to provide under this Master Declaration; 3.1.2 To administer and enforce the covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, and other rights and obligations, set forth in the Master Governing Documents, and the Neighborhood Governing Documents; 3.1.3 To control, preserve and enhance the architectural, aesthetic and environmental character of the Property; and 3.1.4 To administer and coordinate the operation and use of the Master Common Elements. 3.2 Powers and Administration. The operation and administration of the Master Association shall be governed by the Master Governing Documents, MCIOA and the Minnesota Nonprofit Corporation Act, and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 317A. 3.2.1 The Master Association is responsible for the overall operation, management and control of the Property. The Master Association shall have and exercise all powers relating to the operation and maintenance of the Property on behalf of its Members and all Owners and Occupants, except to the extent that such powers are expressly reserved to one or more of the Neighborhood Associations or relinquished by 6 2190398.v1 the Master Association in accordance with the procedures described in the Master Bylaws. All Neighborhood Governing Documents shall contain provisions subordinating the powers of those Neighborhood Associations to the Master Association, subject to the foregoing reservation or relinquishment of powers. 3.2.2 Subject to the limitations in Section 3.2.1, the Master Association shall have all powers with respect to the operation, management and control of the Property and the Master Association as are granted to an association by Section 515B.3-102 of MCIOA, by the Master Bylaws, by the Minnesota Nonprofit Corporation Act and by law. 3.2.3 The power and authority of the Master Association is vested in the Master Board, unless action or approval by the Members is expressly required by the Master Governing Documents or MCIOA. All references to the Master Association mean the Master Association acting through the Master Board unless specifically stated to the contrary. 3.2.4 It is recognized that the interests of the Members may be served in the future by expanding or restricting the Master Association's powers. The powers of the Master Association may be expanded by amending this Master Declaration, and the Master Bylaws if necessary for consistency, and the Neighborhood Governing Documents for the Neighborhoods which are affected by the change in powers, if necessary. 3.2.5 The Master Board shall have exclusive authority to approve and implement such reasonable Master Rules as it deems necessary from time to time for the purpose of operating and administering the affairs of the Master Association and regulating the use of those parts of the Property over which it has jurisdiction. The Master Rules shall not be inconsistent with the other Master Governing Documents or MCIOA. The inclusion in other parts of the Master Governing Documents of authority to approve Master Rules shall be deemed to be in furtherance, and not in limitation, of the authority granted by this Section. New or amended Master Rules shall be effective only after reasonable notice thereof has been given to the affected Members. 3.2.6 The Master Board, and the Master Developer as long as it owns any part of the Property or has the right to add Additional Property to the Property, shall approve all Neighborhood Declarations prior to their recording against any part of the Property. The purpose of the approval shall be to assure that the Neighborhood Declarations are subordinate to and consistent with the Master Declaration, that they do not usurp or impair the power and authority of the Master Association, and that they comply with this Master Declaration. 3.3 Neighborhoods. Separately designated parcels of the Property comprised of defined types of development or use, including, without limitation, single-family detached houses, multiplex, townhomes or zero lot line homes, condominiums, or any other separately designated area within the Property devoted to a common purpose, may be designated by the Master Developer as a Neighborhood, or a Neighborhood may be comprised of more than one housing type if permitted under applicable law. The Master Developer must approve each Neighborhood designation, Neighborhood Developer, and the Neighborhood Governing Documents for such Neighborhood prior to the start of construction or marketing in the 7 2190398.v1 Neighborhood, the recording of the Neighborhood Declaration, or the creation of the Neighborhood Association. 3.3.1 Each Neighborhood shall be created by, and the Units within the Neighborhood shall be subject to, a Neighborhood Declaration containing covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements consistent with the Master Governing Documents. 3.3.2 Each Neighborhood shall, subject to this Master Declaration and the Neighborhood Governing Documents, be governed by a Neighborhood Association in which the Owners of the Units in the Neighborhood shall be the members. Except to the extent delegated or reserved to, or performed by, the Master Association, the Neighborhood Association shall be responsible for administering the additional covenants applicable to the Neighborhood Property within its jurisdiction and for maintaining, in accordance with the Master Governing Documents and its Neighborhood Governing Documents, any Neighborhood Property which it owns or which its respective covenants designate as being for the common benefit of its members. 3.3.3 Each Neighborhood Association shall have a Neighborhood Board, which shall be elected by the members of the Neighborhood Association, subject to the rights afforded to a Neighborhood Developer to appoint the members of a Neighborhood Board under the applicable Neighborhood Governing Documents. The Neighborhood Board shall administer the affairs of the Neighborhood Association in accordance with and to the extent permitted by its Neighborhood Governing Documents and the Master Governing Documents. 3.3.4 The Master Association shall have the power to veto any action that a Neighborhood Association proposes to take if the Master Board reasonably determines the proposed action to be adverse to the interests of the Master Association or its Members and shall have the power to approve the manager of the Neighborhood Association. The Master Association also shall have the power to require specific action to be taken by any Neighborhood Association in connection with its obligations and responsibilities, such as specific maintenance, repairs or aesthetic changes, or that the Neighborhood Association's budget include certain items and expenditures. 3.3.5 Each Neighborhood Developer shall ensure that the Neighborhood Governing Documents authorize the Master Association to exercise the powers described in this Master Declaration and are otherwise consistent with the Master Governing Documents, and shall obtain the written approval of the Master Developer for such Neighborhood Governing Documents in accordance with this Section 3.3. 3.3.6 No Neighborhood shall be required to be subject to MCIOA if it would otherwise be exempt from MCIOA under Section 515B.1-102 thereof. 3.3.7 The Master Developer has the power to (i) redesignate Neighborhood boundaries; (ii) change the number of Units in a Neighborhood; or (iii) combine or subdivide two or more Neighborhoods, subject to the requirements of Section 13. N. 2190398.v1 3.3.8 New, additional Neighborhoods may be created or added to on Additional Property or other property added to the Property pursuant to Section 2.2 or 2.3, as applicable, or replatted from existing outlots. 3.3.9 In addition to the Master Developer's right to add to, subdivide or combine Neighborhoods under Section 13, a Neighborhood Developer or Neighborhood Association may petition the Master Board for an addition to, or combination or subdivision of, a Neighborhood. The petition shall include specific details of the proposed change, together with any other information required by the Master Board. Unless otherwise agreed by the Master Board, the Person(s) making the petition shall be responsible for the payment of all fees and costs in connection with the change. The Master Governing Documents and the affected Neighborhood Governing Documents, must be amended as necessary to reflect the change. The amendment must be approved in writing by the (i) the Neighborhood Board of each affected Neighborhood, as applicable; (ii) the Master Board; (iii) the Master Developer so long as it owns an unsold Unit for sale or has the right to subject any Additional Property to this Master Declaration; and (iv) the Neighborhood Developer of the affected Neighborhood so long as it owns an unsold Unit for sale in the Neighborhood or has the right to add additional real estate to the Neighborhood. 3.3.10 Except as expressly authorized by this Master Declaration, no Neighborhood shall be terminated, no Neighborhood Governing Documents shall be amended, and no Neighborhood Association shall be dissolved or subjected to bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, without the prior written approval of (i) the Master Board; (ii) the Neighborhood Board of the affected Neighborhood, (iii) the Master Developer so long as it owns an unsold Unit for sale or has the right to subject Additional Property to this Master Declaration; and (iv) the Neighborhood Developer so long as it owns an unsold Unit for sale in the Neighborhood or has the right to subject additional property to the Neighborhood Declaration. 3.4 Membership. Membership in the Master Association is governed by the following qualifications: 3.4.1 Each Neighborhood Association shall have one membership in the Master Association, subject to the qualifications set forth in this Section 3.4. The membership shall attach to a Neighborhood Association at the time the Neighborhood Declaration is recorded. Except as expressly provided in this Master Declaration, a membership shall be appurtenant to and shall not be separated from the Neighborhood Association to which it is attached. 3.4.2 The interests, rights and obligations of a Neighborhood Association may be assigned or transferred but only to a successor association or other Person which assumes and/or performs the obligations of the Neighborhood Association pursuant to the Master Governing Documents, the Neighborhood Governing Documents and MCIOA. 3.4.3 Each Member shall elect or appoint a Member Representative and alternate Member Representative (individually and collectively referred to as a "Member Representative") to cast the vote allocated to that Member, as provided in the Master Bylaws. 9 2190398.v1 3.4.4 No Person holding a security interest in any part of the Property shall be a Member solely by reason of such interest. 3.4.5 Additional memberships in the Master Association may be created only by (i) subjecting Additional Property or other property to this Master Declaration, and creating one or more Neighborhoods on the annexed property, or (ii) subdividing a Neighborhood and creating two or more new Neighborhoods, in accordance with the requirements of this Master Declaration. 3.4.6 Memberships may be combined upon the combination of one or more Neighborhoods in accordance with the requirements of this Master Declaration. One membership shall attach to each surviving Neighborhood Association. 3.5 Member Voting Allocation. Each Member is allocated one (1) vote in the affairs of the Master Association that the Members are entitled to vote upon. Each Neighborhood Board shall designate to the secretary of the Master Association a Member Representative to exercise that Member's vote in matters to be voted upon by the Members in accordance with Sections 2 and 3 of the Master Bylaws. Such designation shall remain in effect until replaced by a new designation made by the Neighborhood Board of the applicable Neighborhood Association, and delivered, in writing or by authenticated electronic communication, to the Secretary of the Master Association. The voting rights of the Members are more fully described in Section 3 of the Master Bylaws. The voting rights described in this Section 3.5 shall not be separated or conveyed separately from a membership, and any conveyance, encumbrance, judicial sale or other transfer of such rights, separate from the membership is void. The voting rights described in this Section 3.5 shall be automatically reallocated on the same basis among all Units as and if additional Units are added to a Neighborhood and the Property. 3.6 Master Common Expense Allocation. Except as otherwise provided in Sections 6.5, 6.7 and 6.9, Master Common Expenses shall be assessed and levied against each Neighborhood Association in proportion to the total number of Units in the Neighborhood as compared to the total number of Units in all Neighborhoods. Except as otherwise provided in Sections 6.5, and 6.7 and 6.9, the share of a Master Assessment levied against a Neighborhood Association shall be levied against the Units in the Neighborhood by the Neighborhood Board of each Neighborhood in accordance with its Neighborhood Governing Documents. The Master Common Expense obligations described in this Section 3.6 shall be automatically reallocated on the same basis among the Neighborhood Associations as and if additional Units are added to a Neighborhood and the Property. 3.7 Master Bylaws. The Master Association shall have Master Bylaws. The Master Bylaws govern the operation and administration of the Master Association, subject to this Master Declaration in the event of a conflict. The Master Bylaws are binding upon all Members, Owners and Occupants, and their invitees, all secured parties and all other Persons holding or acquiring any interest in the Property. 3.8 Master Board of Directors. The Master Association's affairs are administered and managed by the Master Board, as provided in the Master Bylaws. Directors shall be elected, serve and exercise their powers as provided in the Master Bylaws. 10 2190398.v1 3.9 Scope and Binding Effect of Actions. All agreements and determinations made by the Master Association in accordance with the powers and purposes established by the Master Governing Documents are binding upon all Persons having any interest in or using the Property. 3.10 Mana ems. The Master Association may, at the discretion of the Master Board, employ a professional manager or managers to manage the Master Association and the Property. The manager shall be a reputable and experienced manager of owners associations, and shall be subject to approval by the Master Developer so long as the Master Developer owns a Unit for sale or has the right to add Additional Property to the Property. The manager may be an employee of the Master Association or an independent contractor. The Master Board may delegate to a manager the management duties imposed upon the Master Association's officers and directors by the Master Governing Documents. However, such delegation does not relieve the officers and directors of the ultimate responsibility for the performance of their duties as prescribed by the Master Governing Documents and by law. The Master Developer and/or an affiliate of the Master Developer may be employed as the manager of the Master Association and/or the Property pursuant to a separate, written agreement, subject to termination as provided by MCIOA or the management agreement. 3.11 Appointment of Officers and Directors by the Master Developer. The Master Developer has the exclusive right to appoint the officers and directors of the Master Association during the Master Developer Control Period, as set forth in Section 12.5. SECTION 4 MASTER COMMON ELEMENTS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 4.1 General. Those parts of the Property owned by the Master Association and not included within the Units or other Neighborhood Property constitute Master Common Elements, which shall be owned by the Master Association for the benefit of the Members, Owners and Occupants. The Members, Owners and Occupants shall have a reasonable right of use and enjoyment in the Master Common Elements, subject to the Master Governing Documents. The rights, easements and obligations attributable to a Unit shall pass with the title to the Unit as an appurtenance thereto, whether or not specifically described. 4.2 Management and Operation. Except as otherwise expressly provided in the Master Governing Documents, the Master Association shall manage, administer, operate, maintain, repair and replace the Master Common Elements. Master Common Expenses for the operation of the Master Association, the maintenance, repair, replacement and management of the Master Common Elements, and such other management, maintenance, repair and replacement as the Master Association is obligated to provide under Section 9, shall be assessed against and collected from the Members in accordance with Section 6. 4.3 Title to Master Common Elements. When Additional Property or other property is subjected to this Master Declaration, title to that portion of such Additional Property or other property constituting Master Common Elements shall simultaneously be conveyed to the Master Association, unless otherwise determined by the Master Developer. Master Common Elements shall be conveyed and owned subject to: (i) building and zoning laws, and state and federal regulations; (ii) reservations of mineral rights in the State of Minnesota; (iii) the lien of real estate taxes not yet due and payable; (iv) this Master Declaration, and other agreements, 11 2190398.v1 easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions of record; and (vi) any exceptions which would be apparent from a survey or physical inspection of the property in question. 4.4 Limitations on Rights and Easements. The easements and other rights of the Members, Owners and Occupants with respect to the Master Common Elements shall be subject to the obligations, conditions and restrictions described in this Master Declaration, all of which shall be appurtenant to and pass with the title to each Unit. SECTION 5 EASEMENTS The following appurtenant easements and rights are hereby granted or reserved, as applicable, over, under and across the Property. 5.1 Access. Each Unit shall be the beneficiary of a nonexclusive easement for access to and from a public roadway on and across those portions of the Master Common Elements or Neighborhood Property designed for use as roadways, alleys, trails or walkways, as originally constructed, or otherwise designated by the Master Association, subject to any restrictions authorized by the Master Governing Documents. 5.2 Use and Enjoyment. Each Unit shall be the beneficiary of nonexclusive easements for use and enjoyment on and across the Master Common Elements, subject to any restrictions authorized by the Master Governing Documents. 5.3 Utilities, Services and Operating Systems. The Master Common Elements, the Units and other Neighborhood Property shall be subject to and benefited by nonexclusive easements in favor of applicable governmental authorities, the Master Association and all utility companies and other service providers for the installation, use, maintenance, repair and replacement of all utilities, services and common operating systems, such as natural gas, electricity, telephone, cable TV, internet and other electronic communications, water, sewer, and similar services, the community irrigation system, water management systems, fire control systems and other common operating systems, and metering and control devices, that exist, that are constructed as part of the development of the Property or the Additional Property by governmental authorities or the Master Developer, that are approved by applicable governmental authorities, that are approved by the Master Association under authority contained in the Master Governing Documents or MCIOA, or that are described or referred to in a plat, this Master Declaration or other recorded instruments. Each Unit, and the rights of the Owners and Occupants thereof, shall also be subject to and benefited by a non-exclusive easement in favor of the other Units, the Master Common Elements and the Master Association for all such utilities, services and systems installed in accordance with the foregoing provision of this Section. 5.4 Drainage. The Master Common Elements, the yard areas of the Units (if applicable), other Neighborhood Property and the Additional Property (regardless of whether it is added to the Property), shall be subject to and benefited by nonexclusive easements for surface water drainage over those parts of the Property and Additional Property which are designed, improved or graded for such purposes. 12 2190398.v1 5.5 Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and Reconstruction. Each Unit, and the rights of the Owners and Occupants thereof, other Neighborhood Property and the Master Common Elements shall be subject to and benefited by nonexclusive easements in favor of the Master Association for the maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction of the Master Common Elements and utilities serving the Units, to the extent necessary to fulfill the Master Association's obligations under the Master Governing Documents. Each Owner shall afford to the Master Association and its management agents and employees, access at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice, to and through the Unit for maintenance, repair and replacement; provided that access may be had without notice and at any time in case of emergency. 5.6 Emergency Access to Units. In case of emergency, all Units are subject to an easement, without notice and at any time, in favor of the Master Association for access by the Master Association's management agents, and in favor of fire, police or other public safety personnel. 5.7 Project Signs. The Master Developer and the Master Association shall have a non-exclusive easement and right to erect and maintain temporary and permanent signs and related landscaping, fencing, monuments and related improvements identifying the Property or a Neighborhood on and over the Master Common Elements, the Neighborhood common elements and those parts of the yard areas of Units designated or reserved for the placement of signs. Those parts of the Master Common Elements on which permanent monument signs or related improvements are located shall be subject to non-exclusive easements in favor of the Master Association for the continuing use, maintenance, repair and replacement of said signs and improvements. 5.8 Master Developer Rights. The Units, other Neighborhood Property and the Master Common Elements are subject to exclusive easements in favor of the Master Developer for the exercise of its Master Developer Rights as described in the Master Governing Documents. Easements in favor of the Master Developer shall terminate only upon the voluntary, written surrender of the easement right or at such time as the Master Developer no longer owns a Unit for sale or has the right to add Additional Property to the Property. 5.9 Other Easements. The Property shall be subject to such other easements as may be authorized by the Master Association under authority contained in the Master Governing Documents or MCIOA or recorded against the Property by reason of the requirements of any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the Property in connection with the development of the Property or Additional Property. 5.10 Continuation, Scope and Conflict of Easements. The easements set forth in this Section (i) shall run with the land and shall be appurtenant to the benefited Property; (ii) shall supplement and not limit any easements described elsewhere in this Master Declaration, or otherwise recorded; (iii) shall be permanent, subject only to termination in accordance with the terms of the easement; and (iv) shall include reasonable access to the easement areas over and through the Property for purposes of construction, maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction. 5.11 Non Interference; Impairment Prohibited. All Persons exercising easement rights shall do so in a reasonable manner so as not to materially interfere with the operation of the Property or cause damage to the Property, and shall be financially liable for all costs of repair of 13 2190398.v1 any part of the Property which is damaged by the Person's exercise of the easement rights. No Person shall impair, obstruct or cause damage to any easement area, or improvements or equipment installed therein. Notwithstanding anything in this Master Declaration to the contrary, no Owner or Occupant shall be denied reasonable access to his or her Unit or the right to utility services thereto. 5.12 Benefit of Easements. All easements benefiting a Unit shall benefit the Owners and Occupants of the Unit, and their families and guests. However, an Owner who has delegated the right to occupy the Unit to an Occupant or Occupants, whether by a lease or otherwise, does not have the use and other easements rights in the Property during such delegated occupancy, except (i) as a guest of an Owner or Occupant, or (ii) in connection with the inspection of the Unit or recovery of possession of the Unit pursuant to law. 5.13 Restriction on Third Party Easement Grants. No Owner or Neighborhood Association shall grant any easement or similar rights upon any portion of the Property without the prior written approval of (i) the Master Board, and (ii) the Master Developer so long as the Master Developer owns an unsold Unit for sale or has the right to subject Additional Property to this Master Declaration; provided, that such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld if the easement is for a purpose consistent with the Master Governing Documents and does not prejudice the rights of any Person thereunder. 5.14 Creation of Additional Easements. The Master Developer hereby reserves the right, in the event that part or all of the Additional Property is not added to the Property, to have, use, create, grant and convey the following easements for the benefit of the Additional Property not added (the "Excluded Property"), for the following purposes and under the following conditions: 5.14.1 To connect any utilities, cable TV, data, electronic communication or other service systems or facilities constructed on the Excluded Property to any utilities, cable TV, data, electronic communication or other systems providing services to the Property, including the right to utilize such facilities and services as are located within or serve the Property. 5.14.2 To have reasonable access over and under the Property to install, repair, maintain and replace all utilities and related facilities and systems installed on the Excluded Property, and to do such other acts as are necessary to connect with and utilize such services, facilities and systems located on the Property. 5.14.3 To have reasonable access to the Excluded Property and to construct and maintain any improvements reasonably necessary to make the access usable. 5.14.4 To cause to be recorded against the Property and the Excluded Property such instruments as may be reasonably necessary to create and memorialize any of the foregoing rights and easements. The Master Association and the Neighborhood Associations shall, upon the Master Developer's reasonable request, join in executing any such instruments, and shall otherwise cooperate with the Master Developer in furtherance of the establishment of the rights and easements referred to herein. 14 2190398.v1 5.14.5 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Master Developer, any other owner of an Excluded Parcel, or any owners' association governing the Excluded Parcel, as applicable, shall be responsible to pay its fair share of the maintenance, repair and replacement of any improvements to the Property which are utilized by or for the benefit of such part of the Excluded Property, and all costs associated with changes or damage to the Property caused by the installation, use or maintenance of the services or facilities by the Master Developer or its successors or assigns. SECTION 6 ASSESSMENTS AND FEES FOR MASTER COMMON EXPENSES 6.1 General. The Master Association has authority to levy Master Assessments against the Members. A budget shall be established and Master Assessments for Master Common Expenses shall be determined and levied against the Members by the Master Board, in its discretion, subject to the requirements and procedures set forth in this Section 6, and the requirements of the Master Bylaws. Master Assessments shall include annual Master Assessments under Section 6.2, and may include special Master Assessments under Section 6.3, Neighborhood Assessments under Section 6.4, and limited Master Assessments under Section 6.5. Subject to Section 6.7, annual Master Assessments and special Master Assessments shall be allocated among the Members in accordance with Section 3.6. Neighborhood Assessments and limited Master Assessments shall be allocated among the Members or Units as provided in Sections 6.4 and 6.5. 6.2 Annual Master Assessments. Annual Master Assessments shall be established and levied annually by the Master Board. Each annual Master Assessment shall cover all of the anticipated Master Common Expenses of the Master Association for that year which are to be allocated among the Members in accordance with Section 3.6. Annual Master Assessments shall be payable in monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual installments, as determined by the Master Board. Annual Master Assessments shall provide, among other things, for an adequate reserve fund for the maintenance, repair and replacement of those parts of the Property, and improvements located outside of the Property for which the Master Association is responsible, Neighborhood Assessments or limited Master Assessments pursuant to Sections 6.4 and 6.5. 6.3 Special Master Assessments. In addition to annual Master Assessments, the Master Board may levy a special Master Assessment against the Members at any time for the purposes described in this Master Declaration. Special Master Assessments shall be allocated among the Members in accordance with Section 3.6. Among other things, special Master Assessments shall be used for the purpose of defraying in whole or in part the cost of any unforeseen and unbudgeted Master Common Expense. 6.4 Neighborhood Assessments. In addition to annual Master Assessments and special Master Assessments, the Master Board may levy and allocate any Master Common Expense benefiting fewer than all of the Neighborhoods among only the Neighborhood Association or Neighborhood Associations benefited and/or the Neighborhood Association or Neighborhood Associations whose members are benefited. All Neighborhood Assessments shall be levied against the Units in the Neighborhood Association or Neighborhood Associations benefited by the Neighborhood Board of each such Neighborhood in accordance with its Neighborhood Governing Documents. 15 2190398.v1 6.5 Limited Master Assessments. In addition to annual Master Assessments, special Master Assessments and Neighborhood Assessments, the Master Board may levy and allocate a limited Master Assessment among one or more, but not all, Members or Units in accordance with the following requirements and procedures: 6.5.1 Any Master Common Expense benefiting fewer than all of the Units in a Neighborhood may, at the Master Board's discretion, be assessed against that Neighborhood as provided in Section 6.4 or directly against the Unit or Units benefited equally, by actual cost per Unit or such other reasonable allocation as may be approved by the Master Board or authorized in the Neighborhood Governing Documents of such Neighborhood. 6.5.2 Reasonable attorney's fees and other professional fees and costs incurred by the Master Association in connection with (i) the collection of Master Assessments, and (ii) the enforcement of the Master Governing Documents and the Neighborhood Governing Documents against a Member or an Owner or Occupant or their guests, may be assessed against the Member or the Owner's Unit, as the case may be. 6.5.3 Late charges, fines and interest may be assessed as provided in Section 11.2. 6.5.4 If damage to the Master Common Elements, Neighborhood Property or another Unit is caused by the act or omission of any Owner or Occupant, or their guests, the Master Association may assess the costs of repairing the damage exclusively against the Owner's Unit to the extent not covered by insurance. 6.5.5 The costs of maintenance performed by the Master Association as result of the failure of a Neighborhood Association, Owner or Occupant to perform such party's maintenance obligations as set forth herein or in the relevant Neighborhood Governing Documents may be assessed against the responsible Neighborhood Association, Owner or Occupant in accordance with Section 9.2.5. 6.6 Master Assessment Procedures. The following procedures shall govern the levying of Master Assessments: 6.6.1 In accordance with the Master Bylaws, the Master Board shall annually approve a Master Association budget, and shall allocate and levy annual Master Assessments against the Neighborhood Associations in accordance with the requirement of this Master Declaration. Special Master Assessments may be levied at any time. Neighborhood Assessments and limited Master Assessments may be levied at any time; however, to the extent that a Neighborhood Assessment or limited Master Assessment can be budgeted prior to the start of the Master Association fiscal year, they shall be levied at the same time as the annual Master Assessment. A Master Assessment may be prorated for a partial year. Notice of a Master Assessment shall be given to the Neighborhood Associations in accordance with the Master Bylaws. 6.6.2 The share of each Master Assessment levied against a Neighborhood Association shall promptly be levied and allocated by the Neighborhood Board among 16 2190398.v1 the Units in the Neighborhood in accordance with its Neighborhood Governing Documents. 6.6.3 Subject to Section 6.7, annual Master Assessments and special Master Assessments shall be allocated among the Neighborhood Associations in accordance with Section 3.6. 6.6.4 Each Neighborhood Association shall pay its share of the Master Assessment to the Master Association in advance, monthly, quarterly or annually, as determined by the Master Board. Notice of a Master Assessment shall be given to the Members as provided in the Master Bylaws. 6.7 Liability for Master Assessments. Each Neighborhood Association shall be liable for the share of the Master Assessments levied against it. 6.7.1 Except as provided in Section 6.7.2, the liability for Master Assessments is absolute and unconditional and no Member or Owner is exempt from liability for payment of the Master Assessments by right of set-off, by waiver of use or enjoyment of any part of the Property, by reason of a Neighborhood Association's failure to collect Neighborhood Common Expenses from its members, by waiver of any rights, or by reason of any claim against the Master Developer, the Master Association or any of their respective officers, directors or agents for their failure to fulfill any duties under the Master Governing Documents or MCIOA. 6.7.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Master Governing Documents or any Neighborhood Governing Documents, the Master Developer shall not be liable to pay any Master Assessment, nor any assessment levied by a Neighborhood Association for Master Assessments, with respect to any Unit owned by it, nor shall the Unit be subject to a lien for such Assessments, until the date on which a Dwelling constituting or located within the Unit has a certificate of occupancy or other comparable certification issued by the City. The Master Developer may, in writing, grant a similar exemption from liability for Master Assessments to a Neighborhood Developer or Builder. In addition, the Master Board may allocate a reduced share of the Master Assessment to certain Members to take into consideration (i) Neighborhoods which contain incomplete or unoccupied Dwellings, or (ii) Neighborhoods which are not otherwise receiving full services from the Master Association (regardless of who owns the Units). 6.8 Working Capital. There shall be established a working capital fund to meet Master Association operating expenses or to purchase additional equipment or services during the Master Association's beginning years of operation. 6.8.1 There shall be contributed on a one-time basis for each Unit sold and conveyed to a purchaser a working capital contribution in the amount of $250.00; provided, that a conveyance to a Neighborhood Developer or a Builder for purposes of construction or development of one or more Units shall be exempt from the foregoing contribution requirements. 17 2190398.v1 6.8.2 The contribution shall be paid at the time of closing of the initial sale of the Unit to a purchaser other than a Neighborhood Developer or Builder. 6.8.3 The contributions are in addition to, and shall not be credited against, the regular installments of Master Assessments. 6.9 Liens for Master Assessments. The Master Association has a lien against each Unit for the portion of a Master Assessment levied against the Unit by the Neighborhood Board of the Neighborhood Association in which that Unit is located. If a Master Assessment is payable in installments, the full amount of the Master Assessment is a lien from the time the first installment becomes due. Fees, charges, late charges, fines, attorneys' fees, interest, or other charges imposed by the Master Association are liens, and are enforceable as Master Assessments hereunder. Recording of this Master Declaration constitutes record notice and perfection of any lien under this Section, and no further recordation of any notice of or claim for the lien is required. 6.10 Lien Priority; Foreclosure. A lien against a Unit for Master Assessments is prior to all other liens and encumbrances on the Unit except (i) liens and encumbrances recorded before the Master Declaration; (ii) any first mortgage on the Unit; and (iii) liens for real estate taxes and other governmental assessments or charges against the Unit. A lien against a Unit for Master Assessments may be foreclosed against the Unit under the laws of the State of Minnesota (i) by action, or (ii) by advertisement in substantially the same manner as a mortgage containing a power of sale. The Master Association, or its authorized representative, shall have the power to bid at the foreclosure sale and to acquire, hold, lease, mortgage and convey any Unit so acquired. The Owner and any other Person claiming an interest in the Unit, by the acceptance or assertion of any interest in the Unit, grants to the Master Association a power of sale and full authority to accomplish the foreclosure by advertisement. The holder of a first mortgage on a Unit which acquires title to the Unit by foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure shall take title to the Unit free and clear of all Master Assessment liens encumbering the Unit and payable in the period prior to the acquisition of title to the Unit by the mortgage holder. At such time as the first mortgage holder takes title to the Unit, it shall be obligated to pay Master Assessments levied against the Unit and payable during the period when it holds title to the Unit. The Master Association shall, in addition to its other remedies, have the right to pursue any other remedy at law or in equity against the Owner who fails to pay or whose Neighborhood Association fails to pay any Master Assessment or charge against the Unit or the Neighborhood Association in which the Unit is located. 6.11 Voluntary Conveyances; Statement of Master Assessments. In a voluntary conveyance of a Unit, the transferee shall not be personally liable for any part of any unpaid Master Assessments due and payable by the transferor prior to or at the time of conveyance of title to the transferee. However, a lien for any Master Assessment levied against the Unit, shall remain against the Unit until satisfied or released. The Master Association shall furnish to the transferor or transferee of a Unit, upon request, a statement as to the current status of Master Assessments against the Unit. The Master Association may charge a reasonable fee for such services. 18 2190398.v1 SECTION 7 USE RESTRICTIONS Adelaide Landing is intended to be a high quality residential development for the use and enjoyment of the Owners and Occupants. The use restrictions contained in this Section are designed to facilitate the various residential uses of the Property, and to preserve and protect the physical environment and architectural characteristics of the Property and immediately adjacent landscaped areas. Accordingly, the following restrictions shall apply to the Property: 7.1 General. The Property shall be owned, conveyed, encumbered, leased, used and occupied subject to the Master Governing Documents, as amended from time to time. All covenants, restrictions, obligations, conditions and easements set forth in the Master Governing Documents are in furtherance of a plan for the Property, and shall run with the Property and be a burden and benefit to all Owners and Occupants and to any other Person owning or acquiring an interest in the Property, their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. 7.2 Residential Use. The Property is designed and intended exclusively as a residential area. Except as provided in Section 7.3, the Units shall be used by Owners and Occupants and their guests exclusively for private, single family residential purposes, and not for transient, hotel, commercial, business or other nonresidential purposes; subject to the respective Neighborhood Governing Documents, and to applicable governmental laws, regulations and ordinances. 7.3 Permitted Business Activities. No business, trade, occupation or profession of any kind, whether carried on for profit or otherwise, shall be conducted, maintained or permitted in any Unit or the Master Common Elements, except: 7.3.1 An Owner or Occupant residing in a Dwelling may maintain an office or home occupation in such Owner or Occupant's Dwelling; provided, that such use (i) is incidental to the residential use; (ii) does not involve physical alteration of the Dwelling visible from the exterior; (iii) is in compliance with applicable governmental laws, ordinances and regulations; (iv) does not involve unusual numbers of deliveries, or unusual levels of pedestrian or vehicular traffic to and from the Unit; and (v) does not involve activity which disturbs the quiet enjoyment of the Property by other Owners or Occupants. 7.3.2 The Master Association may maintain offices and other facilities on the Property, including the Master Common Elements, for management, operations and related purposes. 7.3.3 The Master Developer, and the Neighborhood Developers if approved by the Master Developer, may maintain offices and other related facilities on the Property, including the Master Common Elements, in connection with the exercise of their rights under the Master Governing Documents or the Neighborhood Governing Documents. 7.4 Leasing. Leasing of any Unit or Dwelling is not prohibited by this Master Declaration. However, Master Rules may require a minimum lease term of up to 12 months. The Master Rules may also require that Owners use Master Board -approved lease forms (or include 19 2190398.v1 specific lease terms), and may impose a reasonable review or administrative fee in connection with the Master Board's review of a lease. Neighborhood Associations may from time to time adopt their own Neighborhood Rules, which may be more restrictive than the Master Rules, regarding leasing within their Neighborhoods. 7.5 Pets. Common domesticated animals such as dogs, cats, fish or birds may be kept within the Dwellings as household pets ("pets") subject to the conditions set forth in this Section and to other reasonable regulation by the Master Association and the Neighborhood Association governing the Neighborhood in which the pet's owner is a resident. No other animals may be kept on the Property. Pets shall be kept solely as domestic household pets or as statutorily authorized "service animals" and not for any other purpose. No animal shall be raised or bred, or kept for business or commercial purposes. No pet shall be allowed to make an unreasonable amount of noise, nor to become a nuisance or a threat to the safety of others. The term animal is construed in the broadest sense and includes all living creatures except humans. 7.6 Parking/Vehicles/Personal Property. The outside storage or parking of buses, trucks (other than pick-ups, SUVs and similar small trucks used for the Owner's or Occupant's personal vehicle), trailers, unlicensed automobiles, aircraft, tractors, motorcycles, snowmobiles, motorhomes, all -terrain vehicles, or watercraft is prohibited, except for temporary parking as authorized by the Master Association. The use of driveways and the types of vehicles and other personal property permitted to be kept thereon, shall be subject to regulation by the Master Association and Neighborhood Association. 7.7 Temporary Structures. No structure of a temporary character, mobile home, manufactured or modular home, trailer, basement, tent, shack, garage, barn, or other accessory building or structure shall be used on any Unit at any time as a residence, either temporarily or permanently. 7.8 Ste. Except as permitted by applicable law, no sign or comparable device of any kind shall be placed, erected or maintained on the Property except (i) one sign per Unit of a size and style approved by the Master Association, advertising the Unit for sale or rent; (ii) signs placed by the Master Developer or a Neighborhood Developer to advertise the Property, Units or Dwellings during the construction, development or sales period; and (iii) the permanent entrance signs and monuments erected by the Master Developer or Neighborhood Developers to identify the Property or the Neighborhoods. 7.9 Antennae/Satellite Dishes. The erection or modification of antennae and other communications, transmission or reception devices on the Property shall be governed by federal law and any applicable Master Rules. 7.10 Common Amenities. The use of the common park areas, trails, playgrounds, and related improvements shall be subject to any restrictions authorized by the Master Governing Documents. 7.11 Alterations. No Improvement shall be erected or maintained, no excavation, grading or reshaping shall be undertaken, and no refuse, fill or other material shall be placed, on the Property, which may impede access on, about or through the Property, cause damage to the Property or interfere with the installation, use or maintenance of other Improvements, or which 20 2190398.v1 may change or impede the flow of water through any natural, designed, improved or graded drainage area. 7.12 Additional Protective Covenants. Master Developer may require the imposition on a Neighborhood or portion of a Neighborhood, in connection with the creation or development of the Neighborhood or the annexation of any Additional Property, additional protective covenants and use restrictions not inconsistent with those contained in this Master Declaration. 7.13 Time Shares Prohibited. The time share form of ownership, or any comparable form of lease, occupancy rights or ownership which has the effect of dividing the ownership or occupancy of a Unit into separate time periods or ownership intervals, is prohibited. 7.14 Quiet Enjoyment; Interference Prohibited. All Owners and Occupants and their invitees shall have a right of quiet enjoyment in their respective Units subject to the normal and customary sights, sounds, odors and activity generated by the use of the Property by other Owners and Occupants. No Person shall engage in activity which damages the Property, causes a nuisance or unduly restricts or interferes with the use and quiet enjoyment of the Property by other Owners and Occupants. 7.15 Community Irrigation System. The use of the community irrigation system shall be subject to such Master Rules as the Master Board shall establish from time to time. 7.16 Compliance with Law. No use shall be made of the Property which would violate federal, state or local laws, regulations or ordinances, nor shall any act or use be permitted which could cause waste to the Property, cause a material increase in insurance rates on the Property, or otherwise cause any unusual liability, health or safety risk, or expense, for the Master Association, the Members or any Owner or Occupant. SECTION 8 ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE STANDARDS 8.1 General. It is the intent of the Master Developer to create a general plan and uniform scheme of development of the Property and to create within the Property a residential community of high quality and harmonious Improvements. Accordingly, all site work, landscaping, structures and other Improvements visible from outside of existing structures are subject to standards for design, landscaping, architecture and aesthetics adopted pursuant to this Section (the "Design Guidelines") and the approval procedures set forth in this Section, except as this Section or the Design Guidelines may otherwise specify. 8.2 Design Review Authority. The authority to review and act upon all applications for review of proposed Improvements is granted to the Master Developer until delegated, expired or terminated as provided in this Section, at which time the authority shall, subject to the qualifications and limitations herein, transfer to a Design Review Committee appointed by the Master Board. The entity, whether the Master Developer, the Design Review Committee, or other approved designee, having jurisdiction in a particular review case is sometimes herein referred to as the "Design Reviewer." 21 2190398.v1 8.2.1 Unless expressly otherwise agreed in writing with respect to a specific application or Neighborhood, the Master Developer shall have exclusive authority to review and act upon all applications for review of proposed Improvements until such time as all Dwellings planned for the Property and Additional Property have been completed and a certificate of occupancy has been issued for each. 8.2.1.1 The Master Developer may designate one or more persons to act on its behalf in reviewing any application. 8.2.1.2 In reviewing and acting upon any request for approval, the Master Developer or its designee may act solely in the Master Developer's interest and owe no duty to any other Person. 8.2.1.3 From time to time, the Master Developer may, but is not obligated to, delegate any or all of its authority under this Section to other Persons or committees, including any committee appointed pursuant to Section 8.2.2. 8.2.1.4 Any delegation of authority shall be in writing, shall specify the scope or responsibilities delegated, and shall be subject to (i) the Master Developer's right to revoke such delegation at any time and reassume its prior control, and (ii) the Master Developer's right to veto any decision which it determines, in its discretion, to be inappropriate or inadvisable. 8.2.1.5 So long as the Master Developer has any authority under this Section, the jurisdiction of others shall be limited to such matters as the Master Developer specifically delegates. 8.2.2 Upon the Master Developer's delegation of authority pursuant to Section 8.2.1, or upon expiration of the Master Developer's rights under this Section 8, the Master Board shall appoint a Design Review Committee to assume jurisdiction over matters within the scope of the delegated authority or this Section, respectively. 8.2.2.1 The Design Review Committee shall be a permanent committee of the Master Association, and shall administer and perform the architectural and landscape review and control functions of the Master Association. 8.2.2.2 The Master Board shall (i) determine how many persons shall serve on the Design Review Committee; (ii) set reasonable terms of office for the members of the Design Review Committee; and (iii) determine which member of the Design Review Committee will serve as its chair. Meetings of the Design Review Committee may be called at the discretion of the chair, and shall be called by the chair upon the request of a majority of the members. 8.2.2.3 A majority of the Design Review Committee shall constitute a quorum to transact business at any Design Review Committee meeting, and the action of a majority of those members present and voting shall constitute the action of the Design Review Committee. 22 2190398.v1 8.2.2.4 The Master Board may relinquish and delegate to a Neighborhood Association part or all of the Design Review Committee's authority to review and approve or disapprove architectural change applications with respect to the Neighborhood Property; provided, however, that the Design Review Committee shall retain the ultimate authority to approve or disapprove such applications. A delegation of part or all of the Design Review Committee's authority under this Section 8 shall be in a written document signed on behalf of the Master Association, the Design Review Committee and the Neighborhood Association to which the authority is delegated. The Neighborhood Association and any architectural review committee appointed by it shall follow and be bound by the same approval procedures and standards as the Design Review Committee. 8.2.2.5 Until expiration of the Master Developer's authority under this Section 8, the Design Review Committee shall notify the Master Developer in writing within three (3) business days following any action (e.g., approval, partial approval, or disapproval) it takes under this Section 8 and prior to notifying the applicant of its decision. A copy of the application and any additional information the Master Developer may require shall accompany the notice. The Master Developer shall have ten (10) business days after receipt of such notice to veto any such action, in its sole discretion, by written notice to the Design Review Committee. 8.3 Design Guidelines. The Master Developer may prepare the initial Design Guidelines, which may contain general provisions applicable to all of the Property as well as specific provisions that vary among uses or locations within the community. The Design Guidelines are intended to provide guidance to Owners, Builders and contractors regarding matters of particular concern to the Design Reviewer. 8.3.1 The Master Developer shall have sole and complete authority to amend the Design Guidelines for so long as it has review authority under this Section. The Master Developer's right to amend the Design Guidelines shall continue even if it delegates reviewing authority to the Design Review Committee, unless the Master Developer also delegates the power to amend to the Design Review Committee. Upon termination or delegation of the Master Developer's right to amend the Design Guidelines, the Master Board may amend the Design Guidelines with the Master Board's consent. 8.3.2 Amendments to the Design Guidelines shall apply prospectively only. They shall not require modifications to or removal of any Improvements previously approved once the approved construction or modification has begun. However, any unapproved new work on such Improvements must comply with the Design Guidelines as amended. There shall be no limitation on the scope of amendments to Design Guidelines, and such amendments may eliminate requirements previously imposed or otherwise make the Design Guidelines more or less restrictive. 8.3.3 The Design Reviewer shall make the Design Guidelines available to Owners and Builders upon request. 23 2190398.v1 8.4 Application and Approval Required. Except as otherwise authorized by this Section 8, no Improvement shall be constructed, erected, removed, planted or maintained, nor shall any addition to or any change, replacement or alteration thereof be made, until plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials, floor plans, color scheme and location of the Improvement shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Design Reviewer. 8.4.1 Approval shall be requested by written application on such forms as may be required by the Design Reviewer, and in compliance with the following requirements unless waived in writing by the Design Reviewer. Two complete sets of plans and specifications, including site survey, prepared by an architect, landscape architect, engineer or other person found to be qualified by the Design Reviewer shall be submitted. The site survey shall show the proposed topography of the Property to be improved or altered in one foot contours with other relevant elevation information and all proposed structures, driveways, easements, patios and other hard surfaces and grading. The Design Reviewer may require submission of samples of building materials and colors proposed to be used. The applicant shall also apply for approval to the City or other governmental authority having jurisdiction over the subject of the application, if required by the governmental authority. If the information submitted to the Design Reviewer is, in the Design Reviewer's sole opinion, incomplete or insufficient in any manner, the Design Reviewer may require the submission of additional information. 8.4.2 Subject to any specific requirements or exceptions contained in this Section 8, the Design Reviewer shall have the exclusive right to approve or disapprove all proposed additions or any other Improvements or changes to the exterior of any Dwelling, Building or other Improvement, including but not limited to the size, exterior design, color, materials, landscaping and location with respect to all Improvements, as well as the general plan for the overall development of any Neighborhood. 8.4.3 In reviewing each application, the Design Reviewer may consider any factors it deems relevant, including but not limited to harmony of the proposed external design with surrounding structures and environment. Decisions may be based on purely aesthetic considerations. Each Owner acknowledges that such determinations are purely subjective and that opinions may vary as to the desirability and/or attractiveness of particular Improvements. 8.4.4 The Design Reviewer may, in its sole discretion, impose standards for design, appearance, construction, or development which are greater or more stringent than standards prescribed by the Master Governing Documents, the Design Guidelines, or by building, zoning, or other governmental laws, codes, or regulations; provided that such standards shall be consistent with the architectural character and use of the Property as planned and developed by the Master Developer. 8.5 General Standards For Review. The Design Reviewer has authority to approve, conditionally approve or deny an application, in its sole and absolute discretion. In making its determinations, the Design Reviewer shall consider, at a minimum, the following general criteria: 8.5.1 Compliance with this Master Declaration. 24 2190398.v1 8.5.2 Verification that the grading and mechanisms developed for the Property for the purposes of collecting and disbursing stormwater runoff will not be compromised by the proposed Improvement. 8.5.3 Compatibility of color, size, location, type and design for high quality Dwellings, Buildings containing Dwellings and other Improvements. 8.5.4 Compatibility of the proposed Improvement in terms of topography, soils, drainage, or existing vegetation. 8.5.5 Comparable or better quality of materials as used in existing Buildings or other Improvements on the Property. 8.5.6 Set -back and minimum square footage requirements for Dwellings. 8.5.7 Adequate protection of the Property, the Master Association, Owners and Occupants from liability and liens arising out of the proposed alterations. 8.5.8 Compliance with the Design Guidelines as may be amended from time to time in accordance with Section 8.3. 8.5.9 Preservation of existing trees, vegetation, open areas, ponds, lakes and wetlands located on or adjacent to the Property. 8.5. 10 Compliance with governmental laws, codes, ordinances and regulations. 8.6 Notice of Decision. The Design Reviewer shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the application and notify the applicant in writing within forty-five (45) days following the receipt of the application and all other required information. The notice shall state the approval or denial of the application, or any qualifications or conditions of approval. If the Design Reviewer disapproves the application, it shall state the grounds upon which the disapproval is based. No Improvement shall be erected or shall be allowed to remain which violates any of the covenants, conditions, restrictions or easements contained in this Master Declaration, or which violates any governmental law, zoning or building ordinance, or regulation. 8.7 Exceptions and Variances. The following types of work do not require Design Reviewer approval: (i) work by the Master Developer or any affiliate upon any of the Property owned by the Master Developer or owned by a person who has hired the Master Developer or its affiliate to perform the work; (ii) changes in the interior of any Dwelling; and (iii) the planting of flowers or other vegetation in gardens, flower beds, planters, etc., in a manner that does not change the topography of the Property and that is generally consistent with any landscaping plan that has been previously approved by the Design Reviewer. The Design Reviewer may, in its sole discretion, grant variances from the requirements contained in Section 8 or otherwise established by the Design Reviewer, on a case by case basis; provided, that the variance sought (i) involves unique circumstances; (ii) is reasonable; (iii) does not adversely affect drainage in the Property; and (iv) does not violate any development agreement with the City, any governmental law, ordinance, code or regulation. The granting of such a variance by the Design 25 2190398.v1 Reviewer shall not nullify or otherwise affect the Design Reviewer's right to require strict compliance with its requirements on any other occasion. 8.8 Completion Schedule. Unless otherwise approved by the Design Reviewer, construction of Buildings and other Improvements for which the approval of the Design Reviewer is required under this Master Declaration shall be completed within twelve months after the start of construction of the Building or other Improvement. 8.9 Inspection and Remedies. The Design Reviewer, and any agent or member of the Design Reviewer, has the right of entry and inspection upon any portion of the Property for the purpose of determining whether there is compliance with the applicable architectural standards. If any Person fails to comply with the requirements of the Master Declaration, the Design Guidelines or the standards promulgated by the Design Reviewer, the violator shall pay all costs in connection with the resolution or correction of the violation, including but not limited to any fees of attorneys or other professionals, incurred by the Master Developer or Master Association. The Design Reviewer may, in addition to its other remedies, record against the Unit, in the public records of the county, a Certificate of Noncompliance stating that the Improvements fail to meet applicable architectural standards. 8.10 Review Fees. The Design Reviewer may adopt a schedule of reasonable fees for processing applications for architectural approval. The fees, if any, shall be payable to the Master Association and delivered to the Design Reviewer at the time that the application is submitted to the Design Reviewer. The fees, as well as other expenses of the Design Reviewer required to be paid, shall be deemed to be a Master Assessment against the Unit with respect to which the application is made. 8.11 Master Developer Exemption. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, any Improvements of any nature at any time made or approved by the Master Developer, including but not limited to Improvements made or to be made to the Master Common Elements, Neighborhood Property or Additional Property, shall not be subject to the review or other procedures of the Design Reviewer, but such Improvements shall comply with the plan of development approved by the City. 8.12 No Representation of Compliance/Indemnification. Approval of plans and specifications by the Design Reviewer does not represent or guaranty that the plans and specifications will, if followed, result in properly designed, graded or constructed Improvements, nor that any Building, grading, landscaping or other Improvement built in accordance therewith is built in a good and workmanlike manner. The Master Developer, the Master Association, and the Design Reviewer are not liable for any defects in any plans or specifications submitted or approved; any loss or damages to any person arising out of the approval or disapproval of any plans or specifications; any loss or damage arising from the noncompliance of such plans and specifications with any governmental ordinances or regulations; nor any defects in grading or construction undertaken pursuant to such plans and specifications. Each Person submitting an application for approval is solely responsible for the sufficiency of the plans and specifications submitted and for the quality of construction, including but not limited to grading and landscaping, of the Improvements constructed, and shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the Master Developer, the Master Association, the Design Reviewer and the Neighborhood Associations, and their respective officers, directors, Design Reviewer personnel and agents, 26 2190398.v1 from and against all claims, damages and other liabilities arising out of the approval or construction of the Improvements to which the application relates. SECTION 9 MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS 9.1 Master Association Obli _ atg ions. The Master Association is obligated to, or may as indicated, provide the following maintenance: 9. 1.1 Maintain, repair and replace the Master Common Elements and all Improvements thereon, including but not limited to any "greens" and parks, berms, landscaping, irrigation systems and controls, ponds, private streets, alleys, lighting fixtures, fencing, trails, retaining walls and related Improvements; 9.1.2 Maintain, repair and replace the common entrance signs and related monuments identifying the Master Association and/or the Neighborhoods, whether located on the Master Common Elements, Neighborhood Property, a Unit or other property; and 9.1.3 Maintain, repair and replace the community irrigation system and all related "greens," berms, landscaping, components, controls, ponds, and related improvements located on the Master Common Elements, Neighborhood Property and/or outlots dedicated to the City for drainage or other similar purposes for the benefit of the Property, to the extent not maintained by the City, except those portions thereof that are located on and serve only a specific Unit. The Master Association may undertake such other maintenance, repair and replacement obligations with respect to the Property as are approved by sixty-seven percent (67%) vote of the entire Master Board. 9.2 Neighborhood Association and Owner Obligations. The obligations of the Owners and the Neighborhood Associations, as applicable, are as follows: 9.2.1 Neighborhood Associations shall maintain, repair or replace their respective Neighborhood Property as required by their Neighborhood Governing Documents, except to the extent maintained by the Master Association. 9.2.2 Except for Unit maintenance performed by the Master Association or Neighborhood Association, Owners shall maintain, repair and replace their Units in good, clean and sanitary condition, and in accordance with the Master Governing Documents and the Neighborhood Governing Documents for the Neighborhood in which the Unit is located. Each Owner shall also maintain, repair and replace all portions of the community irrigation system that are located on and serve only such Owner's Unit. 9.2.3 Neighborhood Associations and Owners shall maintain (including mowing), repair and replace trees, grass and landscaping located in the public right-of- way boulevards adjacent to their Neighborhood Property or Units, except to the extent maintained by the City or the Master Association. 27 2190398.v1 9.2.4 The Neighborhood Associations and the Owners shall perform their respective obligations hereunder in a good and workmanlike manner using materials and construction methods that are of a quality and character consistent with or better than the original construction thereof, (ii) maintain their respective properties in first-class condition performing all reasonably necessary cleaning, maintenance and related services as shall be necessary to maintain such condition; (iii) comply with all laws, ordinances, regulations and requirements now or hereafter enacted or promulgated by the City or any other governmental body having jurisdiction over the Property; (iv) proceed diligently and promptly with the required maintenance, repair or replacement activity; and (v) employ every reasonable effort to avoid damage to or interference with the properties of the other parties. 9.2.5 If any Neighborhood Association, Owner or Occupant fails, in the judgment of the Master Board, to perform maintenance required to be performed by the Person, the Master Association may give written notice to the responsible Person identifying the maintenance and demanding that the maintenance be performed within thirty (30) days after said written notice or such longer period of time reasonably necessary to perform such maintenance. If the responsible Neighborhood Association, Owner or Occupant fails to provide the identified maintenance within the period stated in the written notice, the Master Association may, in its discretion, undertake such maintenance and assess the Neighborhood Association, if the maintenance was the responsibility of the Neighborhood Association, or the Owner's Unit if the maintenance was the responsibility of the Owner or Occupant, for the cost thereof. If the cost is assessed against the Owner's Unit, such cost shall be a personal obligation the Owner and a lien against the Owner's Unit. SECTION 10 INSURANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION The Master Association shall obtain and maintain the following insurance relating to the Property: 10.1 Property Insurance. Property insurance in broad form, covering all risks of physical loss, for the full insurable replacement value of any insurable improvements located on the Master Common Elements. The property insurance policy shall provide such other coverages, limits and deductibles as the Master Board deems reasonable, subject to any greater requirements imposed by MCIOA. 10.2 General Liability Insurance. Public liability insurance covering the Master Common Elements, and the activities of the Master Association and its officers, directors, volunteers or employees in connection with the performance of their duties. The public liability insurance policy shall provide such coverage, limits and deductibles as the Master Board deems reasonable, subject to any greater requirements imposed by MCIOA. 10.3 Other Insurance. Such other types and amounts of insurance as may be determined by the Master Board to be necessary or desirable, including without limitation, property insurance, officers and directors' liability insurance, and insurance or fidelity bonds 28 2190398.v1 covering dishonest acts by those Persons having control or custody of the Master Association's funds. 10.4 Master Association as Trustee/Premiums. All insurance coverage obtained by the Master Board shall be written in the name of the Master Association as trustee for the Owners or Neighborhood Associations, as applicable. The premiums for the insurance shall be a Master Common Expense. The Master Board shall have exclusive authority to negotiate, settle and adjust claims under all policies obtained by the Master Association. 10.5 Policy Requirements. Insofar as permitted by law, the Master Association shall be required to make every effort to secure insurance policies with the following provisions and endorsements, if reasonably available: 10.5.1 Policies shall be written with a reputable insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota. 10.5.2 Policies shall contain a waiver by the insurer of its right to cancel without first giving thirty (30) days' prior written notice of such cancellation to the Master Association. 10.5.3 No policy or coverage shall be brought into contribution with insurance purchased by Owners, or Neighborhood Associations, and all policies shall contain appropriate provisions to that effect. 10.5.4 Policies shall contain a waiver of subrogation by the insurer as to any claims against the Master Association or Neighborhood Associations, and their directors and officers, the Owners, and the Master Association's manager, if any. 10.5.5 Policies shall contain a provision that no policy may be canceled, invalidated, or suspended on account of the conduct of one or more of the Owners or Neighborhood Associations, or on account of the acts of any director, officer, employee, or agent of the Master Association or of its manager, without prior demand in writing delivered to the Master Association to cure the defect and the allowance of a reasonable time thereafter within which to cure the defect. 10.5.6 Liability insurance shall contain cross -liability endorsements to cover liability of the Master Association to an Owner and shall also name the Master Developer as an additional insured for so long as the Master Developer owns any part of the Property or has the right to subject Additional Property to this Master Declaration. 10.6 Damage or Destruction to Improvements. In the event of a casualty on or to any portion of the Property, all repair and reconstruction of the damaged improvements shall be commenced promptly following the casualty and shall be carried through diligently to conclusion. The Master Association shall be responsible for the repair and reconstruction of Master Common Element improvements. The repair and reconstruction of the Units, Dwellings, or other Improvements located on Neighborhood Property shall promptly be undertaken by the Owners and/or the Neighborhood Associations in accordance with the requirements and procedures contained in the applicable Neighborhood Governing Documents. Each such Person shall have easements over, under and across the Property, as the case may be, to the extent 29 2190398.v1 reasonably necessary for the completion of such repair or restoration activities and shall (i) perform such obligations hereunder in a good and workmanlike manner using materials and construction methods that are of a quality and character consistent with original construction thereof, (ii) comply with all laws, ordinances, regulations and requirements now or hereafter enacted or promulgated by the City or any other governmental body having jurisdiction over the repair or restoration; (iii) proceed diligently, promptly and in good faith with the required repair or restoration activity; and (iv) employ every reasonable effort to avoid damage to or interference with the property of other parties. 10.7 Notice to Master Developer. Recognizing that the Master Developer is obligated to disclose to prospective purchasers the Master Association's projected budget, it is important that the Master Developer be advised of any budget changes following the termination of the Master Developer Control Period. Accordingly, the Master Association shall give the Master Developer at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice of any change in the Master Association's insurance policies until the Master Developer no longer owns any Unit for initial sale and no longer has the right to add Additional Property to the Property. SECTION 11 COMPLIANCE AND REMEDIES 11.1 Entitlement to Relief. The Master Association has authority to commence legal action to recover sums due, for damages, for injunctive relief, or any combination thereof, or an action for any other relief authorized by the Master Governing Documents or available at law or in equity. Legal relief may be sought by the Master Association against any Member or Owner, or by a Member against the Master Association or another Member or Owner, to enforce compliance with the Master Governing Documents, MCIOA or the decisions of the Master Association. However, no Member or Owner may withhold any Master Assessments, or take or omit other action in violation of the Master Governing Documents, or MCIOA as a measure to enforce such Person's position, or for any other reason. 11.2 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies, express or implied, administrative or legal, the Master Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to implement any one or more of the following actions against Owners or Members which violate the provisions of the Master Governing Documents, or MCIOA: 11.2.1 Exercise self-help or take action to abate any violation of the Master Governing Documents (including removing personal property that violates the Master Governing Documents). 11.2.2 Commence legal action for damages or equitable relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. 11.2.3 Impose late charges of up to the greater of $100, or 15% of the amount past due, for each past due Master Assessment or installment thereof, and impose interest at the highest rate permitted by law on all such unpaid amounts from the due date. 11.2.4 If any Master Assessment or installment thereof becomes more than thirty (30) days past due, all remaining installments of assessments assessed against the 30 2190398.v1 Member may be accelerated by the Master Association, and shall then be payable in full together with all late charges, attorney's fees and other professional fees and costs. Ten (10) days' advance written notice of the acceleration shall be given to the defaulting Member. 11.2.5 Impose reasonable fines, penalties or charges for each violation of the Master Governing Documents, the Design Guidelines or MCIOA. 11.2.6 Suspend the rights of any Owner or Occupant and their guests to use any Master Common Element amenities; provided, that the suspension of use rights shall not apply to those portions of the Master Common Elements providing utilities service and access to the Unit. Such suspensions shall be limited to periods of default by such Owners and Occupants in their obligations under the Master Governing Documents or the Governing Documents, and for up to one year thereafter, for each violation. 11.2.7 Restore any portions of the Master Common Elements or other portions of the Property, damaged or altered, or allowed to be damaged or altered, by any Member or Owner or Occupant or their guests in violation of the Master Governing Documents, and to assess the cost of such restoration against the responsible Member or Owner. 11.3 Rights to Hearing. Before the imposition of any of the remedies authorized by Sections 11.2.5, 11.2.6 and 11.2.7, the Master Board shall, upon written request of the offender, grant to the offender an opportunity for a fair and equitable hearing as contemplated by MCIOA. The offender shall be given notice of the nature of the violation and the right to a hearing, and at least ten (10) days within which to request a hearing. The hearing shall be held within thirty (30) days of receipt of the hearing request, and with at least ten (10) days' notice to the offender. If the offender fails to appear at the hearing, then the right to a hearing shall be waived and the Master Board may take such action as it deems appropriate. The decision of the Master Board, and the rules for the conduct of hearings established by the Master Board, shall be final and binding on all parties. The resulting decision shall be delivered in writing to the offender within ten (10) days following the hearing, if not delivered to the offender at the hearing. The Master Board may delegate all or part of its hearing authority to a committee appointed by it, in which case references in this Section shall refer to the committee as applicable. 11.4 Liability for Owners' and Members' Acts. A Member, Owner or Occupant shall be liable for the expense of any maintenance, repair or replacement of the Property arising out of their acts or omissions, or the acts or omissions of their invitees to the extent that such expense is not covered by the proceeds of insurance. 11.5 Costs and Attorneys. With respect to any measures, legal, administrative, or otherwise, which the Master Association takes to enforce the provisions of the Master Governing Documents, or MCIOA, the offender shall promptly pay or reimburse the Master Association for any expenses incurred in connection with such enforcement, including without limitation fines or charges previously imposed by the Master Association, fees of attorneys and other professionals, court costs and collection agency contingent fees. 11.6 Pre -Litigation Requirement. Any litigation, administrative proceeding or other legal action instituted or intervened in by or in the name of the Master Association, exclusive of (i) any action to collect Master Assessments or foreclose Master Assessment Liens, or (ii) to 31 2190398.v1 enforce the Master Governing Documents is subject to prior approval by more than fifty percent (50%) of the total votes of the Members. SECTION 12 MASTER DEVELOPER RIGHTS Master Developer hereby reserves exclusive and unconditional authority to exercise the following Master Developer Rights for as long as it owns a part of the Property for development or has the right to subject any Additional Property to the Property, or for such shorter period as may be specifically indicated: 12.1 Complete Improvements. To complete all improvements to the Property contemplated by the Master Developer's development plans, allowed by this Master Declaration or approved by the City, and to make alterations in the Master Common Elements, or in Units owned by it, to accommodate its activities. 12.2 Sales Facilities. To construct, operate and maintain sales offices, management offices, models and other development, sales and rental facilities within any part of the Property owned or leased by the Master Developer. 12.3 Ste. To construct and maintain signs and other sales displays offering parts of the Property or Additional Property for sale or lease and/or for other business or construction related purposes, on any part of the Property owned by it or subject to its easement or lease rights. 12.4 Easements. To have and use reasonable access easements, for itself, its employees, contractors, representatives, agents and prospective purchasers through and over the Property for the purpose of exercising its Master Developer Rights. 12.5 Control the Master Association. To control the operation and administration of the Master Association, including but not limited to the power to appoint and remove the members of the Master Board and officers of the Master Association, until the earliest of- (i) £(i) voluntary surrender of control by the Master Developer; (ii) the date when at least seventy- five percent (75%) of the Units that are initially included within the Property or intended to be added to the Property, have been conveyed to Persons other than a master developer, master association, declarant or association; or (iii) the date ten (10) years following the date of recording of this Master Declaration or such longer period authorized by MCIOA or any future amendment thereto. 12.6 Additional Covenants and Restrictions. To review and approve any additional covenants or restrictions affecting any portion of the Property. Any instrument recorded without the required approval shall be void and of no force and effect. 12.7 Exclusive Rights to Use Name of Development. To exclusively use the name "Adelaide Landing" or any derivative of either name in any logo, depiction or display associated with the Property in any printed, electronic or other form. However, Owners may use the name Adelaide Landing where such term is used solely to identify the Owner's property located within 32 2190398.v1 Adelaide Landing, and the Master Association shall be entitled to use the words Adelaide Landing in its name and in related Master Association documents. 12.8 Add, Relocate and Subdivide Property. To add Additional Property, and to combine or subdivide parts of the Property, as described in Section 13. 12.9 Approval of Certain Amendments. To approve or withhold approval for any amendment or other change to the Master Governing Documents or any Neighborhood Governing Documents for so long as the Master Developer owns any part of the Property, or has the right to subject any Additional Property to this Master Declaration. 12.10 Architectural Control. To approve the original construction of, and subsequent changes and additions to, all Improvements as provided in Section 8. 12.11 Other Rights. To exercise any other rights and powers granted or reserved to the Master Developer by any other section of the Master Governing Documents or by MCIOA. 12.12 Delegation of Rights. To temporarily or permanently delegate in writing part or all of its rights under this Section 12 to one or more Neighborhood Developers for purposes consistent with this Master Declaration. Such a delegation shall not be deemed a transfer under Section 12.13, unless recorded in accordance with that Section. 12.13 Transfer of Master Developer Rights. To transfer some or all of the Master Developer Rights, temporarily or permanently, by a separate instrument signed by the Master Developer and the transferee, and recorded against the portions of the Property and Additional Property owned by the Master Developer or the transferee and affected by the transfer, subject to the following qualifications. 12.13.1 Upon transfer of any of the Master Developer Rights, the liability of the Master Developer shall be as follows: (i) the Master Developer shall be liable for any obligation or liability arising out of its acts or omissions occurring before the transfer; (ii) the Master Developer shall be liable for any obligation or liability relating to any Master Developer Rights retained by the Master Developer; and (iii) the Master Developer shall not be liable for any act or omission arising from the exercise of Master Developer Rights by the transferee of the Master Developer Rights. 12.13.2 Any transferee of the Master Developer Rights shall be entitled to exercise such Master Developer Rights from and after the date of recording of the instrument transferring the rights. The transferee shall thereafter be subject to all of the obligations with respect to the rights transferred; except (i) misrepresentations of the Master Developer; (ii) warranty obligations of the Master Developer; (iii) breach of fiduciary obligations by the Master Developer or by any officers or members of the Master Board appointed by the Master Developer; (iv) any liability or obligation imposed on the Master Developer as a result of the Master Developer's acts or omissions after the transfer; and (v) any liability arising out of any Master Developer Rights retained by the Master Developer. 33 2190398.v1 SECTION 13 RIGHTS TO ADD PROPERTY, CREATE, COMBINE AND SUBDIVIDE 13.1 Master Developer's Riahts to Add Additional Property. The Master Developer hereby expressly reserves the exclusive right to add Additional Property to the Property, by unilateral action, subject to the following conditions: 13.1.1 The right of the Master Developer to add Additional Property to the Property shall terminate twenty (20) years after the date of recording of this Master Declaration or such longer period authorized by MCIOA or any future amendment thereto, or upon earlier express written withdrawal of such right by the Master Developer or a successor Master Developer; provided, that said rights may be extended by a vote of the Members. 13.1.2 The Additional Property may be added to the Property in parcels of any size and configuration determined by the Master Developer, subject to any governmental requirements. The Master Developer shall have the right and authority to unilaterally execute and record an amendment to this Master Declaration for the purpose of adding the Additional Property. 13.1.3 The Master Developer has no obligation to add the Additional Property to the Property, and may develop it for any purpose consistent with the applicable governmental requirements. There are no assurances as to the times at which any part of the Additional Property will be added to the Property, the order in which it will be added, the number of parcels per phase nor the size of the parcels. 13.2 Master Developer Rights to Create and Change Neighborhoods and Units. The Master Developer shall have the right to (i) combine, subdivide or relocate the boundaries between, Units owned by it; (ii) combine or subdivide Neighborhoods; or (iii) replat outlots subject to this Master Declaration and create new Master Common Elements or Units, or other Neighborhood Property therefrom, as provided in this Section, subject to the following requirements: 13.2.1 The Master Developer must own the Unit, Neighborhood Property or the part thereof being combined, subdivided, relocated or replatted. If said property is owned by another Person, then the approval of the other Person shall be required. 13.2.2 The creation, combination or subdivision of a Neighborhood or of a Unit shall comply with all governmental laws, codes and regulations applicable to the transaction. 13.2.3 The Master Developer shall have the authority to unilaterally execute and record an amendment to this Master Declaration, as needed, for the purpose of exercising its rights hereunder. 13.2.4 The Neighborhood Governing Documents of any affected Neighborhoods shall be amended, if necessary to reflect the changes, and the Neighborhood Association, 34 2190398.v1 and Neighborhood Developer, as applicable, shall cooperate in amending said documents. 13.3 Number of Units. The total number of Units subject to this Master Declaration is (), and the total number of additional Units planned to be created by the addition of the Additional Property pursuant to Section 13.1, or by the subdivision of Units or other parts of the Property pursuant to Section 13.2, is (). SECTION 14 AMENDMENTS This Master Declaration may be amended by recording an amendment in the office of the applicable county recording officer, subject to the following requirements: 14.1 Approvals. The amendment shall be approved as follows: 14.1.1 The Master Board; 14.1.2 The amendment shall be approved by sixty-seven percent (67%) of the total votes of the Members; and 14.1.3 The amendment shall be approved in writing by the Master Developer so long as the Master Developer owns an unsold Unit or has the right to subject Additional Property to this Master Declaration. 14.2 Recording/BindingEffect. ffect. All amendments shall be recorded, and shall run with the Property and bind the Property for the same period and to the same extent as do the covenants and restrictions set forth herein. 14.3 Affidavit of Compliance. An affidavit by the President or Secretary of the Master Association as to the outcome of the vote or the execution of any written approvals shall be adequate evidence thereof for all purposes, including without limitation the recording of the amendment. SECTION 15 INDEMNIFICATION The Master Association shall, to the extent the alleged liability is not covered by insurance, indemnify every individual acting in any official capacity on behalf of the Master Association, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 317A.521. SECTION 16 MISCELLANEOUS 16.1 Governmental Assessments. If a City or any other governmental authority levies an assessment under the applicable Minnesota Statutes for public improvements to property adjoining the Property, if such improvements benefit substantially all of the Property, and if the 35 2190398.v1 assessment is levied against fewer than all of the Units, then the Master Association shall assess and allocate against those Units which were not assessed by the governmental authority a share of the assessment, and reimburse the owners of the Units against which the assessment was levied, such that all Units are paying substantially an equal share of the assessment. 16.2 Severability. If any term, covenant, or provision of this instrument or any exhibit attached hereto is held to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, such determination shall not be deemed to alter, affect or impair in any manner whatsoever any other portion of this instrument or exhibits. 16.3 Construction. The Master Governing Document shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Minnesota. Where applicable, the masculine gender of any word shall mean the feminine or neutral gender, or vice versa, and the singular of any word used herein shall mean the plural, or vice versa. References to MCIOA, or any section thereof, shall be deemed to include any statutes amending or replacing MCIOA, and the comparable sections thereof. 16.4 Notices. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the Master Governing Documents or MCIOA, all notices required to be given by or to the Master Association, the Master Association officers, a Member, a Unit Owner or Occupant, or Parcel Owner, shall be (i) in writing and shall be effective upon hand delivery, or mailing if properly addressed with postage prepaid and deposited in the United States mail, or (ii) by authenticated electronic communication and shall be effective when sent, as and if authorized by the Master Bylaws and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 317A, except as expressly provided otherwise in the Master Governing Documents. 16.5 Conflicts Among Documents. In the event of any conflict among the provisions of MCIOA, this Master Declaration, or the Master Bylaws approved by the Master Association, MCIOA shall control unless it permits the documents to control. As among this Master Declaration, and the Master Bylaws, this Master Declaration shall control. The Master Governing Documents shall control as against any Neighborhood Governing Documents or Neighborhood Rules. 16.6 Duration of Covenants. The covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, liens and charges contained in this Master Declaration shall be perpetual, subject only to termination as provided in this Master Declaration or MCIOA. [Signature page follows] 36 2190398.v1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument the day and year first set forth above. OP5 ADELAIDE, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Ben Schmidt Its: Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this , 2017, by Ben Schmidt, the Vice President of OP5 Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said entity. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Felhaber Larson (MSR) 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 373-8409 37 2190398.v1 day of Adelaide, LLC, a EXHIBIT A TO MASTER DECLARATION ADELAIDE LANDING DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Lots —through _, inclusive, Block 1; and Outlot , Adelaide Landing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. Note: The Units consist of all Lots identified above excluding the above referenced Outlots which constitute the Master Common Elements. 2190398.v1 EXHIBIT B TO MASTER DECLARATION ADELAIDE LANDING DESCRIPTION OF MASTER COMMON ELEMENTS Outlot , Adelaide Landing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. 2190398.v1 Outlots and , County, Minnesota. 2190398.v1 EXHIBIT C TO MASTER DECLARATION ADELAIDE LANDING DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY Adelaide Landing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington CONSENT TO MASTER DECLARATION (Mortgagee) ADELAIDE LANDING The undersigned (the "Mortgagee") is a mortgagee of portions of real property described in the Master Declaration of Adelaide Landing (the "Master Declaration"), to which this consent is attached. Mortgagee hereby consents to and joins in the Master Declaration; provided, that by consenting to the Master Declaration the Mortgagee does not constitute itself or obligate itself as a Master Developer as defined in the Master Declaration, and provided further that such Mortgagee's mortgage, as the same may be amended from time to time, shall be and remain as a lien on the property described therein, prior to any Master Assessment liens or other liens imposed under the Master Declaration until released or satisfied. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Mortgagee has caused this Consent to be executed on the day of STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ) 2017. a Minnesota am Its: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2017, by , of , a Minnesota THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Felhaber Larson (MSR) 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612)373-8409 219o398.v1 the on behalf of said entity. Notary Public ADELAIDE LANDING Hugo, MN Architectural and Landscape Guidelines March 2017 Draft NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. Tables of Contents Contents STATEMENTS OF PURPOSE AND USE...................................................................................................................2 I. GENERAL PLANNING GUIDELINES AND REVIEW PROCESS....................................................................2 II. LOT CONSIDERATIONS....................................................................................................................................2 A. Grading & Erosion Control...............................................................................................................................2 B. Site Construction Considerations......................................................................................................................2 III. HOME DESIGN GUIDELINES...........................................................................................................................3 A. Presentation.......................................................................................................................................................3 B. House Facades...................................................................................................................................................3 C. Roof Materials and Pitches................................................................................................................................3 D. Decks................................................................................................................................................................3 E. Siding, Soffits and Fascia...................................................................................................................................3 F. Masonry, Brick and Cultured Stone...................................................................................................................3 G. Doors and Windows..........................................................................................................................................3 H. Garages and Garage Doors.................................................................................................................................4 I. Driveways..........................................................................................................................................................4 J. Setbacks............................................................................................................................................................4 K. Landscaping......................................................................................................................................................4 L. Fences...............................................................................................................................................................4 M. Dog Houses and Runs......................................................................................................................................5 N. Pools, Spas and Hot Tubs..................................................................................................................................5 O. Sports Courts....................................................................................................................................................5 P. Basketball Backboards, Trampolines and Gazebos.............................................................................................5 Q. Play Structures/Accessory Buildings...................................................................................................................6 R. Fines.................................................................................................................................................................6 EXHIBIT A — FORMAL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION EXHIBIT B — ARCHITECTUAL CHANGE APPLICATION NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. I STATEMENTS OF PURPOSE AND USE These Guidelines have been created to assist property owners, architects and contractors in their design of homes or other improvements in the community. By encouraging quality and attention to detail, the community will be preserved for the benefit of all present and future homeowners. For the purposes of this document, the term "Builder" or "Builders" shall be defined as any of the approved Builders in Adelaide Landing and "Owner" or "Homeowner" shall be defined as the resident or owner of a home or future home in Adelaide Landing. All homeowners within the community should refer to these Guidelines and any subsequent updates prior to commencing any modification, change, addition or alteration to any of the Improvements on their property. I. GENERAL PLANNING GUIDELINES AND REVIEW PROCESS. All Improvements are required to be submitted for Formal ARC Review. The Formal ARC Review Application (Attachment A) must be submitted with required items. The ARC may, in its discretion, require additional information to confirm that the completed improvements will conform to these Guidelines. In the case of any other Improvement (not a new home) to be completed by the Homeowner, the Architectural Change Application (Exhibit B) should be submitted to the ARC. Upon review of an application, the ARC will provide Owner or Builder one of three notices: A. Not Approved — this designation states that the submittal was not approved. B. Approved with Conditions - this designation indicates that the ARC reviewed and approved the Improvement subject to certain conditions provided that all other government and municipal requirements/approvals have been met/obtained to begin construction of the Improvement. C. Approved for Commencement of Construction - this designation indicates that the ARC reviewed and approved the Improvement provided that all other government and municipal requirements/approvals have been met/obtained to begin construction of the Improvement. NO TE.- All applicants (Builder and Owners) shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the Association and its officers, directors, and agents from and against any expenses, claims, damages, losses or other liabilities, including without limitation attorneys' fees and costs of litigation incurred by the Association, arising out of (i) any part of the alterations/improvements which violates any governmental law, code, ordinance, or regulation; (ii) the adequacy of the plans or specifications submitted by the owner in connection with this application; and (iii) the construction of the alterations/improvements. II. LOT CONSIDERATIONS. A. Grading & Erosion Control It is the responsibility of the Builder and then the Owner to control erosion and to construct and maintain adequate and positive drainage during and after construction of the home and installation of the landscaping. B. Site Construction Considerations Builder will be held responsible for debris that collects on the lot and off the lot from the site. Builder will also keep the street clean of mud, dirt by sweeping or scraping the dirt and or mud as directed by the ARC or the Board. If the Association must clean up, the appropriate charges will NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. 2 be passed on and applied as an assessment to the lot. Every Owner and Builder must provide erosion control per all applicable regulations. III. HOME DESIGN GUIDELINES A. Presentation All homes should be designed to consider architectural detailing on all four sides of the home with a mixture of siding and trim components. B. House Facades Interesting, articulating lines and shapes, porches, porticos, stoops, bays and balconies are strongly encouraged. Avoid building facades consisting of an unarticulated blank wall. Exterior walls may incorporate any of the following: brick, stucco, vinyl, stone, wood, cement board or LP siding. C. Roof Materials and Pitches The minimum roof pitch of the structure's primary roof shall be 6/12, steeper roof pitches are encouraged. The same color shingle on adjacent homes should be avoided (adjacent considers, either side of the subject home on the same side of the street, immediately across the street or directly behind the subject home). If a similar color is desired to be used, the ARC will review the request on a case by case basis. D. Decks Decks and patios should be an extension of the home. Cedar, redwood and wood composite construction is encouraged, painted or stained depending on the home style. The design and color palate of all deck features (posts, railing, skirting, newels, etc) should complement that of the home. E. Siding, Soffits and Fascia Vinyl siding, fascia and trim, as well as maintenance -free aluminum soffits are permitted. The same color siding on adjacent homes is prohibited (adjacent considers either side of the subject home on the same side of the street, immediately across the street or directly behind the subject home). Front elevations are strongly encouraged to include a material other than vinyl (i.e. stone, brick, cement board or LP products). All siding products must follow the final grading of the area around the sides and rear of the home. Exposed exterior insulation, or siding `step downs' which follow the foundation and not the grade will not be acceptable. F. Masonry, Brick and Cultured Stone There is no minimum required amount of stone on a home. When used, brick and stone must wrap around the house corners at least 18 inches. G. Doors and Windows Vinyl and vinyl clad wood windows are allowed. The entry door is expected to be a dominant feature. Sidelights and transoms are encouraged. Windows should be located on all elevations and be properly spaced and proportioned. All front elevation windows shall be trimmed out to provide dimension. Shutters, when used, should be sized to the opening and in keeping with the architectural style of the home. NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. H. Garages and Garage Doors It is strongly encouraged that garages are positioned to reduce their visual impact on the street. This includes keeping the face of the garage in line with the balance of the home, or behind the balance of the front of the home when possible. Exaggerated forward garage construction is strongly discouraged. I. Driveways Asphalt, concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, or pavers shall be used in the construction of all driveways and parking areas. Driveway grade shall be not more than 10%. J. Setbacks Setbacks are to be as required by the City of Hugo pursuant to the approved Planned Unit Development guidelines for Adelaide Landing. K. Landscaping A landscape plan is required as a part of the ARC Review process. All Landscaping shall be completed by the Builder or Owner within 180 days after closing on the home. Landscaping Plans must include a plant list. Front yard landscaping must include foundation plantings as well as one over story deciduous tree (minimum of 2.5" trunk caliper) or one coniferous tree (minimum of 6' in height). This is in addition to the developer -installed boulevard tree(s) as shown on the approved Landscape Plan for Adelaide Landing. All yard areas except natural areas, planting beds, decks, garden, play areas and pavements, must be sodded. No seeding is permitted. All vegetable gardens and play areas must be located in the rear yard. i.) Sod: Sod shall be installed throughout the entire yard and front boulevard of the home site upon completion of construction. The Lot shall be fully sodded by Builder on or before the earlier of 150 days after issuance of the building permit for the Lot or fifteen days after installation of the driveway on the Lot. In the event the home on the Lot is completed between October 15 and June I of any year, then the Lot shall be fully sodded on or before July 31 following completion of the home. ii.) Irrigation Systems: Lot irrigation systems are required for all homes. Adelaide Landing includes a water reuse system; irrigation water is pumped from the neighborhood ponds. The Master Homeowners Association is responsible for the mainline system which is stubbed to each property. Property owners are responsible for the installation and maintenance of irrigation lines and controllers within the owner's lot. iii.) Retaining Walls: Check city requirements for permit, design, certification, and construction requirements. Do not locate any portion of a retaining wall below the 100 - year high water elevation of any wetland or stormwater pond. No retaining walls shall be placed within a city or HOA based drainage and utility easement. iv.) Landscaping: (excluding sodding, which is addressed above) shall be completed by the Builder or Owner within 180 days after closing on the home. L. Fences Fences are not permitted for the Villa Homes. Fences for the Single Family Homes are permitted with the prior approval of the ARC. Materials must be durable and match the aesthetic themes of the home and community. The material of the fencing will be approved at the sole discretion of NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. 4 the ARC. Any fencing shall not exceed 6' feet in height and shall not `cross' any drainage easement. All fence installation must meet any requirements of the applicable government authority and the Master Declaration of Covenants. "Invisible fences" are encouraged and should be used for dog enclosures. Any approved fencing shall be maintained by the Owner on a continual basis, allowing the fencing to fall into any form of disrepair whether by physical maintenance or aesthetic appearance will not be tolerated. The ARC and or the Association will diligently enforce all policies relative to fencing. M. Dog Houses and Runs Dog houses are not permitted; all pets must be housed inside the home overnight. Dog runs may be permitted for the Single Family Units only with written ARC approval. Owner may be required to install perimeter landscaping to screen the enclosure. Dog runs must be placed in locations that minimize impact on neighboring structures. N. Pools, Spas and Hot Tubs Design, materials and layout of any proposed pool, spa or hot tub must be submitted for ARC review. Above ground pools are not permitted. A site plan showing exact location, complete construction details and a landscape plan that provides for sufficient screening are required with all submissions. Approval of the proposed screening will be subject to the discretion of the ARC. Pool and equipment enclosures must be architecturally related to the house and other structures in their placement, mass and detail. All pool equipment enclosures are not allowed within twenty (20) feet from the rear and fifteen (15) feet from the side property lines, and may not exceed five (5) feet in height. Pool decks may not encroach into setback areas to any property line. Pool equipment, tools, hoses, chemicals, etc., are to be located completely out of site. Pool drain hoses must be located to insure drainage remains on home site property and not on adjoining home site properties or easement areas. Pump motor location is to provide minimal noise disturbance to adjoining properties. O. Sports Courts All Sport Courts must be approved by the ARC prior to their installation and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. P. Basketball Backboards, Trampolines and Gazebos All permanent or removable basketball backboards, trampolines and gazebos must be approved by the ARC prior to installation and will be approved on a case-by-case basis. A site plan showing location, complete construction/elevation details and landscape plan are required with all submissions. Placement of trampolines should be considered to reduce the impact on neighboring lots — the ARC will reserve to right to impose certain setbacks for trampolines. Removable backboards and trampolines must be stored indoors and out of sight during the winter months. Care must be taken to locate gazebos so as not to infringe upon view corridors, adjacent structures and the natural amenities of the area. The minimum setback from side property lines is fifteen (15) feet and from the rear property line is twenty (20) feet and shall not be located within a drainage easement. The structure should be constructed of pressure treated wood, designed to NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. 5 complement the house and stained/painted to match the house. Notwithstanding these guidelines, Builder or Owner must meet all local agency requirements. Q. Play Structures/Accessory Buildings All play structures must be approved by ARC prior to installation. The colors of the play structures shall be neutral in color and blend with and compliment the home. A site plan showing the exact location of a proposed play structure is required with all submissions. The minimum setback from the rear property line is twenty-five (25) feet and the side property line is fifteen (15) feet and shall not be placed in a drainage easement. General maintenance and appearance of the play structure and/or gym set is the responsibility of the Owner. If the play structure and/or gym set is not maintained, the ARC may remove or maintain at the Owner's expense. R. Fines If any work is commenced prior to receiving written Approval, the Board may levy fines up to $2,500 against the party responsible for the application or against the subject lot. Prior to the imposition of a fine, the Board shall give reasonable notice to the owner regarding the violation and provide to the owner an opportunity for a hearing before the Board, in accordance with Section 13 of the Master Declaration. If a fine is imposed and is not paid within 30 days of imposition, or the violation is not cured with 30 days of any order to cure, an additional fine up to $250.00 may be imposed on the owner and assessed against the owner's lot for each 30 day period thereafter during which the initial fine remains unpaid or the violation remains uncured. The Board may levy fines in addition to requiring compliance. The payment of a fine shall not constitute authorization for the applicant or any other party to proceed with the proposed construction or continue any violation or a waiver of any requirements contained in these Guidelines or the Master Declaration. The fines imposed under this section are separate from and in addition to any order to cure violations and any other penalties, fines, damages, attorneys' fees or other costs which the Association or the ARC may impose and other remedies the Association or the ARC may obtain in connection with the enforcement of these Guidelines or the Master Declaration. The imposition of a fine for a violation shall not serve as precedent for a subsequent fine for the same violation. The imposition of a fine in an amount for a violation shall not serve as precedent for imposing the same fine for a subsequent similar violation. Each fine shall be imposed on a case- by-case basis. SUBMITTAL PROTOCOL: All submittals can be sent via email or mail to the below address (email is preferred): Deb. RidgewayPExcelsiorLLC. com Adelaide Landing ARC c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 S, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 This email can also be used for general Architectural Review questions. NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. C EXHIBIT A FORMAL ARC REVIEW APPLICATION ADELAIDE LANDING Architectural Information Packages submitted to ARC must be complete. Date: Date Received: Address: Style of Home: Legal Lot: Block: Addition: Survey Enclosed: Landscape Plan: YES: F-1 NO: House Plans: Full Set: YES: F—] NO: Tree Survey Complete: YES: F-1 NO: F-1 N/A: Builder Name: WO: F-1 LO: Contact Information: Name: Phone: Office: Cell: Fax: E -Mail: Buyer Name/Model: Signed Disclosure Copy: Exterior Finishes: (If applicable, please indicate lap siding exposure width.) Front: YES: F—] NO: FB: YES: El NO: Sides & Rear: Stone (provide picture): YES: E] NO: E] Soffit Material: Fascia Material: Exterior Colors: (All submittals must include individual color sample squares of each color.) Front: Sides & Rear: Soffit: Fascia: Other (shutters, columns, etc.): Other: Windows: Window Color: Shingles Type (Manufacturer and Product): Shingle Color: Driveway Type: Front Door Finish (if painted, include color sample): Other: NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. 7 Lot Survey Checklist 1. House style consistent w/grading plan. 2. W/O if allowed on the lots at an elevation no lower than on grading plan. Show garage and basement floor elevations. 3. Setbacks in accordance with ARC Guidelines. Label all setbacks. 4. Emergency Overflows — EOF's elevations same as Grading Plan. 5. Building pad shown. Is rear of home outside of building pad? 6. Driveway width — less than or equal to 18' wide at curb. Label width. 7. Driveway slope/grade — less than or equal to 10%. 8. Show all easements, curb & gutter, decks, porches. 9. Show locations and elevations of homes in adjacent lots. 10. Label existing and proposed lot corner elevations. 11. In difficult drainage situations, sufficiently label proposed elevations and drainage arrows. Submit survey with Architectural Approval Application as required in the Architectural Guidelines. NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. EXHIBIT B ARCHITECTURAL CHANGE APPLICATION ADELAIDE LANDING Name: Address: Development Name: Est. Start Date: Contractor's Name: Type of Alteration/Improvement: Include the following attachments with the application: Phone #: City: Zip Code: Est. Completion Date: Phone #: F1 Attach all the required items as listed in the attached Architectural Change Checklist. If the requested change is not one of the identified changes in the Architectural Change Application Supplement, please contact the Community Association Manager for further instructions on what is needed to fully complete the application. The homeowner agrees to the following: A. No alterations/improvements may be commenced until written approval is received from the Architectural Review Committee. Alterations/improvements must be completed as represented in this Application, or as modified by any changes required as a condition of approval. B. The owner is responsible for obtaining any required building permits. C. The owner, not the Association, Board of Directors, or Review Committee, is responsible for (i) the construction standards and specifications relating to the alterations/improvements and construction work; and (ii) determining whether the alterations/improvements violate any restrictions or requirements imposed by any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the Unit. D. The owner shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the Association and its officers, directors, and agents from and against any expenses, claims, damages, losses or other liabilities, including without limitation attorneys' fees and costs of litigation incurred by the Association, arising out of (i) any part of the alterations/improvements which violates any governmental law, code, ordinance, or regulation; (ii) the adequacy of the plans or specifications submitted by the owner in connection with this application; and (iii) the construction of the alterations/improvements. Signature: NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. Date: Architectural Change Checklist The purpose of this form is to provide a reference tool for common landscaping and architectural changes. This form does not replace the Architectural Guidelines. If you are considering making a landscaping or architectural change, review the Architectural Guidelines prior to submitting the application. For any changes not referenced below, please call the Association's Community Manager for more information. All applications are subject to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Committee. Change Required Documents Requested Landscaping A. Completed Application B. Site Survey — The proposed AND existing landscaping must be drawn on the survey. C. Landscaping Plan D. Plant/Tree Inventory — A description of the type, quantity and size of all plant/tree material. E. Hardscape Inventory — A description of the type, quantity and size of all hardscape material (patios, retaining walls, etc...) F. Drainage Plan — If changes to your elevations and drainage are going to be made then a revised drainage plan must be submitted. Playset A. Completed Application B. Site Survey — The proposed playset must be drawn on the survey. Include evidence that the playset is in compliance with the required side and rear yard setbacks. C. Picture — A color picture of the proposed playset. D. Landscape Plan — Showing how the playset will be screened from side and rear view corridors. E. Plant/Tree Inventory — A description of the type, quantity and size of all plant/tree material. Hot Tub A. Completed Application B. Site Survey — The proposed hot tub must be drawn on the survey. C. Picture — A color picture of the hot tub. D. Landscape Plan — Showing how the hot tub will be screened from all side and rear view corridors. E. Plant/Tree Inventory — A description of the type, quantity and size of all plant/tree material. Fence A. Completed Application B. Site Survey — The proposed fence must be drawn on the survey. C. Picture — A color picture of the fence material. D. Maintenance — A description of the type of maintenance, if any, the fence will need. Deck (Deck A. Completed Application Addition) B. Site Survey — The proposed deck must be drawn on the survey, showing relation to the existing structure. C. Material Description (Picture) — a complete description of the proposed deck material (include a color picture). Include paint colors for deck material. D. Plans and Elevations — A scaled plan drawing showing proposed deck (deck addition) and the side elevations of the deck. Additions A. Completed Application B. Blue Prints — Professionally drawn. C. Site Survey — The proposed addition must be drawn on the survey. D. Material Inventory — Color pictures of the siding, trim and shingles, paint colors, samples of rock, brick or stone if applicable.. E. Elevations — A drawing showing the elevations of the addition. NOTE: Declarant reserves the right to make amendments at any time to these Architectural and Landscape Guidelines. 10 ILLUSTRATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN \V"' L��1LJ - -' sy .L�4LLL�J-J 3. P.: ,, .t' -i•�.. - '.��_✓J .: /.. \\ �,`;-.o - i.' I��`\tr, �}P'�KT� y t -.- �f i�,:\� tt, it\�'�s5�.',s.,�'j• -,5: •'+i:�'•r..'�.'.•,.g,,i,ti+D�.'a\ '{� ,'h t• ,>-. - .,a '.-'ii4:•`.t,,-' _#. t-,;�,ti:,b�t:t..,;�'y ��n}t .t,qq\�v \�,t`,�b'Xkr ',.,, .- ,_.�`�. j+;:�, {�• `r .ti -,- �r'`l" � a`e,P.}.tl, .•eti.. e.. ., !r` . �'': ^.�• ,i�t .�1iV• x `. i• .1. ,. , -1��'-j`"�_ •} �,{�`$.11,1•. -_ _r"��'�•�E,.f.,.i t�. (�•�;��!-:,.�. .�.'– ti ,., .'' 'nL°. .a.r �>��, /��„-;:��It �. F i�•t .- n•�`4 �,..,1=��;:.,. _-;• ,r� ,�'-., ;c+\,,�.g�fi�,/��7 ra,�; . ��f_�,� �ty.5Y`!,:', ,3 .LL':,�.e�/'414• \/ ; r•a r/�",����'✓r -i.'r•.;- a� tr•_ ,/ /.-'// 7/',"� /Yt•,,.,./,ni /� } /�� ' ,.'/s' - .► t y ��*�,C;i)t �`;�-, ♦,iII II . `\ * \ e/ � `�_r�,^ I�III :' -�III II -� .-. - __,,,�:+. yt, -, ,I ►� , �— i\— - .— P, s— — a i _ Lr— - % -II -:. ► �_ _-� r -I/� - �t_*-. �!'�I ��/ / ! :11 !,', ,1, ', c' ISI I � Is F�\ �l\�I SY\ I 1, f: *ys3_ . ,:r,rr_ , o� rriIxIII _r �1 \—*.;►�•r\,�•IIj• � II�I: r �rII -t --- - _–__R- _ '--►1I � , "III - �' .�-II'_-',I—� �j-,• - - ,• .% -1LI. I - � \ II �(��• , ,p_ ,1i . -.".��C'+.�'� �'�' : a, II -� e .I Ir a //` tI;I. �°� // // ^ �yII I /. a//;�L/i/ . v,,/t: h� /r1�'r. ► / ",i •/ l�o�.-III �-' ``�''�s' /\®-' .� � / � j.� ./. 4r"/.CY'-_,,.��. . =,y:�,i•."';/ ,! �.F r� �/ '/-� • IXr- i\ /,\ \�- � ��.. \ �–/.w y.\�� �am–n,.•_� .-/�.1 . i��►ii.��I \ � ;ce, /--I ��\=. /%'� PROJECT DATA r'' took `•– '`,�Ci �–� - II I . A- '\ _lII .,�,4' •II ' ,,- ,�..>.',�'f_!•t;'I�t"i, � '-"a-f• Gr oss Si/ te A r ea : 216.6 a c Collector Road ROW. 8.1 ac Jr- Ll1 30th Street: 4.7 ac. At Exsts Wetland 5 ac Floodzone( 100 yr): 4.6 c ---------- (beyond wetland limits) ]kNet Developable Are 14 ac SacPark O e 111.0 ac (includes ponds, parks, wetlands, wet buffers, road buffers, woods, e tc .) Wetland Proposed Homes 319 lots 45/& 55Villa Homes. 83 lots r–.---------�50 Single Family Lots: 51 lots n a Family vLo65 Si t 34 lots 70 Single FamilyLots: 61 lots -- ----------- ------- S•ngle Family L - o s• Lo ts Includes 7 future lots b othersPreserved Ispen rove Overall Gross Density: 1.5 un/ac ANK L 319 units/ 1975 ac kkJ V_I Overall Net Density: 2.2 un/ac 319units/ 146.2 ac Aerial photography from State of Minnesota; ,:�_ , -..'.e %• : _e�. -f . - .!A'r.. y . 1 - - .1+;,ma�y'l Il ,�1\ i \/, . �,. / \ •. — • • •� -• • -- • _•-___/-�`– / - �..A\– a -/ -A ®/- \\� I L–\ --\ –\–i/ C \\ i',; :. �n ��' _ A _� _'� --C \� —\\\_�\_' ,_/ _ I \ I ------ - •' k%� •'. ..n, "... • •# , •: .i- •' . - ``Ui:;,�. :/ � + y � �-' ,;;wa�r�,. > ��-�s• . '•+�e,, , -ir'��, te�': ,:ti'#r�. - is >,e•-� c:':t>om,'� � ,�•� ,�iYii`1;k,,►�4'r'�..".r=-., n4z..t* �i,.�.,fr,F:v�..jY '"sayem+.'.S III ` •.'� :.D.�:;:d'�f�}!�ti•'� r -r '��,-h4 ,r S'r Topography p�o r�aph Yfrom 'oj m S tat_eh LID+ AR y •• -` –_ "d•yt+�"v�- WONN -Ar-11 i �rr..�,•�(i� _'r,�Vy,+`rln–-- w . II I II II � f�!°► �+7►`–r. 's–Py–. ---t– --- , r _______________ - -- - - - -- - - — -- s __ tea. ►w F L :/ • I II _ 111 1I e JI – - Wa i' •� _ •>"� ,'• � , I _ - III 1 � , I � // `�� I �\:: II \ II II I ` ll - s JL J 1 I i e F7, J \ t I J �•, l � rk�r�•r.�TF_ – i - - I I 1 \\ i \\ I I \\ II �/\ � �^ �� � /� ` s � _ _ – I -- `� I I �\ I il I ----- i' s S.14 I \ \ L -I r s • • ..r \� r 6 \ - � s / u Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. EXCELSIOR ❖ The Excelsior Group 03-09-2017 0008463 I�1 N �� •14W -J L -J L -__IL-- I I 1 /--L---- _------ 10 -__ I I II � •• \��•� I( rill- I IMI jl_q j f1\\\ ►0� ��� ►®4' •0 •mat ��b ��d4 a► i t► '•1,,. � Gid'—►s1�✓ ���, ► s ►�:� IMg I►te ®7/r 1� - t: , I Future Lo,.m• ^ i��'1 .r► o '� \ .g lw � ■ I ..`� 1 � ��'' OUTLOT B �.1d �� Gtr \_i� ■ �� �Cr �. � 1� 00►h 'r '7► . _ �®�� R S " � •'` I "'� n° ►+.+ p 11 it^ ��► � Mpg I�•e ►�� �•�w� � I , .�1 � k� � �,�,�.:•.:. ` .N�. ' . '} . OUTLOT J :i Ze �` °''•',; ■ ■ ■ -�" ;►"±�" Existing Landscape Buffer.., Wetland a•� ►� d® '�,,4 -��. O!� �1 � ��`��•4'"va ►�`.'-a6v��''� A S��`�w:�-9j�'.affivvn9�°�•i` it; III OWN ent -'< 1. ADEI,AIDE LANDING HUGO, MN AIL +rK.' , ,i�..43KK > � ,•^"'••rte'.., •1RI�••ir" � �4r ------------- %K' --- -------- R I Mill Ak 0' 200' 400' 600' <I V ILLUSTRATIVE CROSS SECTION Existing Home 134th St. N. 1 .� 9�Elev 937+/- �� Flov 6i �/- r 1 Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Basement Elev 932.5 +/- (estimated) EXCELSIOR ❖ The Excelsior Group 03-21-2017 0008463 Rear Yard 800'+/- Existing 00'+,_ J 9+ i N 0 a Supplemental J ' Buffer Plantings F (see plans) Emergency Overflow Level = Elev 928.7 Overflow to Ditch ev931+i 100 yr High Water Level = Elev 928.5 -----_- -------- ------------------- -- ---- ------------- --- ------------------------------- ----- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ 15' Pond Normal Water Level = Elev 928.0 (Groundwater Elevation) 15' wet. Buffer (typ.) pond Buffer (typ.) ADEI,AIDE LANDING HuOO, MN Park Trail Corridor & i Landscape Buffer o Plantings a Existing Wetland Ditch 8'Trail Rear Yard Elev 931.5 Proposed Single Family --- -- -- ------ ome Public Street Elev 940 +/- 0' 30' 60' 90' c2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. for • mi Plt, Gradi ang, and Landscape for Streets, Utilities, Ade40 laide Landing Hugo, MN Prepared for: OP5 Adelaide LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Contact: Deb Ridgeway Phone: 952-525-3223 Prepared by: Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Project number: 0008463.00 Contact: Cory Meyer, ASLA Vicinity Map z W La w EUU ¢ 142nd ST N 142nd> Q / U a ST. N, w ca 3 z z 141st ST. a o w w r > ¢ > v1 ¢ J ¢ 01 L� 141st ST.ST z A LLJ C) z W ca _N I�9Y z �~v FCC w l�q q` I > 138th �> c 38�h s �F d sT, L 137th Zj S ST, N �4 z Q w w O ¢ 135th ST 71 U � ���' LJ Q � � P�- �C Of G� CS ❑ LL 132nd ST, Cz GREYSTONE AVE z Z 129th �> z zST, Q N �P W W ���� > FONDAN T11,\SITE 128th ST. N. J z 128th ST. J ¢ ¢ a S ST. W 126th w U � o N. z J 61 > GALLIVA ¢ CT. N. 125th ST. N. ¢ z a o � z D 1�4 th Q 9 (Not to Scale NO. DATE INDEX Sheet Number Sheet Title 12/13/16 1 Cover 2 2 Existing Conditions ALL 3 Overall Preliminary Plat CITY COMMENTS 4 Preliminary Plat 5 Preliminary Plat 6 Preliminary Plat 7 Preliminary Plat 8 Phasing Plan 9 Overall Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 10 Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 11 Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 12 Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 13 Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 14 Overall Preliminary Utility Plan 15 Preliminary Utility Plan 16 Preliminary Utility Plan 17 Preliminary Utility Plan 18 Preliminary Utility Plan 19 Street Profiles 20 Street Profiles 21 Street Profiles 22 Overall Preliminary Landscape Plan 23 Preliminary Landscape Plan 24 Preliminary Landscape Plan 25 Preliminary Landscape Plan 26 Preliminary Landscape Plan 27 Details Vicinity Map z W La w EUU ¢ 142nd ST N 142nd> Q / U a ST. N, w ca 3 z z 141st ST. a o w w r > ¢ > v1 ¢ J ¢ 01 L� 141st ST.ST z A LLJ C) z W ca _N I�9Y z �~v FCC w l�q q` I > 138th �> c 38�h s �F d sT, L 137th Zj S ST, N �4 z Q w w O ¢ 135th ST 71 U � ���' LJ Q � � P�- �C Of G� CS ❑ LL 132nd ST, Cz GREYSTONE AVE z Z 129th �> z zST, Q N �P W W ���� > FONDAN T11,\SITE 128th ST. N. J z 128th ST. J ¢ ¢ a S ST. W 126th w U � o N. z J 61 > GALLIVA ¢ CT. N. 125th ST. N. ¢ z a o � z D 1�4 th Q 9 (Not to Scale NO. DATE REVISION SHEETS 1 12/13/16 REVISED WETLAND DELINEATION ALL 2 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS ALL 3 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS ALL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Preliminary Plans for Plat, Grading, Streets, Utilities, and Landscape for Adelaide Landing Hugo, MN Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 1 of 27 0008463CVP01.dwg� © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L jl I I ISO 1 F 4 I� Mlq 936 _ e QF I ,rn�;j`'d D d� // VV IVI VL_ V IL_ 0 V �v� CCCC���J 936I. _ I L t J \ (moo �� ' o - 8936)0 cv -�`� � C ) ����� / 1 936 934 1, rz ; ,r"' Property Description: °P DN P I�ITS-�\ �,%._/ /'�` p The Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington e d Mow PATH �\ ` County, Minnesota. I ' T 936 sB #1 Q 9 ��// . ;�� A r 1y 0 �T� Y O AND C -Aa 01 nn o Q 936 cam° 6 l ;.< ~.: 9� l ` 4 The Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington ( y�°� `: / \D ^ (• o County, Minnesota. �`-MOW INE g'�A 1934 AND All that part of the South one–half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, 932J \J .•;.: 1/' Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: 9 r M) 100 YEAR-� F// Jly I 34 FLOODPLAIIVL �,i Fy ��- v Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 29• thence East aloe the South line of said 9 � 9 C. j -) Section 29, 932.3 feet; thence North at right angles 33 feet to the point of beginning of the thence North 208.73 feet to an iron stake; thence East at sees description of the land hereby conveyed, I J 932 3I - .,� 1� / 4 right angles 208.73 feet; thence South at right angles 208.73 feet to a point 33 feet North of the 9 South line of said Section 29; thence West at right angles 208.73 feet to the point of beginning. v a 4 —930/ AND A 05 v. '� / ��� 930 The Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington / - ° y Count Minnesota. L WETLAND KES 2 ✓ ., y/. 'ice- {I `^ Dt I I j ',KES \ \ AND The South one–half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota, EXCEPT that part thereof described as follows: s04 �f Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 29; thence East along the South line of said I Section 29, 932.3 feet; thence North at right angles 33 feet to the point of beginning of the I — description of the land hereby conveyed; thence North 208.73 feet to an iron stake; thence East at MOWLI I �,f F \\ right angles 208.73 feet; thence South at right angles 208.73 feet to a point 33 feet North of the I Irn.';'`:: �� South line of said Section 29; thence West at right angles 208.73 feet to the point of beginning, ell I i / I^� 0 containing approximately one (1) acre more or less; and EXCEPT that part thereof described as I 9341 o Q � 1 -BIRD HOUSE TOWERS f follows: All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 29, lying 1 ail,westerly of Highway No. 61. 4,345 SB`v� AND 8�� 93 The West Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 31, Range o r P 9 21, Washington County, Minnesota. Ce ' 0- / Y_ �' eQ �I • -.. .i i / 1� 1 *E7LAND KES .. I /SCP° I \r p O ) r` .:, rn se a� A l � ,� AI LD 1M J� 932 J O« Kali, � /932 � ` se0 15 r ✓ W D a � o s cg319C, 3 " ' �` l 932 U �� � Q � � /- n F �'^�� l r- \ 5� --GAS LINE-, A I r Q �2 v U1 g- ini �°' i l r 934 N �V 7 L-_ c,4 \se's \ / / t n �- F > O O\ °� 0� o �5 00 1p", 121 Z D 3� %` Q� � Q �lb C93 -FARMSTEAD S6 #20 _ -� aS� O m ° Q rn �\ 93 �' , '�.� I 70- 3"6 r' �� 93934 SB /17D0 0� \ \ \ �� AS TRAVELED CENTERLINE- - �� I \-_F SL D 0 93\ \ 11. 0�--- -GR DRIVE o 4� - 10 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance Lezend 0 BUSH/SHRUB ST STORM MANHOLE CONIFEROUS TREE Q TELEPHONE BOX DECIDUOUS TREE TELEPHONE MANHOLE WETLAND ® TRAFFIC CONTROL BOX ® STEEL/WOOD POST HH HAND HOLE -� SIGN-TRAFFIC/OTHER TRAFFIC LIGHT -o-o- SIGN- TRAFFIC/0 THER Da GA TE VAL VE FMAIL1 MAIL BOX HYDRANT HANDICAPPED STALL WATER METER O PERC TEST ❑s CURB STOP BOX Mw MONI TORING WELL WA TER MANHOLE Tv CABLE TV BOXw0 WELL GAS METER —CTV— CABLE TV STREET LITE —GAS— GAS LINE GUY WIRE POH POWER OVERHEAD I -0j POWER POLE —PUG— POWER UNDERGROUND ❑E ELECTRIC BOX —FOP— FIBER OPTIC ELECTRIC METER —SAN— SANITARY SEWER ELECTRIC MANHOLE —STO— STORM SEWER ® ELECTRIC TOWER —TOH— TELEPHONE OVERHEAD SANITARY MANHOLE —TUG— TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND co SEWER CLEANOUT —WA T— WATERMAIN ® BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN x FENCE LINE ® CATCH BASIN- DECIDUOUS TREE LINE ® FLARED END SECTION CURB & GUTTER ® CUL VERT BITUMINOUS SURFACE Q SOIL BORING CONCRETE SURFACE .� • Denotes Iron Monument Found 0 Denotes Cast Iron Monument Adelaide Landing NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date. 11/29/16 Existing Conditions sheet: 2 of 27 0008463EXPOI.dw co 94 sf \\ \\� \ a5 \ j / 5 11,396 sf \\ d 20J / i 144 sf \ \\�\ 8 i 1 6,242 sf �Q �L — 7,549 s — l— — =737 sf — 'Coo � i � \ \ \ \ � v 1 2 \ 6- / �0 3 \ � 13,423 sf / 8,9b3,s I sf hl I h I I a �1 45 45 L -----J L— 59os —J JL� I—� F_� I--1 116 ��1 I I �\ �� — —138 — — 1 I I I I. \ Op // 14,491 sf // s ' �r pro \ \ — _ ^ I I I I I I 18' IR I I I I I 65 /2 $, I� �I I 1 I I N I I I I Ii � 65.00 — 8 0 1 ' 9 8 \ 18,758 sf I \ Ja 7 175 f d 7 425 I 1 1 1 " I I L -----J 11,047 sr I L — 590 sf — N I o I 14,137 sf 18,971 sf �I I I II I 2,319 sf S\ 1 2, 924 I WETLAND FILL 1L8,700 65 0o . 650o - ° nn4/ 18 13 ^'9 \ / / 5_9155 V \ / 0 77 12,652 sf 73,498 sf � I 10 > \ \ \ I I 2,J97 \ �8� \ \� 86 135 70 13 5 5 5 64 110 65 65 16 83 / / 6�g0 e� / 7 3 �-5' SIDEWALK �Im~ — — — — % 15,826s — 54 3 65 65 65 56 i s rb \ 65.00 65.00 65.35 / 12 6� \ / 85 63 I I I I 5 \ 10,923 s / \ eDe -- O TLOT i � 1 / \ � \ \ �/ 1 2 3 4 3\ POND ��14 / 1 / / 1 / / 11 `� / / 10 ' / / 9h� / 8 ' / / / 5y� / 45 3e 2 ` 8,450 sf I 8.450 sf I 8.450 sf I 9.745 sf III 11.342 sf \ \ , / \ \ \ \ ry N 7 3,227 sf \ // l 13,5 sf o o q�, / / o / / / o \ /9 \ s —8' TRAIL POND i OUTLOT C � / / / / ��/ / / / �/ / �/ r / / � �, / �� / �•/ I I I I I I I I I \ Z \ 6� \ >> � I II / OUTLOT H 3 / I39 53 53 53 53 53 69 52 52 52 L52 J L52 J L52 J L52 L 65 J L 65 J L 65 J L 87 72 J'b"' 6p" sf \\ I I \ 913 ) I 1162 S7REE (IGHT _ \ _ 8' TRAIL \ I TI R WO 755 \ \ 462 b I __T -I- T_ 11 1 n - ----------- I - ------------------ ----------- I Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance Side -Load Villa Lot Detail (No Scale) Drain, Utility Si Driveway - — --// STREET Front -Load Villa Lot Detail (No Scale) Drainage & Utility Easement Setback Line Lot Dimension Lot Number - Lot Area -Front Loaded Garage 1 415 I 4P — — - Driveway NO TE STREET Lot width varies from 45' for 2 car garage to 55' for J stall options. Adelaide L_ 0 !1 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 6 of 27 0008463PPP04.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under my direct supervision and that i a dint licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: f t under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS��'O CWM P 5de A 1 1 a de LL Cy LandingSURVHYOR Preliminar Plat Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Craig W. Morse Drawn: SR5 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 23021 Record Drawing by/'date St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L > License Na - // 8,450 sf 34�1,1_ 2,901 sf o � � h R y \ / 10 70 Ile _85- II r_55- II r_ 85- II r_55- II r_ 85- 1 _83 85.00 7 8 10 M I 11 I� �I 12 W 72,508 sf 0008463PPP05.dw 77,050 sf Ifi M 71,050 sf Ifi M 11,050 sf Ifi M 11,050 sf IT 77,050 sf 7 fil O 5de A 1 1 a de i LandingSURVHYOR Plat Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoocips.cotn Craig W. Morse 11,27, Highway 100 South, Suite sf 85.00 1 1 85.00 1 1 85.00 1 1 85.00 1 1 85.00 I I I 52 85 85 85 85 85 43 46 r 1 I 11,327 sf I 'I 'I I I I I 85.00 - I w V I 85.00 85.00 w I I I I 8 00 - 85.00 w 15 1 1 1 85.14 85.00 85.00- - 85 85 40 46 \ , 9 g / °j 72,346 sf 85.00 0 11,050 sf 4 I 13 �I 14 11 850 11,326 sf g5.00 X32 67 - �- \ ✓ u --159- -- 3101 1 �a I-3- - 9g\ \ �� h 15,439 sf Iq m 11,340 sf L 0� \s _ I �� 7 \i �1 / s � , _ - ,9-- � I I I I II II 6 I I // \\ �- -----J 0 1 12, 757 sf \ / / 8s \ STREETLIGHT olw r \ o to I d I I 5 I 14,229 sf- 1 I^ 6/ / 6 g `� \ / sQ % (TYP.) Im - �4'l \� vl N 3 I 1 ,9`0/•0 sF I 11.900 Sf I 11,900 Sf \�� \ // / 2 \,� 2 49 - 85 - - 105 _ _ 105 _ _ (f� 104 I 1 57 sf A �� rnl 1 � 20,197 s I I I I I I II p \ \ �\ I a -I � r of I I EXIS H TO REM It v \ w 13,509 sf \/6� \s.�o1`,/ �\h• 13,11�IIp N f 1 128i47/2f1� 85.32 I I 85.00 ,105.00 I r I 105.00 85.00 �105.88 I )L -(FUTURE 0 EO'ME �15,265 15,265 sf 3 L580 sf i 8' TRAIL 5,965 sf 0sI I 74,08 f 11, 99 sf I f 11,900 sf 14 700 sf 14,899 sf --1,-67540� - s- f1s,14 15 6 -�JII1 a I R W 5 410 sf � - - 1 I / \ 102 85 705 705 85 179 B 8 � m 1 II 1 - - � -1-3 -ll OUTLOT p ^I 72,889 sf h NL -1.3Fr - � \ - - - - - - - 1 - _ FUTURE 67,140 sf ° - / _ r - - 13,047 sf - 1 - 4 1Z 77 r- 85 r-85 --1 117 F_ I I I-� NI -- J -.13 R45 /� / I a h POND L -149- R W I I 12,652 sf 1 14,491 sf / S7 00 \ Rs\ / s I I I I I I I o0 12 pl o I - - - - l ° 71,773 sf I r - - /e op I I^ I �I 17,900 s I mI 1169 sf� I X56- I 1 0 ��/ I I co 1 7 1 \, 1�I L-11,612 sf 6p4 \ ) L - 8r 57 rn "II ---1-1,914- sf 17,776 J 73,498 sf 85.00 I I I I I7 N -STREETLIGHT 10 1I 11,900 sf 17,900 sf J 511, 10 (TYP.) 1 75,527 s L 2,397 sf 745 377 J 2,924 sr% III N 140 o° I 17 \ L TLOT 504 774 39- - 96 J 0 w� � J 85.00 85.00 9 I I I / 5f L ---J L- -J L ---J L--� l" 11 U 53 8 85 54 / a1W 13,864 sf h 1� \�� O 95 ��' \� 16,543 sf h \ -STREETLIGHT (Ty TYP.) 3 �'� �nm j / y \ \ J L - - -1-45- - - 12� 4g1 .� `...:.: ... ,. ,-..P QND 2 .. - S --/ 13,197 sf gs X79 45 868 \\ /I 2Z3 96 s 6 \ WETLAND FILL-/ _ 79 85 - - 85 - 28 - \ g Q TL'jeI ;.9'3C}.0 . : . s s::- s .� .: � ... ..:. .: :� : .raw -�a:�' . . \ / 85.6 :. �J:93 • � � \ 3 85.00 85.00 85.00 85.00 14,549 sf / \ / O OT � / 73,197 sf l .- - \ / / 5 6 1 9 I 8 I .f I II I 7 9 POND 1 3227 sf \ \ POND �/ 13,201 sf 14,339 sf 1 72,014 sf 11,900 sf 11,900 sf : ! :.:. [�' :_. .. �h �� 272, 6&3 sfi t . III \ / :.:. .:.: �. • / - . . .. : - . .:...-.: � . 100 .YEdR. FLCSOD�1,AIN=' _ / / \ / / 3 P s POND J J ;. _ �J nao o, \ -WAT-_,J� _W� � vs / c / G9s ' Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance P POH L_ W !I 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 7 of 27 Adelaide 0008463PPP05.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under myRevIsions: direct supervision and that i a dint licensed PROFESSIONAL �' CWM Prepared for: f t under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland DelineationP 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS O 5de A 1 1 a de LLPreliminar Cy LandingSURVHYOR Plat Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoocips.cotn Craig W. Morse Drawn: SRS 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L Date 02/05/17 License No. 23021 Record Draw�tg by�date: St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. I I �FTT1I -I ,._. of / / \ PONDS \ OT A1:37TH-7S-TfiiEET N. 111RIZEET //7 \ / w1 t� POND- El] OND 0 Ll 8 : — 0 s 7 3 I 3 11 � � — 1 5 0 5 / J 7 s 7 8 I TIS 9 �- to I T �j �D _ \14 O � ' '2 r o >� Xx 1 >4 8 15 1r - OUMOT C�5 7E -1 F T7' P N 2 T T I20 L I - -- 4 — _ I 5 �\ I , 4 I I POND e D I I l D 5 POND '> 7 D 8 1 ♦ J ❑ X� ❑ T IMP OUMOT 1216 1 l' 8 n :a D r TRAILJ r;I - - Ie - F I // Y' POND 1`•k '. ..y2 . 2 .S D19 - \ rye �.'_,.:'-`t'••".. '•+'4 •�`^,',•R �' . - LV 1 O 8 i_ •S. .F, 22 2 b • �i �• A:. 1 PARK - \ 23 t -_ Y / 6 0 - - \ - TH RS -_ PHASE 1 GRADING LIMITS O r ' _ - 1 b 6 J O .- l L L >2z H - l XI T N .- _ ..- ._... OVERHE D .... ... ... { ill _(( � Y} } :.. ... POWER .. - HrL , .�.. Y ... ,.. �- T EASEMEIN' ra PROPOSED - r. _... i..,.._.....a ,_._... ,... ROW 32 X- > ..h.i .`r 1` V/ I / _ SOCCER :.} „ % Y• a 30 NDERGR D r '• '•- .{ FIELD OND I i � /Q \. S- - - ss a T= M � 1 I • TRAIL s : 30 29 V- 29 2 2 _4 E� POND . ,:...._.._ . .. >--: , ::.,..... 4 I 9 r. � 27 5 1 8' I 40 _ 2 i - 17 26 - 4 5 2' 2 s \ 42 \•'' —'- `-''� a 20 I 0 4 \ 24 \ 15 5 43 \ \ '/Q g � ❑ 14 M— 4 10 � [71 M ❑ D \ 4 ` 7 \ \ /\ Q tt) I � l 22 5 � 8 � \ \ � 4 5 6 7 i n 9 sb� 3 / 72� s ❑❑D 5 B � 4 /\ 8 �\ 8 1 21 /\<\D� \ f D�\o / 1J / /� r—� r—� ��1 I .1 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or ca11811.com Common Ground Alliance Phasing Plan Lot Breakdown PHASE VILLAS 50' LOT 65' LOT 70' LOT 85' LOT Phase 1 25 0 0 0 35 Phase 2 5 0 34 0 20 Phase 3 23 0 0 31 11 Phase 4 16 0 0 30 17 Phase 5 14 51 0 0 0 TOTAL 83 51 34 61 83 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Adelaide 0 200' 400' 600' Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 8 of 27 0008463PHSOl .dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under AL direct supervision and that i a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: �' MH II t under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised wetland Delineation 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTSlam: �H IIO 5de P A 1 1 de LL Cg LandingENGIlVHER Phasln Plan Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS a Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Francis D. Hagen II, PEg Drawn DWR 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite Y 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 17716 Record orawft by�datc St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN o Licese No. D ©2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. IJ i I"� I('L F;V4L f / � I o , 1 � , ' I D � • e 4 A � � f I , o 936 I IIll���!' RIVER m--- 1 AIffffff- f 5 M MOW OUTLET �•r!r < : • will - - I' I f3 • � .• • • •• it1 a IFAAW • • • III, � • � � � IIII � %// • �i�� � r • • 1, ��� �ti�/ I II I ,I d f Illlo 31 I,II I + • WIT �I / , ` Illi �_ • �- III ,iil�llllll • VIII IIII �. / ` •� • ■ � l��•v, • I I„III„o , � . ”` ./�.•��, •�. �,• 114 I � 1 \ ,J { MIAMI Ip,p ////////n/{/``//,/ ��� • rill � � . .; /1111 \viii :: �.�»>`i�����iiiwi��«��� - . , . _ ®- - -—.;�I:•�1.��r.,, _ pll 111�� ♦ I III° �I /�/I, r '� • Iuj01 � 11�IU �,,;unW ,�� �j • �� ��� UY. I/�►\ � W • • � \ � �)�� Illy � � � �I`��i � �'/ `�� �� �'�.,oi!� ;�,-a' ♦ i- ��� 1' � . ��. � � �. :. J �,: ��►� ' �►� �- � + �,., - yam. � � , .. � ,���1, /► �r.� J � t -'�� �:. SLB `��--'`•�, �, ��• �� ,�! •; 1 -in 11111 1111111�1*04 red • � ���II IAfl�s;,l •k �►� -r (. • ill �-.,,,, �.:r �� ►_� ' _ • ���% �� � ��,�r 1„ . • • •11W,y.�� ,�. �� ��� 11! L_,_I • • R �Itr /• Cyt• ', /r NL4 W: ZA 91K3 WHA �G film ..ice or under my Revision& WestwoodPROFESSIONAL nN:u' under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 12/13/16 ' 02/05/17 CITY Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MIN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 vvestwoodps.corn Francis D. Hagen H, PE - EROSION CONTROL NOTES: ALL SILT FENCE AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FEATURES SHALL BE IN—PLACE PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL VIABLE TURF OR GROUND COVER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. EXISTING SILT FENCE ON—SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND OR REMOVED AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. IT IS OF EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO BE AWARE OF CURRENT FIELD CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO EROSION CONTROL. TEMPORARY PONDING, DIKES, HAY BALES, ETC., REQUIRED BY THE CITY SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONTRACT. ALL STREETS DISTURBED DURING WORKING HOURS MUST BE CLEANED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY. A ROCK ENTRANCE TO THE SITE MUST BE PROVIDED ACCORDING TO DETAILS TO REDUCE TRACKING OF DIRT ONTO PUBLIC STREETS. GENERAL GRADING & DRAINAGE NOTES: ALL CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN TO FINISHED SURFACE/GUTTER GRADES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. REFER TO THE SITE PLAN/RECORD PLAT FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL SITE DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHICAL FEATURES WITH THE OWNERS AND FIELD—VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM PLAN. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL RULES. POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM THE SITE MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL TIMES. ^” %''�! � w► i i�r:�� 1 -_—`- • , - —`fir ,� _/n'Y •FOR awl 1 3 r IL 7 ' � ,,`• • eS i ' • 1' � �.� a•'s a Sar• �,'', • � • / � 11 i- � • � �� a 'tet ��.._ ' • I IVI rj 1 •, •,els Y I • • r I , • , Ili �� ��� � • iw I j . � gnu • 1 ��� ��''�`M��i—� 1 _— -..�. • � , • ������u ",�Cnns' �F�M���•I�III��titi�� /I ��-. i I ��� ���e+,v���I �������� ��: - ;�I��—���l��iIIl'I1 �Nll��—,ll�l ►`©—te�t�II��► �� ��. � R� '� I� � IJ����!�J 1115a PMMA .A—S1U � .I � .:� • / 1�� T �� mac;• ��:• •� I � � � • ll ��� r�VARA10 eike <D_ ♦ to i WINNNNt��,� DeSUON : FDH II Prepared for: Checked: FDH 11 OP5 Adelaide LLC Drawn: DWR 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Record Drawing by datc St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or ca11811.com Common Ground Alliance LEIGRM LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD LO LO 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE11 ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION in FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION M N I.7 04 0 DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. MIO = WALKOUT LO - LOOKOUT R = RAMLER NOTA: SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT DENOTES SOIL BORING Duration of DENOTES SILT FENCE DENOTES HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE _-980-- DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS X980 - DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS []— t>>—r' DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER OF— P* -� DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER 0.33 acres DENOTES EXISTING TREE LINE DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION (3,006) DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIO 13- Wetland KES 2 DENOTES 810—ROLL EROSION CHECK P DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW E.O.F. ELEVATION ❑ WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT P PROPOSED WETLAND FILL LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD LO LO 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE11 ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION in FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION M N I.7 04 0 DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. MIO = WALKOUT LO - LOOKOUT R = RAMLER NOTA: SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT Adelaide Landing 0' 200' 400' 600' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 9 of 27 0008463GDP01.dw Overall Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Duration of Impact Wetland ID Size of Impact Type of Impacl Permanent (P) or Temporary (T) 11 -Wetland KES 2 0.33 acres Fill P (14,371 sf) 12- Wetland KES 2 0.07 acres Fill P (3,006) 13- Wetland KES 2 0.33 Fill P (14,579) 14- Wetland KES 2 0.11 Fill P (4,866 sf) 15- Wetland KES 2 Fill P (3,330505 sf) 16- Wetland KES 2 0.12 Fill P (5,165 sf) 17-KES 3 0.28 Fill P (12,290 sf) Total 1.32 acres (57,582 sf) Adelaide Landing 0' 200' 400' 600' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 9 of 27 0008463GDP01.dw Overall Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan i `.. • . - -w 0 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. ♦ 93, .5 930 I � R h Q � � � ', � ✓ � / g 3g4j.5 Y 3 1 Q� �ll� 5 ` 9335 J 1 _ _ �I _ � � J I I �) WETLAND KES 2 AND KES 2 °' 14 l� I EXIS G FLOODPLAIN o ELE 9 6(TYP) \ \ / '0 a C/ 9�6 Or'�p �P ( W N D K ES 2 fj, g2 `9010 ` ' WIDE POND • i p � � � 92 / / / O♦ � � 922 / 1 0 . / � MAINTENANCE ACCESS(TYP) 9335 i I a I r / JO O� ♦ 9Q2 • I - MM• \ L so G 930.2 �1 �f I - POND 10 -� I I OUTLET EL=928.5 ^ I I IeM i HWL=930.0 / l �y " SAN - I POND BOTTOM=918.5 ��• �,��. S // < G9 s 135TH S i - la /1.30 / _14) 3y? .III � 10 •A � __T_� r C- I _ j ��✓/ 1 0 � N ,` � I `q CY) I i / 0 0 V `JI CQ� / �^� /�5) 933.5 I LP. 1 v I I e') X928 / \ D:I OF L � % �\ 1 1 1 � i I _ \ I 934 I I I� / I r 34 � � � -��, , � I I I `_ � � �\� �3 ` 933.5 1 �� > 932 632 o - - - - - -gyp N -B- t-7- O \ OUTLET EL=928.0 1 ° °3° I \ I I I HWL=928.5 926 / f� \ MM 0 o POND BOTTOM=900.0 6) FT; i iI I I M / I^POND 19D 9OUTLET EL_ 929.5 \ V / / o I { O• / ° �'` / / HWL=930.0 1A�, ' I ( I I I \ ✓ 00 4D / /_ -POND BOTTOM=904.0 \ Q O 9 01l 10 1// a O rn II o �° / / / 1 I 3L W EO.F. ND KES 2 505 WE POND 9 OUTLET EL -927.0 HWL=928.7 / / I ' a 0) / POND BOTTOM 920.0 / p 01 Y, 4OF / lire 3 / L� F o 41 _ / 9 "F_0 011 99R 5 / 99�y9 / A D co 0I J / 970 I \ �'6 ��Aj 910-+ g24 i 920 �1 l4 i / - 00, 928- \ / POND 18 / / OUTLET EL=929.5 o ,- 3 HWL=930.0 / POND BOTTOM=900.0 � I r a POND/WETLAND 22 •( ` 9 II / r /� L J HWL=928.5 N 1 1 WETLAND KES 2 iN / / 00 p • �� ` \ h/ WETLAN / KES W TLAND KES 2 l0, o HWL=93 `C......._:. D ° V \ \ v 1 r (� C� TOM = 918.5 10% , / \ POND 8 �--- :;rb� c l \�� / OUTLET EL=930.0 HWL-932.2 \ o 1 `\I / 9 / POND BOTTOM=922.0 - --��°T7 as.. g2�'-� �- �ia-KN� KES 2 / \ �" 9 \ KES 2-' \\\ sb v'NETL NDs,POND�1 916 / �/ ----� _ 1 _ 1� ° � ` I I � •�►�/ /� i�E•�L-Ai�ll3 � � � o�_� FIL`C=0.08 AC. % \ \ OU�T�LETH E =92 r / // FILL -0.11 AC. - < 9'� , • g2 i �A,O------------- I y ETLIA S 2 Adelaide Westwood I I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under AL I � I I Prepared for: • direct supervision and that IEER a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL �' FM II T andin ENGINunder the laws of the State of Minnesota. 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation • Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Francis D. Hagen II, PE Date 02/05/17 License No. 17716 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Qw-ked: FDH H Drawn: DWR Record Drawing by/date: OP5 Adelaide LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ,MN Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD `n LD 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION n FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION 04 C14 N r7 DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. W0, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO = LOOKOUT R = RAMLER SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT NOTE: THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 11 of 27 0008463GDP03.dw Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan DENOTES SOIL BORING DENOTES SILT FENCE DENOTES HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE -980- DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS X98()- - DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS E�-- Do-{- DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER OF- P* DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING TREE LINE DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIO DENOTES BIO -ROLL EROSION CHECK DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW E.O.F. ELEVATION ❑ WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PROPOSED WETLAND FILL LOT CORNER ELEVATION 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD `n LD 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION n FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION 04 C14 N r7 DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. W0, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO = LOOKOUT R = RAMLER SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT NOTE: THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 11 of 27 0008463GDP03.dw Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan c2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. ' _/ r g24 920 920=- I (� O / l o r g� 4 i - �/00, F928- I \' L/ v o Un; d m 1 POND 18 / ✓ /:: - ° I - OUTLET EL=929.5 / � HWL 930 0 `II - ` // I m M< I �� . 0 006, POND BOTTOM=900.0 \ -924 91-� ( ( / // r \ Q1-4 Ns \ N f rn :� Q \ I �gpp_cn I /ar L HWL=928.5\�0� a ` 9 N 00't N 1 �-� -% / J \ 9.3 �� WETLAND KES 2 j e� ` 7 0 / \ (� ,�� \ \ l W TL*D KES 2 A WETLAN KES bar IDE POND S' s` D M T AN CE ♦ ` ` ��'' \ o g •�� I aL,Q CCE / ` EXISTING 'FLOODPLAIN ELEV=928.6(TYP)�'I P OUT L EL= 9'x:8',:.. \ �d w ' HWL=93i':::::::-. D o r // 1 \ - \ I Z P ND TOM -918.5 \sb \ o gi 1 - f POND 8 , �, �� i \ l� : sb / 0`� / c �� �` 1 I OUTLET EL=930.0 HWL=932.2 0 1 II / / g / POND BOTTOM=922.0 - IAn28-x1 - - ----- - - - - - - - � � --- �� - --- - - -924 - �---� �� -�..._j� r 924 0 - ` --- --- 'A /jam .------.. - 928 - -- - =��-------------- rn��0 \ s6� 9 \ '�NETL ND ETLAND KES 2 'S n \ \ �R ` c, v %N� 1 916 IOtJT `� 5 o° ��`1' � II II<:::::::1Ii I°�`�i O//� �i� , \o �\\\ y\ew\ \ \\\9� R.. \ `\P 9d2� '♦ �� 9`Z$5� II� //�Op' �/�,/ / � / / / / � ,-I, �`_- , - \�c�nEW -A�- �-` FILL -0.08 AC. / OU -928: FILL-0.1�1 AC TLE C) LtWL=928. D*T 0 =9W. / %PO D B ------------- . I 930 ` I... w I \ \ 6 / / c l ` / �, 1 / l I 1 WETLAND KES 2 FILL=0.1 AC. Q N ICO I xx A � I o / � 39.87 l I I _ \\ \ � 9% �� Vo [�.,� / / � O I I � � ✓ w �1 I 00 I 42.4 41. I S I g32 1 9.., .38 a o 10- N �) 33. I I\ \ 9 O / 1 �'`� a.Z 934 / O I Q1 934. /ug - I Ii '•A, 141. I \ \\ - \�^\� / 92V WETLAf KE� 2 / o� Z - / 934's c •�s? ss �� -920- , T O' QT� v' ` ,� I / ' p�� \ 9 37 • ai. 33. I a� \ \\ \ .� 7 �. �- 930 _ � 9 / - - 1' r -� _��i g 3 2 \ O i \ �I i \ I W I . I / I39 �1A,� I SGG / � LO I \ \ ? / 9,�•yn� � � 9.j' 93j \ �\ � ^ A \ \ 0.7 �� \ 'cin O I O / / ✓v / I I I - \ / r /�/ 'Q •`S 41. I � ,...' \ LI G I (342-:1 � � I / I 3�• a1• \ / 3 / I `� '� S` � \ 'rj� 34.4 WO .j � \ 934.2 � 93423 g ` � o c� \ \ c�'n�,. ` E.:�: 93S � � � N ^ / / � 01�• G \ / /� � • 4. I f9 �.y^Y 9'S�' 94 \ � 3 Ate \g .:. \ ` � I a M O) wo I \\ \� ss:N s3 / ./ _ 37.92 \ \ /� 42. / ♦O -I / 0 \ \ `�.. J S ? hb fig. / . _` Soc / \ \ \\ / J� f 3 �' \C 7 s6 �/ WETLAND 9 s \ _ �\ •AyOGi \ \ R / A 43. I I� I �7 / 9 40 \� \ / KES 2 M " I .5 Oe A,' \\ 3 R? \ / 35. I / 3y`'•O > CL CL 0.91 // ` \ I N <.DUTLOT / I3157 LP. if; na Iwo 2n now, M11 1� • 93 .00 DENOTES SOIL BORING 9 938.40I 941.9 G G I 941.9 G 1 1 941.9 G H.P. 0 93 (3) 935 R(3) 93 0(3 1 LO(3 EO.F. DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS []- t>> --r' 1 EXISTING STORM SEWER OF- ►►---M DENOTES I• I I II DENOTES 938.9 J� II DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION 66.30 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIC DENOTES 810 -ROLL EROSION CHECK DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW E.O.F. ELEVATION ❑ WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PROPOSED WETLAND FILL • r • a �� � �ads - ♦� _ Vlt�s i � .y ♦ . � , -''/ . :moi � if; na Iwo 2n now, M11 1� • 93 .00 DENOTES SOIL BORING 9 938.40I 941.9 G G I 941.9 G 1 1 941.9 G H.P. 0 93 (3) 935 R(3) 93 0(3 1 LO(3 EO.F. DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS []- t>> --r' 1 EXISTING STORM SEWER OF- ►►---M DENOTES I• I I II DENOTES 938.9 J� II DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES '� \ \ plS � � b� LP. I • 9� 5 3435 � - sals \ \FJ�-L 35.9 LO�� \ \ � n'�� �� • 5.5 I � • �o,`L� � 9� \ °��`L 926 � � Y 1 \ L _ 6 � � _ W I n I 924' 20 `930- I- _ X931 \ - 9 0 4 s I7.5o -932. 932- -- - --- g3 L - . 934- 9 4GL wA------ - ---------- -------------------------� POND 1 1N. _yv '� POH POH POH POH QUrL L= 9 31 .O \ --� 31. -7 - - _ HWL=932.7 \ N N B0 TOM= 18.5 I H - -- - ", -- `POND BOTTOM=9 1. SA \ 8 PVC SAN � \ \ �9s -�-\ \ / SAN \ \ WAT WAT WAT WAT \\\ I � SAN SAN SAN AN � \1 f i I Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoocips.corn Westwood Professional Services, Inc. II hereby certify that this plan 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. Francis D. Hagen II, PE Dates 02/05/17 License No. 17716 Deeilpted: FDH II Prepared for. 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS Checked: MHII OP5 Adelaide LLC 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Drawn: DWR 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Rema D�`"i"8 by date St. Louis Park, MN 55416 OND 3 UTLET-EL 930. HWL--932.5 0 10 ,JPOND OT =9 0.0 c Adelaide Landing Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance LEGRM LOT CORNER ELEVATION N ao � LO 0 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD LOLQ 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION LO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION M 0404 N r7 LO U') DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO - LOOKOUT R = RAMLER NOS: SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 12 of 27 0008463GDP04.dwa Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan DENOTES SOIL BORING DENOTES SILT FENCE DENOTES HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE --980- DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS X980- - DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS []- t>> --r' DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER OF- ►►---M DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING TREE LINE DENOTES APPROXIMATE TREE REMOVAL LIMITS x 856.3 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION 66.30 DENOTES PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIC DENOTES 810 -ROLL EROSION CHECK DENOTES EMERGENCY OVERFLOW E.O.F. ELEVATION ❑ WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PROPOSED WETLAND FILL LOT CORNER ELEVATION N ao � LO 0 99 LOT NUMBER DRAINAGE ARROW 520.5 FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD LOLQ 517.0 ( IF APPLICABLE ) 524.0 MINIMUM BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION LO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION M 0404 N r7 LO U') DRIVEWAY LO = GRADED FOR 5.0' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO, SWO = GRADED FOR 8.2' DIFFERENCE FROM FINISH GROUND ELEVATION AT REAR OF PAD TO FRONT GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION. WO = WALKOUT LO - LOOKOUT R = RAMLER NOS: SLO = SIDE LOOKOUT THE (1) INDICATES THAT THE GARAGE IS 1 BLOCK OR 0.7 FEET BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION. TYPICAL LOT 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 12 of 27 0008463GDP04.dwa Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 0 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. STREET 1 M,IIf MOS 920- 70 . o O .,t .O N �, � di .� .� .r .0D .Lr) .� .pr) .N .pr) .� .pr) .O .O .M .N .� .n .... L.R.'ELEV'.=:939:25 �.rn r�.00 �.� o.� �.d �.� �.� �r.c4 �o.co �o.N l�.tn �.cv N.M in �.O �.� �.� �.d 0�.0 �.� rn.in rn.M rn.N 970 n. O-tM .-;I--n . Orn pM .� �. . . . Orn CV . . . .� �. O-� .� �. M -N .� �. . . . M- * . . . .� �. . . . O-rn . . . .� 60. . . . O CV . . . .� �. . . . 00-N . . . .� �. co-� .� �. co .� �. o0 -CV .� �. . . . 00-N . . . .� 60. . . . Orn -CV . . . .� �. . . . 0.. .� �. O-� .-4 �. O � .� �. M.. .� �. ai-O .� 60. . . . � O . . . .� 60. . . . I� O . . . .� �. . . . �o O . . . .� 60. . . . . . . . A.D.:= -2.51% .. A.D; _ -2.60% PVI ELEV _ 935.50 PVI: ELEV := 938.22 - XD. _ :-1.20% : A.D. = 1.19% PVI STA _: 49+55:00 li- W J......... K- K = 19.93 _ K = 19.26 1.60+88 : A.D..= A.D. - =1.41 . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . K - 41.59 - K 42.05 PVI ELEV = 939.�F5 M,IIf MOS 920- 70 . o o 110.00. VC .50.00' VC - . . N .50.00' VC . .O . .N T_ . . . .O . . . . .O . . . . 50:00' VC .0) . 50.00' VC . ..... • ao... �......... L.P. ELEV := 938.77 H P. ELEV. = 940.45 : ..... H.P.. ELEV:.= .940.79..:...... 150:00 VC .......... '50.00�.-VC .............. ,H.P: ELEV,.=':940:75........... .... L.R.'ELEV'.=:939:25 . . M.N . . . -. . . . . .......................................... . Ln .65 . . . -.970 L.P. STA = -66+46.25 H.P. STA =: 64+93.22 . . H.P. STA =- 61+27.62 . . L.P. ELEV = 936.25 H.P.: ELEV .= 938.37 H.P. STA = 52+75.05 L.P. STA = 50+00.68 40.00' VC O) .. P STA _..66+38.00 PVI STA =- 65+00.0:0 . . .. PVI STA = 61+13.96 . . L.P. 58+45..13. H.P: STA - -56+85.00 . PVI .STA _ 52+75.00 PVI STA = 50+01.00 H. P. ELEV . 939,38 ........ .. I� PVI _ ELEV := 938.40 ..... PVI ELEV:= 940.60 ................. PVI- ELEV:.= .940.90............ _STA . _ PVI STA = 5$+45.00 ..... PVI- STA- =-:57+10:00 ................... PVI 'ELEV'. _ 940:$3. :..... .PVI ELEV. - = 939.18. . ........F+.P:. .STA- _- 49+-60:21................ . M 0) . . . . M 0) A.D: _ 2.77% A.D.:= -2.51% .. A.D; _ -2.60% PVI ELEV _ 935.50 PVI: ELEV := 938.22 - XD. _ :-1.20% : A.D. = 1.19% PVI STA _: 49+55:00 li- W J......... K- K = 19.93 _ K = 19.26 1.60+88 : A.D..= A.D. - =1.41 . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . K - 41.59 - K 42.05 PVI ELEV = 939.�F5 V.. . w =.39.67 PVC = '65+83.00 ...PVC- = --6�4�+75.00 ................. PVC _ 96 .4:02%........ K = 37.29 K- =- 35:34................... .. ... ... . . . ... = PVC. 52+50:00... PVC = 49+76:00..A.D.-'= -- 59%.................... . 1: oo :.:::. N 960 PVT 66+93.00 PVT = ' 65+25.00 . . PVT = 61 +38.96 . . PVC 57+70.00 . . PVC = -56+85.00 . . . ... . . . ... . . . 50.00' VC :.:.:::.:50..00' PVT - 53+00.00 PVT = 50+26.00 . . . . . K = - 25.21 . . .. _. 939.28 ELEV- = 940.37 .. . . . . . ELEV: = 940.40 - PVT _ PVT - -57+35.00 M,O) 6).0) . ELEV.= .940.68 ELEV •= 939.33 • PVC = 49+35.00 - ...............ELEV. . . . . . ELEV := 939.05 ........ELEV: = 940.20................... ELEV:= 940.75........ . . . . . . ........ . _ .59+20.00. .. . . . ELEV = 937.01 ... ... -ELEV-: _ - 938:37 . .. . �.0) ....... 'ELEV, _ =- 940:68 ........ . . . 'ELEV' _ ... i � 939:33 ...... PVT :- 49+75:00: .................. . . . . . . . . . : 160.00': VC H.P. ELEV - - 939:84 - ELEV - 937.01 ELEV := 937.72 . H.P. STA . 35+13:.53 . . . L.P.ELEV = 939.22 ELEV = 939.25 . . 955 . .... H.P: STA = 49+60.21 L.P. ELEV = 935.85 H.P:.STA = PVI .STA =. 42+38.55:::.:. P ELEV = 939.33 . . 3:7.+7.1.55 ... ............ . -1.59% 0.91% _0.59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PVI_ STA -7 30+18.55.:.:::... -x.60% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0:60% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60:00' VC . . . . . . . . 2.017 . . . . . . . .......... = 939.19 2 01�° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.5 . . .1. . . . . . . . . 007 . . . . . . . ........................................... . PVI ELEV _ 940.53 . L.P.. ELEV = .939.51................................................................ 90.0:0' VC : PVI: ELEV = 939:.45 PVI STA: = _ .................................................................................................................................. PVI ELEV = 940.04 . A:D.: _ 1.20% . .�,--�_ _- L.P. STA L.P. ELEV PVI ELEV = 939.15 H.P.:ELEV = 939.85 H.P. STA L.P. ELEV - 37.73 H. 9 A.D. _ : -1.73% = 940.87 ..::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.::. 950 :: A. D. = -1.59%.:.:..... PVI: ELEV = 935.25 . 63+6_8.76- - . ----- ------____ K _ :4.1:67....:.:.:::.: __-= . -.-.-----=-- - -__ _--__ AD . = 20% . :.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:. 950 H.P::STA. =.:15+50.04 :.:.: . K := : 28.8?.:::.:.:.:.:::.:. . _ PVI =. 939..4.0............................................................................................................. 950 L.P. -- :.: STA 9+01.00 M.P. -__-.:` _ = :3.97%.... ................ - K = 22:43 - --- _ . - - -___. _ � _............... - _ .. � ........................................ . . ... . . ... . . .ELEV. ... . . ... . 1.50% ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ................. . ... . . ... ...... . . . ... . .. - . -._> .V :-� _� /.-. . ... . . ... . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K-= 39.92 . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . - .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................................. . . PV+ P. .=........................................................................................................................................................................................................ . .. . . .. 945 . .. . . .. . PVT = 49+75.00 PVC = 44+55.00 PVT' =: 44+:13:55 . . . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... .PVT = 6:3+98.76 ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ELEV =939.58 . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =. -2.80%. = - - .C.=. ELEV =939.67 ............ ELEV = 940:38 - =- 2:06% ............... ELEV 939.33: :ELEV = 937.62 ELEV = 938:85 - 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 STREET 1 MO.] �1011_0191 �OSTI.11 �1011 to] OLD] ......................................................................................................................................... . . . . . N . . . . ._ . . . . .rn . . . . . N ,to . .O . .N T_ . . . .O . . . . .O . . . . .N . . . . .0) . . . . .,It . . . . .to . .O . .N .O . . . . .rn . . . . .F1, . . . . .N T- .LO . STREET 4 �.U7 . . . . . M.n . . . . . . . -. . . . . . -. . . . . . . M.N . . . -. . . . . . . m.O . . -. . . Ln .65 . . . -.970 N.I_ co.0 . . . . . �.� . -.� L0.� . O.N . . �.,t . . . . . Co.tr) . . . . . N.N . �.� _ Ln.� �.� Q.� . �.- . . . . . N.0) . . . . . O.po . 965 . . . . . �Q. . . . . �O. . . . r7 to r1) V) . �Q. . . . r7 to . �.0). r'�N . . . . �.0). r1)N . . . . �Q. . . r7n . . �Q. . . r7 to . . Q).O?. . . . . . . Q.O. . . . . . . Q.O. r' -)N -;I- K) �n . . . . . . Q.0?. . . . . _tN Q).O?. . i")N . . . Q).O?. . . i")N . . . . Q.0). . . . �N . . . Q.0). �N . . . . . . Q.0?. . . . . Q).00. . . . �N r7N . Q).O?. r7N . . . . Q.0?. . . �N . . Q.0?. �N . . . . 9).00. . . . . 00.0?. . . . r7N r7N . . . . .M . o.6 ... 10 . 00 � 0 M 0) M 0) . . . . . . . . . M 0) . . . . M 0) . . . M 0) M 0) . . . . M 0) . . . M 0) M 0) M 0) . . . . . . . . . . . M 0) . . . M 0) M 0) . . . . M 0) . . . . . M 0) M 0) 000) . . . . . . . . . M 0) M 0) . . . . . . M 0) M 0) M 0) . . . . . . . . . . �:o 965 �:Oo . . ... . . . ... . . . ... ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . ... . . . . . . ... . . . ... ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . ... . . . .. . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . .. ... ... . . . ... . . . . . . .. .. . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . 965 oo :.:::. N 960 :.:::.: N . . ... . . . ... . . . ... :.::: . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . ..:::.:.:.:.::: . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . 50.00' VC :.:.:::.:50..00' ... . . . ... : VC . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... 50.00' : VC . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... 50.00' :V.C:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:. . 960 M,O) M,O) 6).0) . .. 40.00' .VC... ... :.........:... M.0) ...... 80.00' VC O�.0) L.P. ELEV = 939.30 : L.P. ELEV .:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.: = 939.26 M.0) . H:P. ELEV .:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:. = 940.66 . . . . . :.........:.........:.........:.... � CA .. . �.0) . . . 0).0) .. . � O) H.P. ELEV _ 940:43 .. . � 0) . . 0).0) . . . . . H.P: ELEV = 939.38: : 160.00': VC H.P. ELEV - - 939:84 - L.P.:STA . 42+38.55 L. p. STA = 37+71.58 . . H.P. STA . 35+13:.53 . . . L.P.ELEV = 939.22 . . . H.P..STA .= 30+26.26 955 .... H.P: STA = 49+60.21 L.P. ELEV = 935.85 H.P:.STA = PVI .STA =. 42+38.55:::.:. P 3:7.+7.1.55 PVI STA = .35+13..55 L.P.. STA : 32+48.5:5 . - PVI_ STA -7 30+18.55.:.:::... 955 955 N.^ �O . . _ OWSTA STA = 49+55.00 L.P. STA. = 45+74..67 PVI STA- = .4:3+47..01 .:.:::.:.:...::: 43+73.55 - -VI PVI ELEV - 939.23 = - PVI .STA.... ELEV .......... = 939.19 PVI ELEV .. _ = 940.74 : _ PVI STA - 32+48.55. 9.0.00' VC . . PVI ELEV _ 940.53 . . 90.0:0' VC : PVI: ELEV = 939:.45 PVI STA: = 45+35.00 PVI ELEV = 940.04 . A:D.: _ 1.20% A.D. = 1.20% : A. = -1.20% L.P. ELEV PVI ELEV = 939.15 H.P.:ELEV = 939.85 H.P. STA L.P. ELEV - 37.73 H. 9 A.D. _ : -1.73% = 940.87 ..::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.::. 950 :: A. D. = -1.59%.:.:..... PVI: ELEV = 935.25 A.D.:_ : -3.57.% 950 K. =. 41.67::.......:::...:.:.:::.. K _ :4.1:67....:.:.:::.: 950 , K _ 41:64 :.:.:::.:.. AD . = 20% . :.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:. 950 H.P::STA. =.:15+50.04 :.:.: . K := : 28.8?.:::.:.:.:.:::.:. 950 L.P. -- :.: STA 9+01.00 M.P. K = 25.21 . .A.D.: = :3.97%.... ................ - K = 22:43 - PVC- = 42+13:55 PVC _ 37+46.55 - PVC = 34+88-.55 - K, � , 41:67. . - _ - - - - PVC = . 29+93.55 - PVI STA = 15+50.00 - PVC = 49+35.00 . - K = 40.33 PVC- _ 43+33:55 - PVT: = 42+63:55 : PVT _ 37+96:55 PVT = 35+38:.55 . .. PVC = 32+23.55 - . . . . PVT.= :30+43.55 . . ... . .. . . .. 945 . .. . . .. . PVT = 49+75.00 PVC = 44+55.00 PVT' =: 44+:13:55 _ 938.56 ELEV = 939.38 . :PVI _:.9:39:34.:...:.:::.:.. ELEV = 940.59 PVI - VT : 32+73.55 - 934.36 95 ... ELEV = 940:25 ... . . - . 945 945 ELEV = 939.25 PVT . 46+15.00 EL1=V . .:::.:.:.:.:: =. 939:80 = _ ...... A.D..... 1.20% ............A.D....1..20% .:.:.:ELEV. ELEV = 939.38 ELEV = 939:34 - ELEV = 940.59 =. -2.80%. = - - - ............ ELEV = 940:38 - =- 2:06% ............... ELEV 939.33: :ELEV = 937.62 ELEV = 938:85 - . . . . . . . ... . . K = 41.74 . . . : ELEV = 939.30 : : : : : 940 = 43:64 . . ... . . ELEV = 936.05 . . PVI ELEV _ 936.5:0 4.60% 945 PVC = 15+25.00: .. . . . ... . . . . . . ... . . . .. . . ... . . . ... . . . ... PVC 940 . . . ... 0.5 o . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . 0. 60% -0.60% ..�. . .. 0:60% 940 =0.60% - 0.60% =0.60%. PV.T. _.:15+.75.00 ....:::.:PVT :_ :1:3+65.00...::.: PVT -- .11+:35.00.::..:.:.: _ . :.:.: PVT - 9+50.00 PVT . 6+55.00 :.:. ;2 g1%: . 50.00 VC : PVT- =- 2+00:00 ............... . . . ... . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . ... . . 1.137 .... . ... ELEV = 939.67 . . .. .1.00% . ... . . . ... . .. ELEV = 938.06 ELEV = 940:51 . KP. ELEV = 940.54 . ELEV = 934.61 ... . . ... . . ... ... =1.129; . . . . . .. .. . .. . H.P. ELEV = 943.79 . .. .. . .. . . .. . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . o ...... ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... _ . . H. . A = + .. :.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:............................................................................................ .. - 940.60 .. .. .. .. . . ELEV = 935:03 . ... 940 935 . ... . .. . . . . .. 935 935 . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . PVI STA = 40+08.55 .......................................... . . . . .. . 0.60% . . . . . - .60� 0 ... .............. ............... . .. . 1.2 57 . .. _1 30% ...... ...... ............................. . . . . .. . . . . .. ....... . . . .. . 930 ,__ : : : . ---- --_ = 94 _ _ - 33% : P l ELEV = 940_6 . : : : : : : : : : : : : . . . ... 930 ... } .507 . . . . ...�.. 930 ... . ._ 'A.D.' =. -1:.20% -----------...-.---------------.------ PVI ELEV :.:: _ 940 87 -:. :: . ... . �. K = X7.66:.:.:.:. . . 930 - -------------------- . . . ... - - - ... . . . ... . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . L✓ ... . . . . . . ... . . . ... ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . _ .. .K. 41.70 .......... ._ ........... . .ELEV: - - - - _ _ _ - PVC - ��-. . - . _ 925 . . . : : : : : : : : PVC = 39+83.55 : . ... : : . PVI =.1 .938073 . _ _ . . = 6+25.00 PVI STA = 27+25.98 925 PVI ELEV = 938.44. . ... . . . ... . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . .. - . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . / 930 925 . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... :.:.: 925 - .PVI ELEV - 937.2.1 ELEV:=.943.�2:.............................. . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. _ ELEV-� 4.4 _- . . . ... . �.�-------.___�-...-.-.-.- . -------1*{2t2: . ... . . . ......:.........:......... 920 ................................ . . . . . . . . ELEV = 940.46 : . .. . . . . : : . . ...� � f. ��� _, . - . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . ... 9ZO = 934 67 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 . . .. . . .. . 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 STREET 2 STREET 4 970 970 965 965 ..................................................................................................... . . . . .N . .N . ..... �.m "10 .N . 00.E .N . .O . . . . .0. . . -t-00 �-t . .- . 00.E . . . .O . . . . To. M.O r --r- . . . .... . . . L,.� . . mb . .� . oo.� 10 . r --u,) 10 �,.o . .M . o.6 ... 10 . 00 � 0 STREET 3 .............. Do � �-� I ..I ..1 T- T- -t-o M -to . 1.. I.. I T- �_N ..I ........... .. .0) .i .. -t-r .r-.* . . 965 co.� o �:o �:Oo �:� 965 960 960 960 000. i. 960 ....... gip. ......: :� :.:::.: r7 t+j r7 t+j N:o; :.:::.: r7 t+j oo rrJ t+j :.:::.: o :.:::.: o:� :.:::. r7 t+j r0 fvj o :.:::. r7 Kj :.:::. :.:::. N tvj N oo :.:::. N :.:::.: N :.:::.: N oo:� :.:::.: N t+j N Nj :.:::.: o;:� :.:::.: N Nj :.:::.: N t+j . N . . . . . .�.r. N.� . . . . . . .O�.N. . . . . . . .O�.c,1. N N. . . . . . . .O�.M. . . N . . . . .O�. . . . . . . .�. . . . . . N.� N.� . . . . . . . . . . M.0) . M.0). M,O) . M,O) . 6� O) . O� O) . M,O) M,O) 6).0) O�.0) M.0) O�.0) . M,O) O�.0) . 07.0) M.0) . M 0) . . . . . . � CA .. . �.0) . . . 0).0) .. . � O) . . . M.0) .. . � 0) . . 0).0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M . .N . .O . 960 960 955 N.^ �O . . 955 955........::.........::.........::.........::.........::.........::........ 955 . ... . . 50.00' VC : 50.00' VC ,.VC 60.00' VC : 100.00' VC . 9.0.00' VC . . . . 90.0:0' VC : ...... .......... ....... rn:a rn:rn .rn . . . . . . 955 H.P. ELEV = 939.75 - L.P. ELEV = 938.64 H.P.:ELEV = 939.85 H.P. STA L.P. ELEV - 37.73 H. 9 ELEV ... = 940.87 ..::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.::. L.P. ELEV _ 934:54 955 950 950 950 :: 950 H.P::STA. =.:15+50.04 :.:.: L.:P..: STA :=:13+40.00 _ _= :1:1+:15:53.:::.: L.P. -- :.: STA 9+01.00 M.P. STA :� . 6+13.20 L.P: STA � 1+34:59 ::.:.:.:.:::.:. :.:::.:.:.:..::.:.:.:.:.. :.:.:.:::.:. ................................................................................. PVI STA = 15+50.00 - PVI STA = 13+40.00 PVI STA - 11+05:00 PVI - STA - STA - -_6+10.00 PVI STA =-1+55:00 . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . 950 PVI ELEV = 939.82 PVI ELEV _ 938.56 PVI :ELEV = 939.97 - A.D. = :PVI _9+00.00 :PVI ELEV - 937.41 PVI ELEV-: 941.18 PVI ELEV 934.36 95 945 ... . . - . 945 945 . ....... 945 = _ ...... A.D..... 1.20% ............A.D....1..20% _ -1.85% ................................A.D. -_ -2.55% ........ A:D.- =. -2.80%. ................................... A:D.- =- 2:06% ............... PVI STA = 3+00:00 .......... ... ........... .........::.........::.........::.........::........ .. .. . . .....: . . _ . 0.737 .. . . ... . . K = 41.74 . K = 41.67 K - 32.45 .. . K = 39.23 K : = 32.16 K = 43:64 . . ... . . . PVI ELEV _ 936.5:0 4.60% 945 PVC = 15+25.00: PVC = 13+15.00 PVC: _ 10+75.00 PVC = 8+50.00 PVC = :5+65.00 - PVC := 1+.10.00 945 940 940 940 :..:.:.:.:.::.:.:...:.::.:50.00'. VC:.:.:.:...::.........::... 940 PV.T. _.:15+.75.00 ....:::.:PVT :_ :1:3+65.00...::.: PVT -- .11+:35.00.::..:.:.: _ . :.:.: PVT - 9+50.00 PVT . 6+55.00 :.:. ....................... PVT- =- 2+00:00 ............... ........................... ....... . .... . ... ELEV = 939.67 . . .. .ELEV = 938.71 -ELEV - 939.60 . . . .. ELEV = 938.06 ELEV = 940:51 ELEV = 934.61 ... . . ... . . ... ... =1.129; . . .. .. . .. . H.P. ELEV = 943.79 . .. .. . .. . . .. . 940 . ... ELEV = 939.67 : :ELEV = 938.71 :ELEV = 939:79 ELEV - 938.03 - ELEV - 940.60 ELEV = 935:03 . ... 940 935 . ... . .. . . . . .. 935 935 ......::.......:.::.:.:PVI H.P. STA = . STA .= 5+97.60 .6+OQ-QQ:.. . .... . ..: ... 935 ....................... . ... . ... . . . =o:6a% .......................................... . . . . .. . 0.60% . . . . . - .60� 0 ... .............. ............... . .. . 1.2 57 . .. _1 30% ...... ...... ............................. . . . . .. . . . . .. ....... . . . .. . ......... _ ......... ............. ... ----- . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . _06 PVI :STA : I 1 +00 00 PV ELEV = 94 _ _ - 33% _ . VI A +4 .. _ 0 PVI ELEV..... 9 . 935 . ... . . . ... . . . . _ - - - _ _. _. . . . ... . . . ... ... . . . ... . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . .. . ... . . . ... . . . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... } .507 . . . . 935 930 ... . ._ 930 930 PVI ELEV :.:: _ 940 87 -:. :: . ... . �. K = X7.66:.:.:.:. . . 930 ...............,............................................................................................................................................. . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . 6% .......... ._ ........... . .ELEV: - - - - _ _ _ - PVC - . . - 5-075._09 - - - - - - -...... PVI STA. = 17+80.77: = . . _ . . . _ . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . -.Q . PVI =.1 .938073 . _ _ . . = 6+25.00 :: 930 PVI ELEV = 938.44. . ... . . . ... .-.- . ... . . . ... . . . ... - _ . . . .. . . -- . . . -....__.- ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . / 930 925 . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... :.:.: 925 925 ELEV:=.943.�2:.............................. . 925 ................................................-._ _ _ ----.... - _- . . . ... �.�-------.___�-...-.-.-.- . -------1*{2t2: . ... . . . ......:.........:......... ................................ L V _ 94 . ... . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . ...� � f. ��� _, . - . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . ... -PVI ELEV = 934 67 . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . 925 . ... . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . - 925 920 . . ... . . . .. 920 920 . 920 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 L_ 0' 100' !I 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or calI811.com Date: 11/29/16 Sheet: 19 of 27 Common Ground Alliance Adelaide 0008463DTPOl.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under AL direct supervision and that i a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL �' >�H II Prepared for: 1 t ENGINEER under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised wetland Delineation CITY COMMENTS lam: >�H IIOP5 1 Adelaide LLC02/05/17 Landing Street Profiles Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Francis D. Hagen II, PE .I 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 g Y Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 17716 Record orawdng by�date: St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L > icse Na © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. UOR 6011142NE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 965 9600 960 STREET 6 .o STREET 5 955 N 00 ! -di �:� N: 955 950 970 950PVI 945 STA 1+00.00 PVI STA = .4+73.12 PVF ELEV- - - - 938.20- - PVI. ELEV .= :..937.:80. . 945 970 940 :N :L, ..... 0.90%........ ........ -1-. 2.7q .... . 940 :00 :0, .r- :r- :� :r- :M 50.00' VC :� 935H.P. :� :� :0 ELEV = 939.87 970 ........._.........._ . ..................... H.P. STA. = 2+95.73 935 - -- - - - _ PVi STk:=1+00.00 930 - - - - PVI ELEV = 9400 ..._...._.........._ ..................... A.D. = -2.17% 930 K = 23.03 925PVC = 2+75.00 965 �.N ........._.........._ ................... PVT _ 3+25.00 925 �.� N �.N �.� �.O . . 00 :: ELEV =: 939.78 . . m.0) . . . 920 . . �.� . . �.� ELEV = 939:68 1 2 3 4 5 1 915 30 Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance STREET 5 970 970 STREET 7 :N :L, :a, ::� :� :00 :0, .r- :r- :� :r- :M :o :� :� :� :� :0 970 970 965 �.N �.� �.� �.M �.� N.� �.� N �.N �.� �.O . . 00 N.N �.� . . . . . m.0) . . . . �.� . . . . �.� . . �.� Ln.� �.� . 965 N.11? �.� . N.0 . . . . . . �.� . �.� . �.� N.�Q . . . . . 4.(O . �.OQ . . . . . �.� �.O . . . . . �.� . �.O . �.OQ . �.OQ . . . . . �.0) . �.+ 4.0) . �.� 4.0? . . . . . � :6 . . �.� �.M N.0? . �.� N.O . �.+ N.O . �.+ N.O . �.+ N.O . N.O . r ro O O O N.� O N �,.O, �.�, . ... �.� 00.E �.� �.� O) � Cn O) M 0) � O) (M � 0) 00.E . M.� 00.E �.� M.� �.� O) .+ M.� M.� . . �� �� X00 �� �r NCD 965 960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................ �. 50 00 .VC .............. . . . 50.00. 7c . 960 I`) PO I„7 fo 1"7.N] 7 N] �:� �.� M �:� .. 50.00' VIC : : H.P; ELEV = 941.02 60:.00' VC H.P.: ELEV = 940.82 H'P _ H P -STA 46+81 16 5 .... 50.00.'. VC 960 .. . 955 H.P. ELEV = 936.57. ............................ H.P. STA = 35+43.07 L.P. ELEV = - 936.82 PVI .STA ._ . 35+43.00 ................... .................. H.P. STA = _ - .. . :44 :RVI STA 44+42.23 44+40 30 _ _ PVI STA 46+82 00 955 :..........:........... _...........:...... . H.P. STA = 31+25.74 L.P. STA = 32+92.07 PVI ELEV = 941.42 PVI: ELEV = 940.90 _ PVI ELEV - 941:00 _ H.P. STA - 3+26:00 955 PVI STA = 31+25.00: PVI STA _ 33+22.07 A.D. _ -3.99% A.D. = -1.32% . A D . . _ 1 . ..48% . . PV[ STA =:3+26..00: .:........ ... 950 PVI . ELE:V. =. 936.65:.:.:::.:.: PVI ELEV = : 937.00 .... K : T : 20.03 .. ....................... PVI STA. _ 37+14:54 ........... :.:.:::.:.:. :K := :37..83.:. ............: . K _ = 33 7.4 :.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:. 950 _ 38 PVI ELEV �9 .36 A.D. _ -1:24% . A.D: = 1.40% PVC 35+03.00 PVI ELEV: _ 938.00: PVC = 44+15.30 PVC = 46+57:00 A.D. _ -1:20% K = 40.44: K - 42.84 PVT = 35+83.00. ... . . . ... . . . .. PVT = 44+65.30 . . ... _ - + � _ -. . X. 41 4 945 PVC. = 31+00.00 :.:.:::.:.:.:PVC = 32+92.07:.:.:.:.: ELEV.�.940.62.:.:. :.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:.: ELEV:=.940.72.:................:.ELEV = 940. 82 :.:.:::.:.:.:.:::.:. 945 -PVC 3+01:00 PVT = 31+50.00. PVT = 33+52.07 ELEV 940.62 . ... . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . .ELEV . . _ 945 _ . 00 . 945 ELEV _ 936.49: ELEV = : 936.82 . . ........................ ELEV 93821 - . 940 ELEV _ -. 936.50 ............................... ... . ELEV _ 937.60 . . ... . . . .. . ......... pp%.. . . . ............ . . . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . .1..999;............ 90%....... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... _ . . ... . . . .. . ... 71% .......... . . 0 6 - : 1% ......... 0 72% . . . .. . ... . -0.77% .. 940 _ :ELEV : 938..21 .. . ... . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . ... . . . . . . . 940 . ... . . ... . 0.64% =0.60% 0.60% . ... . . . . - - - - - -__: . . . ... . . .. . . ... . . ... . . ... . . . . . ... . . ... . . . . ......................... ..................................... .. . 935 ,,- �`_� `--_-�- , .6 0 % - 0.60 .... .................... 50.00' vc /5 7:00 VC ................................ 59:00 VC ......:......._ - - - - _:50.00 - ........................... 7c 50:00' VC ............................. . 935 935 ---------CP. ELEV _ 935.18 -- J L.P. ELEV _ 936.31: H.P. ELEV _ 940.07 _ L.P. ELEV=-_938SJ8= - L P ELEV - _ �2 - ----------._-,-- - - _._..........................................:.... 930 L.P.: STA : _ : 28+80.:8:0.........L....P. STA _ H.P. STA - 39+59.615 L.P. STA = 41+57.59 L P STA. = 45.+61.29 :.:.:.:...:.:.:...:::.:.:...: 93O - .............:::.: . P.VI STA = 28.+81.49 .........3................................... PVI STA- _ 31 +94.37 PVI STA = 39+55.90 ELEV :PVI STA = 41 +S9.39 PVI S = .�. - - -- - - - - - - - - 925 . ... . . . ... . PVI ELEV _ 935.10 . . . PVC ELEV = 936.23 PVI = 940.16 - - .A D 1 PVI ELEV :A.D. _ _930 - 93$.90 1.33 = PVI ELEV 940 15 PVI ... PVI STA - 48+90.96 ELEV _ 939.40 . 925 PVF STA _. ....... _. 1+00 00 - PVI STA 6+68 27 :...... .. . .................. = = 1.20% A.D.A.D.....1.24.%................................................................. :... .51% _ K = 33.:01 :K = 37.64 _. = .33%:................................. A D 1 PVI ELEV = 937:00 = .. . 30 . ... . . . .. K: = 40.36 K = 41.67 PVC = 31+6937 _ ... PVC 39+30 00 . . . ... . . . ... . _ PVC - 41+34 39925 _ . . ... . . . ... . . . ... :: ...:....:....................................... :: .. . 920 . ... . . . ... . PVC _ 28+56-.49 _ PVT = 32+19.37 ... . . . .. _ PVT - 39+80.00 :PVT = 41+84.39 PVC p.V:T:r.45+88.29.................................. _ _ 45+38 29 920 ..................PVT:-:29+:06:49........... ELEV = 935.25 ................................................... ELEV _ 936.38 _ ELEV = 939.94 :ELEV = 939.:05 ELEV - 940.30 920 :: 920 ELEV . . . . ELEV _ :936.38 -ELEV _ 940.-01 -ELEV _ 939:08 LV -94 915 . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. . . . 915 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 STREET 8 960 960 955 0) -M N� a N_a _0) t,I N_� _O) � _O) O-0) O (f) cD r N_N _O) �� N_� -O r- -C-4 r-_� r_O �_� i �_�,� 00-� _O . u) -pp �_� ..0 oO..N . ..0. -..N �.� ..0 �..� LO -E; Ln.� �.N �.� oo.O C_o; i �.� �.� cD.� Q_�; o).r- ."n 955 �_� �_N �_� �_� �_N �_� �_T �_N �.� �_� �.� �.� M -O) . M -O) M-0) . M -O) M-0) O� 0) M-0) O� 0) M -O) O� 0) M-0) O� 0) O� 0) O� Q) M.0) M.0) M)m M.0) M.0) M.0) M.0) M.Q) Q� � 950 : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 950 PVI STA 1+00.00 PVI STA _ 25+03.00 945 PVI ELEV = 940:19 _ PVI ELEV . 933.64 94 _ 0.150%._ -0.60% - - : 0.60% : -0.607 - -0.60% : - -0.60% :0.60% .1 940 : _ : _ _ _ : _ _ _ 0 940 ................................................................................................................ ... ..._...._. ........_...... ... .._ .60%... ........._...._...._........ .......... 50.00' VC : 50.00' VC : 50.00' VC 50.00' VC- - 50.00' VC: L.P. ELEV = 940.97 50.00' VC 70:00' VC 50.00' `VE - :- -2 00;� 935 H.P.. ELEV = 942.62 - L.P. = 941.:18 : H.P. ELEV x42.42 L.P. ELEV _ -941.26 - H.P. ELEV _ 942.22 - L.P. STA: _ 16+50.00 H.P. ELEV, 941.83 � - L.P. ELEV =� 939.1-6= 1 _ _ ! H.P. ELEV = '939.68 - 935 ... . .... . .... . ... H.P. - STA -= 5+16.83... ....... L.P- -STA - - -7+82.00... _ =}# P- STA' = 10+15.017= � : L.P-:ST1� - - :12+:3:3.00 - � _ . _ HP -STA_ _ 14+17.00 - _ _ PVI STA - 16+50.:0Q- _ P- STA = 18+'I4 L�P� TA = 20+'76".72 . _ . . H.R. STA = 21+81.54 - - _ - _PVI -STA = --5 15-•83 - - - - -RVI-STA_ _7+82M_ PVI STA = 10+15.00 PVI STA _ 12+33.00 PVI STA := 14+17.00 PSI �Et V = 9-40 30 PVI STA = 18+23.00 PVI STA = 20+65.00 PVI STA _ - 21 +95.00 930 - - - - PVI ELEV = 942.69 - PVI :ELEV = 941.:10 : PVI ELEV = 942.50 - PVI ELEV = 941.19 - PVI ELEV _ 942.29 - A.D. = 1.20% PVI ELEV = 941.93 PVI ELEV _ 939.02 PVI ELEV = 939.80 930 ........A.D;---1.20% .................A.D.-- J.20% .._...------ . = -.20%. ._...._... A D.. 1 A b -_ .207.:...._.. 1 . _ -,20%:...._...._. A D 1 K _ °- 41.:6- .A D... 1 ="-.$0%. - 80% .A.D•- - -1 . . .. . .. A.D. _ -2:60% K _: 41.67 K = 41.67 K- = 41.67 : K = :41.67 : - K = : 41.67: PVC- _ 16+25.00 K = 27.71 K = 38.80 K = 19.23: 925 - : PVC = 4+91.83 - PVC = 7+57.00 : PVC _ - 9+90.00 - PVC = 12+08.00 - PVC -= 13+92.00- PVT: _ 16+75.00 PVC = 17+98.60 :PVC = 20+30.00 PVC - 21+70.00 925 .....................PVT-= 5+41.83 ............... PVT =-8+07.00..._...._... PVT = 10+40.00........ -.PVT :='12+:5:8.00_.. PVT-= 14+42.00_ ELEV _ ...._.. 941:05 PVT _ ..._...._ 18+48.00 _ PVT -- 21+00.00 PVT = 22+20.00 - - ELEV - 942.54 - ELEV = 941.25 - ELEV 942.35 - ELEV = 941.34 - ELEV = 942.14 - EL -EV _ 941.05 ELEV = 941.7$ ELEV = 939.44 ELEV = 939.615 920 ELEV = 942.54 ELEV = 941.25 ELEV = 942.35 ELEV = 941.34 - ELEV = 942.14 ELEV = 941.63 ELEV _ 939.23 ELEV _ 939.30 920 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0' 100' 200' 300' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 20 of 27 Adelaide 0008463DTP02.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under AL direct supervision and that i a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL �H II Prepared for: t ENGINEER under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised wetland Delineation CITY COMMENTS�H II OP5 Adelaide LLC02/05/17 Landing Street Profiles Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax Toll Free (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.cotn Francis D. Hagen II, PEg 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite Y 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 17716 Record orawdng��`atw St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L icse Na © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance STREET 9 STREET 10 STREET 11 970 970 970 970 970 970 O N cD 1- .00 V) .00 N -co N O '0 .O .00 tD 965 N N �,.�, ,.�, co -co -,I- PO �.�, �.� :► :► :� �.� �: M.00 ,. 965 965 �, N �,.� �. N.N �.� 0.� �,.�, �.� �.� 965 9 65 �.� �.o �.0 965 r� M ....... ....... rr) ro ....... ...:... ...:... ...:... ...:... ....... r� ro r� ro r� ro r� n r7 r7 rq ro ....... rq rn ....... r� to .......: r7 r7 r7 to . . . . . . .r).Nj r�.t� . . . r7 n ..__.._. rl In r� in ....... r� n : ...:... :� ...:... r� r7 r� r7 :� ...:... :� . N) r7 t+j a� rn rn rn rn rn M.� rn.m M.� a�.o) M'a) M rn M.0) rn.� M.m rn.� M.0) M rn 960 960 960 90.0x vc 960 960 :: :: 960 .........................................._...._...._...._...._...._...._............................................ ................ _ ........................................... L.P. STA _ 2+47.68 955 955 955 = 955 955 955 ............................................_...._...._...._...._...._...._............................................. .......... ELEV _ ............................................ PVI STA = 11+93.13.A.D. = 2.42% 950 PA STA. =. � +:00,00:................................................................. PVI- ELEV:. = .. 941.34 ........... : 9 j0 950 K 37 20 PVI = ::. STA 6+08 51 _ ::...:.... 950 950 ........................................... 950 PVI ELEV = 938.63. - ............: _ ._ . PVT - 2+70.00 PVI STA = 1+00 00• 945 :..........:..........:.....:....:....:....:....:....:....:....:.........:..........:..........:..... 945 945 ::.: ELEV ._ 940.63 ::...:.:.: 945 945 PVI ELEV = 942.23 PVI STA _ 5+30.23 945 . .. _ ELEV 940:09 .- .. - . . I _ . - 940 2 00% -0.60% 0.60% :..........:..... -0.649 940 940 - 829 .60% - 0 4� 6..°........ 940 940 84 ......... 0.84% ° 940 . ....:. 0. 0,. vC:.... _ .... _ ............... 50.00' VC 5. VC.- 40.00' -VC _ H.P. ELEV _ 942.91 50.00 VC - .... ........... ... V 70.00. C 935 H.P.L V = 941.91 L.P. ELEV:-_ 940.5;8 L.P. STA =5+2 00 - ' � - `:_ - : H.P. STA - : 9+:36.40 935 935 _ _ H;P. ELEV 941.12 935 935 L.P. ELEV = 939.86 935 :..........: ...H:P..STA = .2+83.46:....:....:. - --P _. -ST-A '5+25 00 - .--RVI�TA_-_: _ 9+37.00 .. - - ..... - - _ - - - - I+P: -aTX - -4+-53.84 _ - - - - -.-.-.- -tP STA A+00.38 - - T - - _-_ -P�ll�TA--2+-79:49---- P _ VI ELEV = 940:50 _ _ . - PVI ELEV � 94� 9� - --- _ PVI STA - 1 +00.00 _ - PVI STA 4+:54 63 ------- _ - PVI :STA . 4+00.40 930 :..........:....A.D..= PVI ELEV = 942.03 A.D. = 1.20% :..........: A.D. = -1.24% 930 PVI ELEV= 942.09 PVI ELEV _ 941.19 930 :....:....:....:... PVI ;ELEV = ;939.71 930 .=2..6.0 ....:....: .K -- - - -67 .......... _ ... _ K - 32 .33. ............................ - - . - .24% .... A D 1 - .... A.D. = 1.68% ..... K _. 19.2.3 PVC _ 2+45.0.0 PVC.. 5+00.;00;; � � PVC T 9 +17:00 = K: 40:34 = K 41.6.9 925 :.....:.....:....PV.T _ PVT = 5+50.00 = :..........:. PVT - 9+57.00 925 925 ::.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:. PVC ;_ ;4+29.63 925 925 :....:....:....:....:.. PVC: _: 3+65.40 925 .2+95.00....:....:.... . ELEV = 94.0.65 V ELEV - - -942-.85 _ .PVT - -4+79.63 .PVT �_ �4+35.40 ELEV = 941.53 ELEV _ 94:0.65 : ELEV _ 942.84 ELEV _ 941.:04 ELEV = .940:00 920 ELEV = 941.88 920 92O ELEV = 941.03 92O 92O :: :: ELEV = 940;00 920 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 STREET 13 970 970 STREET 14 STREET 12 n N 01 T- N.� �.� . �.p N.O �.� �.O N.� O.O� . 960 960 950 950 9 65 �.. �:I*- �:.. �:�.. �:.. :.. :a;.. :.. - :� 965 �P) ..a. �r7 ... �r7 ..a. �r7 r7 r7 ..a. ... �r7 r7 r7 ..a. . :. �r7 . 955 �oNCV o:� o:0) N N N_ o:0) N:� ,_ �:o 955 .O � 10 945 �.� .00 T_ .O _tn �.O . �.� �.� �.� N.Ui 945 960 . . . 960 .. :.:::. ...... r , �j r7 trj �.� �.� ..:::. :.:::. r , M . r7 �.� r7 ............................................. ........................................................................................................ . . . . M.� M.� M.� M.� . . . ... . 50.00 vc - 950 . . . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . 950 :. PVI STA _ 1+00.00 PVI STA _ 4+85.04 . 940 PV..ELEV.. .ELEV _ .9 _ . 955 .........................H.P. . ... . . . ... H.P. ELEV -STA = = 939..5.2 .6+1.5.00........................................... ..... . ....................................................... PVI STA = 1+00.00 - PVI: STA. _. 5+90:56 _ .938.50:.. . ... -� 92q . . PVI TA =: S 6 +15.:00 945 PVI ELEV = :939.84 .................................................. PVI ELEV 939.51 945 935 0.87% 935 950 PVI -ELEV = 939.-59 . ... . . . ... . . . ... . . . .. . . .. . 950 . . __.......... ..................................:A,D:. �. -.1,20 _ 105.00' : Vc-=- = - _ - -._- . . . K: = 41.57 940 .... =0.609:.:.: ......: � 0.6 o .. . - .62�: 940 930 L.P. - _ ELEV = 9:34:88 .. .. ....... 930 .. 945 ... . . . ... . PVC . . . PVT - 5+90.00 6 ... +40. . . . STA = 9+18.91 945 50.00' VC . . 50,00' VC . ...L.P.� PVI STA _� 3+24.67 ... ................... STA = 3+-05.00 ................ .............. PVI STA- = 1+00.00 _. ELEV = ..... ............... 939.44 . _ _PVI . .... PVI ELEV = .. ........ 939.86 935 L.P. ELEV .= 938.96. :H.P. ELEV =:940.12 935 925 PVI : ELEV = 9.34.57 925 940 PVI :ELEV: _ 936.9:3:: EL _ . . . ELEV - 939.44 .. .. . . . ... � .P: STA �= :2+60.00......... L � •� � _ � +� PVI STA 4+8{ 06 - - - -:- ........................ ... A. . . . _0.609........ fl.60 ........... -0.609.............0 .85%..:. PVI STA = 2+60.00 = PVI X940 . . . K = 37.65 0.84% . 930 PVI ELEV = 938.88 E-!- EL _ . . 2. . . 50.00' . VC . ... . . . 5.0 0 V 0 C V 6 .0 C . .. 137' = 7:.: ° A.2D _: .. A.D. = --1-.22% ............ . 920 PVC = 2+:52:50 920 935 - '� H.P.. ELEv.-= -9391-... - - _ : = _ L. ELEV =. 938._74 L.P. ELEV = 938:74 935 . K = 41.67 K = 40.85 :.PVT = 3+:57.50 .....:.........:.........:. _ H.P.- STA 3+74 18 ......:... = - - L P STA �+-6(�-00--:= L Py--ST-4 = -7+69.•75• 925 PVC = 2+35.00 PVC - 4+55.00 925 ELEV = 935.58. - VI: STA = 3+70:00 _ ; _ _ - PVI STA :- 4+60.00 = PVI STA : 7+75.00 PVT = 2+85.00 :.. _ PVT - 5+05.00 915 ELEV = 9:35:03 . 915 930 PVI ELEV = 939:20 PVI ELEV-.= 938:66 PVI ELEV = 938.63 930 ELEV = 939.03 ELEV = .940.05 1 2 3 4 5 . A.D. _ -1.44% A,D. = 1:20% . A.D.- = 1.45% 92O ELEV = 939.03 ELEV = :940.04 920 K=34:70 K=4:1.67 K_: 41.25: 925 PVC = 3+45:00 PVC = 4+35.00 PVC- _ 7+45:00 925 1 2 3 4 5 6 ................................................................................................ PVT = 3+95.00 PVT _ 4+85.00 . . ........ PVT- = 8+05.00 ELEV: = 938:99 ELEV = 938.81: ELEV = 938.81 920 . ELEV'= 939:05 ELEV = 938.81 ELEV = 938.89 920 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 STREET 15 970 970 965 O M op.� �.� CO.p o7 �a; 'LO�a; ��o�o - 965 r7.......�. .......�. .......F).� .......�. .......�. ...... . 960 . _ . ... . _ . ... . _ . ... . _ ... . _ . ... . _ . ... . _ . . . .. 960 ........................... 50:00' . VC .................. . ....... . • . . • . L.P. ELEV 939.68 - 955 ... . . . . . L.P. STA _. 2+49'99.! . . . . 955 ............................ PVI_ TA- _..2+50-.00 ................ . . . . . . • . . . . . - PVI ELEV =- 939.60 - 950 PVI STA = 1+00.00. - A.D. := 1.20% - - 950 PVI ELEV _ '939.36, .. K. _..41.65 ......................... . . - • - • :PVC •= 2+25.00 PVI STA - 6+78:00 94.5 . . -PVT; 77 2;+75.00 PVI ELEV _ 940.11 945 .................. ....... ELEV -939.75....................... . . . . . . ELEV: = 939.75 - - 940 -0:609 - 0.607... '.0.60 0.60%: - ov ........................... 940 - 50.00 VC - - 50.00' VC - 935 = : H.R _ELEV :939.86 H.P. -ELEV _ 941.06 935 ��. H.P: STA- _ -1+9�5:00- -.- H,P.. sTA. �r5+e6.�o- . _ - PVI SQA = 1+95.00 - -" eVl STA- _ : 5+06:50 93O : PVI ELEV = :939.93 - PVI ELEV _ 941.1-4 93O .. A.D: = -=1-.20% ...................... A.D.. _. -.1,20% .... . . - :K = 41.67 :: - - ::K = -41.63: 925 = :PVC = 1+70.00 = _ PVC- 4+81.50 925 ..........P -VT- _ 2+20.00 .................... PVT. �. 5+31.50.. -.. . . : ELEV = 939:.78 - ELEV: _ 940.99 - 920 - :ELEV :_ 939:78 - - ELEV- _ 940.99 - 920 0' 100' 200' 300' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 21 of 27 Adelaide 0008463DTP03.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared se me or under AL direct supervision and that i a duly licensed PROFESSIONAL �' �H II Prepared for: ENGINEER under the laws of the State of Minnesota t 12/13/16 Revised wetland Delineation CITY COMMENTS lam:�H IIOP5 Adelaide LLC02/05/17 Landing Street Profiles Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 westwoocips.com Francis D. Hagen II, PEg 1660 Highway Y 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 17716 Record orawdng by�date: St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L Licase Na © 2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. COMMON/BOTANICAL NAME Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance SIZE SPACING O.C. Thornless Autumn Blaze Maple / Acer x freemanii 'Jeffers Red' 1.5"-2.5" AS BB AS SHOWN 6' HT., BB CLUMP Sienna Glen Maple / Acer x freemanii 'Sienna' 1.5"-2.5" Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' BB AS SHOWN Prairiefire Skyline Honeylocust / Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis 'Skycole' 1.5"-2.5" AS BB AS SHOWN 1.5" BB Northern Pin Oak / Quercus ellipsoidalis 1.5"-2.5" Spring Snow Crab / Malus 'Spring Snow' BB AS SHOWN AS Swamp White Oak / Quercus bicolor 1.5"-2.5" Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 22 OF 27 BB AS SHOWN Red Oak / Quercus rubra 1.5"-2.5" BB AS SHOWN 321 Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana 'Boulevard' 1.5"-2.5" Ornamentals: BB AS SHOWN Accolade Elm / Ulmus japonica x wilsoniona 'Morton' 1.5"-2.5" 312 BB AS SHOWN Princeton Elm / Ulmus americana 'Princeton' 1.5"-2.5" NOTES BB AS SHOWN River Birch / Betula nigra 6'-8' HT., BB CLUMP AS SHOWN Thornless Cockspur Hawthorn / Cratoegus crus—galli var. inermis 1.5" BB AS SHOWN Japanese Tree Lilac / Syringa reticulata 6' HT., BB CLUMP AS SJOWN Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' 6' HT., BB CLUMP AS SHOWN Prairiefire Crab / Malus 'Prairiefire' 1.5" BB AS SHOWN Profusion Crab / Malus 'Profusion' 1.5" BB AS SHOWN Spring Snow Crab / Malus 'Spring Snow' 1.5" BB AS SHOWN Black Hills Spruce / Picea glauca densato 6' HT., BB AS SHOWN Colorado Green Spruce / Picea pungens 6' HT., BB AS SHOWN White Pine / Pinus strobus 6' HT., BB AS SHOWN Ponderosa Pine / Pinus ponderosa 6' HT., BB AS SHOWN Norway Pine / Pinus resinosa 6' HT., BB AS SHOWN NOTES: QUANTITIES ON PLAN SUPERSEDE LIST QUANTITIES IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY. REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR SPECIES LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES. Planting Legend DENOTES STREET TREE O Landscape Requirement Calculations TREE TO REMAIN AV - DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN 7F MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS: DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS & 624 TREES TREE TO BE REMOVED 2 Trees per Residential Lot (312 lots) (Excludes 7 future lots by others) Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: OVERALL TOTAL TREES PROVIDED: 1,417 CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES TREES SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. Highway 100 South Suite g Y 400 • STREET TREES: Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L 467 TREES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION o' 200' 400' 600' • OTHER BUFFER/SCREENING TREES: Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 22 OF 27 638 TREES Overstory: 183 Trees Evergreens: 321 Trees Ornamentals: 134 Trees • FUTURE YARD TREES (BY BUILDER) (1/LOT): 312 TREES To be installed by builder after home construction is complete NOTES * 1 FRONT YARD TREE TO BE PLANTED ON ALL 65', 70' & 85' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS * 1 REAR YARD TREE TO BE PLANTED ON ALL VILLA & 50' SINGLE FAMILY LOTS Planting Legend DENOTES STREET TREE O DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS Prepared for: �'��' � TREE TO REMAIN AV - DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN 7F DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS & TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO BE REMOVED DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. Highway 100 South Suite g Y 400 Landscape Plan Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L i 02/05/17 License No. 26971 Record PN!mj g by/`ate NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION o' 200' 400' 600' Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 22 OF 27 Adelaide I 0008463PLPOl.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared me or under my direct supervision and that i am duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: �'��' � Overall ARCHTCECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS OP5 Adelaide LdinanLANDSCAPE g Preliminary Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Cory Meyer DraWn: brw 1660 Highway 100 South Suite g Y 400 Landscape Plan Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L i 02/05/17 License No. 26971 Record PN!mj g by/`ate St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN C) 2016 Westwood Professional Services. Inc � 1 I tS E ISTIN TREES TO E REMOVED: �: 1 • D • ± 0"40" BUR AK 93936 I ± 0"-40" RED AK 2 • 3± 0" BLACK C ERRY I • 2± 0" BOXELDER 3 iC� ..J QIP`=1410M!OI 11 =�l O N Iii! rel TREE TO REMAIN Oil; in .9 111 DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE r DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Planting Notes Common Ground Alliance 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE AT 811 OR CALL811.COM TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MATERIAL. 2. ACTUAL LOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS. 3. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. 4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND/OR QUOTE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ONE YEAR GUARANTEE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. THE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE DATE OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S OR OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANTING. REPLACEMENT PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A ONE YEAR GUARANTEE COMMENCING UPON PLANTING. 6. ALL PLANTS TO BE SPECIMEN GRADE, MINNESOTA—GROWN AND/OR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE TO, BUT IS NOT LIMITED BY, THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WOUNDS, SCARS, ETC. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTICEABLE GAPS, HOLES, OR DEFORMITIES. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES. ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE HEAVY, HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING. CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABLISHED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN 5:3. 7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1-2004 OR MOST CURRENT VERSION) REQUIREMENTS FOR SIZE AND TYPE SPECIFIED. 8. PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER MNLA & ANSI STANDARD PLANTING PRACTICES. 9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT SITE. PROPERLY HEEL—IN MATERIALS IF NECESSARY; TEMPORARY ONLY. 10. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR. WHEN THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. 11. OPEN TOP OF BURLAP ON BB MATERIALS; REMOVE POT ON POTTED PLANTS; SPLIT AND BREAK APART PEAT POTS. 12. PRUNE PLANTS AS NECESSARY — PER STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND TO CORRECT POOR BRANCHING OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES. 13. WRAP ALL SMOOTH—BARKED TREES — FASTEN TOP AND BOTTOM. REMOVE BY APRIL 1ST. 14. THE NEED FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED UPON SITE SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE NEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS. 15. BACKFILL SOIL SHALL BE NATIVE TOP SOIL FROM SITE AND ADHERE TO MN/DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3877 (SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW) FREE OF ROOTS, ROCKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH, SUBSOIL DEBRIS, AND LARGE WEEDS. MINIMUM 4" DEPTH OF NATIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL LAWN GRASS AREAS AND 12" DEPTH TOPSOIL FOR ALL TREES. 16. FOUR INCHES OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH SHALL BE USED AROUND ALL TREES WITHIN TURF AREAS. MULCH TO BE FREE OF DELETERIOUS MATERIAL. 17. EDGING TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. SPADED EDGE TO PROVIDE V—SHAPED DEPTH AND WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN MULCH AND GRASS. INDIVIDUAL TREES TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 18. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX, FREE OF LAWN WEEDS. ALL TOPSOIL AREAS TO BE RAKED TO REMOVE DEBRIS AND ENSURE DRAINAGE. 22. PROVIDE IRRIGATION TO ALL STREET TREES PLANTED ON SITE. TREES WITHIN NATIVE SEEDED OUTLOTS WILL NOT BE IRRIGATED. 23. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL THE PLANT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED OR IRRIGATION SYSTEMS ARE OPERATIONAL. OWNER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR. 24. REPAIR & REPLACE EXISTING TURF AREAS AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO THE SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 25. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT NO COST TO OWNER. Planting Legend DENOTES STREET TREE O DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO BE REMOVED DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: Date. 1 1/29/16 Sheet. OF27 REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. Adelaide NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0° 100' 200' 300' C:) n :.. ..............:. ....:: :.: ... :... ........ . Date. 1 1/29/16 Sheet. OF27 Adelaide 0008463PLP02.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared me or under my direct supervision and that i am duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: � � LANDSCAPE ARCHTCECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineationg Landin Preliminary 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS' OP5 1 Adelaide Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Landscape Plan Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Drawn: NTM 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Cory Meyer Westwood Professional Services, Inc. L Dater 02/05/17 iicmse No. 26971 Record Drawing by datc St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN C) 2016 Westwood Professional Services. Inc I ) D w M. QV o p ... .,�. o 2 ...................................... o.. s :.....:: .....1.::. / . . �i 2,.. -. -. .. n. 14 Planting Details Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or ca11811.com Common Ground Alliance Planting Legend PRUNE OUT MISDIRECTED BRANCHES. O PROVIDE ONE CENTRAL LEADER. GUYING AND STAKING, AS REQUIRED, FIDECIDUOUS FOR ONE (1) YEAR ON ALL LANDSCAPE ARCHTfECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation AND CONIFEROUS TREES: �V s TOP STAKES 5' ABOVE GROUND LandingPreliminary (MAX.) OR TO FIRST BRANCH. o BOTTOM OF STAKE 3' (MIN.) P ° 8d ' BELOW GROUND. STAKING POSTS o 9 4 TO BE 2"X2" STAINED WOOD OR •off i5 °94 PAINTED STEEL DELINEATOR 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS POSTS. PLACE 3 POSTS �o D 0 � EQUIDISTANT AROUND AND pP ,.,R6 OUTSIDE ROOT BALL. SECURE Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com TREE TO POSTS WITH 16" LONG Drawn: NTM 1660 POLYPROPYLENE OR 400 POLYETHYLENE, 40 MIL., 1.5" WIDE STRAP. 02/05/17 26971 Record Draw4tg /dam St. Louis Park, MN 55416 TREE WRAP MATERIAL FROM L D i�ae No. GROUNDLINE UPWARD TO FIRST BRANCHES, AS REQUIRED. PLACE MULCH, DEPTH AS SPECIFIED, 2X BALL OVER PLANT PITS - DO NOT PILE DIAMETER IX AGAINST TRUNK. IIII II _ FORM 3" DEEP WATERING BASIN. II., III—III III ;= = - BACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH SPECIFIED III011I II- BACKFILL SOIL. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. III `;.::::::::•— _ :::.: III - REFER TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR _ -III—I�' 111-III=� NURSERY STOCK FOR MINIMUM BALL SIZE. ROOT FLARE TO BE PLANTED AT OR NEAR FINISHED GROUNDLINE. SET ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL OR COMPACTED SOIL MOUND MATCHING TREES NATURAL GROUNDLINE WITH FINISHED SITE GRADE. N.T.S. LAST REVISED: ". DECIDUOUS TREE 04/05/16 PLANTING LA28 PRUNE OUT MISDIRECTED BRANCHES. PROVIDE ONE CENTRAL LEADER. GUYING AND STAKING AS REQUIRED, FOR ONE (1) YEAR ON ALL DECIDUOUS AND CONIFEROUS TREES: TOP STAKES 5' ABOVE GROUND (MAX.) OR TO FIRST BRANCH. BOTTOM OF STAKE 3' (MIN.) BELOW GROUND. STAKING 80 POSTS TO BE 2"X2" STAINED d g� WOOD OR PAINTED STEEL 0 00 epi ' DELINEATOR POSTS. PLACE 3 00 00 POSTS EQUIDISTANT AROUND AND OUTSIDE ROOT BALL. SECURE TREE TO POSTS WITH 16" LONG POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE, 40 MIL., 1.5 i WIDE STRAP. p 9 I PLACE MULCH, DEPTH AS SPECIFIED, OVER PLANT PITS - 2 X BA DO NOT PILE AGAINST TRUNK. _ DI FORM 3" DEEP WATERING BASIN. ,IL-III-�II-I�IIIII�I BACKFILL PLANT PIT WITH :. �I-III— SPECIFIED BACKFILL SOIL. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. 1—IIS -I�IIIII REFER STANDARD ,III— I ,I11= �I=III- FFORNURS R^STOCK FOR MINIMUM BALL SIZE. ROOT FLARE TO BE PLANTED AT OR NEAR FINISHED GROUNDLINE. SET ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL OR COMPACTED SOIL MOUND MATCHING TREES NATURAL GROUNDLINE WITH FINISHED SITE GRADE. N.T.S. LAST REVISED: ". EVERGREEN TREE 06/05/13 PLANTING LA29 Planting Legend *NOTE: REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Adelaide 0' 100' 200' 300' Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 24 OF 27 0008463PLP03.dw Westwood DENOTES STREET TREE O DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHTfECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS LandingPreliminary DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS & TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS CLIAP O 5 TREE LL C TREE TO BE REMOVED DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Adelaide 0' 100' 200' 300' Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 24 OF 27 0008463PLP03.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared me or under myRevisions: direct supervision and that i am duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: a � LANDSCAPE ARCHTfECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation LandingPreliminary 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS' CLIAP O 5 Adelaide LL C Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Landscape Plan Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Cory Meyer Drawn: NTM 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 26971 Record Draw4tg /dam St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L D i�ae No. r 1u l b westwooa F'rotessionai Jervices, Inc. Z±-1 V ' I /lVlWC 111V �WAT— W.AT WAT WAT SAN SAN SAN SAN AN Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance Planting Legend DENOTES STREET TREE O DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS Prepared for: a � TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO BE REMOVED DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS Landin TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS' REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com 0' 100' 200' 300' Date. 11/29/16 sheet: 25 OF 27 Adelaide I 0008463PLP04.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared me or under myRevisions. direct supervision and that i am duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: a � LANDSCAPE ARCHTCECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation Landin Preliminary 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS' CLIA OP5 1 Adelaide g Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Landscape Plan Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Cory Meyer Drawn: NTM 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 26971 Reco>d >1� W dam St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L License No. ® 2016 Westwood Professional Services. Inc A•110, �� I ��► �O� �� �►�' '�ii������ 0 moo' .� �� iso . , . �;. v1►yyi� I � o00 '1 �'� �� ► ���_ ��� - ��,' �i��` �- r� �/� O .� • ` roe i 11 ��- .� �,, .: ail► � �� � . �, 'E�1 t "MR A✓�'I' —, ��� - �.� .: _ _ .Q� I � • �# �� v �e • ��� • � rCh _' rd� G`����;��1��'i�� V 0 p� O / 11 • • •inET I❑ ERR 0 -- -�' ':�� __j � 1 S / / c / qss L0 -X I U - I D OlDr-MIAll CLIVI 6± 10"-30" PIN OAK 5± 15"-30" SUGAR MAPLE 5± 10"-15" BALSAM FIR 1- 30" AMERICAN ELM EXISTING HOMESTEAD TREES TO REMAIN: 5± 15"-45" PIN OAK Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance Planting Legend DENOTES STREET TREE O DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES BUFFER EVERGREEN DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS DENOTES BUFFER DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN DENOTES EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE Preliminary TREE TO BE REMOVED DENOTES BUFFER ORNAMENTAL CLIA OP5 DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS g TREE TO BE REMOVED *NOTE: 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS REFER TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANT SELECTIONS AND SIZING. STREET TREES SHOWN ON PLAN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS, AND SHALL BE PLANTED IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CURBSTOPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER & WATER CONNECTION OR DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. Drawn: NTM 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Adelaide 0' 100' 200' 300' Date: 11/29/16 sheet: 26 OF 27 0008463PLP05.dw Westwood I hereby certify that this plan was prepared me or under myRevisions. direct supervision and that i am duly licensed PROFESSIONAL Prepared for: �g� � LANDSCAPE ARCHTCECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/13/16 Revised Wetland Delineation Landin Preliminary 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS' CLIA OP5 Adelaide g Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS Landscape Plan Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Cory Meyer Drawn: NTM 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 02/05/17 26971 te °° rd `"'PMin��LicenseSt. Louis Park, MN 55416 Hugo, MN L Dater License Na c2016 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. H WL J: I JLUrt POND On Ari CI IOCAnC TYPICAL POND CROSS—SECTION ® ADJACENT PROPERTIES N.T.S. 30' TYP. CORRIDOR 8' BIT. 10' SHOULDER TRAIL TYP. BUFFER VARIES WETLAND 3:1 SLOPE TYPICAL TRAIL CROSS—SECTION CSD POND 17 N.T.S. 3GRADE ELEV. )TEXTILE FILTER AGGREGATE DOT 3149.2H) PERF. PVC PIPE SDR 35 . �JTEXTILE FABRIC—TYPE II (MnDOT 3733) PERFORATED UNDER DRAIN DETAIL INSTALL AT LOW POINT AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER NOTEe DRAINTILE INSTALLED 50' IN EACH DIRECTION FROM CATCH BASIN PERFORATED DRAIN TILE Westwood Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. I hereby certify that this plan 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. Francis D. Hagen II, PE Date 02/05/17 License Na 17716 6" MIN. 13' TOPSOIL (TYP.) 3 1.5:1 SLOPE 2.0' BOC - 6" MIN. 15' TOPSOIL 3% f 1.5:1 SLOPE 2.0' BOCK 12/1 /116 Revised Wetland Delineation 02/05/17 CITY COMMENTS 03/10/17 CITY COMMENTS III I FP°� ROPO O/R 030 FOQ F/V�RgS o. N FR o dCr 910 g�qo oo� l=%�o n �� 2" WASHED COARSE AGGREGATE 6"MIN.DEPTH NOTES- 1. CRUSHED CONCRETE NOTALLOWED. 2. LENGTH AND WIDTH SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY ENGINEER 3. FABRIC REQUIRED UNDER ROCK FOR DRIVEWAYS LARGER THAN 24 FEET, HEAVY TRAFFIC, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. PLATE NO. Hu-Ec-1 HUGO REVISION DATE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 60' (ROW) 32' (F–F 34' (B–B 17' 17' 3�_0% PROFILE GRADE) / GRADING GRADE L40" STREETS 2,3 & 13 SIDEWALK & PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T.S. 6"Distance to CL Variable – 28' F–F) 60' (ROW) e—SLOPE 314"LFL Mr DOT B 624 28' (F–F) 30' B–B) 30' (B–B) IT,, 68"r 1l2 TOP OF BITUMINUS 15' 1 15' BASE 12' 6" Distance to C 1[ariable 2" r 3�_0% rdr 6" MIN. PROFILE GRADE) / GRADING GRADE L40" STREET 5 (sta 10+45-15+00) TRIAL ONE SIDE; NO PARKING N.T.S. OERECIOR PLATE OVERFLOW Ql - CEN7FR BF FILTER ASSEMBLY OVERFLOW (2 - rop OF CURB BUX 7a� Btr CURB CC -23 HIGH -R. HIGH-FLOW FABRIC Material: 1. The Road Drain -Curb & Gutter model consists of a reusable, open topped receptacle that sets inside the Strom sewer grate. An incorporation rear deflector plate is connected to the receptacle directing the water into the basin for filtration. 2. The Road Drain -Curb & Gutter model has a replaceable filter cartridge. 3. The Filter media shall meet all local specifications for inlet protection. Maintenance: 1. Check Filter media after each rain event. Clean or replace if sediment clogs filter. 2. Remove sediment and debris from the receptacle after each rain event. PLATE NO. HU -EC -4 HUGO WIMCO Curb &Gutter REVISION DATE Inlet Protection (Model CG23) I `> 6' Distance to CE Variable uz°r 3" r 3 1l2" r - �—SLOPE3/4IFT.a Mn/DOT B 618 2" r 6"Distance to CL Variable – 28' F–F) 3" r 41 �1/2"r e—SLOPE 314"LFL Mr DOT B 624 30' B–B) 28" r FACE OF CURB 16" IT,, 68"r 1l2 TOP OF BITUMINUS MAT - MODIFIED'S' DESIGN BASE 12' 6" Distance to C 1[ariable 2" r 6' 1 5' 11'10' rdr 6" MIN. 13"r1/2" Mn/DOT B 612 2% TOPSOIL (TYP.) 3% 3.0% NOTES: 1. MINIMUM OF 3" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE UNDER ALL CURB AND GUTTER — PLATE NO.HU-STR-26 DATIE10N 10/0e/06 CONCRETE HUGOCURB & GUTTER SIDEWALK (TYP.), 111 A) Installation WIRE FENCING POST 1 SET POSTS AND 2 STAPLE THE WIRE EXCAVATE A MESH FENCING TO 6"X 6"TRENCH EACH POST TRENCH UPSLOPE ALONG THE 6"X 6" \ LINE OF THE POSTS INI-VIII=1111= \V 11111=11�I1-VIII- 11111=11111- �tl= J 11111-11111-1100 11111-11111=11111 -IIIIL-1111 11111-1111=11111 -IIIIL=-11111 =11111-L111 11711= -IIII=1101 111= III NIII FILTER FABRIC —>' 3 ATTACH THE FILTER 4 BACKFILL THE TRENCH FABRIC TO THE AND COMPACT THE WIRE FENCING AND EXCAVATED SOIL THE TRENCH COMPACTED BACKFILL 111191111-IIIII= 11111-11111-11111- 111119 N11�1111In 11111-111110 00 IIIIL=-11111=IIIII =IIIIL=-tllll IIIIL=-IllIm IIIII-IIIII IIIII=111111111 1111= �III= 1101 I BOTTOM OF DRAINAGE WAY LLA_B A ELEVATION: POINTS "A" SHOULD BE HIGHER THAN POINT "B" B) Maintenance 1. FILTER BARRIERS SHALL BE INSPECTED IMMEDIATELY 3. SEDIMENT DEPOSITS SHOULD BE REMOVED AFTER AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING EACH STORM EVENT. THEY MUST BE REMOVED WHEN PROLONGED RAINFALL. ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS SHALL DEPOSITS REACH APPROXIMATELY 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF BE MADE IMMEDIATELY. THE BARRIER. 2. SHOULD THE FABRIC DECOMPOSE OR BECOME 4. ANY SEDIMENT DEPOSITS REMAINING IN PLACE AFTER INEFFECTIVE PRIOR TO THE END OF THE EXPECTED THE SILT FENCE OR FILTER BARRIER IS NO LONGER USEABLE LIFE AND THE BARRIER STILL BE NECESSARY, REQUIRED SHALL BE DRESSED TO CONFORM WITH THE THE FABRIC SHALL BE REPLACED PROMPTLY. EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED AND SEEDED. 5. WETLANDS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY TWO ROWS OF H.D. SILT FENCE. DOUBLE H.D. SILT FENCE IS REQUIRED AROUND WATER BODIES, STEEP SLOPES, AND HIGHLY ERODIBLE SOILS. PLATE NO. HU -EC -2 �I HUGO PLACEMENT AND REVISION DATE CONSTRUCTION OF A SILT FENCE TYPICAL PAVEMENT NO SCALE 1 1/2" BIT. WEARING COURSE MNDOT SPEC 2360, TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR COURSE (3.B)(SPNWEA340B) TACK COAT, MnDOT 2357 2 1/2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE MNDOT SPEC. 2360, SP12.5 NON WEAR COURSE (3.B)(SPNWB330B) 12" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (100% CRUSHED) 24" MNDOT 2211 CLASS AGGREGATE SUB–BASE (100% CRUSHED) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, FOR CLAY SUBSOILS – MIRAFI 50OX Designed: FM II Qw-ked: FDH H Drawn: DWR Record Drawing by/date Prepared for: 0F5 Adelaide LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 50' (ROW) 28' F–F) 30' B–B) 15' 15' 3.0% PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE 40" Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance STREET 14 STREET 5 (sta 15+00-49+00 SIDEWALK & PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T.S. 50' (ROW) 28' (F–F) 30' B–B) 15' 1 15' 3�_0% PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE 1 40" STREETS 4,6,7,10 & 11 PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T S. Adelaide Landing , MN CONC. WALKWAY NO SCALE 3A32 CONCRETE SIDEWALK CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE J% CRUSHED GRAVEL) UunvIPACTED SUBGRADE 4' j5' 1% 2 SIDEWALK (TYP.), VERIFY LOCATION SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER 10' 3% SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Details Sheet: 27 OF 27 0008463DTP04.dw 54' (ROW) 28' F–F) 30' B–B) 7' 5' 1' 6" MIN. 12' 15' 15' 6' 1 5' 11'10' 6" MIN. 3% 2% TOPSOIL (TYP.) 3% 3.0% 3% 2% TOPSOIL (TYP.) — \ SIDEWALK (TYP.), I SIDEWALK (TYP.), VERIFY LOCATION VERIFY LOCATION 1.5:1 SLOPE SURMOUNTABLE 2.0' BOC PROFILE GRADE SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER GRADING GRADE CURB & GUTTER 1.5:1 SLOPE 2.0' BOCK 40" STREETS 1,8,9 & 15 SIDEWALK & PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T.S. 54' (ROW) 1 ~TRAIL _ 30' B–B� i EASEMENT 6' 8' 1 ' 12' 15' 1 15' 8' 4' (CITY OUTLOT) 4 1 10' 6" MIN. 6" MIN. 3% 2% TOPSOIL (TYP.) 3% 3.0% 3% 2% I — TOPSOIL (TYP.) 7 TRAIL (TYP.) I TRAIL (TYP.) 1.5:1 SLOPE SURMOUNTABLE 2.0' BOC PROFILE GRADE B618 CURB & 1.5:1 SLOPE CURB & GUTTER B618 CURB & GRADING GRADE GUTTER 2.0' BOCK GUTTER 40" STREET 12 (sta 1+00 TRAIL ONE SIDE; NO PARKING N.T.S. Designed: FM II Qw-ked: FDH H Drawn: DWR Record Drawing by/date Prepared for: 0F5 Adelaide LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 50' (ROW) 28' F–F) 30' B–B) 15' 15' 3.0% PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE 40" Call 48 Hours before digging: 811 or call811.com Common Ground Alliance STREET 14 STREET 5 (sta 15+00-49+00 SIDEWALK & PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T.S. 50' (ROW) 28' (F–F) 30' B–B) 15' 1 15' 3�_0% PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE 1 40" STREETS 4,6,7,10 & 11 PARKING ONE–SIDE N.T S. Adelaide Landing , MN CONC. WALKWAY NO SCALE 3A32 CONCRETE SIDEWALK CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE J% CRUSHED GRAVEL) UunvIPACTED SUBGRADE 4' j5' 1% 2 SIDEWALK (TYP.), VERIFY LOCATION SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER 10' 3% SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Date: 11/29/16 Details Sheet: 27 OF 27 0008463DTP04.dw 40 %Aez 7 DF. Drop-off Items for Hugo residents only Hazardous Materials Accepted Electronics Accepted - -------- - Hazardous materials and electronics will be accepted free -of -charge Carload of trash $5 and up Pickup load of trash $25 and up from households only (no businesses). Proof of residency required. Trailer load of trash $25 and up Household Items: Home Improvement: • Mercury thermometers and • Latex/oil paint & stain Lawn mower (Push) $15/unit thermostats • Paint remover/thinner Lawn mower (Rider) $30/unit • Fluorescent bulbs (bundled together Automotive & Recreation: Household appliance $15/unit with rubber bands, no tape) • Antifreeze • Household cleaners • Used motor oil and filters Commercial appliance $75 and up • Sharps, syringes, needles and used •Propane tanks Air conditioner $20/unit epi pens in a sealed, sturdy container . Rechargeable batteries •Computers &monitors Water softener $20/unit .peripherals (keyboards, mice, Yard &Garden: Mattress or box spring $20/unit speakers, etc.) •Insect/roach/ant killer • Printers &fax machines •Fertilizers/herbicides Upholstered furniture $20/each • TVs, DVD & VCR players - Carpet $1/yard . Cell phones NOTE: Please Bicycle with tires $5/each Document shredding will also be offered. organize your load so Bicycle withouttires FREE To serve as many people as possible, no all electronics and more than four boxes per customerwill be hazardous materials Scrap metal FREE accepted. can be removed first. Please note thatshredding capacity may be Tires $2.50 and up reached before the end of the event. F Cash or checks only. Please brin small y g bills. Please make payable to Cit of Hugo. Proof of residency such as a y g (Proportional rates may be applied to partial loads and overloaded .. ®vim trucks) driver's license is required. (CO- Rd. sl A N Hugo 5 Drop-off Public Works Building 140th St. N. I Public a;i Works o 6900 137th St. N. F���dke �,naRa Ra o Building .0 * Drop-off Buba gmks CO 2 8� 137th St. N. r=6900137th St. N. Edt Entrance Only kif—HugoCity of Questions? Call the Hugo City Hall at 651-762-6300 Washingtong.-= Count Drive through and Drop it Off! WasCaty Environmental Center If you have hazardous materials, electronics, or recyclables that you need to get rid of, you can bring them to Washington County's Environmental Center in Woodbury. It is as easy as driving through and dropping it off. 4039 Cottage Grove Drive • Woodbury, MN 55129 Tuesdays 11 am -7:00 pm Thursdays 8 am - 4:30 pm 1-94 Valley Cree kRd Saturdays u; a, 1-494 0 0 c 0 40th St. Bailey Rd cs 0 U 4039 Cottage Grove Drive • Woodbury, MN 55129 Tuesdays 11 am -7:00 pm Thursdays 8 am - 4:30 pm Fridays 8 am - 4:30 pm Saturdays 8 am - 2:00 pm Closed on Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, New Year's Day & other major holidays. Open to residents of Washington, Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, and Ramsey counties. Proof of county residency, such as a driver's license, is required. Pick up reusable paint, automotive supplies, cleaners and other products forfree. Residents must be 18 years old to participate. More info: www.co.washington.mn.us (Click on Environmental Center) 651-275-7475 P Like us! ® Printed with soy inks on 100% post -consumer recycled paper. Ote You're Invited... Tewin Cities Habitat for Humanity' join Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity for the —Dedication— of the homes of: Stefanie & Ronald Currier Nicholas & Meseret Halverson Chaltu Berati Bisrat Gebreegziabher 14932 Generation Ave., Hugo, MN 55038 22, April 2017 at 10:OOAM An opportunity to socialize and tour the host home will follow. Give mad. Every 2 seconds someone in the U.S. needs blood. American Red Cross Blood Drive Community of Hugo Fire Station 5323 140th St No Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:30 PM to 7:30 PM Please call 1-800-RED CROSS (1-800-733-2767) or visit redcrossblood.org and enter: Hugo to schedule an appointment. Scan to schedule an appointment. 1-800-RED CROSS 1 1-800-733-2767 1 redcrossblood.org I Download the Blood Donor App i52016 The American National Red Cross Kidz Saturday, April 29th 11am - 2pm oneka Elementary in Hugo • FREE Carnival Games • FREE Multi Bike Raffle • FREE Balloon Animals • FREE Face Painter • Family Fun Stage • Zillions of Prizes • FREE Bouncy Castle • Giant Slide • FREE Fair Hair • Meet your favorite mascots! • Food & Refreshments • FREE Spin Art Visit hugobusinesses.com for more information Made possible by: The Hugo Area Business Association and Hugo ,.e Economic Development Authority THIS EVENT IS NOT SPONSORED BY THE WBL AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THIS FLYER WAS NOT PRINTED AT THE DISTRICT'S EXPENSE. You are invited to Northeast Youth & Family Services 2017 Leadership Luncheon Guest speaker. Tony Buettner, Blue Zones "Secrets of a Long Life" 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m., Wednesday, May 3 Midland Hills Country Club 4 Rw 2001 Fulham St., Roseville Tony Buettner Northeast Youth &Family SeNoes Tony Buettner is the Senior Vice President of Business Development at Blue Zones, Transforming Lives a research -based organization that is dedicated to helping people live longer, better lives. His work includes strategic planning, operations and implementation of all Blue Zones Community Projects. For more information, please contact Sandra Bahr, 651-379-3422 or email sandra@nyfs.org. Thanks to our generous sponsors, there is no cost to participate in this event. Please consider a donation to support the important work of NYFS, even if you are unable to attend. 2017 Leadership Luncheon Sponsors fli TwinCiecom s PIONEER PRESS N1 1130 COMCAST NBC UNIVERSAL XFINITY Allegra Print and Imaging Bev Aplikowski Bahr Memorial Fund CBRE Inspire Medical Systems Maguire Agency Sandy Martin 4. LAND Q'LAKES,INC. PEOPLES BANK MIDWEST People You Know. People You Trust. First Resource Group, Ltd. Northeast Bank North Suburban Golden K Kiwanis Sheriff Jack Serier St. Anthony Park Dental Trust Marketing Solutions, Inc. Zamansky Professional Association About Northeast Youth & Family Services This fundraising event will benefit NYFS, a nonprofit mental health and community services agency that transforms the lives of over 4,000 youth, adults and families every year. NYFS works with people to develop the skills and fortitude they need to address issues today and reach their full potential tomorrow. Our client -centered, family -focused approach helps people reach their goals including: academic success healthy families successful parenting stable employment economic stability increased self-reliance We help youth, adults and families thrive at home, at school, at work and in their communities. We serve the northeast suburbs through our Shoreview and White Bear Lake locations. For more information, visit us on the web at www.nyfs.org. Rgoy i' F Northeast Vooth & Family Services Transforming Lives ipojinul oa,noA - uoogoun-1 diLlsiopee-1 SCAN 9USS NW `MainaaoyS N •any U01BUIxa-1 0617£ OL69'0N llNbld NN `SDU10 NIMl aldd awisod sn EMO ilz]02Jd-NON April 2017 April 2017 May 2017 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr 5a Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 910 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 28 29 30 31 30 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY Mal-26 27 28 29 30 31 Apr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7:00pm City Council Meeting 6:00pm Food Shelf Past Dinner (American Legion) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 5:30pm Board of 6:30pm_�OZA 7:00pm Pla�nina 16 17 7:00pm City Council Meeting 18 19 20 21 22 S:OOpm EDA Meets 7:00pm Comp Plan 7:00pm Parks 8:00am Spring Cleanup (Public Works) 6:30pm Historical Commission I 10:00am Habitat Home Dedication (14932 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 11:00am Kidz'n Biz (Oneka Elementary) 2:30pm Blood Drive (Fir Den 5:00pm Burger Night (Hugo Legion) 6:30pm BOZA 7:00pm Planning msmson 30 May 1 2 3 4 5 6 Meetings in green are scheduled/posted meetings 1 4/13/2017 2:59 PM May 2017 May 2017 June 2017 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY Apr 30 May 1 2 3 4 5 6 7:00pm City Council 11:30am NYFS Lunch Meeting (Midland Hills) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 6:30pm BOZA 7:00pm Planning Commission 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 5:00pm EDA Meets 7:00pm Parks 7:00pm City Council Meeting 6:30pm Historical Commission 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 5:00pm Burger Night 6:30pm BOZA (Hugo Legion) 7:00pm Planning Commisison 28 29 30 31 Jun 1 2 3 Memorial D Meetings in green are scheduled/posted meetings 2 4/13/2017 2:59 PM